Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-at
May 18, 1999 - May 31, 1999
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Greg Cardinal <gcardinal(at)startribune.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Spoked Wheels |
Another thing to keep in mind when scavenging boneyards for motorcycle
rims is that 36 spoke rims are FAR more common than 40 spoke rims.
I discovered this after I had fabricated the hubs to Howard Hendersons
plans. If you really want 19" rims with 40 spokes look for the Honda
Goldwings and big Kawasakis.
Greg Cardinal
>>> Warren Shoun 05/18 9:50 AM >>>
Michael Cuy's video notes Buchanan Spokes as a reference for his
wheels. Had used them
prior to seeing the tape for redoing my Honda motorcycle wheels as they
are only 3 miles from
me. They have moved to a new industrial park The current info is:
Buchanan Spoke & Rim, Inc.
805 West 8th Street
Azusa, CA. 91702 Phone: (626) 969-4655 Fax (626) 812-0243
They have a great catalogue of rim, hubs, etc. All high quality
aftermarket stuff, and not
cheap.
They charged me $1.00 each for 9 gauge stainless spokes and nipples
(will pull 1,000 pounds
each!) for $36.00, plus $54.00 labor to lace and true each wheel. Paid
$10.00 each at a
motorcycle salvage yard, polished them out with Mothers Mag & Aluminum
Polish ($7.50) and put
in new bearings and brake pads. Hub came with an arm to prevent brake
rotation that can easily
be affixed to the gear.
Note: There are a LOT more choices for tires if you 18" rims.
Warren
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Test flying and professional test pilots. |
Ken,
Yes, Norm Ronaasen was involved with the Arrow test
program. The fact that he was chosen for this indicates
that he was indeed an exceptional pilot.
He told me that he was scheduled to fly one of those
a/c (don't remember which one) and had done a series
of taxi and higher speed ground handling test that fateful
morning. There were a few minor problems to correct,
so he went to lunch intending to fly it that afternoon. He
returned to learn that the program had been cancelled
and all the aircraft were grounded. He was extremely bit-
ter about the whole thing---even about four years later
when he told me the story during his visit with us. In his
opinion, the Arrow was a really good aircraft and he felt
that a major blunder had been made.
I don't know whether he ever flew a Pietenpol and I wish
he could have flown mine. An evaluation by a professional
test pilot would have been interesting. Has anyone out there
ever heard of a report on the Pietenpol done by a profes-
sional test pilot? By the way, Norm loved gliding and did not
confine his flying to "heavy iron".
Such a report could be interesting. I had such a report on
the Cassutt Formula 1 racer done by Paul Hartman who test
flew one for a couple of fellows in Quebec back around 1970.
It was well-organized and packed with useful information.
Cheers,
Graham
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Electrical power was "power" |
This reminded me,
The regs state that if you have no electrical system then you don't have to
have a transponder to enter the Mode C veil. I found that out trying to
negotiate the Mode c and Class B airspace at SLC
Steve Eldredge
Provo UT
IT Services
Brigham Young University
> -----Original Message-----
> Richard DeCosta
> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 1999 11:35 AM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Re: Power
>
>
> Not to sidetrack the discussion, but maybe someone could answer me a
> quick question about the 'A' engine installation: I am under the
> impression (due to lack of knowledge?) that planes with an 'A' engine
> do not have an electrical system. Is this true? If so, how does one do
> about adding one (I will very likely need a transponder and radio,
> since I am within the Portland Class C airspace, or if I hangar it
> elsewhere, will need to fly into 'C' airspace quite often).
>
> Richard
>
>
> --- Ed0248(at)aol.com wrote:
> > Danny...
> > Just a thought: no matter which engine you use, you should probably
> > overhaul
> > it before flight, unless you can get a terrific deal on a recently
> > overhauled
> > engine (and I mean both operating hours AND calendar!). I somewhat
> > agree
> > with the Continental over Lycoming. Parts are available
> and not TOO
> > expensive. Somehow my overhaul manuals for these engines escape me
> > right
> > now, but I would almost bet money that the mount for any of the "C"
> > engines
> > is identical. As for weight differences, here's what I was able to
> > come up
> > with:
> >
> > A-65-8 170 pounds dry
> >
> > A-75-8 170 pounds
> >
> > C-75-8 177 pounds (this is a no accessories case)
> >
> > C-85-8 178 pounds
> >
> > C-90-8 184 pounds
> >
> > O-200A 190 pounds
> >
> > All of the -8 engines are not set up for electrical systems or
> > starters.
> > Some may have flange cranks, but others have a tapered shaft,
> > requiring an
> > adapter. The O-200 comes in basically one flavor...starter and
> > generaror/alternator. Main differences in the dash numbers is for
> > pull vs.
> > key starter, alternator vs. generator, and even a fuel
> injected model
> > (also
> > available in the C-85 and C-90). The choice is yours. Will the "A"
> > engine
> > be less expensive to obtain/overhaul? UNDOUBTEDLY. Will
> it be less
> > dependable? Questionable, with proper care of both. Less
> power? Uh
> > huh.
> > More fun? YOU BETCHA!!!
> >
> > The little Continentals are fairly simple to overhaul, and sip fuel
> > (I get a
> > little less than 5 gph on my '66 Cessna 150)
> >
> > No matter which way you go, the only person that should make up your
> > mind is
> > you. Weigh all the factors, make your decision, and enjoy
> your Piet.
> >
> > Ed (working on airplanes too darned long to be still doing
> it) Woerle
> >
> >
>
> ===
> My homepage: http://www.AirCamper.org/w3builder
> ....Oh that I had wings like a dove! for then would I fly
> away, and be at rest. -Psalm 55:6
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> Visit www.AirCamper.org - A Low 'n Slow Online Community!
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> ____
> Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Danny Mac:
After I finished up my last post, my tired mind got to wandering...seems I
recalled putting a larger engine in a Cub. Got to looking through my old
records, found where I did, indeed, replace a C-75 with a C-85. No engine
mount change, so the mount is the same. I can't swear to the O-200, but I
think it and the C-90 share the same bolt pattern, and it is slightly larger
(wider) than the C-75/85.
Hope this helps.
Ed Woerle
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Beanlands <kbeanlan(at)spots.ab.ca> |
After a lot of careful consideration, I am planning to sell my C-85-12F
"project engine". The engine is disassembled at the engine shopand has as
many bad parts as good. Here's what's included:
Crankshaft: Magnafluxed and dimensions checked. Currently at 0.010"/0.010"
under and needs to go to 0.020" under on both.
Case: OK
Rear accessory case: Two included, one is OK, the other is shot in the oil
pump
Gears: mag, cam and oil pump gears are poor.
Cylinders: 8 in total. 4 are completely shot, the other 4 have some cracks
but are in much beter shape.
Rods: Servicable. A second set of servicable 0-200 rods are included
Mags: None
Generator: Servicable with gear
Starter: Pull type with gear
Carb: Stromberg, not O/H'd
Cam: Good but needs re-grind
Lots of new seals, gaskets, intake tubes, clamps, etc. The O/H kit for it
was purchased. Manuals are also included.
I'd like to get $3500 plus shipping for the lot, but I'm open to offers.
Cost to O/H with factory new jugs was estimated at around $6000 USD. If
you used the -8 rear case and gears, the cost could be significantly
reduced.
Oh yeah, I'll be using a PZL/Franklin engine on the Christavia. The extra
35 ponies at only a little more seams reasonable.
Thanks
Ken
On Tue, 18 May 1999 Ed0248(at)aol.com wrote:
> Danny...
> Just a thought: no matter which engine you use, you should probably overhaul
> it before flight, unless you can get a terrific deal on a recently overhauled
> engine (and I mean both operating hours AND calendar!). I somewhat agree
> with the Continental over Lycoming. Parts are available and not TOO
> expensive. Somehow my overhaul manuals for these engines escape me right
> now, but I would almost bet money that the mount for any of the "C" engines
> is identical. As for weight differences, here's what I was able to come up
> with:
>
> A-65-8 170 pounds dry
>
> A-75-8 170 pounds
>
> C-75-8 177 pounds (this is a no accessories case)
>
> C-85-8 178 pounds
>
> C-90-8 184 pounds
>
> O-200A 190 pounds
>
> All of the -8 engines are not set up for electrical systems or starters.
> Some may have flange cranks, but others have a tapered shaft, requiring an
> adapter. The O-200 comes in basically one flavor...starter and
> generaror/alternator. Main differences in the dash numbers is for pull vs.
> key starter, alternator vs. generator, and even a fuel injected model (also
> available in the C-85 and C-90). The choice is yours. Will the "A" engine
> be less expensive to obtain/overhaul? UNDOUBTEDLY. Will it be less
> dependable? Questionable, with proper care of both. Less power? Uh huh.
> More fun? YOU BETCHA!!!
>
> The little Continentals are fairly simple to overhaul, and sip fuel (I get a
> little less than 5 gph on my '66 Cessna 150)
>
> No matter which way you go, the only person that should make up your mind is
> you. Weigh all the factors, make your decision, and enjoy your Piet.
>
> Ed (working on airplanes too darned long to be still doing it) Woerle
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Beanlands <kbeanlan(at)spots.ab.ca> |
Nope, the A-65, A-75, A-80, C-75, C-85, C-90 and 0-200 all have the same
mount bolt pattern. THe only thing to watch is the length of the mount.
The electric equipped models require a little more length to accomadate
the starter and generator. As long as you've left enough room you should
be fine. Even if you havent left the room, you could always try the B&C
starter/altenator as they are much smaller than the original.
Ken
On Tue, 18 May 1999 Ed0248(at)aol.com wrote:
> Danny Mac:
>
> After I finished up my last post, my tired mind got to wandering...seems I
> recalled putting a larger engine in a Cub. Got to looking through my old
> records, found where I did, indeed, replace a C-75 with a C-85. No engine
> mount change, so the mount is the same. I can't swear to the O-200, but I
> think it and the C-90 share the same bolt pattern, and it is slightly larger
> (wider) than the C-75/85.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Ed Woerle
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
Hi listers. Just got in from a two hour flight. These Texas winds are
really something. Our main runway here in Uvalde is 15/33, and the winds
are almost always out of the South East, so there's usually a really good
sometimes a direct 90 degree x-wind. I love wheel landings, so on final, I
approach at 65, and carry about 1200 rpms till right over the threshold,
then throttle on back. With these winds, lots of rudder is sometimes
required to keep it down the center line (well, almost centered that is). I
keep this configuration till the left wheel touches, then apply a little
forward stick and the right wheel is on the pavement, then wait for the tail
to settle. I probably made 12 touch and goes this evening, what a kick!
Our house is just off the end of the airport, so on the last approach, I saw
my wife waving me in for supper, she had the BBQ pit fired up there in the
back year. Gotta go eat BBQ'ed chicken. Love these
Piets/GN-1's!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Robert Hensarling GN-1 83887
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Bicycles & Airplanes |
Howdy Ho from a new BPA member and new to "online discussion".
This group is VERY communicative! Keep it up. I have 2 questions.
1. What is the correlation between bike mechanics/racers and the
fascination with airplanes? I'm a former national level racer/ local
level mechanic and I'm planning on building a Piet in the next
millennium. My closest friends are in the same ship. My assessment is:
We,re all Tim Allen wannabees, and we have a need for things to go round
and round; We have an insatiable urge for freedom of riding/flying in
something we've created;
2. Who in Piet-land has built a Subaru EA-81 powered airbuggy?
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Max takeoff weight for the Piet |
Thank you Mr Atnip, that was very helpfull.
Since you mentioned your weight, I began thinking, and at the risk
of embarrassing myself I wish everyone would do this math with me.
I'm a low time student pilot and if I'm going to look silly, others
might as well benefit from it because my instructor sure wont. Here it
is. If the "max. empty weight" of the plane and the "max. useful load"
equal the "max. takeoff weight", then that means pilot, passenger, and
fuel shall not exceed 385 lbs if the plane builds out to the 610 lbs
empty as is in the specs on Don's website. If this is so, I figure that
My eldest son of 180 lbs and myself of 200 lbs may be able to carry
enough fuel to get through the pattern once or twice. Is this so? Maybe
I should earnestly reconsider how bad I want to build a Piet?
Simply ignorant near Houston, DannyMac
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: Max takeoff weight for the Piet |
Danny- Don't get discouraged when you look at the
useful load of the Piet. When I had to have my data plate
engraved for the FAA requirement I called Donald Pietenpol
and asked him what he'd put down in the gross wt. box and
he said 1150 lbs. I've flown my Piet at 1135 lbs. with no
problems. (Yes, two fat guys and 17 gal. of fuel !)
I can't say if this holds true for Ford powered or
others though. I'm sure the airframe could support the weight
though.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC" |
| Subject: | FW: Bicycles & Airplanes |
Brian, I alsmost would have guessed the wright brothers. Excuse my
ignorance...who is Tim Allen? And welcome to the group.
Domenic
----------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Bicycles & Airplanes |
Howdy Ho from a new BPA member and new to "online discussion".
This group is VERY communicative! Keep it up. I have 2 questions.
=A0=A0=A0 1. What is the correlation between bike mechanics/racers and
the
fascination with airplanes? I'm a former national level racer/ local
level
mechanic and I'm planning on building a Piet in the next millennium. My
closest friends are in the same ship. My assessment is: We,re all Tim
Allen
wannabees, and we have a need for things to go round and round; We have
an
insatiable urge for freedom of riding/flying in something we've
created;
=A0=A0=A0 2. Who in Piet-land has built a Subaru EA-81 powered
airbuggy?
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0
Brian Sanders (717)599-5477
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0
501 Hidden Valley Lane
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0
Harrisburg,PA 17112
=A0
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 MC: see ya on
6-21-99 Can't wait
=A0
=A0
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
| Subject: | Brodhead/Michael Cuy |
Hi Michael. Is everything still a "go" for the Brodhead/Oshgosh meet? I've
been building up time in my GN-1, however right now it's a 50/50 if I can
fly from South Texas to Brodhead. May look into going commercially, but I
sure wanted that white hat! Michael King in Dallas may try to get up there
also. Looking forward to meeting all you guys (and gals).
Robert Hensarling GN-1 N83887
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Max takeoff weight for the Piet |
-----Original Message-----
From: dannymac <dannymac@hal-pc.org>
Date: Wednesday, May 19, 1999 12:06 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Max takeoff weight for the Piet
Danny, drive over to Uvalde someday, and we'll go up in my GN-1 so you can
see what you think. Also, there's a guy here (Gary MacAuther) that's
building a "true" Piet, and you can see his project.
Robert Hensarling GN-1 N83887
830-278-1832
>Thank you Mr Atnip, that was very helpfull.
>
> Since you mentioned your weight, I began thinking, and at the risk
>of embarrassing myself I wish everyone would do this math with me.
>I'm a low time student pilot and if I'm going to look silly, others
>might as well benefit from it because my instructor sure wont. Here it
>is. If the "max. empty weight" of the plane and the "max. useful load"
>equal the "max. takeoff weight", then that means pilot, passenger, and
>fuel shall not exceed 385 lbs if the plane builds out to the 610 lbs
>empty as is in the specs on Don's website. If this is so, I figure that
>My eldest son of 180 lbs and myself of 200 lbs may be able to carry
>enough fuel to get through the pattern once or twice. Is this so? Maybe
>I should earnestly reconsider how bad I want to build a Piet?
>
>Simply ignorant near Houston, DannyMac
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC" |
| Subject: | FW: Max takeoff weight for the Piet |
I recently registered my gross weight at 1319 Lbs. Just 4 pounds under the
limit where I would have to pay $60./annum for air navigation services. My
empty weight came in at 807 Lbs. My wing area is non-standard at 159.16
Sq./Ft. for wing loading of 8.29 Lbs/ft.
Domenic
----------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Max takeoff weight for the Piet |
Danny- Don't get discouraged when you look at the
useful load of the Piet. When I had to have my data plate
engraved for the FAA requirement I called Donald Pietenpol
and asked him what he'd put down in the gross wt. box and
he said 1150 lbs. I've flown my Piet at 1135 lbs. with no
problems. (Yes, two fat guys and 17 gal. of fuel !)
I can't say if this holds true for Ford powered or
others though. I'm sure the airframe could support the weight
though.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: Brodhead/Michael Cuy |
>Hi Michael. Is everything still a "go" for the Brodhead/Oshgosh meet? I've
>been building up time in my GN-1, however right now it's a 50/50 if I can
>fly from South Texas to Brodhead.
Robert/Group- everything is working out perfect for the 70th Anniv. gathering
at Osh and the immediately following gathering at Brodhead ! So far I think
we have 16 committed planes. Should be a great time. Hope to see you
joining us !!! Grant MacLaren has all the info on his web update page.
Bill Rewey has been visiting EAA headquarters too to setup everything.
We will owe a big thanks to those two gentlemen at Grant's Theater in The
Woods Piet slideshow/multimedia presentation on the big arrival day eve.
of Weds. July 2th.
Mike C.
Hi Michael. Is everything still a go for the
Brodhead/Oshgosh meet? I've
been building up time in my GN-1, however right now it's a 50/50 if I
can
fly from South Texas to Brodhead.
Robert/Group- everything is working out perfect for the 70th Anniv.
gathering
at Osh and the immediately following gathering at Brodhead ! So far
I think
we have 16 committed planes. Should be a great time. Hope to
see you
joining us !!! Grant MacLaren has all the info on
his web update page.
Bill Rewey has been visiting EAA headquarters too to setup
everything.
We will owe a big thanks to those two gentlemen at Grant's Theater in
The
Woods Piet slideshow/multimedia presentation on the big arrival day
eve.
of Weds. July 2th.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Bell <mbell(at)sctcorp.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Max takeoff weight for the Piet |
Seventeen gallons of fuel will probably keep you in the air
longer than you want to be. You'll find that as you get older
your bladder requires relief on a little more regular basis.
How far have folks traveled in Piets. I just pulled out an
almanac and it looks like it is around 800 miles from Columbia,
SC to Brodhead/Oshkosh. This would probably end up at around a
thousand miles after zigzagging a little. That's 17 hours of
airtime at 60 mph. With good weather I guess that is two very
full days of flying. Maybe a C-85 or O-200 isn't such a bad
idea. Southt Carolina to California would be a very full week
each way. What is it like in the cockpit (flight deck???) of a
Piet as the speed gets much over 60? Does everyone wear those
little aviator hats/helmets? What do you call them? Noise
canceling headsets have to be a really great option to spring
for?!?!?
More rambling later.
Mike Bell
Columbia, SC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Craig Lawler <clawler(at)ptd.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Max takeoff weight for the Piet |
x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Danny,
I have a C-65 Peit that weighs 635 empty. I weigh about 160 and I have
had 200lbs in the front. Not easy to get in and harder to get out. Climb
is not spectacular, but safe. Fly's easier with some weight in front.
Less float on landing. Been doing some Eagle flights too. I had more fun
than the kids.
Craig
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chad Johnson <cjohnson(at)jayhawkpl.com> |
| Subject: | RE: Spoked Wheels |
Earl,
I am approx 1hr drive or so. Im about 30 miles south of Salina, Ks if
you know where that is. How about you? I assume your a piet builder
too?
chad
-----Original Message-----
From: Earl Myers [SMTP:allaire(at)raex.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 1999 12:52 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Spoked Wheels
Chad;
How close are you to the Flint Hills area?
Earl Myers
-----Original Message-----
From: Chad Johnson <cjohnson(at)jayhawkpl.com>
Date: Tuesday, May 18, 1999 11:12 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: RE: Spoked Wheels
Would love to have your sketch, thank you for making it available. I am
just starting the "pietenpol path" and am gathering all info I can. I
have
my "A" stripped and ready for assembly. Thanks again. Chad Johnson,
1307
Eastmoor Drive, McPherson, Kansas, 67460.
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> (by way of Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov>)
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Weds. July 28th 1999
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 10:21:58 -0400
Typo error in my last e-mail.......the big arrival day
at Osh (opening day of Osh) for the Piets is Weds.
July 28th, not the 2th. Duh !
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Beanlands <kbeanlan(at)spots.ab.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: FW: Bicycles & Airplanes |
Let's not forget Rans. They also build bikes and kitplanes.
BTW, Tim Allen is the comedian who Tim "The Toolman" Taylor in Home
Improvements. Funny guy that LOVES tools and cars and MORE POWER RRR RRR
RRR!
Ken
On Wed, 19 May 1999, BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC wrote:
> Brian, I alsmost would have guessed the wright brothers. Excuse my
> ignorance...who is Tim Allen? And welcome to the group.
>
> Domenic
> ----------
> From: Sanders Family
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Bicycles & Airplanes
> Date: Tuesday, May 18, 1999 9:43PM
>
> Howdy Ho from a new BPA member and new to "online discussion".
> This group is VERY communicative! Keep it up. I have 2 questions.
>=A0=A0 1. What is the correlation between bike mechanics/racers and th=
e
> fascination with airplanes? I'm a former national level racer/ local leve=
l
> mechanic and I'm planning on building a Piet in the next millennium. My
> closest friends are in the same ship. My assessment is: We,re all Tim All=
en
> wannabees, and we have a need for things to go round and round; We have a=
n
> insatiable urge for freedom of riding/flying in something we've created;
>=A0=A0 2. Who in Piet-land has built a Subaru EA-81 powered airbuggy?
>=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 Bri=
an Sanders (717)599-5477
>=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 501=
Hidden Valley Lane
>=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 Har=
risburg,PA 17112
>
>=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 MC: see ya on 6=
-21-99 Can't wait
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Spoked Wheels |
I live in Ohio. I mentioned this because there is a guy building a piet that
I correspond with not on the Piet Chat group that lives in Salina by the
name of Dick Schlaefli. His E-mail is pegndick(at)flinthills.com. He built a
wing turnover structure from my "drawings" so he must be building a one
piece wing. Might want to give him a jingle, er beep and say hi. He and his
wife are very nice. I met them at Broadhead last year. Good people!
I have a Piet Scout about done powered by a Ford Model "A" engine. An
Aircamper is on the list too as well as others. The Scout was #4 built but
is the first to be completed. It has custom wire wheels ($). There are
several ways to build wire wheels and I have hub drawings, all the custom
sources to get em done plus watch the Piet group for their input. Other
Piets up here with wire wheels just use motorcycle rims and hubs from the
cycle junk yard. Allready have brakes on them and so forth. Be glad to help
you with anything you need!
Earl Myers
-----Original Message-----
From: Chad Johnson <cjohnson(at)jayhawkpl.com>
Date: Wednesday, May 19, 1999 10:16 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: RE: Spoked Wheels
Earl,
I am approx 1hr drive or so. Im about 30 miles south of Salina, Ks if you
know where that is. How about you? I assume your a piet builder too?
chad
-----Original Message-----
From: Earl Myers [SMTP:allaire(at)raex.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 1999 12:52 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Spoked Wheels
Chad;
How close are you to the Flint Hills area?
Earl Myers
-----Original Message-----
From: Chad Johnson <cjohnson(at)jayhawkpl.com>
Date: Tuesday, May 18, 1999 11:12 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: RE: Spoked Wheels
Would love to have your sketch, thank you for making it available. I am
just starting the "pietenpol path" and am gathering all info I can. I have
my "A" stripped and ready for assembly. Thanks again. Chad Johnson, 1307
Eastmoor Drive, McPherson, Kansas, 67460.
-----Original Message-----
From: bowdler(at)juno.com [SMTP:bowdler(at)juno.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 1999 10:53 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Spoked Wheels
Robert, Daniel, Mike and Earl,
My sketch and description of Brian Kenney's Honda wire wheel
conversion will be in the mail this morning.
Any othes who want it I still have some copies or will make more.
Send me your snail mail off list.
Have fun!
Tom
__________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Cross Countries in a Piet |
>Seventeen gallons of fuel will probably keep you in the air
>longer than you want to be. You'll find that as you get older
>your bladder requires relief on a little more regular basis.
>How far have folks traveled in Piets.
Mike Bell- You've got that right ! Especially after coffee.
I just have the extra fuel in case I land somewhere and they
either don't have fuel or are gone for the day. Kind of a buffer
too for absent-mindedness. (from which I suffer time to time)
Most of my Piet flying is very local. 20 min. after work, hopping
the 10-15 min. rides, etc... but when it comes to cross country in
the Piet it can be tiring. Turbulence and headwinds are the most
fatiuging to me. It's just not as easy read the sectionals, fold them,
keep altitude. On smoother days with light winds cross countries
are mindless, relaxing, and just fun. The open cockpit environment
can really dry your eyes out and on windy dusty days can really cause
irritation if you don't at least wear sunglasses, if not goggles.
A good windscreen helps reduce fatigue. Now when I fly a Champ
or Cub I feel wierd because there is no wind. Oh, yes....I have gotten
some sunburn too on my neck and arms flying the Piet.
My trip to Osh was about 550 miles and door to door it took 12 hours
w/ 5 stops and terrible headwinds. Going home it took only about 9 hrs.
Mike C.
Seventeen gallons of fuel will probably keep you in the air
longer than you want to be. You'll find that as you get
older
your bladder requires relief on a little more regular basis.
How far have folks traveled in Piets.
Mike Bell- You've got that right ! Especially after
coffee.
I just have the extra fuel in case I land somewhere and they
either don't have fuel or are gone for the day. Kind of a
buffer
too for absent-mindedness. (from which I suffer time to time)
Most of my Piet flying is very local. 20 min.
after work, hopping
the 10-15 min. rides, etc... but when it comes to cross country in
the Piet it can be tiring. Turbulence and headwinds are the
most
fatiuging to me. It's just not as easy read the sectionals, fold
them,
keep altitude. On smoother days with light winds cross
countries
are mindless, relaxing, and just fun. The open cockpit
environment
can really dry your eyes out and on windy dusty days can really
cause
irritation if you don't at least wear sunglasses, if not goggles.
A good windscreen helps reduce fatigue. Now when I fly a
Champ
or Cub I feel wierd because there is no wind. Oh, yes....I have
gotten
some sunburn too on my neck and arms flying the Piet.
My trip to Osh was about 550 miles and door to
door it took 12 hours
w/ 5 stops and terrible headwinds. Going home it took only about 9
hrs.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC" |
| Subject: | FW: FW: Bicycles & Airplanes |
Oh yes, that's the guy who has two more episodes before the show is
pulled.
I've been counting, can't wait.
Domenic
----------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: FW: Bicycles & Airplanes |
Let's not forget Rans. They also build bikes and kitplanes.
BTW, Tim Allen is the comedian who Tim "The Toolman" Taylor in Home
Improvements. Funny guy that LOVES tools and cars and MORE POWER RRR
RRR
RRR!
Ken
On Wed, 19 May 1999, BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC wrote:
> Brian, I alsmost would have guessed the wright brothers. Excuse my
> ignorance...who is Tim Allen? And welcome to the group.
>
> Domenic
> ----------
> From: Sanders Family
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Bicycles & Airplanes
> Date: Tuesday, May 18, 1999 9:43PM
>
> Howdy Ho from a new BPA member and new to "online discussion".
> This group is VERY communicative! Keep it up. I have 2 questions.
>=A0=A0 1. What is the correlation between bike mechanics/racers
and the
> fascination with airplanes? I'm a former national level racer/ local
level
> mechanic and I'm planning on building a Piet in the next millennium.
My
> closest friends are in the same ship. My assessment is: We,re all Tim
Allen
> wannabees, and we have a need for things to go round and round; We
have an
> insatiable urge for freedom of riding/flying in something we've
created;
>=A0=A0 2. Who in Piet-land has built a Subaru EA-81 powered
airbuggy?
>=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0
Brian Sanders (717)599-5477
>=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0
501 Hidden Valley Lane
>=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0
Harrisburg,PA 17112
>
>=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 MC: see ya
on 6-21-99 Can't wait
>
>
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Sury <jimsury(at)fbtc.net> |
I am interested in a cylinder. How much would you be asking for one of the
serviceable ones. jas
>After a lot of careful consideration, I am planning to sell my C-85-12F
>"project engine". The engine is disassembled at the engine shopand has as
>many bad parts as good. Here's what's included:
>
>Crankshaft: Magnafluxed and dimensions checked. Currently at 0.010"/0.010"
>under and needs to go to 0.020" under on both.
>
>Case: OK
>
>Rear accessory case: Two included, one is OK, the other is shot in the oil
>pump
>
>Gears: mag, cam and oil pump gears are poor.
>
>Cylinders: 8 in total. 4 are completely shot, the other 4 have some cracks
>but are in much beter shape.
>
>Rods: Servicable. A second set of servicable 0-200 rods are included
>
>Mags: None
>
>Generator: Servicable with gear
>
>Starter: Pull type with gear
>
>Carb: Stromberg, not O/H'd
>
>Cam: Good but needs re-grind
>
>Lots of new seals, gaskets, intake tubes, clamps, etc. The O/H kit for it
>was purchased. Manuals are also included.
>
>I'd like to get $3500 plus shipping for the lot, but I'm open to offers.
>Cost to O/H with factory new jugs was estimated at around $6000 USD. If
>you used the -8 rear case and gears, the cost could be significantly
>reduced.
>
>Oh yeah, I'll be using a PZL/Franklin engine on the Christavia. The extra
>35 ponies at only a little more seams reasonable.
>
>Thanks
>Ken
>
>On Tue, 18 May 1999 Ed0248(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>> Danny...
>> Just a thought: no matter which engine you use, you should probably
overhaul
>> it before flight, unless you can get a terrific deal on a recently
overhauled
>> engine (and I mean both operating hours AND calendar!). I somewhat agree
>> with the Continental over Lycoming. Parts are available and not TOO
>> expensive. Somehow my overhaul manuals for these engines escape me right
>> now, but I would almost bet money that the mount for any of the "C"
engines
>> is identical. As for weight differences, here's what I was able to come
up
>> with:
>>
>> A-65-8 170 pounds dry
>>
>> A-75-8 170 pounds
>>
>> C-75-8 177 pounds (this is a no accessories case)
>>
>> C-85-8 178 pounds
>>
>> C-90-8 184 pounds
>>
>> O-200A 190 pounds
>>
>> All of the -8 engines are not set up for electrical systems or starters.
>> Some may have flange cranks, but others have a tapered shaft, requiring an
>> adapter. The O-200 comes in basically one flavor...starter and
>> generaror/alternator. Main differences in the dash numbers is for pull
vs.
>> key starter, alternator vs. generator, and even a fuel injected model
(also
>> available in the C-85 and C-90). The choice is yours. Will the "A"
engine
>> be less expensive to obtain/overhaul? UNDOUBTEDLY. Will it be less
>> dependable? Questionable, with proper care of both. Less power? Uh
huh.
>> More fun? YOU BETCHA!!!
>>
>> The little Continentals are fairly simple to overhaul, and sip fuel (I
get a
>> little less than 5 gph on my '66 Cessna 150)
>>
>> No matter which way you go, the only person that should make up your
mind is
>> you. Weigh all the factors, make your decision, and enjoy your Piet.
>>
>> Ed (working on airplanes too darned long to be still doing it) Woerle
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: Bicycles & Airplanes |
Duane Woolsey has an EA-81 piet flying. For sale at OSH/Bhead. 110hrs.
Chime in anytime Duane..
Steve Eldredge
Steve(at)byu.edu
IT Services
Brigham Young University
-----Original Message-----
Family
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 1999 7:43 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Bicycles & Airplanes
Howdy Ho from a new BPA member and new to "online discussion".
This group is VERY communicative! Keep it up. I have 2 questions.
1. What is the correlation between bike mechanics/racers and the
fascination with airplanes? I'm a former national level racer/ local level
mechanic and I'm planning on building a Piet in the next millennium. My
closest friends are in the same ship. My assessment is: We,re all Tim Allen
wannabees, and we have a need for things to go round and round; We have an
insatiable urge for freedom of riding/flying in something we've created;
2. Who in Piet-land has built a Subaru EA-81 powered airbuggy?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bowdler(at)juno.com |
| Subject: | Re: Max takeoff weight for the Piet |
> I've flown my Piet at 1135 lbs. with no
>problems. (Yes, two fat guys and 17 gal. of fuel !)
Yes, Mike and I loved every minute of it! 8>)
Tom
__________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bowdler(at)juno.com |
>
>
>it is around 800 miles from Columbia,
>SC to Brodhead/Oshkosh.
>Southt Carolina to California would be a very full week
>each way.
Mike,
You should talk to Alan Wise from Orlando or Bill Rewey from Madison
WI. Alan flew quite a few times to Brodhead with an aux. tank in the
front seat. He used a hand squeeze bulb to transfer the fuel. Bill has
made several trips to Sun n Fun from Madison in the early spring.
A couple of guys flew from CA to Brodhead a couple of years ago and
Mike Madrid has made the trip in his flybaby.
They should all receive the Iron Butt or is it Iron Bladder award.
Tom
__________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: Max takeoff weight for the Piet |
>> I've flown my Piet at 1135 lbs. with no
>>problems. (Yes, two fat guys and 17 gal. of fuel !)
>
>Yes, Mike and I loved every minute of it! 8>)
>Tom
TOM !!!! You're not fat !! It was me and a guy from
church !!! Well....maybe we were close though, course
you're tall. PS-I loved every minute of it too.....just needed
a smoother day, eh ?
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: Piet Travels |
> They should all receive the Iron Butt or is it Iron Bladder award.
>Tom
>
>Absolutely right !!! Geeez !! I remember meeting Mr. Wise at Brodhead.
Really neat guy......and Bill Rewey and I got to know each other at Osh
last year and now coordinating this thing. He flew F4U Corsairs, TBM's, etc.
What a neat guy.
ps- what's the latest on your Piet ? Are there any pics of yours posted
anywhere by chance ?
Thanks,
Mike C.
They should all receive the Iron Butt or is
it Iron Bladder award.
Tom
Absolutely right !!! Geeez !! I remember
meeting Mr. Wise at Brodhead.
Really neat guy......and Bill Rewey and I got to know each other at
Osh
last year and now coordinating this thing. He flew F4U Corsairs,
TBM's, etc.
What a neat guy.
ps- what's the latest on your Piet ? Are there any pics of
yours posted
anywhere by chance ?
Thanks,
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chad Johnson <cjohnson(at)jayhawkpl.com> |
| Subject: | RE: Spoked Wheels |
Thanks Earl, I will look Mr. Schlaefli up and you can count on my asking
questions. My intent is to biuld a pure piet with just a little
modification to the A engine to get a little more horses. Any
suggestions on what types of radiatiors to keep my eyes open for?
Thanks again Earl and happy flying.
Chad.
-----Original Message-----
From: Earl Myers [SMTP:allaire(at)raex.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 1999 10:03 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Spoked Wheels
I live in Ohio. I mentioned this because there is a guy building a piet
that
I correspond with not on the Piet Chat group that lives in Salina by the
name of Dick Schlaefli. His E-mail is pegndick(at)flinthills.com. He built
a
wing turnover structure from my "drawings" so he must be building a one
piece wing. Might want to give him a jingle, er beep and say hi. He and
his
wife are very nice. I met them at Broadhead last year. Good people!
I have a Piet Scout about done powered by a Ford Model "A" engine. An
Aircamper is on the list too as well as others. The Scout was #4 built
but
is the first to be completed. It has custom wire wheels ($). There are
several ways to build wire wheels and I have hub drawings, all the
custom
sources to get em done plus watch the Piet group for their input. Other
Piets up here with wire wheels just use motorcycle rims and hubs from
the
cycle junk yard. Allready have brakes on them and so forth. Be glad to
help
you with anything you need!
Earl Myers
-----Original Message-----
From: Chad Johnson <cjohnson(at)jayhawkpl.com>
Date: Wednesday, May 19, 1999 10:16 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: RE: Spoked Wheels
Earl,
I am approx 1hr drive or so. Im about 30 miles south of Salina, Ks if
you
know where that is. How about you? I assume your a piet builder too?
chad
-----Original Message-----
From: Earl Myers [SMTP:allaire(at)raex.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 1999 12:52 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Spoked Wheels
Chad;
How close are you to the Flint Hills area?
Earl Myers
-----Original Message-----
From: Chad Johnson <cjohnson(at)jayhawkpl.com>
Date: Tuesday, May 18, 1999 11:12 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: RE: Spoked Wheels
Would love to have your sketch, thank you for making it available. I am
just starting the "pietenpol path" and am gathering all info I can. I
have
my "A" stripped and ready for assembly. Thanks again. Chad Johnson,
1307
Eastmoor Drive, McPherson, Kansas, 67460.
-----Original Message-----
From: mboynton(at)excite.com
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Workbench
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 12:49:55 -0700 (PDT)
Paul,
I'm glad the MDF worked out for you. As far as the plastic laminate, I'd
suggest Formica or Wilsonart(sp?) One tip - MDF really likes to soak up the
adhesive. You might want to apply two coats, the second after the first has
dried to a tack. Also, don't cut cost on the adhesive (contact cement). My
advice is to use the stuff the professionals use - 3M. I found out through
experience that cheap glue makes for cheap bonds. You should be able to
find both the laminate and the 3M contact cement from a laminate supply
house (yellow pages). I'm a real novice on Piet building (just starting on
my wing ribs) but I'll probably try using round-over bits on my router table
when it comes time to put the countours on the leading and trailing edges of
the stabilizers. Better advice, anyone?
Mark
> Mark;
>
> Thanks for the suggestion to use MDF, it works great! I built five, soon
> to be six workbenches. I modified the plans slightly and put a 4"
clamping
> surface around each one. I'm looking for hasps to fasten the workbenches
> together from underneath (my garage floor is very uneven). I used oak
trim
> on the edges which looks nice and works fine.
>
> What type of a laminate surface do you recommend? Also, I'm going to
start
> building the tail soon and am wondering how to get the rounded front and
> back shapes. Is there a router bit or a shaper bit I can buy?
>
> Thanks again,
>
> Paul Schultz
> pschultz(at)uplogon.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Craig Lawler <clawler(at)ptd.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Cross Countries in a Piet |
x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
I flew my Piet to Beaver Springs last week. About 30m SW of us. Longest
cross country. Took the PA roadmap so I wouldn't get too lost. Gets
boring flying a Piet in a straight line for more than 10 min or so.
Craig
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: Cross Countries in a Piet |
I did a XC to Price UT on monday. Highest peak was 9200' flew up to 10500.
Not exactly low and slow, but it was cold, high and slow. Still beat the
traffic speeds however due to the windy canyon roads. 1.5hrs in a car and
.9 in a piet! There is much more to this story, and I'll be posting it
soon. HINT has to do with small town cops and landing on county roads and a
popped brake line. (oh yah, my smoke system too...)
Stay tuned.
Steve Eldredge
IT Services
Brigham Young University
> -----Original Message-----
> Craig Lawler
> Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 1999 3:16 PM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Re: Cross Countries in a Piet
>
>
> I flew my Piet to Beaver Springs last week. About 30m SW of
> us. Longest
> cross country. Took the PA roadmap so I wouldn't get too lost. Gets
> boring flying a Piet in a straight line for more than 10 min or so.
>
> Craig
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Brusilow <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Re: power discussion:
I flew with an model A engine for two years, had all kinds of problems
- overheating, bent valve
stem, vapor lock (scary forced landing-the A does not windmill),constant
tweking & adjusting - that
I changed to a 0-200 and have been a happy aircamper for the past nine
years.
When I converted, weight & balance was a problem. The A engine with Al
head but without
radiator & water I calculated to weigh about 240 lbs. The 0-200 bare,
weighs 200lbs.Made up a
dummy (me) weight & balance which told me to move the wing back 3.5
inches & the CG of the
0-200 fwd of the A engine CG 11 inches plus a metal prop. CG was good.
Flew great.( quick CG
check-lift the tail to straight & level, If the airplane teeters, you
are just about right-long fuselage).
I was proping the aircraft, looks good, but aint good. I fly from a hard
surface field. Number one, it
is illegal to hand prop an aircraft without a qualified person at the
controls.Who is watching, one
never knows.Go find a qualified person. So. I roll the airplane out,
chock the wheels,set the brakes,
tie the tailwheel to a concrete block( didn't do that one time , the
airplane nosed over )- if no tie
down is available-& prop the airplane.Sometimes there is someone around
who says "need a prop"
sure thing. Who is this guy? Some of these airport geeks don't know an
airplne from a lawn mower
Anyway, make a long story short, I put the alternator & starter on,
hung a battery from the
firewall-nirvana
I should mention that I have a three foot center section with a 16 gal
tank which far exceeds my
bladder capacity
Mike B ( Piet N687MB).
Re: power
discussion:
I flew with an model A engine for two years, had all kinds of
problems
- overheating, bent valve stem, vapor lock (scary forced landing-the
A does
not windmill),constant tweking adjusting - that I changed to
a
0-200 and have been a happy aircamper for the past nine
years.
size3>
When I converted,
weight
balance was a problem. The A engine with Al head but without
radiator
water I calculated to weigh about 240 lbs. The 0-200 bare, weighs
200lbs.Made up
a dummy (me) weight balance which told me to move the wing
back 3.5
inches the CG of the 0-200 fwd of the A engine CG 11 inches
plus a
metal prop. CG was good. Flew great.( quick CG check-lift the tail
to
straight level, If the airplane teeters, you are just about
right-long
fuselage).I was proping the aircraft, looks good, but aint good. I
fly from
a hard surface field. Number one, it is illegal to hand prop an
aircraft
without a qualified person at the controls.Who is watching, one
never
knows.Go find a qualified person. So. I roll the airplane out, chock the
wheels,set the brakes, tie the tailwheel to a concrete block( didn't
do that
one time , the airplane nosed over )- if no tie down is
available- prop
the airplane.Sometimes there is someone around who says need a
prop
sure thing. Who is this guy? Some of these airport geeks don't know
an
airplne from a lawn mowerAnyway, make a long story short, I
put the
alternator starter on, hung a battery from the
firewall-nirvanaI should mention that I have a three foot
center
section with a 16 gal tank which far exceeds my bladder
capacity
size3>
Mike B ( Piet
N687MB).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mboynton(at)excite.com |
Joe,
I think what Paul is doing is just covering the surfaces of his work
benches. What I've done and what I think many of the builders have done is
to build a rib jig that sets on top of a work bench. I really don't know
what the others are doing to the surface of their jigs; I used an old
counter top (laminated) I removed from my house. To be honest, I don't know
if it will resist the glue I'm using (aerolite) or not. I've used a
one-inch hole saw to remove the material directly below where each glue
joint will be. My hope is that the glue will drip through and minimize any
sticking to the jig. I'm using 1/4 inch staples - the wire kind, to clamp
the gussets to the cap strips and bracing while the glue cures. Then I'll
remove the staples. I'll put gussets on one side while the rib is in the
jig, then after the glue is stable, I'll take the rib out of the jig and
gusset the other side. Like I mentioned before, I'm new at this. Others
may have better advice to share with you. Hope this helps.
Mark
> Mark,
> So you build the wing jig surface covered with Formica or Wilsonart and
> that should prevent the adhesive from sticking to the jig, right?
> I've wondered about how to prevent sticking. Does the rib just lift out
of
> the jig or do you have to "Pop" it out? Are you applying the gussets on
one
> side while the rib is in the jig? Are you fastening the gussets in
anyway,
> or just clamping? How long does the rib need to stay in the jig before
you
> can remove it to start on a second?
> Did you have to soak or steam the cap strips or can you fit them into the
> jig dry?
> Are you sick of all of these questions??
>
> Sorry Mark, but I'm anxious to get started also, but need some answers
> first.
>
> Thanks,
> Joe
>
> >Paul,
> >
> >I'm glad the MDF worked out for you. As far as the plastic laminate,
I'd
> >suggest Formica or Wilsonart(sp?) One tip - MDF really likes to soak up
> >the
> >adhesive. You might want to apply two coats, the second after the first
> >has
> >dried to a tack. Also, don't cut cost on the adhesive (contact cement).
> >My
> >advice is to use the stuff the professionals use - 3M. I found out
through
> >experience that cheap glue makes for cheap bonds. You should be able to
> >find both the laminate and the 3M contact cement from a laminate supply
> >house (yellow pages). I'm a real novice on Piet building (just starting
on
> >my wing ribs) but I'll probably try using round-over bits on my router
> >table
> >when it comes time to put the countours on the leading and trailing edges
> >of
> >the stabilizers. Better advice, anyone?
> >
> >Mark
> >
> >
> > > Mark;
> > >
> > > Thanks for the suggestion to use MDF, it works great! I built five,
> >soon
> >
> > > to be six workbenches. I modified the plans slightly and put a 4"
> >clamping
> > > surface around each one. I'm looking for hasps to fasten the
> >workbenches
> >
> > > together from underneath (my garage floor is very uneven). I used
oak
> >trim
> > > on the edges which looks nice and works fine.
> > >
> > > What type of a laminate surface do you recommend? Also, I'm going to
> >start
> > > building the tail soon and am wondering how to get the rounded front
and
> > > back shapes. Is there a router bit or a shaper bit I can buy?
> > >
> > > Thanks again,
> > >
> > > Paul Schultz
> > > pschultz(at)uplogon.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________________
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Can we hear from other 'A' guys on the list about this (the reliablilty
of the A). I am using an 'A' and would like to believe it isnt all like
that... at least I hope it isnt ALL like that.
--- Michael Brusilow wrote:
> Re: power discussion:
> I flew with an model A engine for two years, had all kinds of
> problems - overheating, bent valve
> stem, vapor lock (scary forced landing-the A does not
> windmill),constant tweking & adjusting - that
> I changed to a 0-200 and have been a happy aircamper for the past
> nine years.
>
===
My homepage: http://www.AirCamper.org/w3builder
....Oh that I had wings like a dove! for then would I fly away, and be at rest.
-Psalm 55:6
---------------------------------------------------------
Visit www.AirCamper.org - A Low 'n Slow Online Community!
---------------------------------------------------------
____
Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Pioneering Piets |
Dear Robert,
Thank you for the offer. You didn't tell me you were practically in
Mexico!......You are what......about 60 mi from the border? Let's see,
that is about a 5 hour drive from here? Wont you send me a photo of your
plane? You TOO if you want. E-mail me and tell me more about your build.
I'd love to know. That goes for EVERYONE'S build projects.
And Thanks to EVERYONE who has been responding to my querries......
it's so good to have your support help and support.
Sincerely, DannyMac
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Brusilow <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
<>
Hey, I didn't mean to condem all A engines. I was just relating an
isolated experience.I flew Ed Snyder's A powered Piet quite a bit with
no problems.Don't let me discourage you if you want to go model A.
Mike B ( Piet N687MB )
Can we hear from other 'A' guys on
the list
about this (the reliabliltyof the A). I am using an 'A' and would
like to
believe it isnt all likethat... at least I hope it isnt ALL like
that.
Hey, I didn't mean to condem all A engines. I
was just
relating an isolated experience.I flew Ed Snyder's A powered Piet quite
a bit
with no problems.Don't let me discourage you if you want to go model
A.
Mike B ( Piet N687MB
)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | First wheels I've spotted |
Dear Guys,
I had time today to run by a motorcycle salvage yard today. I found two
1973 Harley rims that looked really solid and strong. There were some
cast aluminum ones but I found a couple made of steel with cast aluminum
hubs. They were 19" and a tread with of 2.5"......The inside diameter
was large enough for a bushing on a 1.5" axle but the cast hubs troubled
me. Anyone know if I should steer clear?.......The flanges (I guess
that's what you call them, the part around the hub where the spokes go
through) were .25" thick and all of the spokes were tight even though
some had begun to rust. I noticed the diam of the spokes were larger
than most on the other rims I found in the yard. Not considerably, may
just the next size thicker. Has anyone trusted cast aluminum under THEIR
private parts?
Like I said, this is the first place I've looked. Doing what I can
till plans and materials arrive.
________________________________________________________________________________
Make that "tread width" Ha! These had no tires.
DannyMac
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
Can't speak as to the not windmilling part.... I have owned and driven model
A's for more than twenty years and have found the with a proper rebuild they
are very reliable. It is usually dumb little things that cuase them to stop
running just like any other engine.
Build it right the first time and pay close attention to detail and you will
have a safe engine.
John Mc
P.S. detail means the installation, systems, and controls too!
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard DeCosta
Date: Wednesday, May 19, 1999 7:05 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: engine
>Can we hear from other 'A' guys on the list about this (the reliablilty
>of the A). I am using an 'A' and would like to believe it isnt all like
>that... at least I hope it isnt ALL like that.
>
>--- Michael Brusilow wrote:
>> Re: power discussion:
>> I flew with an model A engine for two years, had all kinds of
>> problems - overheating, bent valve
>> stem, vapor lock (scary forced landing-the A does not
>> windmill),constant tweking & adjusting - that
>> I changed to a 0-200 and have been a happy aircamper for the past
>> nine years.
>>
>===
>My homepage: http://www.AirCamper.org/w3builder
>....Oh that I had wings like a dove! for then would I fly away, and be at
rest. -Psalm 55:6
>---------------------------------------------------------
>Visit www.AirCamper.org - A Low 'n Slow Online Community!
>---------------------------------------------------------
>____
>Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
| Subject: | Re: First wheels I've spotted |
Danny ,
My wheels use cast hubs brakes included and are 21" dirt bike wheels. I
figure if they can take the pounding dirt bikes dish out the should survive
my landings. ;-)
John Mc
-----Original Message-----
From: dannymac <dannymac@hal-pc.org>
Date: Wednesday, May 19, 1999 8:42 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: First wheels I've spotted
>Dear Guys,
>
>I had time today to run by a motorcycle salvage yard today. I found two
>1973 Harley rims that looked really solid and strong. There were some
>cast aluminum ones but I found a couple made of steel with cast aluminum
>hubs. They were 19" and a tread with of 2.5"......The inside diameter
>was large enough for a bushing on a 1.5" axle but the cast hubs troubled
>me. Anyone know if I should steer clear?.......The flanges (I guess
>that's what you call them, the part around the hub where the spokes go
>through) were .25" thick and all of the spokes were tight even though
>some had begun to rust. I noticed the diam of the spokes were larger
>than most on the other rims I found in the yard. Not considerably, may
>just the next size thicker. Has anyone trusted cast aluminum under THEIR
>private parts?
> Like I said, this is the first place I've looked. Doing what I can
>till plans and materials arrive.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
John,
Does your aeroplane have brakes?
DannyMac
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Weights of some Pietenpol components. |
Hello Gang,
Quite a few years ago I prepared this for our EAA Chapter newsletter.
It may be of interest to those who are building Pietenpols. All weights
are given to the nearest quarter pound. These figures apply to C-FARH,
a Pietenpol built by a friend in 1975. He used my jigs and this a/c is a
sister to mine. It is powered by a Continental A65 - 8 and has a 3-piece
wing.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----------
2.25
8.75
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
------------
The total weight of the doped polyester fabric cover for the above
components was 36.5 pounds. The estimated weight of the fuse-
lage covering was about 8 pounds, giving the total weight of the
cover at about 45 pounds. This could have been reduced a bit by
using a lighter grade of fabric.
The weight of the fuselage and main landing gear was not available.
The combined weight of lift and jury struts, strut bracing wires, tail
bracing wires, hardware and fittings was about 30 pounds.
The tailwheel assembly weighed 6.5 pounds and is the A-frame yoke
type with a coiled compression spring. The tailwheel itself was some-
what lighter than the Scott 6" tailwheel used on many lightplanes.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
--------------------------
SUGGESTIONS FOR REDUCING WEIGHT
---------------------------------------------------------------
1. Routed spars could save 13 -15 lbs. overall. This a/c used solid
spars (Sitka spruce, unrouted).
2. A single piece wing according to the plans would eliminate a lot
of hardware and save about 15 lbs. (Ref. BHP himself).
3. A minimum amount of dope and paint will save some weight, but
not very much when the entire cover weighs only 45 pounds. Keep
the cover light and flexible with the weave of the fabric still
visible
in the finish.
4. Avoid heavy seat cushions, keep instruments small and few in num-
ber. Use a lightweight fire extinguisher.
5. Use a wooden propeller instead of a metal one and save about 10 lb.
Avoid oversize tires (6.00 - 6 or 7.00 - 6, 4 ply rating, are OK).
Old
C-FARH uses 8.00 - 4 Cub wheels, brakes and tires.
6. Do not use an electrical system with starter, etc. unless you are
pre-
pared to pay the penalty in performance.
7. Use lightweight magnetos such as Slick and save several pounds. A-
void fibreglas cowlings unless they are quite thin and well-made.
Both
C-FARH and CF-AUN (my a/c) use aluminum sheet cowlings. Very
light and simple.
8. Follow the plans! Pietenpols are perhaps overbuilt and careful
engineer-
ing could pare some weight from the structure, but this could
compro-
mise durability for pasture flying. The tail group is as light as it
is pos-
sible to make it. Some fittings should be redesigned to current
engineer-
ing standards, but that is about all one can recommend. This need
not
add any appreciable amount of weight.
The Pietenpol airplane, as designed, is a marvel of practicality and
simp-
licity that is difficult to improve upon. One can preserve this by
keeping it
light. Watch the ounces and the pounds will be taken care of
automatically.
Graham
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bowdler(at)juno.com |
| Subject: | Re: Weights of some Pietenpol components. |
>The Pietenpol airplane, as designed, is a marvel of practicality and
simplicity that is difficult to improve upon.
Bravo, Graham!
__________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
>
>
>
> Hey, I didn't mean to condem all A engines.
> Mike B ( Piet N687MB )
Guys- Mike is right here. An A is no different from any other engine.....if
it's got
internal problems you don't know about or it's supposedly rebuilt and ready to
go,
but not really,...etc. you'll have problems. Frank Pavliga and his father had
several
forced landings with Sky Gypsy before they pulled the Ford out and put in a
Continental. Go figure. Now Wilbur Graff has an A also with a Funk head and
that guy has cruised all over the place, from Ohio to Brodhead/Osh many times
in the last 4 years or so with not so much as a hiccup. I certainly don't know
squat
about Ford A engines (besides they sound incredibly sweet swinging a
propeller)
but my gut feeling is that knowledgeable aircraft engine rebuilders are more
abundant
than knowledgeable Ford A engine gurus. I think you just have to snuggle up to
your
local Model A Ford CAR club near you and find out who the MOST knowledgeable A
rebuild guy is in the area, then go pick his brain till he boots you out.
Mike C.
Hey, I didn't mean to condem all A engines.
Mike B ( Piet N687MB )
Guys- Mike is right here. An A is no different from any other
engine.....if it's got
internal problems you don't know about or it's supposedly rebuilt and
ready to go,
but not really,...etc. you'll have problems. Frank Pavliga and his
father had several
forced landings with Sky Gypsy before they pulled the Ford out and put in
a
Continental. Go figure. Now Wilbur Graff has an A also with a
Funk head and
that guy has cruised all over the place, from Ohio to Brodhead/Osh many
times
in the last 4 years or so with not so much as a hiccup. I certainly
don't know squat
about Ford A engines (besides they sound incredibly sweet swinging
a propeller)
but my gut feeling is that knowledgeable aircraft engine rebuilders are
more abundant
than knowledgeable Ford A engine gurus. I think you just have to
snuggle up to your
local Model A Ford CAR club near you and find out who the MOST
knowledgeable A
rebuild guy is in the area, then go pick his brain till he boots you
out.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
Makes me glad the my 'A' guy is only 8 miles from me. I plan on
spending lots of time there getting to know his work and my engine.
> than knowledgeable Ford A engine gurus. I think you just have to
> snuggle up to
> your
> local Model A Ford CAR club near you and find out who the MOST
> knowledgeable A
> rebuild guy is in the area, then go pick his brain till he boots you
> out.
>
> Mike C.
>
Hey, I didn't mean to condem all A engines.
Mike B ( Piet N687MB )
Guys- Mike is right here. An A is no different from any other
engine.....if it's got
internal problems you don't know about or it's supposedly rebuilt and
ready to go,
but not really,...etc. you'll have problems. Frank Pavliga and
his
father had several
forced landings with Sky Gypsy before they pulled the Ford out and put
in
a
Continental. Go figure. Now Wilbur Graff has an A also with
a
Funk head and
that guy has cruised all over the place, from Ohio to Brodhead/Osh many
times
in the last 4 years or so with not so much as a hiccup. I
certainly
don't know squat
about Ford A engines (besides they sound incredibly sweet
swinging
a propeller)
but my gut feeling is that knowledgeable aircraft engine rebuilders are
more abundant
than knowledgeable Ford A engine gurus. I think you just have to
snuggle up to your
local Model A Ford CAR club near you and find out who the MOST
knowledgeable A
rebuild guy is in the area, then go pick his brain till he boots you
out.
Mike C.
===
My homepage: http://www.AirCamper.org/w3builder
....Oh that I had wings like a dove! for then would I fly away, and be at rest.
-Psalm 55:6
---------------------------------------------------------
Visit www.AirCamper.org - A Low 'n Slow Online Community!
---------------------------------------------------------
____
Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Joe Krzes <jkrzes(at)hotmail.com> |
Thanks Mark,
I never thought about a hole!! I've been going over the plans and listing
out as many questions as I can, drawing by drawing. I figure I'll just put
them up on a web site with answers/solutions I receive for review. Thanks
again for your help.
Joe
>From: mboynton(at)excite.com
>Reply-To: Pietenpol Discussion
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Subject: Re: Workbench
>Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 16:12:07 -0700 (PDT)
>
>Joe,
>
>I think what Paul is doing is just covering the surfaces of his work
>benches. What I've done and what I think many of the builders have done is
>to build a rib jig that sets on top of a work bench. I really don't know
>what the others are doing to the surface of their jigs; I used an old
>counter top (laminated) I removed from my house. To be honest, I don't
>know
>if it will resist the glue I'm using (aerolite) or not. I've used a
>one-inch hole saw to remove the material directly below where each glue
>joint will be. My hope is that the glue will drip through and minimize any
>sticking to the jig. I'm using 1/4 inch staples - the wire kind, to clamp
>the gussets to the cap strips and bracing while the glue cures. Then I'll
>remove the staples. I'll put gussets on one side while the rib is in the
>jig, then after the glue is stable, I'll take the rib out of the jig and
>gusset the other side. Like I mentioned before, I'm new at this. Others
>may have better advice to share with you. Hope this helps.
>
>Mark
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Doug Sheets <doug_sheets(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Cross Countries in a Piet |
Craig:
If you're from PA, our EAA chapter is having a fly-in on June 6 all day and
would be very pleased if you flew up. We are GKJ, in Meadville PA and I
would be extremely happy to see your Piet because I'm building one. I'll buy
your (and guest) breakfast and gas if you come.
Thanks, Doug
>From: Craig Lawler <clawler(at)ptd.net>
>Reply-To: Pietenpol Discussion
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Subject: Re: Cross Countries in a Piet
>Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 16:15:49 -0500
>
>I flew my Piet to Beaver Springs last week. About 30m SW of us. Longest
>cross country. Took the PA roadmap so I wouldn't get too lost. Gets
>boring flying a Piet in a straight line for more than 10 min or so.
>
>Craig
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Craig Lawler <clawler(at)ptd.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Cross Countries in a Piet |
x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Doug,
June 6th sounds interesting. I better get a new road map and watch the
weather. If you are over this way, Milton Pa, let me know and we'll go
for a ride.
Craig
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC" |
To all corvair pilots,
I just can't seem to get what I need from the engine. In the pouring rain I
changed the springs in the distributer with lower tension springs. The new
weights wouldn't fit, so.. I
used the old ones. I tried to modify their travel with a file but the file
would not touch the hardened mat'l. I think it is 4130, tough stuff when
hardened.
Last night I ran up the engine and forgot my crankcase vent line was not
connected... result...oil
everywhere. Got it all cleaned up. Connected the vent line. Tried again. and
viola! Got the same RPM as before, about 2600 RPM, but now it feels like a
much
smoother transition... so the light springs did help bring the advance in
sooner and smoother. Next it tried to advance the timing ( just a few
degrees to astart with) the more throttle I added, the more the engine
seemed to mush. At
the end of the throttle travel the RPM was 200 less than at the original
timing setting. Now I'm really confused because I expected a little
improvement even though I did not advance it to the required 35 Degrees BTDC
required. Tonight I'll put a timing light on and see whats going on. Could
it be I moved the distributer in the wrong direction??? The rotor moves
clockwise so I moved the distributer housing CCW. Right?
Domenic
________________________________________________________________________________
Richard, and others,
I have downloaded the PIET Discussion list Archives to Richard's site
www.aircamper.org
Not very pretty, but you can get to it. I'll be cleaning it up soon.
Steve E
Provo, UT
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: Cross Countries in a Piet |
>Doug,>
>June 6th sounds interesting. I better get a new road map and watch the
>weather. If you are over this way, Milton Pa, let me know and we'll go
>for a ride.
>
>Craig
>
Craig- If you go, I'll go. :))) Really, if the weather is good, it
would be neat to have two Piets there...plus get to meet you.
Mike C.
Doug,
June 6th sounds interesting. I better get a new road map and watch
the
weather. If you are over this way, Milton Pa, let me know and we'll
go
for a ride.
Craig
Craig- If you go, I'll go. :))) Really, if the weather is
good, it
would be neat to have two Piets there...plus get to meet you.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
Hi Gang.
You can see an image of my hats at http://steve.byu.edu There are 40 of
you who are sporting the embroidered Piet cap, and several others have
orders so I have placed and order for another 2 doz. Those of you holding
out for a different color, I am doing the same design on a black cap with
black logo and text. They will be ready in a week to 10 days. I am
discontinuing the logo only version, since everyone save 2 ordered the "low
and slow for 70 years" version. If there is enough interest I might do red
and also a blue version.
The pricing again
$18 with rear message "Low and Slow for 70 Years.
$20 your own message i.e.: (Steve Eldredge; NX7229R)
$2 per order (not per hat) for first class shipping .
Send your check with a note including details and your Phone # to:
Steve Eldredge
1005 E. 620 N.
Provo UT, 84606
Steve E.
Provo UT.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: Piet Archives |
Here is the direct address:
http://www.aircamper.org/users/stevee/
Steve E
-----Original Message-----
steve(at)byu.edu
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 1999 9:35 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Piet Archives
Richard, and others,
I have downloaded the PIET Discussion list Archives to Richard's site
www.aircamper.org
Not very pretty, but you can get to it. I'll be cleaning it up soon.
Steve E
Provo, UT
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Piet Archives |
If anyone knows of a way to automatically archive them right from this
list, let me know, it'd be a great asset to the site.
--- steve(at)byu.edu wrote:
> Richard, and others,
>
> I have downloaded the PIET Discussion list Archives to Richard's
> site
> www.aircamper.org
> Not very pretty, but you can get to it. I'll be cleaning it up soon.
>
> Steve E
> Provo, UT
>
>
size=2>Richard, and others,
size=2>
size=2>I have
downloaded the PIET Discussion list Archives to Richard's site
href="http://www.aircamper.org">www.aircamper.org
size=2>
face=Arial size=2>
color=#000000 face=Arial size=2>Not very pretty, but you can get to
it.
I'll be cleaning it up soon.
size=2>
size=2>Steve
E
size=2>
face=Arial size=2>Provo, UT
===
My homepage: http://www.AirCamper.org/w3builder
....Oh that I had wings like a dove! for then would I fly away, and be at rest.
-Psalm 55:6
---------------------------------------------------------
Visit www.AirCamper.org - A Low 'n Slow Online Community!
---------------------------------------------------------
____
Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
Reference the Pavliga's Ford engine problems, Their engine turned out to NOT
to have been "set-up" right. It had a way high compression head which caused
the pistons to burn and break and the other failure was the water
pump.......outside of that, the Ford hummed along and was very easy to
start.
Earl Myers
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard DeCosta
Date: Thursday, May 20, 1999 8:58 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Ford Power
>Makes me glad the my 'A' guy is only 8 miles from me. I plan on
>spending lots of time there getting to know his work and my engine.
>
>> than knowledgeable Ford A engine gurus. I think you just have to
>> snuggle up to
>> your
>> local Model A Ford CAR club near you and find out who the MOST
>> knowledgeable A
>> rebuild guy is in the area, then go pick his brain till he boots you
>> out.
>>
>> Mike C.
>>
>
>
>Hey, I didn't mean to condem all A engines.
>Mike B ( Piet N687MB )
>Guys- Mike is right here. An A is no different from any other
>engine.....if it's got
>internal problems you don't know about or it's supposedly rebuilt and
>ready to go,
>but not really,...etc. you'll have problems. Frank Pavliga and
>his
>father had several
>forced landings with Sky Gypsy before they pulled the Ford out and put
>in
>a
>Continental. Go figure. Now Wilbur Graff has an A also with
>a
>Funk head and
>that guy has cruised all over the place, from Ohio to Brodhead/Osh many
>times
>in the last 4 years or so with not so much as a hiccup. I
>certainly
>don't know squat
>about Ford A engines (besides they sound incredibly sweet
>swinging
>a propeller)
>but my gut feeling is that knowledgeable aircraft engine rebuilders are
>more abundant
>than knowledgeable Ford A engine gurus. I think you just have to
>snuggle up to your
>local Model A Ford CAR club near you and find out who the MOST
>knowledgeable A
>rebuild guy is in the area, then go pick his brain till he boots you
>out.
>
>Mike C.
>
>
>===
>My homepage: http://www.AirCamper.org/w3builder
>....Oh that I had wings like a dove! for then would I fly away, and be at
rest. -Psalm 55:6
>---------------------------------------------------------
>Visit www.AirCamper.org - A Low 'n Slow Online Community!
>---------------------------------------------------------
>____
>Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Talbert <wtalbert(at)flash.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Piet Archives |
Richard;
I can't think of a way to have it download directly, but not
sure that is a good idea. Like Steve said, it ain't
pretty. A lot of subjects do not reflect the body of the
message. I have been toying with the idea of building a
viewer that would filter the list to the subject at hand
(Engine, Glue, wood sources, wheels, etc). Is there any
interest? I tend to program for my benefit, if anyone has
suggestions, keep them to yourself. Just kidding, what I
was thinking was a bitmap of the A/C and hotspots to filter
the items. Food for thought
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Duprey <duprey(at)excite.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Piet Archives |
Bill:That sounds like a great Idea to me, then it would help everyone hone
right in on the subject matter they need at the time.
John Duprey
Richard;
>
> I can't think of a way to have it download directly, but not
> sure that is a good idea. Like Steve said, it ain't
> pretty. A lot of subjects do not reflect the body of the
> message. I have been toying with the idea of building a
> viewer that would filter the list to the subject at hand
> (Engine, Glue, wood sources, wheels, etc). Is there any
> interest? I tend to program for my benefit, if anyone has
> suggestions, keep them to yourself. Just kidding, what I
> was thinking was a bitmap of the A/C and hotspots to filter
> the items. Food for thought
>
"the Ox is slow, but the Earth is patient"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Craig Lawler <clawler(at)ptd.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Cross Countries in a Piet |
x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Mike,
How far is Meadville from you?
Craig
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Beanlands <kbeanlan(at)spots.ab.ca> |
| Subject: | C-85 For Sale - Clarification |
I seem to have caused a little confusion. The $3500 I'm asking is $3500
CDN or about $2300 USD. I'm still negotiable even on that.
Ken
On Tue, 18 May 1999, Ken Beanlands wrote:
> After a lot of careful consideration, I am planning to sell my C-85-12F
> "project engine". The engine is disassembled at the engine shopand has as
> many bad parts as good. Here's what's included:
>
> Crankshaft: Magnafluxed and dimensions checked. Currently at 0.010"/0.010"
> under and needs to go to 0.020" under on both.
>
> Case: OK
>
> Rear accessory case: Two included, one is OK, the other is shot in the oil
> pump
>
> Gears: mag, cam and oil pump gears are poor.
>
> Cylinders: 8 in total. 4 are completely shot, the other 4 have some cracks
> but are in much beter shape.
>
> Rods: Servicable. A second set of servicable 0-200 rods are included
>
> Mags: None
>
> Generator: Servicable with gear
>
> Starter: Pull type with gear
>
> Carb: Stromberg, not O/H'd
>
> Cam: Good but needs re-grind
>
> Lots of new seals, gaskets, intake tubes, clamps, etc. The O/H kit for it
> was purchased. Manuals are also included.
>
> I'd like to get $3500 plus shipping for the lot, but I'm open to offers.
> Cost to O/H with factory new jugs was estimated at around $6000 USD. If
> you used the -8 rear case and gears, the cost could be significantly
> reduced.
>
> Oh yeah, I'll be using a PZL/Franklin engine on the Christavia. The extra
> 35 ponies at only a little more seams reasonable.
>
> Thanks
> Ken
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Lightsey, Mark - TP2MAL" <MLightsey(at)socalgas.com> |
Does anyone have a suggestion on how much advance to run on the Model A.
Right now I'm using about 25 degrees BTDC. This is very convenient since my
mag has 25 degrees of lag on the impulse. Very easy to start with no
kicking back. I just installed a 6:1 Brumfield head in place of a "way
high" compression aluminum head. I'm now able to turn about 1850 static with
a 74"x52" Felix prop. The funny thing is, by time the throttle is about 3/4
of the way in, I've reached the maximum rpm. The last 1/4 of throttle
travel has no effect. Any thoughts...
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 1999 10:17 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Ford Power
Reference the Pavliga's Ford engine problems, Their engine turned out to NOT
to have been "set-up" right. It had a way high compression head which caused
the pistons to burn and break and the other failure was the water
pump.......outside of that, the Ford hummed along and was very easy to
start.
Earl Myers
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard DeCosta
Date: Thursday, May 20, 1999 8:58 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Ford Power
>Makes me glad the my 'A' guy is only 8 miles from me. I plan on
>spending lots of time there getting to know his work and my engine.
>
>> than knowledgeable Ford A engine gurus. I think you just have to
>> snuggle up to
>> your
>> local Model A Ford CAR club near you and find out who the MOST
>> knowledgeable A
>> rebuild guy is in the area, then go pick his brain till he boots you
>> out.
>>
>> Mike C.
>>
>
>
>Hey, I didn't mean to condem all A engines.
>Mike B ( Piet N687MB )
>Guys- Mike is right here. An A is no different from any other
>engine.....if it's got
>internal problems you don't know about or it's supposedly rebuilt and
>ready to go,
>but not really,...etc. you'll have problems. Frank Pavliga and
>his
>father had several
>forced landings with Sky Gypsy before they pulled the Ford out and put
>in
>a
>Continental. Go figure. Now Wilbur Graff has an A also with
>a
>Funk head and
>that guy has cruised all over the place, from Ohio to Brodhead/Osh many
>times
>in the last 4 years or so with not so much as a hiccup. I
>certainly
>don't know squat
>about Ford A engines (besides they sound incredibly sweet
>swinging
>a propeller)
>but my gut feeling is that knowledgeable aircraft engine rebuilders are
>more abundant
>than knowledgeable Ford A engine gurus. I think you just have to
>snuggle up to your
>local Model A Ford CAR club near you and find out who the MOST
>knowledgeable A
>rebuild guy is in the area, then go pick his brain till he boots you
>out.
>
>Mike C.
>
>
>===
>My homepage: http://www.AirCamper.org/w3builder
>....Oh that I had wings like a dove! for then would I fly away, and be at
rest. -Psalm 55:6
>---------------------------------------------------------
>Visit www.AirCamper.org - A Low 'n Slow Online Community!
>---------------------------------------------------------
>____
>Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
| Subject: | Re: Corvair engine |
The point plate moves in the opposite direction to the rotor to advance the
timing. I'm curious about your intake system? What manifold pressures
(Vacuum) are you getting?
John
-----Original Message-----
From: BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC
Date: Thursday, May 20, 1999 9:33 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Corvair engine
>To all corvair pilots,
>
> I just can't seem to get what I need from the engine. In the pouring rain
I
>changed the springs in the distributer with lower tension springs. The new
>weights wouldn't fit, so.. I
>used the old ones. I tried to modify their travel with a file but the file
>would not touch the hardened mat'l. I think it is 4130, tough stuff when
>hardened.
> Last night I ran up the engine and forgot my crankcase vent line was not
>connected... result...oil
>everywhere. Got it all cleaned up. Connected the vent line. Tried again.
and
>viola! Got the same RPM as before, about 2600 RPM, but now it feels like a
>much
>smoother transition... so the light springs did help bring the advance in
>sooner and smoother. Next it tried to advance the timing ( just a few
>degrees to astart with) the more throttle I added, the more the engine
>seemed to mush. At
>the end of the throttle travel the RPM was 200 less than at the original
>timing setting. Now I'm really confused because I expected a little
>improvement even though I did not advance it to the required 35 Degrees
BTDC
>required. Tonight I'll put a timing light on and see whats going on. Could
>it be I moved the distributer in the wrong direction??? The rotor moves
>clockwise so I moved the distributer housing CCW. Right?
>
>Domenic
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
| Subject: | Re: Piet Archives, Subject filter |
It would help us all if we remembered to change the subject line of our
replies. I really enjoy this list!
John Mc
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Talbert <wtalbert(at)flash.net>
Date: Thursday, May 20, 1999 11:48 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Piet Archives
>Richard;
>
>I can't think of a way to have it download directly, but not
>sure that is a good idea. Like Steve said, it ain't
>pretty. A lot of subjects do not reflect the body of the
>message. I have been toying with the idea of building a
>viewer that would filter the list to the subject at hand
>(Engine, Glue, wood sources, wheels, etc). Is there any
>interest? I tend to program for my benefit, if anyone has
>suggestions, keep them to yourself. Just kidding, what I
>was thinking was a bitmap of the A/C and hotspots to filter
>the items. Food for thought
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Piet Archives, Subject filter |
I don't do chat......so this works just fine!
DannyMac
IJohn McNarry wrote:
>
> It would help us all if we remembered to change the subject line of our
> replies. I really enjoy this list!
> John Mc
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | something simple maybe? |
I downloaded the zip file and unzipped it into a separate directory.
Now how do I view the file "piet.arc" file that I now have?
DannyMac
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Doug <ve6zh(at)oanet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Corvair engine |
The point plate is moved by the Vac.advance not by the mech. advance.The
fly weights rotate the point cam .But of course,the dist.must be moved
against the rotation of the dist. shaft to advance ign.timming.
In regards to your sag in rpm at wot.(wide open throttle),verify your
mixture,rich or lean?A quick check is to use a propane source;ie a propane
torch(not lit of course)and feed the gas into the intake at the suspect
rpm,and note if there is a change.If the rpm goes up,your mixture is
lean,if rpm drops then the mix.is too rich.
35 degrees might be a little much in the advance,i would stay down in the
25 degree range,or your pistons may become holly!You may have too much
pitch for your available torque.Can you borrow another prop??
Best of luck in resolving your problem,and have a great CANADA DAY long
weekend!!!!!!
Doug---------now painted and on the gear again CGCGJ
> From: John McNarry <jmcnarry(at)techplus.com>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Re: Corvair engine
> Date: Thursday, May 20, 1999 8:23 PM
>
> The point plate moves in the opposite direction to the rotor to advance
the
> timing. I'm curious about your intake system? What manifold pressures
> (Vacuum) are you getting?
>
> John
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Date: Thursday, May 20, 1999 9:33 AM
> Subject: Corvair engine
>
>
> >To all corvair pilots,
> >
> > I just can't seem to get what I need from the engine. In the pouring
rain
> I
> >changed the springs in the distributer with lower tension springs. The
new
> >weights wouldn't fit, so.. I
> >used the old ones. I tried to modify their travel with a file but the
file
> >would not touch the hardened mat'l. I think it is 4130, tough stuff when
> >hardened.
> > Last night I ran up the engine and forgot my crankcase vent line was
not
> >connected... result...oil
> >everywhere. Got it all cleaned up. Connected the vent line. Tried again.
> and
> >viola! Got the same RPM as before, about 2600 RPM, but now it feels like
a
> >much
> >smoother transition... so the light springs did help bring the advance
in
> >sooner and smoother. Next it tried to advance the timing ( just a few
> >degrees to astart with) the more throttle I added, the more the engine
> >seemed to mush. At
> >the end of the throttle travel the RPM was 200 less than at the original
> >timing setting. Now I'm really confused because I expected a little
> >improvement even though I did not advance it to the required 35 Degrees
> BTDC
> >required. Tonight I'll put a timing light on and see whats going on.
Could
> >it be I moved the distributer in the wrong direction??? The rotor moves
> >clockwise so I moved the distributer housing CCW. Right?
> >
> >Domenic
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: Cross Countries in a Piet |
>Mike,
>
>How far is Meadville from you?
>
>Craig
>
Craig- I think it would be about an hour and 1/2 flight or
so, but I'll have to check the charts (excuse me, road maps:)))
before I know for sure.
How far are you ?
ps- I cruise about 74 mph.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bowdler(at)juno.com |
| Subject: | Piet Cross Country |
A friend showed me the latest issue of Flying Magazine containing a
blurb about Pietenpols and the 70th celebration at Oshkosh. It lists
cruise speed at 80 mph and range at 350 miles! That would require over
four hours flying time (if you could cruise that fast) and almost 20
gallons of fuel! That's bladder and butt bustingly optimistic in my
opinion!
BTW if my history is correct, yesterday the 20th was actually the
70th anniversary. I "toasted" BHP's memory and the friendships and
cameraderie I have enjoyed as a result of my involvement with his simple
little wooden airplane!
Happy anniversary to all!
Tom
__________
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: something simple maybe? |
It is a text file. flat text editor will work. It must be able to handle
something on the order of 3-4 meg files however. I use ultraedit. WP or
Word will handle it too.
Steve Eldredge
IT Services
Brigham Young University
> -----Original Message-----
> dannymac
> Sent: Thursday, May 20, 1999 8:12 PM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: something simple maybe?
>
>
> I downloaded the zip file and unzipped it into a separate directory.
> Now how do I view the file "piet.arc" file that I now have?
> DannyMac
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Craig Lawler <clawler(at)ptd.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Cross Countries in a Piet |
x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Mike C.
AirNav says we are 166m from Meadville. Might have to fudge and tape the
Garman 90 antenna to my tail cone. Won't work in the cockpit because my
center section is covered with sheet metal.
Craig
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Bell <mbell(at)sctcorp.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Cross Countries in a Piet |
Sheet Metal??? Does that mean that the plywood on the plans
has nothing to do with the structural integrity and I can use
marine plywood or "sheet metal" if I want???? What is the
sheet metal, light gauge aluminum? How much weight savings do
you get over plywood?
Mike Bell
Columbia, SC
Craig Lawler on 05/21/99 11:41:25 AM
Please respond to Pietenpol Discussion
cc:
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Cross Countries in a Piet
Mike C.
AirNav says we are 166m from Meadville. Might have to fudge and
tape the
Garman 90 antenna to my tail cone. Won't work in the cockpit
because my
center section is covered with sheet metal.
Craig
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: something simple maybe? |
Thanks, Steve
Works fine, Danny
> >
> >
> > I downloaded the zip file and unzipped it into a separate directory.
> > Now how do I view the file "piet.arc" file that I now have?
> > DannyMac
> >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC" |
| Subject: | Re: Cross Countries in a Piet |
Mike, i see your cruise is 74 MPH. On my first flight I acchieved 60 Kts.
that 69.9 MPH, maybe I'm in the ball park? I would be slower since I have a
longer wing span.
Domenic
----------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Cross Countries in a Piet |
>Mike,
>
>How far is Meadville from you?
>
>Craig
>
Craig- I think it would be about an hour and 1/2 flight or
so, but I'll have to check the charts (excuse me, road maps:)))
before I know for sure.
How far are you ?
ps- I cruise about 74 mph.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC" |
| Subject: | Bernie's article |
To all,
Last night I re-read B.H.P.'s article on the corvair conversion. In one
paragraph he states three different Max. full throttle RPM acchievements.
What gives? Does anyone with the article understand what he was saying. The
RPMs he listed were 2600, 2900, and 3300. How can he acchieve three
different maximums, unless he changed something and didn't change his
article? All this acchieved with the Tilotson carb which he admitted was too
small and a larger one should be used. At 3300 he managed 120 MPH. He must
have had some pitch on that prop., and if he did how could he have gotten
3300 RPM. It doesn't make any engineering sense to me. Perhaps someone can
enlighten us.
A.O.G.
Domenic
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: Cross Countries in a Piet |
Right in the ballpark. I cruise 72-74mph on the GPS. A realy screamer!
Steve Eldredge
IT Services
Brigham Young University
> -----Original Message-----
> BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC
> Sent: Friday, May 21, 1999 11:12 AM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Re: Cross Countries in a Piet
>
>
> Mike, i see your cruise is 74 MPH. On my first flight I
> acchieved 60 Kts.
> that 69.9 MPH, maybe I'm in the ball park? I would be slower
> since I have a
> longer wing span.
> Domenic
> ----------
> From: Michael D Cuy
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Re: Cross Countries in a Piet
> Date: Friday, May 21, 1999 9:42AM
>
> >Mike,
> >
> >How far is Meadville from you?
> >
> >Craig
> >
> Craig- I think it would be about an hour and 1/2 flight or
> so, but I'll have to check the charts (excuse me, road maps:)))
> before I know for sure.
>
> How far are you ?
>
> ps- I cruise about 74 mph.
>
> Mike C.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Lund <malund(at)sprint.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Piet Archives, Subject filter |
We're building/ flying 70 year old airplanes, built with 100 year old trees,
and powered by 30-80 year old engines, and you want us to remeber to change
something that works in nanoseconds ????
;-)
Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Lund <malund(at)sprint.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Spoked Wheels |
Hi Michael
About your suggestion on the Ultra Piet/ MTB wheels- ther's about 10#
difference (and the originality) between a scout and an Ultra..... How much
weight and $ can you save me ?
Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net> |
Good Day, Folks,
I'm back. Been spraying silver on my ship lately. Work a bunch on it and
still find flaws when I spray. Can anybody reassure me they'll sand out and
that I'll get a presentable finish?
Has anybody got any work on the 1st qtr BPA Newsletter?
BCNU all at Brodhead this summer.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Lund <malund(at)sprint.ca>
Date: Friday, May 21, 1999 5:46 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Spoked Wheels
>Hi Michael
>
>About your suggestion on the Ultra Piet/ MTB wheels- ther's about 10#
>difference (and the originality) between a scout and an Ultra..... How much
>weight and $ can you save me ?
>
>Mike
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Neal <llneal(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Piet Archives, Subject filter |
Wow!
Nothing like a little perspective Mike!
Gee, when I started to dream about building my own, they were 40 year old
airplanes... I'd better get back to the workshop pretty quick.
;-) LLN
Mike Lund wrote:
> We're building/ flying 70 year old airplanes, built with 100 year old trees,
> and powered by 30-80 year old engines, and you want us to remeber to change
> something that works in nanoseconds ????
>
> ;-)
>
> Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Gee, where do my hands go? |
As a student pilot, I am learning to fly left seat in a 152. Left
hand yoke, right hand throttle. If I place the throttle on the right in
my Piet, does that mean others that have placed it on the left of their
cockpit will have a hard time flying it? I am left handed also, so this
feels quite comfortable to me.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bowdler(at)juno.com |
| Subject: | Re: Gee, where do my hands go? |
Danny, The convention is right hand stick left hand throttle. I was
concerned about the same thing. In my Warrior I use my left hand for the
yoke, right hand for throttle, mixture, radios etc. A friend told me
don't worry it will take you a few seconds to get used to it. Had to
make a go around after a bad bounce during taildragger transition
training in a J3. He was right, no problem.
Disclaimer: It's your airplane, put the throttle where you want it.
Have fun!
Tom
__________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
test
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Newbie seeks guidance |
What can anyone tell me about Jean Peters spruce? I spoke with him today
and he told me to ask around these sites so......here it is. As most of
you know, I am ignorant on aircraft grade materials and that I am trying
to "cram" knowledge to begin my build as soon as possible. He has the
fuse spruce ready to ship to me Tuesday and as some of you know, most of
the other suppliers are running up to several months behind.He suggested
that I contact B&D in California if I wanted to order plywood right
away. He said that I wouldn't have to know any more than thickness and
numbers of sheets from you guys if I ordered only birch from them
because they don't sell anything but exceptional grade plywood. Any
feedback on this statement? When I mentioned putting the 0-200 in my
Piet, he suggested using only birch because of it's ruggedness against
the larger powerplant. Is this so? Also he highly recomended a glue
called "Structan". Anything on this? He said it has survived 6 hour
boiling tests. What does this mean?
Though I have a handfull of guys around here that I can pick for
info much of the time, I would really like to go head to head, voice to
voice with someone fluent in Pietledge, if you know what I mean. If
anyone wants to give me their number and tell me when to call, I'll sure
give you the old ..........you know! Anything to make it to Wisconsin
next year.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave and Connie <dmatt(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Newbie seeks guidance |
>What can anyone tell me about Jean Peters spruce?
Two sono tubes, one 15' long, one 8' long. Cost about
$100 to air freight it to Rochester, NY. Other than that
the wood looks fine to me. I do question the amount of
1/2 x 1/2 in the package. I think that he missed that
it is used for the front upright in the ribs.
It is much easier and cheaper than figuring a mill list
for AS&S.
Dave
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Gee, where do my hands go? |
Danny,
I can appreciate your plight for dexterity alignment (fancy term for
"duh-righthand or lefthand"). 3 things come to mind: 1. Once upon a time
(except this is a true story) I owned a VW with rightside steering wheel
which put the gearshift on my left. 2 missed shifts and I was on my way, no
problem. 2. Last summer I lost the ends of 2 fingers on my righthand, and I
was very right-handed. I was forced to transition to my lefthand. As a
result I use the mouse as a lefty and penmanship stayed on the starboard
side. The point is that we're all a lot more ambidextrous than we give
ourselves credit. 3. And, as no doubt you've experienced, it's a
right-handed world so here's your chance to customize a little piece of
paradise. Brass it, 'glass it, and gas it your way! I too am a lowtime
student pilot and an aspiring Piet builder.
-----Original Message-----
From: dannymac <dannymac@hal-pc.org>
Date: Saturday, May 22, 1999 8:34 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Gee, where do my hands go?
>As a student pilot, I am learning to fly left seat in a 152. Left
>hand yoke, right hand throttle. If I place the throttle on the right in
>my Piet, does that mean others that have placed it on the left of their
>cockpit will have a hard time flying it? I am left handed also, so this
>feels quite comfortable to me.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
Hi guys. I'm trying to figure out how and where to mount my Icom 22, and
Lowrance Airmap GPS. I'll eventually get it where I want it, but I heard a
story on another list last year about a GPS not working properly with an
Icom, but I can't recall the reason they gave. Anyone heard that before?
Robert H GN-1 N83887
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
Ok, here's another one. The distance from the instrument panel, to the back
of the seat (rear), is 21" on my GN-1. Is this the standard on the "true"
Piet? The passenger has 22". Has anyone ever mover the back bulkhead back
a couple of inches?
Robert GN-1 N83887
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Doug Sheets <doug_sheets(at)hotmail.com> |
Robert:
I had(have)an old Garmin 95 GPS that I bought when they first came out and
it would NOT work in my Cherokee without an expternal antenna. The factory
said that nothing was wrong, but several aiviation consumer articles stated
that the Garmins were sensitive to frequencies emitted by some nav/coms. It
worked fine in a rental Cessna and a Tri-Pacer, but didn't like the
Cherokee. The key always seems to be antenna location.
Doug
>From: robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com>
>Reply-To: Pietenpol Discussion
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Subject: GPS/Icom
>Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 21:11:17 -0500
>
>Hi guys. I'm trying to figure out how and where to mount my Icom 22, and
>Lowrance Airmap GPS. I'll eventually get it where I want it, but I heard a
>story on another list last year about a GPS not working properly with an
>Icom, but I can't recall the reason they gave. Anyone heard that before?
>
>Robert H GN-1 N83887
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bowdler(at)juno.com |
Robert,
Long or short fuselage plans? Short fuselage '33 plans show 23"
from insturment board to top of turtledeck, long fuselage is two inches
more.
Moving the bulkhead back will increase the moment of the pilot for
CG considerations. If I were starting again I'd tilt the seatback
rearward a bit for more comfort. I am 6'1", and have plenty of room with
the two inch longer seat length of the long fuse.
Tom
__________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Brusilow <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Tom wrote:
rearward a bit for more comfort>>
Not a bad idea. A better idea is to lower the seat as low as possible.
That accomplishes two things-1) more padding on the seat ( believe me,
you will need it ) & 2) more wind protection.
After flying a few years, I lowered the seat, makes a difference.
Mike B ( N687MB )
Tom wrote:
If I were starting again I'd
tilt the
seatbackrearward a bit for more comfort
Not a bad idea. A better idea is to lower the
seat as
low as possible. That accomplishes two things-1) more padding on the
seat (
believe me, you will need it ) 2) more wind
protection.
After flying a few years, I lowered the seat, makes a
difference.
Mike B ( N687MB )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kyle ray <rrobert(at)centuryinter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Adjustable lift strut attachments |
-----Original Message-----
From: steve(at)byu.edu
Date: Tuesday, May 11, 1999 1:14 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: RE: Adjustable lift strut attachments
>>>
>> Do they really have to be streamlined. I've noticed several
>> light planes that
>> simply use round tube. Does it really make much difference? This is a
>> question, not an opinion;-)
>>
>> Dean Dayton
>> dayton(at)netwalk.com
>>
>> Ken Beanlands wrote:
>>
>> > Now, I just have to
>> > figure out how to streamline them without breaking the bank
>> or getting too
>> > heavy.
>>
tube fineness ratio resistance ratio
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
-----Original Message-----
From: bowdler(at)juno.com
Date: Sunday, May 23, 1999 8:23 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: airspace
My GN-1 must be a short version of the short plans!! It's 21" from the
turtle deck to the instrument panel. I can get in and out just fine, but
have to put on glasses to see the readings.
I think the idea of lowering the seat sounds feasible. Looks like it would
be a mojor undertaking to try and move the turtledeck back.
Robert
>Robert,
> Long or short fuselage plans? Short fuselage '33 plans show 23"
>from insturment board to top of turtledeck, long fuselage is two inches
>more.
> Moving the bulkhead back will increase the moment of the pilot for
>CG considerations. If I were starting again I'd tilt the seatback
>rearward a bit for more comfort. I am 6'1", and have plenty of room with
>the two inch longer seat length of the long fuse.
>Tom
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bowdler(at)juno.com |
Mike Brusilow,
I never sat in "Mr. Sam". I have lowered my seat about 1.5 in and
"opened" the angle with the seat back to keep out of the wind stream (I'm
long waisted) and attempt to increase comfort since I built the seat back
to plans and it was already there. I plan to shape a thigh support for
the front of the seat and use a cushion of two or three inches of
Temperfoam. My shoulders are still about 4" above the turtle deck. My
concern is the lowness to the floor causing my legs to stick more
straight to the rudder bar causing discomfort on longer flights, hence
the shaping of the foam to create more of a bucket seat effect.
In light of your years of experience what thoughts do you have on
the above?
Thanks,
Tom
__________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
-----Original Message-----
From: bowdler(at)juno.com
Date: Sunday, May 23, 1999 1:42 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: seat
>Mike Brusilow,
> I never sat in "Mr. Sam". I have lowered my seat about 1.5 in and
>"opened" the angle with the seat back to keep out of the wind stream (I'm
>long waisted)
Hi Tom and list. I've spent the day at the hanger lowering the seat on my
GN-1. I'm now almost three inches lower than I was. I'm long waisted also,
so this is going to help a heck of a lot. As it was before, my eyes were at
the top of the windscreen, and now I can look through it lake you normal (?)
people :o)
I'll go test it out later today.
Robert H. GN-1 N83887
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Brusilow <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Tom wrote:
<
straight to the rudder bar causing discomfort on longer flights, hence
the shaping of the foam to create more of a bucket seat effect. >>
I know what you mean Tom. Sounds like a good idea.
Mike B ( Piet N687MB)
Tom wrote:
the lowness to the floor
causing
my legs to stick morestraight to the rudder bar causing discomfort
on longer
flights, hencethe shaping of the foam to create more of a bucket
seat
effect.
I know what you mean Tom. Sounds
like a
good idea.
Mike B ( Piet
N687MB)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
Well, I logged a little over three hours this evening in the ol GN-1.
Pretty gusty when I started at about 5:50, but it was heaven the last hour.
Winds dropped to almost zero. I practiced left-handed patterns, and
right-handed patterns, wheel landings, and three pointers. That little
Cont. 65 just purrs right along, and doesn't miss a beat. Also, the
alteration I made to the seat height really felt great. It's neat to be low
enough to see gauges! After I had flown about two hours, I landed, made a
mad dash for my truck, charged down to the local convience store, bought 6
more gallons of gas, filled her up, and headed back for the sky. Now if I
could just win the Texas Lottery, I'd spend the entire rest of my life
repeating what I did today. Ya gotta love it!
Robert Hensarling GN-1 N83887
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
-----Original Message-----
From: robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com>
Date: Sunday, May 23, 1999 9:09 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Sunday Fun!
Correction (for those of you that caught it), I started this evening at
5:00, not 5:50.
rh
>Well, I logged a little over three hours this evening in the ol GN-1.
>Pretty gusty when I started at about 5:50, but it was heaven the last hour.
>Winds dropped to almost zero. I practiced left-handed patterns, and
>right-handed patterns, wheel landings, and three pointers. That little
>Cont. 65 just purrs right along, and doesn't miss a beat. Also, the
>alteration I made to the seat height really felt great. It's neat to be
low
>enough to see gauges! After I had flown about two hours, I landed, made a
>mad dash for my truck, charged down to the local convience store, bought 6
>more gallons of gas, filled her up, and headed back for the sky. Now if I
>could just win the Texas Lottery, I'd spend the entire rest of my life
>repeating what I did today. Ya gotta love it!
>
>Robert Hensarling GN-1 N83887
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
I purchased two wrecked community hall chair, the kind with the molded
plywood seat.
I hate sitting on them at meetings but the seat base feels right in my
fuse mockup.
For 50 cents each its a good deal, plus some steel tube to practice
welding on.
John Mc
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Brusilow <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net>
To: Pietenpol Discussion
Date: Sunday, May 23, 1999 6:42 PM
Subject: seat
Tom wrote:
<
straight to the rudder bar causing discomfort on longer flights,
hence
the shaping of the foam to create more of a bucket seat effect. >>
I know what you mean Tom. Sounds like a good idea.
Mike B ( Piet N687MB)
________________________________________________________________________________
Dear Guys,
I really could use everyones help with some feedback on a couple of
points this morning, then I'll try to ease up on everyone for a while.
"Structan" brand glue. Comes in a caulk type tube, no mixing, about a
year tube-life once opened and kept capped. Appx $20 a tube. Anyone
heard of it? Is it any good? Jean Peters says it is better than the old
"Weldwood Glue" (powdered) we used to mix back in the 60's.
Second thing: Can a couple of people verify a min. plywood list for
the fuse and wing so I can get started?
1. Size of sheets 61"x61"?
2. How many sheets of what thickness for fuse, gussets, etc.
3. How many ply?
4. Birch, mahogany, other?
Plans still not here yet. With these answers I can go ahead and order
some glue and ply and have it on the way.
Everyone has been so very helpfull so far. Thanks already!
Sincerely, DannyMac
________________________________________________________________________________
I'll respond with what I remember.
1/8 2 sheets 3ply
1/16 3 sheets 3ply
1/4 1 sheet 5ply (floor)
All may be cut in half for shipping. I had to scarf the fuse sides for
length.
If I remember correctly this gave me enough to do the LE of the wing in
1/16" as well. Birch or Mahogony is fine. I used birch.
Never heard of Structan.
No matter how much you order you will likely need to reorder. (Murphy is
always with us...)
Steve Eldredge
IT Services
Brigham Young University
> -----Original Message-----
> dannymac
> Sent: Monday, May 24, 1999 1:24 AM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: help
>
>
> Dear Guys,
>
> I really could use everyones help with some feedback on
> a couple of
> points this morning, then I'll try to ease up on everyone for
> a while.
> "Structan" brand glue. Comes in a caulk type tube, no mixing, about a
> year tube-life once opened and kept capped. Appx $20 a tube. Anyone
> heard of it? Is it any good? Jean Peters says it is better
> than the old
> "Weldwood Glue" (powdered) we used to mix back in the 60's.
> Second thing: Can a couple of people verify a min.
> plywood list for
> the fuse and wing so I can get started?
> 1. Size of sheets 61"x61"?
> 2. How many sheets of what thickness for fuse, gussets, etc.
> 3. How many ply?
> 4. Birch, mahogany, other?
>
> Plans still not here yet. With these answers I can go ahead and order
> some glue and ply and have it on the way.
>
> Everyone has been so very helpfull so far. Thanks already!
>
>
> Sincerely, DannyMac
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Meadville, PA Fly-In |
Doug- Does your fly in fall on a Sat. or Sun ?
Thanks,
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
Ron- Are you out there listening ?
If so could you e-mail me when you get a chance ?
Thanks,
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
Hi Mike,
I am listening but who?
Ron
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Meadville, PA Fly-In |
Hi Mike,
Still who?
Ron
P.S.
My son and I are building an Aircamper will that help?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Doug Sheets <doug_sheets(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Meadville, PA Fly-In |
Mike:
The fly-in is on Sunday, June 6 from 8:00 am until you go home. Sausage,
eggs and pancakes for breakfast and hamburgers and hot dogs for lunch. Pray
for good weather.
Doug
>From: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov>
>Reply-To: Pietenpol Discussion
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Subject: Meadville, PA Fly-In
>Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 13:01:31 -0400
>
>Doug- Does your fly in fall on a Sat. or Sun ?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Mike C.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gene Tomblin <tombling(at)MercyShips.ORG> |
Robert ,
I somehow managed to get myself on to a Pietnpol discussion group and was
reading your mail about seat heigth. I have a question for you. I have been
concidering building a n Air Camper. What is a GN-1? I keep seeing refrences to
then in the Pietnpol stuff but have no idea about what they are and how they
relate to an Air Camper. From your mail it sounds like your in Texas, your
comment about winning the state lottery. I live in Van Texas about 80 miles
East of Dalas on I 20. Near Tyler.
Regards
Gene Tomblin
robert hensarling wrote:
> Well, I logged a little over three hours this evening in the ol GN-1.
> Pretty gusty when I started at about 5:50, but it was heaven the last hour.
> Winds dropped to almost zero. I practiced left-handed patterns, and
> right-handed patterns, wheel landings, and three pointers. That little
> Cont. 65 just purrs right along, and doesn't miss a beat. Also, the
> alteration I made to the seat height really felt great. It's neat to be low
> enough to see gauges! After I had flown about two hours, I landed, made a
> mad dash for my truck, charged down to the local convience store, bought 6
> more gallons of gas, filled her up, and headed back for the sky. Now if I
> could just win the Texas Lottery, I'd spend the entire rest of my life
> repeating what I did today. Ya gotta love it!
>
> Robert Hensarling GN-1 N83887
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
>Hi Mike,
>I am listening but who?
>Ron
Hey Ron !!!!
Are you still making redwood sawdust ? My girlfriend bought
a house and wants some kind of sign made.......house numbers, etc....
not sure, but I mentioned you as a possible source. (she'd be a paying
customer too !)
ps- are you Piet building yet/still ?
Mike C.
pss- I still can't get over how gorgeous that Piet sign you made for me looks.
That took some TIME.
________________________________________________________________________________
Hey Mike,
Wrong Ron but I am helping my son build an Aircamper. It is about 70%. Here
are some pics.
Ron Deets
121 Dow Lane
North Fort Myers, FL 33917
[Unable to display image]
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
-----Original Message-----
From: Gene Tomblin <tombling(at)MercyShips.ORG>
Date: Monday, May 24, 1999 3:05 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Sunday Fun!
Hi Gene. Good to hear from you. The GN-1 was designed to use piper cub
gear, and I think there are some other things that are a little different,
but I'm not sure. I obtained my plane through a trade, so I didn't actually
build it. I'm located in Uvalde, Texas, about 70 miles West of San Antonio.
I can't place Van, although I've been to Edom several times. There's a guy
by the name of Michael King, in Dallas, who is a friend of mine, and who has
a GN also. Maybe you could arrange with him to take a look at it. His
email addr. is King, Michael
E-mail Address(es):
mikek(at)nstar.net
Whichever way you go, you'll have a blast in the Pietenpol (GN-1). It's a
fun airplane, however, it's not designed with really large people in mind.
I weigh 200, and it's a squeeze, that's for sure. Keep in touch, and let me
know if you get in touch with Michael.
Thanks!
Robert Hensarling
http://www.mesquite-furniture.com
rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com
Uvalde, Texas
>Robert ,
>
>I somehow managed to get myself on to a Pietnpol discussion group and was
>reading your mail about seat heigth. I have a question for you. I have
been
>concidering building a n Air Camper. What is a GN-1? I keep seeing
refrences to
>then in the Pietnpol stuff but have no idea about what they are and how
they
>relate to an Air Camper. From your mail it sounds like your in Texas, your
>comment about winning the state lottery. I live in Van Texas about 80
miles
>East of Dalas on I 20. Near Tyler.
>
>Regards
>
>Gene Tomblin
>
>robert hensarling wrote:
>
>> Well, I logged a little over three hours this evening in the ol GN-1.
>> Pretty gusty when I started at about 5:50, but it was heaven the last
hour.
>> Winds dropped to almost zero. I practiced left-handed patterns, and
>> right-handed patterns, wheel landings, and three pointers. That little
>> Cont. 65 just purrs right along, and doesn't miss a beat. Also, the
>> alteration I made to the seat height really felt great. It's neat to be
low
>> enough to see gauges! After I had flown about two hours, I landed, made
a
>> mad dash for my truck, charged down to the local convience store, bought
6
>> more gallons of gas, filled her up, and headed back for the sky. Now if
I
>> could just win the Texas Lottery, I'd spend the entire rest of my life
>> repeating what I did today. Ya gotta love it!
>>
>> Robert Hensarling GN-1 N83887
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SAM & JAN MARINUCCI |
Guys... I can get Okoume marine plywood locally. It is available (in stock)
and quite a bit less costly than African mahogany. Is this a good
-----Original Message-----
From: steve(at)byu.edu
Date: Monday, May 24, 1999 11:33 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: RE: help
>I'll respond with what I remember.
>
>1/8 2 sheets 3ply
>1/16 3 sheets 3ply
>1/4 1 sheet 5ply (floor)
>All may be cut in half for shipping. I had to scarf the fuse sides for
>length.
>If I remember correctly this gave me enough to do the LE of the wing in
>1/16" as well. Birch or Mahogony is fine. I used birch.
>
>Never heard of Structan.
>
>No matter how much you order you will likely need to reorder. (Murphy is
>always with us...)
>
>Steve Eldredge
>IT Services
>Brigham Young University
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> dannymac
>> Sent: Monday, May 24, 1999 1:24 AM
>> To: Pietenpol Discussion
>> Subject: help
>>
>>
>> Dear Guys,
>>
>> I really could use everyones help with some feedback on
>> a couple of
>> points this morning, then I'll try to ease up on everyone for
>> a while.
>> "Structan" brand glue. Comes in a caulk type tube, no mixing, about a
>> year tube-life once opened and kept capped. Appx $20 a tube. Anyone
>> heard of it? Is it any good? Jean Peters says it is better
>> than the old
>> "Weldwood Glue" (powdered) we used to mix back in the 60's.
>> Second thing: Can a couple of people verify a min.
>> plywood list for
>> the fuse and wing so I can get started?
>> 1. Size of sheets 61"x61"?
>> 2. How many sheets of what thickness for fuse, gussets, etc.
>> 3. How many ply?
>> 4. Birch, mahogany, other?
>>
>> Plans still not here yet. With these answers I can go ahead and order
>> some glue and ply and have it on the way.
>>
>> Everyone has been so very helpfull so far. Thanks already!
>>
>>
>> Sincerely, DannyMac
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave and Connie <dmatt(at)frontiernet.net> |
-- zap a bunch
>Whichever way you go, you'll have a blast in the Pietenpol (GN-1). It's a
>fun airplane, however, it's not designed with really large people in mind.
>I weigh 200, and it's a squeeze, that's for sure.
-- zap a bunch more
I sat in Tom Bowdler's fuselage - on his garage floor. I am about 5'10"
and 225 on a light day. It wasn't tight at all for me. He has a long
fuse model and I think that he raised the turtle deck an inch or two.
Dave
Gonna get to work on the Piet again real soon. I have to do the
written test first (then a few other things like the checkride!).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
-----Original Message-----
From: Dave and Connie <dmatt(at)frontiernet.net>
Date: Monday, May 24, 1999 6:14 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Sunday Fun!
Maybe it's my extra three inches that make it tight to get in the plane,
after I'm in, it's great.
Robert
>
>-- zap a bunch
>>Whichever way you go, you'll have a blast in the Pietenpol (GN-1). It's a
>>fun airplane, however, it's not designed with really large people in mind.
>>I weigh 200, and it's a squeeze, that's for sure.
>
>-- zap a bunch more
>
>I sat in Tom Bowdler's fuselage - on his garage floor. I am about 5'10"
>and 225 on a light day. It wasn't tight at all for me. He has a long
>fuse model and I think that he raised the turtle deck an inch or two.
>
>Dave
>Gonna get to work on the Piet again real soon. I have to do the
>written test first (then a few other things like the checkride!).
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ted Brousseau <nfn00979(at)naples.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Gee, where do my hands go? |
Danny,
I am left handed also. I have flown Cessnas for years from the left seat.
I started flying a Piet several years ago and had no problem changing hands.
After a year of being able to fly a stick with my right hand and a yoke with
my left hand I got worried. I was actively looking for a Luscombe. You fly
it from the left seat like your 152, except it has a stick. I was afraid
that trying to fly with a stick in my left hand would break the "system" I
had worked out with my hands. So, I started flying the Piet with the stick
in my left hand and controling the power with my right hand (yep, by
reaching across my body to the left). Talk about "cross controled".
Anyway, it took about 30 minutes and I was greasing the landings. Like Tom
said, you will adapt very easily. A bonus is that if someone in a Stearman
asks if you want to go for a flight you will be very comfortable with the
right hand stick setup. I think all tandem aircraft control power on the left.
Good luck, Ted
>As a student pilot, I am learning to fly left seat in a 152. Left
>hand yoke, right hand throttle. If I place the throttle on the right in
>my Piet, does that mean others that have placed it on the left of their
>cockpit will have a hard time flying it? I am left handed also, so this
>feels quite comfortable to me.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Beanlands <kbeanlan(at)spots.ab.ca> |
I've been using it on the Christavia and find that it's a very high
quality ply that's quite water resistant. Should work well.
Ken
On Mon, 24 May 1999, SAM & JAN MARINUCCI wrote:
> Guys... I can get Okoume marine plywood locally. It is available (in stock)
> and quite a bit less costly than African mahogany. Is this a good
> -----Original Message-----
> From: steve(at)byu.edu
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Date: Monday, May 24, 1999 11:33 AM
> Subject: RE: help
>
>
> >I'll respond with what I remember.
> >
> >1/8 2 sheets 3ply
> >1/16 3 sheets 3ply
> >1/4 1 sheet 5ply (floor)
> >All may be cut in half for shipping. I had to scarf the fuse sides for
> >length.
> >If I remember correctly this gave me enough to do the LE of the wing in
> >1/16" as well. Birch or Mahogony is fine. I used birch.
> >
> >Never heard of Structan.
> >
> >No matter how much you order you will likely need to reorder. (Murphy is
> >always with us...)
> >
> >Steve Eldredge
> >IT Services
> >Brigham Young University
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> dannymac
> >> Sent: Monday, May 24, 1999 1:24 AM
> >> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> >> Subject: help
> >>
> >>
> >> Dear Guys,
> >>
> >> I really could use everyones help with some feedback on
> >> a couple of
> >> points this morning, then I'll try to ease up on everyone for
> >> a while.
> >> "Structan" brand glue. Comes in a caulk type tube, no mixing, about a
> >> year tube-life once opened and kept capped. Appx $20 a tube. Anyone
> >> heard of it? Is it any good? Jean Peters says it is better
> >> than the old
> >> "Weldwood Glue" (powdered) we used to mix back in the 60's.
> >> Second thing: Can a couple of people verify a min.
> >> plywood list for
> >> the fuse and wing so I can get started?
> >> 1. Size of sheets 61"x61"?
> >> 2. How many sheets of what thickness for fuse, gussets, etc.
> >> 3. How many ply?
> >> 4. Birch, mahogany, other?
> >>
> >> Plans still not here yet. With these answers I can go ahead and order
> >> some glue and ply and have it on the way.
> >>
> >> Everyone has been so very helpfull so far. Thanks already!
> >>
> >>
> >> Sincerely, DannyMac
> >>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bowdler(at)juno.com |
Robert and Dave,
My turtle deck is not raised but my seat is lowered. I did not want
to change the look of the Pietenpol. I kept the 24" width to the rear
seat rather than start the taper to the tail at the rear instrument board
as the plans show. I wouldn't do that again as I don't think it is
needed.
I am 6'1" and 210 lbs. Most folks would have no trouble in the long
fuse once they are limber enough to get in. (start stretching exercises
when you start building) Mike Cuy and others have made cutouts in the
wing center section to ease entry. Jim Vandervoort (sp?) from Ohio is
quite a big guy (admits to 270 I think) and has no entry aids. I made a
"flop" in the trailing edge including one port side wing bay which should
make things easier plus allow access to the baggage compartment in the
wing center section; I copied it from Zeke Royal.
Dave: Keep working on that license! Let's go paddling some time.
Get the hull varnished?
Have fun!
Tom
__________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dlwoolsey(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: EA-81 Suburu in a Pietenpol |
Hello to the chat group. I have been reading and following alog with some of
the discussions but have not had much to add untill now. Steve Eldredge has
been pushing me to get some information a out about my Suburu conversion so
here goes.
My engine is an EA-81 Japanese version that I purchased at an
exchange house for $625.00 with about 25,000 miles on it. I installed it
using an RFI publishing redrive with a 2.1 to 1 gear ratio. I did nothing to
rebiuld the engine other than a compression check and a quick look to make
sure that it was clean inside. I used a VW radiator, Geo alternator and
Crane Cams XR700 electronic ignition. The engine has 112 hours as of this
writting with no problems to report. It starts first pull (by hand) 90% of
the time and gives me very good performance. I climb at 800 fpm timed by
stop watch and indicated altitude at a field elevation af 4,500 feet and
criuse at about 75mph with 4,200 engine RPM. Im using a 76 X 50 prop but am
in the process of carving another to see if I can get better numbers, I will
keep the group posted as I get time.
Duane NX6398
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Neal <llneal(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Bernie's article |
Domenic,
I'm not sure of Bernie's testing schedule, but this may help.
Engine rpm is related to prop pitch and total output in the same way that a cars
gearing and rpm go together. You can't "lug" the engine and you can't
over-speed it and get good results.
Think of drive reduction units as the equivelant of long crank throws and narrow
cylinders. They are essentially the same, a larger mechanical advantage
operating over a longer time.
A Ford "A" motor has a long(er) throw, and operates happily at a lower speed
with more torque and less horsepower than the Corvair. Intake efficiency,
combustion chamber design and compression ratio also affect the mix, so
everybody lay off me with the flames okay?
A Corvair has a shorter throw (and other differences) and is happy at a higher
speed.
The Corvair would "lug" the big "A" prop and not perform worth beans. You can
fix this by reduction gearing (been done but costly and heavy) or using a
smaller prop direct allowing a higher rpm to get into the more efficient rpms
for the engine.
The smaller prop then runs faster and moves a smaller disc of air more quickly
to produce a somewhat more total thrust.
Again, you allow the engine to run at an efficient speed and allow some method
of mechanical advantage... crank stroke, reduction gearing or prop speed to put
the HP into the slipstream.
Bernie found that shorter props and higher rpm allowed the Corvair to run at
it's design speed, about twice the "A"'s and put out close to it's rated
horsepower (some say 95, some 110, I'd guess about 65 or 70 myself).
The game is to allow the engine to run at it's more efficient speed without the
prop tips exceeding mach 1 at the given altitude and speed. This is a critical
limit as if the prop exceeds this factor a bunch of the generated HP starts
going not into forward motion, but into the producton of airport reduction
noises!
Bernie reduced the prop lengths on his Corvairs (and gradually increased rpms)
until he got some damn decent results..
Today, 3300 to 4000 rpm sounds about right to me for the Corvair. Might make
sense to look at three bladed props too, but I'm not too happy about the
esthetics and they are difficult to carve in the backyard garage.
Bottom line is that Bernie's Corvair motor represented a real advance in piston
engine efficiency that was later picked up by generations of VW powered Sonerai,
Volksplanes, KR's and a bunch of new NASA turbine ships with short, weird
looking props.
Bernie did it all. Had all the t-shirts, went there, did all that stuff.
LLN
BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC wrote:
> To all,
>
> Last night I re-read B.H.P.'s article on the corvair conversion. In one
> paragraph he states three different Max. full throttle RPM acchievements.
> What gives? Does anyone with the article understand what he was saying. The
> RPMs he listed were 2600, 2900, and 3300. How can he acchieve three
> different maximums, unless he changed something and didn't change his
> article? All this acchieved with the Tilotson carb which he admitted was too
> small and a larger one should be used. At 3300 he managed 120 MPH. He must
> have had some pitch on that prop., and if he did how could he have gotten
> 3300 RPM. It doesn't make any engineering sense to me. Perhaps someone can
> enlighten us.
>
> A.O.G.
> Domenic
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Gee, where do my hands go? |
1. Don't worry about it. You don't let others fly your plane.
2. Even if you did, the trottle is not moved much in flight: a. set trottle
to idle, start engine. b. taxi. c. take off--full trottle. d. cruise. e.
set to 1500 rpm, glide. f. set back to idle, land. g. taxi back. Check out
anyone who would fly your plane.
3. Get some right seat time and learn to fly with both hands.
dannymac wrote:
> As a student pilot, I am learning to fly left seat in a 152. Left
> hand yoke, right hand throttle. If I place the throttle on the right in
> my Piet, does that mean others that have placed it on the left of their
> cockpit will have a hard time flying it? I am left handed also, so this
> feels quite comfortable to me.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
>Hey Mike,
>Wrong Ron but I am helping my son build an Aircamper. It is about 70%. Here
>are some pics.
>Ron Deets
>121 Dow Lane
>North Fort Myers, FL 33917
>[Unable to display image]
Opps....but glad you are 70% !!!
Thanks, MIke C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net> |
Vandervoort's weight is only an estimate as I know of no scales that read
that high! ;-)
I hope he is a subscriber so he can enjoy being the center of attention.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: bowdler(at)juno.com
Date: Monday, May 24, 1999 10:38 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Sunday Fun!
>Robert and Dave,
> My turtle deck is not raised but my seat is lowered. I did not want
>to change the look of the Pietenpol. I kept the 24" width to the rear
>seat rather than start the taper to the tail at the rear instrument board
>as the plans show. I wouldn't do that again as I don't think it is
>needed.
> I am 6'1" and 210 lbs. Most folks would have no trouble in the long
>fuse once they are limber enough to get in. (start stretching exercises
>when you start building) Mike Cuy and others have made cutouts in the
>wing center section to ease entry. Jim Vandervoort (sp?) from Ohio is
>quite a big guy (admits to 270 I think) and has no entry aids. I made a
>"flop" in the trailing edge including one port side wing bay which should
>make things easier plus allow access to the baggage compartment in the
>wing center section; I copied it from Zeke Royal.
> Dave: Keep working on that license! Let's go paddling some time.
>Get the hull varnished?
>Have fun!
>Tom
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Bernie's article |
Good a.m. guys,
My limited understanding of aerodynamics adds this bit of info:
Draggy airframes like Pietenpols, biplanes, and WW I fighters work better
with gosh-awful long props turning low rpms. Clean slick designs like
Nemesis like short props turning fast. Therefore, the Corvair and VW are
best at home in a faster airplane. The Corvair will fly the Piet fine
because it has an overabundance of power relative to what is necessary.
I've always wondered how a Corvair would work out in a Taylor Titch
(designed for an 85 Cont.)
I understand some of the rotaries from WWI turned only maybe 1500 rpm -- but
made a BUNCH of thrust with the big long paddle props attached.
An engineer could take what I just said and put it into some sort of
technical speech. He would sound more intelligent than I but would probably
agree with what preceeds.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Neal <llneal(at)earthlink.net>
Date: Monday, May 24, 1999 11:11 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Bernie's article
>Domenic,
>
>I'm not sure of Bernie's testing schedule, but this may help.
>Engine rpm is related to prop pitch and total output in the same way that a
cars
>gearing and rpm go together. You can't "lug" the engine and you can't
>over-speed it and get good results.
>Think of drive reduction units as the equivelant of long crank throws and
narrow
>cylinders. They are essentially the same, a larger mechanical advantage
>operating over a longer time.
>A Ford "A" motor has a long(er) throw, and operates happily at a lower
speed
>with more torque and less horsepower than the Corvair. Intake efficiency,
>combustion chamber design and compression ratio also affect the mix, so
>everybody lay off me with the flames okay?
>A Corvair has a shorter throw (and other differences) and is happy at a
higher
>speed.
>The Corvair would "lug" the big "A" prop and not perform worth beans. You
can
>fix this by reduction gearing (been done but costly and heavy) or using a
>smaller prop direct allowing a higher rpm to get into the more efficient
rpms
>for the engine.
>The smaller prop then runs faster and moves a smaller disc of air more
quickly
>to produce a somewhat more total thrust.
>Again, you allow the engine to run at an efficient speed and allow some
method
>of mechanical advantage... crank stroke, reduction gearing or prop speed
to put
>the HP into the slipstream.
>Bernie found that shorter props and higher rpm allowed the Corvair to run
at
>it's design speed, about twice the "A"'s and put out close to it's rated
>horsepower (some say 95, some 110, I'd guess about 65 or 70 myself).
>The game is to allow the engine to run at it's more efficient speed without
the
>prop tips exceeding mach 1 at the given altitude and speed. This is a
critical
>limit as if the prop exceeds this factor a bunch of the generated HP starts
>going not into forward motion, but into the producton of airport reduction
>noises!
>Bernie reduced the prop lengths on his Corvairs (and gradually increased
rpms)
>until he got some damn decent results..
>Today, 3300 to 4000 rpm sounds about right to me for the Corvair. Might
make
>sense to look at three bladed props too, but I'm not too happy about the
>esthetics and they are difficult to carve in the backyard garage.
>Bottom line is that Bernie's Corvair motor represented a real advance in
piston
>engine efficiency that was later picked up by generations of VW powered
Sonerai,
>Volksplanes, KR's and a bunch of new NASA turbine ships with short, weird
>looking props.
>Bernie did it all. Had all the t-shirts, went there, did all that stuff.
>
>LLN
>
>BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC wrote:
>
>> To all,
>>
>> Last night I re-read B.H.P.'s article on the corvair conversion. In one
>> paragraph he states three different Max. full throttle RPM acchievements.
>> What gives? Does anyone with the article understand what he was saying.
The
>> RPMs he listed were 2600, 2900, and 3300. How can he acchieve three
>> different maximums, unless he changed something and didn't change his
>> article? All this acchieved with the Tilotson carb which he admitted was
too
>> small and a larger one should be used. At 3300 he managed 120 MPH. He
must
>> have had some pitch on that prop., and if he did how could he have gotten
>> 3300 RPM. It doesn't make any engineering sense to me. Perhaps someone
can
>> enlighten us.
>>
>> A.O.G.
>> Domenic
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net> |
As I am an income tax preparer and most of my work for the year is done, I
am about to go spray the last cross coat of silver on my fuselage, rudder
and fin -- while the rest of y'all are at work. It will all work out fine
if I can just quit sanding through the @@!
## fabric!!
Did any of y'all get the 1st qtr BPA newsletter yet?
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov>
Date: Tuesday, May 25, 1999 6:45 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Ron Eismann
>>Hey Mike,
>>Wrong Ron but I am helping my son build an Aircamper. It is about 70%.
Here
>>are some pics.
>>Ron Deets
>>121 Dow Lane
>>North Fort Myers, FL 33917
>>[Unable to display image]
>
>Opps....but glad you are 70% !!!
>Thanks, MIke C.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC" |
| Subject: | Bernie's testing schedule |
Larry,
Thanks for your response, it's very informative. My prop is 66X32, I think
it's in the ball park of what most corvairs run with that are successful. I
can't go the reduction route, I have a starter installed as well as a bell
housing and bearing supporting the prop. shaft. This is my own design using
my own castings. It works very well. How short ,and what pitch was Bernie's
prop???
according to the performance charts the 110 H.P. engine has it's peak torque
at 2800 RPM. This equates to 83 BHP. But there are losses as well that rob
power. An Alternator will use about 6-7 h.p. This puts the H.P. more into
your estimate. If you use the original fan as well then you lose another 13
H.P. (I did not... and no heat problems...if anything I may be running a bit
too cold at 165 Deg.) Now for the bad news... I advanced the timing to 35
degrees as suggested and detonated a hole in the #6 piston. I was wondering
why the engine would not develop the RPM as per my previous setting, so I
performed an compression test. all cyl. except #6 read 130 Lbs., #6 was
zero. Will pull the head and cyl. this week. Bummer.
Dom.
----------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Bernie's article |
Domenic,
I'm not sure of Bernie's testing schedule, but this may help.
Engine rpm is related to prop pitch and total output in the same way that a
cars
gearing and rpm go together. You can't "lug" the engine and you can't
over-speed it and get good results.
Think of drive reduction units as the equivelant of long crank throws and
narrow
cylinders. They are essentially the same, a larger mechanical advantage
operating over a longer time.
A Ford "A" motor has a long(er) throw, and operates happily at a lower speed
with more torque and less horsepower than the Corvair. Intake efficiency,
combustion chamber design and compression ratio also affect the mix, so
everybody lay off me with the flames okay?
A Corvair has a shorter throw (and other differences) and is happy at a
higher
speed.
The Corvair would "lug" the big "A" prop and not perform worth beans. You
can
fix this by reduction gearing (been done but costly and heavy) or using a
smaller prop direct allowing a higher rpm to get into the more efficient
rpms
for the engine.
The smaller prop then runs faster and moves a smaller disc of air more
quickly
to produce a somewhat more total thrust.
Again, you allow the engine to run at an efficient speed and allow some
method
of mechanical advantage... crank stroke, reduction gearing or prop speed to
put
the HP into the slipstream.
Bernie found that shorter props and higher rpm allowed the Corvair to run at
it's design speed, about twice the "A"'s and put out close to it's rated
horsepower (some say 95, some 110, I'd guess about 65 or 70 myself).
The game is to allow the engine to run at it's more efficient speed without
the
prop tips exceeding mach 1 at the given altitude and speed. This is a
critical
limit as if the prop exceeds this factor a bunch of the generated HP starts
going not into forward motion, but into the producton of airport reduction
noises!
Bernie reduced the prop lengths on his Corvairs (and gradually increased
rpms)
until he got some damn decent results..
Today, 3300 to 4000 rpm sounds about right to me for the Corvair. Might
make
sense to look at three bladed props too, but I'm not too happy about the
esthetics and they are difficult to carve in the backyard garage.
Bottom line is that Bernie's Corvair motor represented a real advance in
piston
engine efficiency that was later picked up by generations of VW powered
Sonerai,
Volksplanes, KR's and a bunch of new NASA turbine ships with short, weird
looking props.
Bernie did it all. Had all the t-shirts, went there, did all that stuff.
LLN
BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC wrote:
> To all,
>
> Last night I re-read B.H.P.'s article on the corvair conversion. In one
> paragraph he states three different Max. full throttle RPM acchievements.
> What gives? Does anyone with the article understand what he was saying.
The
> RPMs he listed were 2600, 2900, and 3300. How can he acchieve three
> different maximums, unless he changed something and didn't change his
> article? All this acchieved with the Tilotson carb which he admitted was
too
> small and a larger one should be used. At 3300 he managed 120 MPH. He must
> have had some pitch on that prop., and if he did how could he have gotten
> 3300 RPM. It doesn't make any engineering sense to me. Perhaps someone can
> enlighten us.
>
> A.O.G.
> Domenic
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael King <mikek(at)nstar.net> |
Say Gang,
While we are on the subject of prop size, any
experience from those using an A-80?
I have a 1940 A-80 and currently using a 69x39
metal prop. Would like better climb performance
on a hot Texas day with two people onboard.
Thanks.....
Mike King
GN-1
77MK
Dallas
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Vandervort's Weight |
Reminds me of a guy who had a talking scale........and
when I got on it said " ONE at a TIME please !!"
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | plywood on cement? |
After a month of inactivity I am ready to put my fuselage sides
together. I do not, however have a very flat surface to do it on. I do
have 2 4x8's that are sort-of flat...
Can anyone recommend a method of getting 4x8's to lay FLAT on a cement
floor (Ive tried putting cement blocks on them, etc.. with no luck).
Can you drill into a cement floor without ruining it, or making it
crack in winter?
Eager to get going again.
Richard
===
My homepage: http://www.AirCamper.org/w3builder
....Oh that I had wings like a dove! for then would I fly away, and be at rest.
-Psalm 55:6
---------------------------------------------------------
Visit www.AirCamper.org - A Low 'n Slow Online Community!
---------------------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Doug <ve6zh(at)oanet.com> |
I used okoume ply on my fuse,looked so good varnished i hated to put
fabric over it.
Doug
> From: SAM & JAN MARINUCCI
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Re: help
> Date: Monday, May 24, 1999 4:53 PM
>
> Guys... I can get Okoume marine plywood locally. It is available (in
stock)
> and quite a bit less costly than African mahogany. Is this a good
> -----Original Message-----
> From: steve(at)byu.edu
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Date: Monday, May 24, 1999 11:33 AM
> Subject: RE: help
>
>
> >I'll respond with what I remember.
> >
> >1/8 2 sheets 3ply
> >1/16 3 sheets 3ply
> >1/4 1 sheet 5ply (floor)
> >All may be cut in half for shipping. I had to scarf the fuse sides for
> >length.
> >If I remember correctly this gave me enough to do the LE of the wing in
> >1/16" as well. Birch or Mahogony is fine. I used birch.
> >
> >Never heard of Structan.
> >
> >No matter how much you order you will likely need to reorder. (Murphy is
> >always with us...)
> >
> >Steve Eldredge
> >IT Services
> >Brigham Young University
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> dannymac
> >> Sent: Monday, May 24, 1999 1:24 AM
> >> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> >> Subject: help
> >>
> >>
> >> Dear Guys,
> >>
> >> I really could use everyones help with some feedback on
> >> a couple of
> >> points this morning, then I'll try to ease up on everyone for
> >> a while.
> >> "Structan" brand glue. Comes in a caulk type tube, no mixing, about a
> >> year tube-life once opened and kept capped. Appx $20 a tube. Anyone
> >> heard of it? Is it any good? Jean Peters says it is better
> >> than the old
> >> "Weldwood Glue" (powdered) we used to mix back in the 60's.
> >> Second thing: Can a couple of people verify a min.
> >> plywood list for
> >> the fuse and wing so I can get started?
> >> 1. Size of sheets 61"x61"?
> >> 2. How many sheets of what thickness for fuse, gussets, etc.
> >> 3. How many ply?
> >> 4. Birch, mahogany, other?
> >>
> >> Plans still not here yet. With these answers I can go ahead and order
> >> some glue and ply and have it on the way.
> >>
> >> Everyone has been so very helpfull so far. Thanks already!
> >>
> >>
> >> Sincerely, DannyMac
> >>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chad Johnson <cjohnson(at)jayhawkpl.com> |
My A is disassembled on my bench just waiting for reconstructive
surgery. I am needing advice as to how to overhaul. Looking for
thoughts on whether to rebuild as "stock" or should I modify some things
such as 351 pistions, different carb etc. I have a perfectly good
block, head, zenith carb and intake, crank and cam. Is it worth trying
to get a few more horses by boring, counter weighting, polishing
etc.???? All comments are welcome. Thanks.
Chad
-----Original Message-----
From: Lightsey, Mark - TP2MAL [SMTP:MLightsey(at)socalgas.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 1999 5:41 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: RE: Ford Power
Does anyone have a suggestion on how much advance to run on the Model A.
Right now I'm using about 25 degrees BTDC. This is very convenient
since my
mag has 25 degrees of lag on the impulse. Very easy to start with no
kicking back. I just installed a 6:1 Brumfield head in place of a "way
high" compression aluminum head. I'm now able to turn about 1850 static
with
a 74"x52" Felix prop. The funny thing is, by time the throttle is about
3/4
of the way in, I've reached the maximum rpm. The last 1/4 of throttle
travel has no effect. Any thoughts...
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 1999 10:17 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Ford Power
Reference the Pavliga's Ford engine problems, Their engine turned out to
NOT
to have been "set-up" right. It had a way high compression head which
caused
the pistons to burn and break and the other failure was the water
pump.......outside of that, the Ford hummed along and was very easy to
start.
Earl Myers
-----Original Message-----
From: "BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC"
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Corvair cooling
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 11:57:00 -0400
Doug,
Thanks for the article. I have read that article at least 20 times trying to
understand what Jim is talking about. Maybe I'm dense.
My vacuum was locked out as Bernie and Jim said. My initial timing was 14
Deg. + 12 deg. of centrifical advance (I thought), but this was with the
original centrifial springs. Then I changed the springs to weeker ones. and
reset the advance to 23 deg. + 12 centrifical = 35 deg. This was the Max.
one should set the advance accordig to Jim's Bpan article. And Bang.. it
happened anyway. I was using 100 LL. avgas. Of course I don't really know
where the advance ended up at full throttle setting since my timing light
(red neon) wasn't bright enough to check. This is when it happened. I could
never get back up to 2600 RPM after that. Ran rough, with smoke (Steve...I
didn't need any oil injected into my exhaust). I tested the compression and
found I had a problem. Courious thing though my overflow vent which was
previously giving me a positive pressure in the crank is now like a vacuum
cleaner sucking air into the crankcase. Cyl. 2, 4 are now contaminated with
oil and have been firing intermitent. Checked the wires and plugs they're
O.K. must just be the oil fouling them. Will pull the head this week. The
question is ... is there a hole in the pison or are the valves damaged or
both? Stay tuned for the answer?
Domenic
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David B. Schober" <dbs(at)fscvax.wvnet.edu> |
Your 69X39 prop is way to short to be efficient. Put a 74X40 or 74X42 on
and you should see an improvement in climb and cruise. If climb is your
primary concern and your gear legs are long enough, try a 76X34 prop
(seaplane prop for an airknocker). I would also recommend changing to a
wood prop. The wood prop will save between 11 and 13 pounds on your
empty weight. Weight decreases performance.
Michael King wrote:
> Say Gang,
>
> While we are on the subject of prop size, any
> experience from those using an A-80?
>
> I have a 1940 A-80 and currently using a 69x39
> metal prop. Would like better climb performance
> on a hot Texas day with two people onboard.
>
> Thanks.....
>
> Mike King
> GN-1
> 77MK
> Dallas
--
David B.Schober, CPE
Instructor, Aviation Maintenance
Fairmont State College
National Aerospace Education Center
Rt. 3 Box 13
Bridgeport, WV 26330-9503
(304) 842-8300
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC" |
| Subject: | FW: Corvair cooling |
Doug, I forgot to add I do not have a cooling problem. I'm probably running
too cold at 165 deg.F.
----------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC |
Doug,
Thanks for the article. I have read that article at least 20 times trying to
understand what Jim is talking about. Maybe I'm dense.
My vacuum was locked out as Bernie and Jim said. My initial timing was 14
Deg. + 12 deg. of centrifical advance (I thought), but this was with the
original centrifial springs. Then I changed the springs to weeker ones. and
reset the advance to 23 deg. + 12 centrifical = 35 deg. This was the Max.
one should set the advance accordig to Jim's Bpan article. And Bang.. it
happened anyway. I was using 100 LL. avgas. Of course I don't really know
where the advance ended up at full throttle setting since my timing light
(red neon) wasn't bright enough to check. This is when it happened. I could
never get back up to 2600 RPM after that. Ran rough, with smoke (Steve...I
didn't need any oil injected into my exhaust). I tested the compression and
found I had a problem. Courious thing though my overflow vent which was
previously giving me a positive pressure in the crank is now like a vacuum
cleaner sucking air into the crankcase. Cyl. 2, 4 are now contaminated with
oil and have been firing intermitent. Checked the wires and plugs they're
O.K. must just be the oil fouling them. Will pull the head this week. The
question is ... is there a hole in the pison or are the valves damaged or
both? Stay tuned for the answer?
Domenic
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: plywood on cement? |
Richard;
Get or make a pair or trio of saw horses, put the4x8's on and SCREWED to
the top of the saw horses. Hang a, or as many as required, concrete block
from each saw horse. Shim the saw horses at the floor as required to
level.......You may have to tie the sawhorse legs together so they don't
splay out with the weight hanging on them. I assembeled my first plane this
way. Down and dirtty but it worked fine , easy to dissassemble and cheap!
Earl Myers
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard DeCosta
Date: Tuesday, May 25, 1999 10:46 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: plywood on cement?
>After a month of inactivity I am ready to put my fuselage sides
>together. I do not, however have a very flat surface to do it on. I do
>have 2 4x8's that are sort-of flat...
>
>Can anyone recommend a method of getting 4x8's to lay FLAT on a cement
>floor (Ive tried putting cement blocks on them, etc.. with no luck).
>Can you drill into a cement floor without ruining it, or making it
>crack in winter?
>
>Eager to get going again.
>Richard
>===
>My homepage: http://www.AirCamper.org/w3builder
>....Oh that I had wings like a dove! for then would I fly away, and be at
rest. -Psalm 55:6
>---------------------------------------------------------
>Visit www.AirCamper.org - A Low 'n Slow Online Community!
>---------------------------------------------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: "A" Overhaul |
Sir;
I would suggest just putting a 5.9 to 6.0:1 Aluminum or "stock" head on the
critter, assemble it and go fly. There are several sources for these heads.
If you don't know Model A engines A to Z, I wouldn't go any farther than the
slightly higher head. There are numerous Piets flying with these heads. The
"A"'s flying (2?) with hopped up engines are a tinkerer's delight! One that
I know of is a test bed for soup ups. You want to fly reliably or tinker
continuosly................?
Earl Myers
PS: I subscribe to a Ford A racing magazine (SOSS). You can't believe the
power you can get from a "A" or "B" when souped up in those race cars but,
they play with them constantly, tweaking and whatnot............go easy, go
stock, get bored, soup up.
-----Original Message-----
From: Chad Johnson <cjohnson(at)jayhawkpl.com>
Date: Tuesday, May 25, 1999 11:48 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: "A" Overhaul
My A is disassembled on my bench just waiting for reconstructive surgery. I
am needing advice as to how to overhaul. Looking for thoughts on whether to
rebuild as "stock" or should I modify some things such as 351 pistions,
different carb etc. I have a perfectly good block, head, zenith carb and
intake, crank and cam. Is it worth trying to get a few more horses by
boring, counter weighting, polishing etc.???? All comments are welcome.
Thanks.
Chad
-----Original Message-----
From: Lightsey, Mark - TP2MAL [SMTP:MLightsey(at)socalgas.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 1999 5:41 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: RE: Ford Power
Does anyone have a suggestion on how much advance to run on the Model A.
Right now I'm using about 25 degrees BTDC. This is very convenient since my
mag has 25 degrees of lag on the impulse. Very easy to start with no
kicking back. I just installed a 6:1 Brumfield head in place of a "way
high" compression aluminum head. I'm now able to turn about 1850 static with
a 74"x52" Felix prop. The funny thing is, by time the throttle is about 3/4
of the way in, I've reached the maximum rpm. The last 1/4 of throttle
travel has no effect. Any thoughts...
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 1999 10:17 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Ford Power
Reference the Pavliga's Ford engine problems, Their engine turned out to NOT
to have been "set-up" right. It had a way high compression head which caused
the pistons to burn and break and the other failure was the water
pump.......outside of that, the Ford hummed along and was very easy to
start.
Earl Myers
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard DeCosta
Date: Thursday, May 20, 1999 8:58 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Ford Power
>Makes me glad the my 'A' guy is only 8 miles from me. I plan on
>spending lots of time there getting to know his work and my engine.
>
>> than knowledgeable Ford A engine gurus. I think you just have to
>> snuggle up to
>> your
>> local Model A Ford CAR club near you and find out who the MOST
>> knowledgeable A
>> rebuild guy is in the area, then go pick his brain till he boots you
>> out.
>>
>> Mike C.
>>
>
>
>Hey, I didn't mean to condem all A engines.
>Mike B ( Piet N687MB )
>Guys- Mike is right here. An A is no different from any other
>engine.....if it's got
>internal problems you don't know about or it's supposedly rebuilt and
>ready to go,
>but not really,...etc. you'll have problems. Frank Pavliga and
>his
>father had several
>forced landings with Sky Gypsy before they pulled the Ford out and put
>in
>a
>Continental. Go figure. Now Wilbur Graff has an A also with
>a
>Funk head and
>that guy has cruised all over the place, from Ohio to Brodhead/Osh many
>times
>in the last 4 years or so with not so much as a hiccup. I
>certainly
>don't know squat
>about Ford A engines (besides they sound incredibly sweet
>swinging
>a propeller)
>but my gut feeling is that knowledgeable aircraft engine rebuilders are
>more abundant
>than knowledgeable Ford A engine gurus. I think you just have to
>snuggle up to your
>local Model A Ford CAR club near you and find out who the MOST
>knowledgeable A
>rebuild guy is in the area, then go pick his brain till he boots you
>out.
>
>Mike C.
>
>
>===
>My homepage: http://www.AirCamper.org/w3builder
>....Oh that I had wings like a dove! for then would I fly away, and be at
rest. -Psalm 55:6
>---------------------------------------------------------
>Visit www.AirCamper.org - A Low 'n Slow Online Community!
>---------------------------------------------------------
>____
>Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: plywood on cement? |
Richard, what worked for me was using two sheets of 3/4 4x8 plywood
(birch) that I had used for lofting thee tail and sides. My basement
floor was reasonably flat, painted cement. I power nailed the plywood to
the floor with one of those "hit it hard..it goes bang" units. I then
used a level and drove shims into the low spots. No problems and every
thing came out square and true. The ply was on the floor for about 4
months with no problems.
-=Ian=-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chad Johnson <cjohnson(at)jayhawkpl.com> |
| Subject: | RE: "A" Overhaul |
Thanks Earl, for the info and suggestions. That is ideed the way that I
am leaning. A parts supplier told me that the "Brumfield head" was not
the way to go. He said it was too inconsistent from cylinder to
cylinder. He suggested just machining the stock head surface and
possibly the block surface, which would knock off enough to raise
compression with out changing anything else. What are your thoughts
about that? I would be grateful if anyone could give me a source for
the aluminum head. Thanks again.
chad
-----Original Message-----
From: Earl Myers [SMTP:allaire(at)raex.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 1999 11:27 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: "A" Overhaul
Sir;
I would suggest just putting a 5.9 to 6.0:1 Aluminum or "stock" head on
the
critter, assemble it and go fly. There are several sources for these
heads.
If you don't know Model A engines A to Z, I wouldn't go any farther than
the
slightly higher head. There are numerous Piets flying with these heads.
The
"A"'s flying (2?) with hopped up engines are a tinkerer's delight! One
that
I know of is a test bed for soup ups. You want to fly reliably or tinker
continuosly................?
Earl Myers
PS: I subscribe to a Ford A racing magazine (SOSS). You can't believe
the
power you can get from a "A" or "B" when souped up in those race cars
but,
they play with them constantly, tweaking and whatnot............go easy,
go
stock, get bored, soup up.
-----Original Message-----
From: Chad Johnson <cjohnson(at)jayhawkpl.com>
Date: Tuesday, May 25, 1999 11:48 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: "A" Overhaul
My A is disassembled on my bench just waiting for reconstructive
surgery. I
am needing advice as to how to overhaul. Looking for thoughts on
whether to
rebuild as "stock" or should I modify some things such as 351 pistions,
different carb etc. I have a perfectly good block, head, zenith carb
and
intake, crank and cam. Is it worth trying to get a few more horses by
boring, counter weighting, polishing etc.???? All comments are welcome.
Thanks.
Chad
-----Original Message-----
From: Lightsey, Mark - TP2MAL [SMTP:MLightsey(at)socalgas.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 1999 5:41 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: RE: Ford Power
Does anyone have a suggestion on how much advance to run on the Model A.
Right now I'm using about 25 degrees BTDC. This is very convenient
since my
mag has 25 degrees of lag on the impulse. Very easy to start with no
kicking back. I just installed a 6:1 Brumfield head in place of a "way
high" compression aluminum head. I'm now able to turn about 1850 static
with
a 74"x52" Felix prop. The funny thing is, by time the throttle is about
3/4
of the way in, I've reached the maximum rpm. The last 1/4 of throttle
travel has no effect. Any thoughts...
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 1999 10:17 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Ford Power
Reference the Pavliga's Ford engine problems, Their engine turned out to
NOT
to have been "set-up" right. It had a way high compression head which
caused
the pistons to burn and break and the other failure was the water
pump.......outside of that, the Ford hummed along and was very easy to
start.
Earl Myers
-----Original Message-----
From: Earl Myers
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: "A" Overhaul
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 14:29:02 -0400
Chad;
I have heard good and bad about the Brumfield Head ref the
inconsistantcies..........I will dig up my Aluminun Head supplier (named
...Price in Columbus, Ohio & was building a Scout too).
Suggest you don't mill the block! This might make your pistons come up to
or higher than the top of the block. My head came with a warning to make
sure that this condition doesn't occur!
There has been a trend to stick with steel or stock heads slightly milled to
get better compression. The 15# difference in weight just has to be
overlooked.....
Earl Myers
-----Original Message-----
From: Chad Johnson <cjohnson(at)jayhawkpl.com>
Date: Tuesday, May 25, 1999 2:03 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: RE: "A" Overhaul
Thanks Earl, for the info and suggestions. That is ideed the way that I am
leaning. A parts supplier told me that the "Brumfield head" was not the way
to go. He said it was too inconsistent from cylinder to cylinder. He
suggested just machining the stock head surface and possibly the block
surface, which would knock off enough to raise compression with out changing
anything else. What are your thoughts about that? I would be grateful if
anyone could give me a source for the aluminum head. Thanks again.
chad
-----Original Message-----
From: Earl Myers [SMTP:allaire(at)raex.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 1999 11:27 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: "A" Overhaul
Sir;
I would suggest just putting a 5.9 to 6.0:1 Aluminum or "stock" head on the
critter, assemble it and go fly. There are several sources for these heads.
If you don't know Model A engines A to Z, I wouldn't go any farther than the
slightly higher head. There are numerous Piets flying with these heads. The
"A"'s flying (2?) with hopped up engines are a tinkerer's delight! One that
I know of is a test bed for soup ups. You want to fly reliably or tinker
continuosly................?
Earl Myers
PS: I subscribe to a Ford A racing magazine (SOSS). You can't believe the
power you can get from a "A" or "B" when souped up in those race cars but,
they play with them constantly, tweaking and whatnot............go easy, go
stock, get bored, soup up.
-----Original Message-----
From: Chad Johnson <cjohnson(at)jayhawkpl.com>
Date: Tuesday, May 25, 1999 11:48 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: "A" Overhaul
My A is disassembled on my bench just waiting for reconstructive surgery. I
am needing advice as to how to overhaul. Looking for thoughts on whether to
rebuild as "stock" or should I modify some things such as 351 pistions,
different carb etc. I have a perfectly good block, head, zenith carb and
intake, crank and cam. Is it worth trying to get a few more horses by
boring, counter weighting, polishing etc.???? All comments are welcome.
Thanks.
Chad
-----Original Message-----
From: Lightsey, Mark - TP2MAL [SMTP:MLightsey(at)socalgas.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 1999 5:41 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: RE: Ford Power
Does anyone have a suggestion on how much advance to run on the Model A.
Right now I'm using about 25 degrees BTDC. This is very convenient since my
mag has 25 degrees of lag on the impulse. Very easy to start with no
kicking back. I just installed a 6:1 Brumfield head in place of a "way
high" compression aluminum head. I'm now able to turn about 1850 static with
a 74"x52" Felix prop. The funny thing is, by time the throttle is about 3/4
of the way in, I've reached the maximum rpm. The last 1/4 of throttle
travel has no effect. Any thoughts...
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 1999 10:17 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Ford Power
Reference the Pavliga's Ford engine problems, Their engine turned out to NOT
to have been "set-up" right. It had a way high compression head which caused
the pistons to burn and break and the other failure was the water
pump.......outside of that, the Ford hummed along and was very easy to
start.
Earl Myers
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard DeCosta
Date: Thursday, May 20, 1999 8:58 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Ford Power
>Makes me glad the my 'A' guy is only 8 miles from me. I plan on
>spending lots of time there getting to know his work and my engine.
>
>> than knowledgeable Ford A engine gurus. I think you just have to
>> snuggle up to
>> your
>> local Model A Ford CAR club near you and find out who the MOST
>> knowledgeable A
>> rebuild guy is in the area, then go pick his brain till he boots you
>> out.
>>
>> Mike C.
>>
>
>
>Hey, I didn't mean to condem all A engines.
>Mike B ( Piet N687MB )
>Guys- Mike is right here. An A is no different from any other
>engine.....if it's got
>internal problems you don't know about or it's supposedly rebuilt and
>ready to go,
>but not really,...etc. you'll have problems. Frank Pavliga and
>his
>father had several
>forced landings with Sky Gypsy before they pulled the Ford out and put
>in
>a
>Continental. Go figure. Now Wilbur Graff has an A also with
>a
>Funk head and
>that guy has cruised all over the place, from Ohio to Brodhead/Osh many
>times
>in the last 4 years or so with not so much as a hiccup. I
>certainly
>don't know squat
>about Ford A engines (besides they sound incredibly sweet
>swinging
>a propeller)
>but my gut feeling is that knowledgeable aircraft engine rebuilders are
>more abundant
>than knowledgeable Ford A engine gurus. I think you just have to
>snuggle up to your
>local Model A Ford CAR club near you and find out who the MOST
>knowledgeable A
>rebuild guy is in the area, then go pick his brain till he boots you
>out.
>
>Mike C.
>
>
>===
>My homepage: http://www.AirCamper.org/w3builder
>....Oh that I had wings like a dove! for then would I fly away, and be at
rest. -Psalm 55:6
>---------------------------------------------------------
>Visit www.AirCamper.org - A Low 'n Slow Online Community!
>---------------------------------------------------------
>____
>Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wayne and Kathy <ktokarz(at)incentre.net> |
unsubscribe
(temporary)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: "A" Overhaul |
Could you post your Aluminun Head supplier to the list? I want to add
it to AirCamper.org's supplier list too. Thanks!
--- Earl Myers wrote:
> Chad;
> I have heard good and bad about the Brumfield Head ref the
> inconsistantcies..........I will dig up my Aluminun Head supplier
> (named
> ...Price in Columbus, Ohio & was building a Scout too).
> Suggest you don't mill the block! This might make your pistons come
> up to
> or higher than the top of the block. My head came with a warning to
> make
> sure that this condition doesn't occur!
> There has been a trend to stick with steel or stock heads slightly
> milled to
> get better compression. The 15# difference in weight just has to be
> overlooked.....
> Earl Myers
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chad Johnson <cjohnson(at)jayhawkpl.com>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Date: Tuesday, May 25, 1999 2:03 PM
> Subject: RE: "A" Overhaul
>
>
> Thanks Earl, for the info and suggestions. That is ideed the way
> that I am
> leaning. A parts supplier told me that the "Brumfield head" was not
> the way
> to go. He said it was too inconsistent from cylinder to cylinder.
> He
> suggested just machining the stock head surface and possibly the
> block
> surface, which would knock off enough to raise compression with out
> changing
> anything else. What are your thoughts about that? I would be
> grateful if
> anyone could give me a source for the aluminum head. Thanks again.
>
> chad
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Earl Myers [SMTP:allaire(at)raex.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 1999 11:27 AM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Re: "A" Overhaul
>
> Sir;
> I would suggest just putting a 5.9 to 6.0:1 Aluminum or "stock" head
> on the
> critter, assemble it and go fly. There are several sources for these
> heads.
> If you don't know Model A engines A to Z, I wouldn't go any farther
> than the
> slightly higher head. There are numerous Piets flying with these
> heads. The
> "A"'s flying (2?) with hopped up engines are a tinkerer's delight!
> One that
> I know of is a test bed for soup ups. You want to fly reliably or
> tinker
> continuosly................?
> Earl Myers
>
> PS: I subscribe to a Ford A racing magazine (SOSS). You can't believe
> the
> power you can get from a "A" or "B" when souped up in those race cars
> but,
> they play with them constantly, tweaking and whatnot............go
> easy, go
> stock, get bored, soup up.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chad Johnson <cjohnson(at)jayhawkpl.com>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Date: Tuesday, May 25, 1999 11:48 AM
> Subject: "A" Overhaul
>
>
> My A is disassembled on my bench just waiting for reconstructive
> surgery. I
> am needing advice as to how to overhaul. Looking for thoughts on
> whether to
> rebuild as "stock" or should I modify some things such as 351
> pistions,
> different carb etc. I have a perfectly good block, head, zenith carb
> and
> intake, crank and cam. Is it worth trying to get a few more horses
> by
> boring, counter weighting, polishing etc.???? All comments are
> welcome.
> Thanks.
> Chad
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lightsey, Mark - TP2MAL [SMTP:MLightsey(at)socalgas.com]
> Sent: Thursday, May 20, 1999 5:41 PM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: RE: Ford Power
>
> Does anyone have a suggestion on how much advance to run on the Model
> A.
> Right now I'm using about 25 degrees BTDC. This is very convenient
> since my
> mag has 25 degrees of lag on the impulse. Very easy to start with no
> kicking back. I just installed a 6:1 Brumfield head in place of a
> "way
> high" compression aluminum head. I'm now able to turn about 1850
> static with
> a 74"x52" Felix prop. The funny thing is, by time the throttle is
> about 3/4
> of the way in, I've reached the maximum rpm. The last 1/4 of
> throttle
> travel has no effect. Any thoughts...
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Thursday, May 20, 1999 10:17 AM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Re: Ford Power
>
>
> Reference the Pavliga's Ford engine problems, Their engine turned out
> to NOT
> to have been "set-up" right. It had a way high compression head which
> caused
> the pistons to burn and break and the other failure was the water
> pump.......outside of that, the Ford hummed along and was very easy
> to
> start.
> Earl Myers
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard DeCosta
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Date: Thursday, May 20, 1999 8:58 AM
> Subject: Re: Ford Power
>
>
> >Makes me glad the my 'A' guy is only 8 miles from me. I plan on
> >spending lots of time there getting to know his work and my engine.
> >
> >> than knowledgeable Ford A engine gurus. I think you just have to
> >> snuggle up to
> >> your
> >> local Model A Ford CAR club near you and find out who the MOST
> >> knowledgeable A
> >> rebuild guy is in the area, then go pick his brain till he boots
> you
> >> out.
> >>
> >> Mike C.
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Hey, I didn't mean to condem all A engines.
> >Mike B ( Piet N687MB )
> >Guys- Mike is right here. An A is no different from any
> other
> >engine.....if it's got
> >internal problems you don't know about or it's supposedly rebuilt
> and
> >ready to go,
> >but not really,...etc. you'll have problems. Frank Pavliga and
> >his
> >father had several
> >forced landings with Sky Gypsy before they pulled the Ford out and
> put
> >in
> >a
> >Continental. Go figure. Now Wilbur Graff has an A also
> with
> >a
> >Funk head and
> >that guy has cruised all over the place, from Ohio to Brodhead/Osh
> many
> >times
> >in the last 4 years or so with not so much as a hiccup. I
> >certainly
> >don't know squat
> >about Ford A engines (besides they sound incredibly sweet
> >swinging
> >a propeller)
> >but my gut feeling is that knowledgeable aircraft engine rebuilders
> are
> >more abundant
> >than knowledgeable Ford A engine gurus. I think you just have
> to
> >snuggle up to your
> >local Model A Ford CAR club near you and find out who the MOST
> >knowledgeable A
> >rebuild guy is in the area, then go pick his brain till he boots you
> >out.
> >
> >Mike C.
> >
> >
> >
> >===
> >My homepage: http://www.AirCamper.org/w3builder
> >....Oh that I had wings like a dove! for then would I fly away, and
> be at
> rest. -Psalm 55:6
> >---------------------------------------------------------
> >Visit www.AirCamper.org - A Low 'n Slow Online Community!
> >---------------------------------------------------------
> >____
> >Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com
> >
>
>
>
>
===
"Lady, you want me to answer you if this old airplane is safe to fly? Just how
in the world do you think it got to be this old?" - Jim Tavenner
---------------------------------------------------------
Visit www.AirCamper.org - A Low 'n Slow Online Community!
---------------------------------------------------------
My homepage: http://www.AirCamper.org/w3builder
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael King <mikek(at)nstar.net> |
Thanks David for the input. The gear on the GN-1
is regular Piper Cub gear on 6:00 wheels. I know
I could probably go with a 72 but do you think a 74
would work too.
I could get Ray Hegy in Marfa, Texas to build a wooden
72x40.......according to what you are saying that should be
better than what is on there now.
Again thanks David for the help.
Mike
GN-1
77MK
Dallas
>Your 69X39 prop is way to short to be efficient. Put a 74X40 or 74X42 on
>and you should see an improvement in climb and cruise. If climb is your
>primary concern and your gear legs are long enough, try a 76X34 prop
>(seaplane prop for an airknocker). I would also recommend changing to a
>wood prop. The wood prop will save between 11 and 13 pounds on your
>empty weight. Weight decreases performance.
>
>Michael King wrote:
>
>> Say Gang,
>>
>> While we are on the subject of prop size, any
>> experience from those using an A-80?
>>
>> I have a 1940 A-80 and currently using a 69x39
>> metal prop. Would like better climb performance
>> on a hot Texas day with two people onboard.
>>
>> Thanks.....
>>
>> Mike King
>> GN-1
>> 77MK
>> Dallas
>
>
>--
>
>
>David B.Schober, CPE
>Instructor, Aviation Maintenance
>Fairmont State College
>National Aerospace Education Center
>Rt. 3 Box 13
>Bridgeport, WV 26330-9503
>(304) 842-8300
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael King <mikek(at)nstar.net>
Date: Tuesday, May 25, 1999 3:56 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: PROP SIZE
Hi Michael, good to see you on the list today. Let me know what Hegy
charges you for the prop, I may need one eventually. I flew about 30
minutes last night, had lots of fun. I flew in formation with Dr. Carper,
who was flying his 1942 paint scheme Stearman.
Take Care!
Robert Hensarling GN-1 N83887
>Thanks David for the input. The gear on the GN-1
>is regular Piper Cub gear on 6:00 wheels. I know
>I could probably go with a 72 but do you think a 74
>would work too.
>
>I could get Ray Hegy in Marfa, Texas to build a wooden
>72x40.......according to what you are saying that should be
>better than what is on there now.
>
>Again thanks David for the help.
>
>Mike
>GN-1
>77MK
>Dallas
>
>
>>Your 69X39 prop is way to short to be efficient. Put a 74X40 or 74X42 on
>>and you should see an improvement in climb and cruise. If climb is your
>>primary concern and your gear legs are long enough, try a 76X34 prop
>>(seaplane prop for an airknocker). I would also recommend changing to a
>>wood prop. The wood prop will save between 11 and 13 pounds on your
>>empty weight. Weight decreases performance.
>>
>>Michael King wrote:
>>
>>> Say Gang,
>>>
>>> While we are on the subject of prop size, any
>>> experience from those using an A-80?
>>>
>>> I have a 1940 A-80 and currently using a 69x39
>>> metal prop. Would like better climb performance
>>> on a hot Texas day with two people onboard.
>>>
>>> Thanks.....
>>>
>>> Mike King
>>> GN-1
>>> 77MK
>>> Dallas
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>
***
>>
>>David B.Schober, CPE
>>Instructor, Aviation Maintenance
>>Fairmont State College
>>National Aerospace Education Center
>>Rt. 3 Box 13
>>Bridgeport, WV 26330-9503
>>(304) 842-8300
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Brusilow <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Robert wrote:
<>
Hi Bob:
There are things that are a lot different. For one the airfoil. The
GN-1 does not have a Piet airfoil which is a major change.
Mike B ( Piet N687MB )
Robert wrote:
size3>Hi Gene.
Good to hear from you. The GN-1 was designed to use piper
cubgear, and
I think there are some other things that are a little different,but
I'm not
sure
size3>
Hi
Bob:
size3>
There
are things that
are a lot different. For one the airfoil. The GN-1 does not have a Piet
airfoil
which is a major change.
size3>
Mike B (
Piet N687MB
)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael King <mikek(at)nstar.net> |
Robert,
Good to see you had fun last night....I'm on my
to the airport this afternoon to take her up.
The last time I talked to Hegy, the price was $500
which included shipping and a guarantee. Not
bad considering what the big boys get.
Nice guy......loves to talk and is VERY informative.
Will let you know tomorrow if I go up today. May
take the Cherokee up first for a little air work.
Best regards,
Mike
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Michael King <mikek(at)nstar.net>
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Date: Tuesday, May 25, 1999 3:56 PM
>Subject: Re: PROP SIZE
>
>Hi Michael, good to see you on the list today. Let me know what Hegy
>charges you for the prop, I may need one eventually. I flew about 30
>minutes last night, had lots of fun. I flew in formation with Dr. Carper,
>who was flying his 1942 paint scheme Stearman.
>
>Take Care!
>Robert Hensarling GN-1 N83887
>
>
>>Thanks David for the input. The gear on the GN-1
>>is regular Piper Cub gear on 6:00 wheels. I know
>>I could probably go with a 72 but do you think a 74
>>would work too.
>>
>>I could get Ray Hegy in Marfa, Texas to build a wooden
>>72x40.......according to what you are saying that should be
>>better than what is on there now.
>>
>>Again thanks David for the help.
>>
>>Mike
>>GN-1
>>77MK
>>Dallas
>>
>>
>>>Your 69X39 prop is way to short to be efficient. Put a 74X40 or 74X42 on
>>>and you should see an improvement in climb and cruise. If climb is your
>>>primary concern and your gear legs are long enough, try a 76X34 prop
>>>(seaplane prop for an airknocker). I would also recommend changing to a
>>>wood prop. The wood prop will save between 11 and 13 pounds on your
>>>empty weight. Weight decreases performance.
>>>
>>>Michael King wrote:
>>>
>>>> Say Gang,
>>>>
>>>> While we are on the subject of prop size, any
>>>> experience from those using an A-80?
>>>>
>>>> I have a 1940 A-80 and currently using a 69x39
>>>> metal prop. Would like better climb performance
>>>> on a hot Texas day with two people onboard.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.....
>>>>
>>>> Mike King
>>>> GN-1
>>>> 77MK
>>>> Dallas
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>--
>>>
>***
>>>
>>>David B.Schober, CPE
>>>Instructor, Aviation Maintenance
>>>Fairmont State College
>>>National Aerospace Education Center
>>>Rt. 3 Box 13
>>>Bridgeport, WV 26330-9503
>>>(304) 842-8300
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bowdler(at)juno.com |
| Subject: | Vandervort's Weight |
Well I've opended Pandora's Box with this one. If you want to have fun
at Brodhead settle in on the benches surrounding the campfire when "Big
Jim" holds court. It will certainly be interesting, intriguing,
informative, enjoyable and occasionally side splitting.
Been there,
Tom
__________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bowdler(at)juno.com |
| Subject: | Re: plywood on cement? |
Richard,
I built and put everything together on two simply-built 3' x 8'
tables I constricted from 4 x 8 sheets of ply framed with 2 x 4's with 2
x 2 legs that have t-nuts and bolts on the bottom that allow leveling.
The tables can be connected with "T" braces from the hardware to make one
3 x 16 table.
It is so much easier to work at waist height. Now that I don't need
them for plane building anymore they are very useful utility tables. The
legs with triangle gussets are held on with drywall screws, easily
removable with an electric drill or screwdriver. Very handy. I have a
drawing I made here somewhere I'll mail to you if you like.
Tom
__________
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: plywood on cement? |
Actually, Ive already started with it on the floor (got some REALLY
flat boards and Im not going to waste any time building it so the ones
I have wont warp). I hope my youth and good back will help me deal with
it being on the floor. :) Although, once I get the basic box glued,
I'll put it up on saw horses and build the rest up there.
Thanks guys.
Richard
--- bowdler(at)juno.com wrote:
> Richard,
> I built and put everything together on two simply-built 3' x 8'
> tables I constricted from 4 x 8 sheets of ply framed with 2 x 4's
> with 2
> x 2 legs that have t-nuts and bolts on the bottom that allow
> leveling.
> The tables can be connected with "T" braces from the hardware to make
> one
> 3 x 16 table.
> It is so much easier to work at waist height. Now that I don't
> need
> them for plane building anymore they are very useful utility tables.
> The
> legs with triangle gussets are held on with drywall screws, easily
> removable with an electric drill or screwdriver. Very handy. I
> have a
> drawing I made here somewhere I'll mail to you if you like.
> Tom
> __________
> Get completely free e-mail from Juno at
> http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
>
===
"Lady, you want me to answer you if this old airplane is safe to fly? Just how
in the world do you think it got to be this old?" - Jim Tavenner
---------------------------------------------------------
Visit www.AirCamper.org - A Low 'n Slow Online Community!
---------------------------------------------------------
My homepage: http://www.AirCamper.org/w3builder
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Hinchman <mikehi(at)molalla.net> |
| Subject: | Flaky distributor, was: Corvair cooling |
Sounds like a hole in both #2 and #4 -- the pistons, not the valves. Are
these both on the same side? If so, one of them could be holed and there
could be some kind of transfer of gases during the intake pulses. If it's a
hole in a piston, you were running it too advanced and experienced
detonation. This also explains why the engine won't make the RPM you want --
not enough ponies, with a blown piston.
It would be a good idea to have a speed shop dial in your distributor on a
distributor machine for the maximum advance that you require. Springs are
sometimes not what they are supposed to be, even right out of the box.
Setting it up on a distributor machine is the only inexpensive way to find
out. It is also possible that the distributor has worn parts that make the
timing at RPM something other than what you think it is. This could be
things like worn bushings and breaker plate, flaky springs or worn weight
pivots. To make a distributor behave correctly, everything that rotates or
supports rotating parts needs to be checked and replaced if it is out of
tolerance.
Personally, I think a good electronic ignition would solve all of these
problems and also (with a knock sensor) adjust for the maximum useable
advance at any RPM.
Regards,
Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | just 14 more months |
A BIG Thanks,
to everyone who has been responding to my pleas. Really!!!It has
been an extremely exciting and informative 2 weeks.....I haven't crammed
this much since I was a YOUNGER kid. I had the receiver surgically
removed this afternoon and I may have to take out a loan to pay my phone
bill. Anyway, I received the plans yesterday afternoon (Thanks Don) and
Jean Peters says he will ship my spruce on Friday. I have decided to use
the Australian Hoopwood plywood and have ordered the "Structan" glue
from Cottonport, La. This is the glue I asked y'all about this weekend.
While looking for a shop yesterday, I happened upon a man (ratted out by
his neighbors)that "has been building planes for better'n 50 years",
they say. Wow! What a stroke of luck. After a thorough interview I
agreed to take him on as a technical advisor. This interview of course
was very lengthy and thourough as I eagerly listened to hours of facts,
advice and stories of things that occurred decades before I was born.
Once, as I was wiping the drool of my lap and pulling my eyebrows back
down into place, the phone rang again and the solid threats from
ladyfolk caused us to terminate the interview. What the heck, there
should be 24 hours in tomorrow too! Right? So, There it all is 'cept for
the kicker. I didn't find a shop...but after great discussion and my
sons blessing, we decided to build the entire plane in our living room.
We have no ladyfolk at home and we entertain mostly across the lane at
the main house anyway......so.....I get an AIR CONDITIONED shop!
Preparations in Texas, DannyMac
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David B. Schober" <dbs(at)fscvax.wvnet.edu> |
If possible, before you spend your money, see if anyone around the airport with
a
Champ, Cub, T'craft, Stinson 10A or 105 or any other airplane with a 65-90 hp
Cont. will let you borrow their prop or has a spare in the hangar that you can
borrow for performance testing. I have a Sensenich72CK44 here in my office and
a
McCauley metal prop in the hanger that I think is a 42" pitch. If you were in the
area I'd let you try them out. It's amazing what some people have laying around.
A
friend borrowed the McCauley a few months back for his Champ. Just wanted to see
the difference between a cruise and climb prop. As I said, dig around before you
spend your money.
Michael King wrote:
> Thanks David for the input. The gear on the GN-1
> is regular Piper Cub gear on 6:00 wheels. I know
> I could probably go with a 72 but do you think a 74
> would work too.
>
> I could get Ray Hegy in Marfa, Texas to build a wooden
> 72x40.......according to what you are saying that should be
> better than what is on there now.
>
> Again thanks David for the help.
>
> Mike
> GN-1
> 77MK
> Dallas
>
> >Your 69X39 prop is way to short to be efficient. Put a 74X40 or 74X42 on
> >and you should see an improvement in climb and cruise. If climb is your
> >primary concern and your gear legs are long enough, try a 76X34 prop
> >(seaplane prop for an airknocker). I would also recommend changing to a
> >wood prop. The wood prop will save between 11 and 13 pounds on your
> >empty weight. Weight decreases performance.
> >
> >Michael King wrote:
> >
> >> Say Gang,
> >>
> >> While we are on the subject of prop size, any
> >> experience from those using an A-80?
> >>
> >> I have a 1940 A-80 and currently using a 69x39
> >> metal prop. Would like better climb performance
> >> on a hot Texas day with two people onboard.
> >>
> >> Thanks.....
> >>
> >> Mike King
> >> GN-1
> >> 77MK
> >> Dallas
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >
> >
> >David B.Schober, CPE
> >Instructor, Aviation Maintenance
> >Fairmont State College
> >National Aerospace Education Center
> >Rt. 3 Box 13
> >Bridgeport, WV 26330-9503
> >(304) 842-8300
> >
> >
> >
> >
--
David B.Schober, CPE
Instructor, Aviation Maintenance
Fairmont State College
National Aerospace Education Center
Rt. 3 Box 13
Bridgeport, WV 26330-9503
(304) 842-8300
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net> |
If y'all built airplanes, you should consider carving your own props. They
are not difficult -- just time consuming.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael King <mikek(at)nstar.net>
Date: Tuesday, May 25, 1999 3:57 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: PROP SIZE
>Robert,
>
>Good to see you had fun last night....I'm on my
>to the airport this afternoon to take her up.
>
>The last time I talked to Hegy, the price was $500
>which included shipping and a guarantee. Not
>bad considering what the big boys get.
>
>Nice guy......loves to talk and is VERY informative.
>
>Will let you know tomorrow if I go up today. May
>take the Cherokee up first for a little air work.
>
>Best regards,
>
>Mike
>
>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Michael King <mikek(at)nstar.net>
>>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>>Date: Tuesday, May 25, 1999 3:56 PM
>>Subject: Re: PROP SIZE
>>
>>Hi Michael, good to see you on the list today. Let me know what Hegy
>>charges you for the prop, I may need one eventually. I flew about 30
>>minutes last night, had lots of fun. I flew in formation with Dr. Carper,
>>who was flying his 1942 paint scheme Stearman.
>>
>>Take Care!
>>Robert Hensarling GN-1 N83887
>>
>>
>>>Thanks David for the input. The gear on the GN-1
>>>is regular Piper Cub gear on 6:00 wheels. I know
>>>I could probably go with a 72 but do you think a 74
>>>would work too.
>>>
>>>I could get Ray Hegy in Marfa, Texas to build a wooden
>>>72x40.......according to what you are saying that should be
>>>better than what is on there now.
>>>
>>>Again thanks David for the help.
>>>
>>>Mike
>>>GN-1
>>>77MK
>>>Dallas
>>>
>>>
>>>>Your 69X39 prop is way to short to be efficient. Put a 74X40 or 74X42 on
>>>>and you should see an improvement in climb and cruise. If climb is your
>>>>primary concern and your gear legs are long enough, try a 76X34 prop
>>>>(seaplane prop for an airknocker). I would also recommend changing to a
>>>>wood prop. The wood prop will save between 11 and 13 pounds on your
>>>>empty weight. Weight decreases performance.
>>>>
>>>>Michael King wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Say Gang,
>>>>>
>>>>> While we are on the subject of prop size, any
>>>>> experience from those using an A-80?
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a 1940 A-80 and currently using a 69x39
>>>>> metal prop. Would like better climb performance
>>>>> on a hot Texas day with two people onboard.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.....
>>>>>
>>>>> Mike King
>>>>> GN-1
>>>>> 77MK
>>>>> Dallas
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>
**
>>***
>>>>
>>>>David B.Schober, CPE
>>>>Instructor, Aviation Maintenance
>>>>Fairmont State College
>>>>National Aerospace Education Center
>>>>Rt. 3 Box 13
>>>>Bridgeport, WV 26330-9503
>>>>(304) 842-8300
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net> |
I've never seen the GN-1 plans, but understand it is a totally different
airplane using the general outline and dimensions of the Piet. One of
the things is that it was supposed to use Cub gear and other stuff that
was cheap at one time.
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Build the Piet that others
want to imitate. It has better resale I understand.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Brusilow <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net>
To: Pietenpol Discussion
Date: Tuesday, May 25, 1999 3:49 PM
Subject: GN-1
Robert wrote:
<>
Hi Bob:
There are things that are a lot different. For one the airfoil.
The GN-1 does not have a Piet airfoil which is a major change.
Mike B ( Piet N687MB )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Vandervort's Weight |
I looked up 'character' in Webster's dictionary and found Vandervoort's
picture!
John
-----Original Message-----
From: bowdler(at)juno.com
Date: Tuesday, May 25, 1999 6:30 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Vandervort's Weight
>Well I've opended Pandora's Box with this one. If you want to have fun
>at Brodhead settle in on the benches surrounding the campfire when "Big
>Jim" holds court. It will certainly be interesting, intriguing,
>informative, enjoyable and occasionally side splitting.
>Been there,
>Tom
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net> |
| Subject: | Re: just 14 more months |
Where abouts in TX are you?
John
-----Original Message-----
From: dannymac <dannymac@hal-pc.org>
Date: Wednesday, May 26, 1999 12:39 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: just 14 more months
>A BIG Thanks,
>
> to everyone who has been responding to my pleas. Really!!!It has
>been an extremely exciting and informative 2 weeks.....I haven't crammed
>this much since I was a YOUNGER kid. I had the receiver surgically
>removed this afternoon and I may have to take out a loan to pay my phone
>bill. Anyway, I received the plans yesterday afternoon (Thanks Don) and
>Jean Peters says he will ship my spruce on Friday. I have decided to use
>the Australian Hoopwood plywood and have ordered the "Structan" glue
>from Cottonport, La. This is the glue I asked y'all about this weekend.
>While looking for a shop yesterday, I happened upon a man (ratted out by
>his neighbors)that "has been building planes for better'n 50 years",
>they say. Wow! What a stroke of luck. After a thorough interview I
>agreed to take him on as a technical advisor. This interview of course
>was very lengthy and thourough as I eagerly listened to hours of facts,
>advice and stories of things that occurred decades before I was born.
>Once, as I was wiping the drool of my lap and pulling my eyebrows back
>down into place, the phone rang again and the solid threats from
>ladyfolk caused us to terminate the interview. What the heck, there
>should be 24 hours in tomorrow too! Right? So, There it all is 'cept for
>the kicker. I didn't find a shop...but after great discussion and my
>sons blessing, we decided to build the entire plane in our living room.
>We have no ladyfolk at home and we entertain mostly across the lane at
>the main house anyway......so.....I get an AIR CONDITIONED shop!
>
>Preparations in Texas, DannyMac
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael King <mikek(at)nstar.net> |
I have never thought about it before. Between my brother
who has a 1939 Taylorcraft and my GN-1, there may some
thought to doing just that. Robert in Uvalde, who is one of
the best skilled custom wood furniture builder might be
interested too. Between the three of us, we could get some
good use from making our own props for various configurations...
cruise and speed applications.
Is there a wooden prop machine available?
Thanks......
Mike
>If y'all built airplanes, you should consider carving your own props. They
>are not difficult -- just time consuming.
>
>John
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Michael King <mikek(at)nstar.net>
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Date: Tuesday, May 25, 1999 3:57 PM
>Subject: Re: PROP SIZE
>
>
>>Robert,
>>
>>Good to see you had fun last night....I'm on my
>>to the airport this afternoon to take her up.
>>
>>The last time I talked to Hegy, the price was $500
>>which included shipping and a guarantee. Not
>>bad considering what the big boys get.
>>
>>Nice guy......loves to talk and is VERY informative.
>>
>>Will let you know tomorrow if I go up today. May
>>take the Cherokee up first for a little air work.
>>
>>Best regards,
>>
>>Mike
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: Michael King <mikek(at)nstar.net>
>>>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>>>Date: Tuesday, May 25, 1999 3:56 PM
>>>Subject: Re: PROP SIZE
>>>
>>>Hi Michael, good to see you on the list today. Let me know what Hegy
>>>charges you for the prop, I may need one eventually. I flew about 30
>>>minutes last night, had lots of fun. I flew in formation with Dr. Carper,
>>>who was flying his 1942 paint scheme Stearman.
>>>
>>>Take Care!
>>>Robert Hensarling GN-1 N83887
>>>
>>>
>>>>Thanks David for the input. The gear on the GN-1
>>>>is regular Piper Cub gear on 6:00 wheels. I know
>>>>I could probably go with a 72 but do you think a 74
>>>>would work too.
>>>>
>>>>I could get Ray Hegy in Marfa, Texas to build a wooden
>>>>72x40.......according to what you are saying that should be
>>>>better than what is on there now.
>>>>
>>>>Again thanks David for the help.
>>>>
>>>>Mike
>>>>GN-1
>>>>77MK
>>>>Dallas
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Your 69X39 prop is way to short to be efficient. Put a 74X40 or 74X42 on
>>>>>and you should see an improvement in climb and cruise. If climb is your
>>>>>primary concern and your gear legs are long enough, try a 76X34 prop
>>>>>(seaplane prop for an airknocker). I would also recommend changing to a
>>>>>wood prop. The wood prop will save between 11 and 13 pounds on your
>>>>>empty weight. Weight decreases performance.
>>>>>
>>>>>Michael King wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Say Gang,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> While we are on the subject of prop size, any
>>>>>> experience from those using an A-80?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have a 1940 A-80 and currently using a 69x39
>>>>>> metal prop. Would like better climb performance
>>>>>> on a hot Texas day with two people onboard.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks.....
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mike King
>>>>>> GN-1
>>>>>> 77MK
>>>>>> Dallas
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>--
>>>>>
>**
>>>***
>>>>>
>>>>>David B.Schober, CPE
>>>>>Instructor, Aviation Maintenance
>>>>>Fairmont State College
>>>>>National Aerospace Education Center
>>>>>Rt. 3 Box 13
>>>>>Bridgeport, WV 26330-9503
>>>>>(304) 842-8300
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Prop Carving Was: Prop Size |
> Is there a wooden prop machine available?
Or for that matter, is there an online guide/tutorial for prop carving?
Either way, I'd sure love to get/make one and put it on AirCamper.org!
I've wanted to carve my own prop ever since I saw this picture:
http://www.aircamper.org/acimg/444mh.jpg Is that beautiful or what?
Richard
===
"Lady, you want me to answer you if this old airplane is safe to fly? Just how
in the world do you think it got to be this old?" - Jim Tavenner
---------------------------------------------------------
Visit www.AirCamper.org - A Low 'n Slow Online Community!
---------------------------------------------------------
My homepage: http://www.AirCamper.org/w3builder
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David Swagler <dswagler(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: was PROP SIZE now:carving your own |
Where can you find info? There is supposed to be a
book by Eric Clutton that is helpful but I've never
seen it for sale anywhere.
I think there are three or four people offering plans
for carving machines. They advertise in the back of
most of the custom/homebuilt plane magazines. Are any
of them any good?
--- John Greenlee wrote:
> If y'all built airplanes, you should consider
> carving your own props. They
> are not difficult -- just time consuming.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC" |
| Subject: | FW: Prop Carving Was: Prop Size |
Richard,
I'll make you a deal you can't refuse. Send me my CD and I'll send you a
copy of the Prop. Carving machine.
Domenic
----------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Prop Carving Was: Prop Size |
> Is there a wooden prop machine available?
Or for that matter, is there an online guide/tutorial for prop carving?
Either way, I'd sure love to get/make one and put it on AirCamper.org!
I've wanted to carve my own prop ever since I saw this picture:
http://www.aircamper.org/acimg/444mh.jpg Is that beautiful or what?
Richard
===
"Lady, you want me to answer you if this old airplane is safe to fly? Just
how in the world do you think it got to be this old?" - Jim Tavenner
---------------------------------------------------------
Visit www.AirCamper.org - A Low 'n Slow Online Community!
---------------------------------------------------------
My homepage: http://www.AirCamper.org/w3builder
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gene Tomblin <tombling(at)MercyShips.ORG> |
Hi All,
Thank You for the education on the GN-1. I'm full of questions so you
may here more from me than you'l like , I hope not. I grew up around
airplanes. My father was a WWII pilot and worked for Northrop Aircraft
in Hawthorne California for about 37 years. I have done a little flying
my self mostly in the right seat of a 150 or 172 on long cross country
trips and a little around east Texas. I have built and flown models
since I was a boy and to me a Piet looks like a big RC trainer. I'd
love to build one . In recent years a have been involved with a number
of Local EAA types in Canton , Texas. BHP's idea of keeping the cost of
aircraft ownership down to the point where the average guy could build
and fly his own plane apeals to me . My father always told me not to get
involved with flying unless I could justify the great expense.
The discussion of propeller size a pitch prompts a question from me. Is
the Corvair a good engine choise for the Piet? I know that BHP built
Air Campers with Corvair engines and I have visited William Wayane's
web site and he has nothing but praise for the Corvair as a aircraft
power plant. But then he wants to sell prop hubs at $300 each too. I
sounds like the Corvair wants to turn more RPM than the Ford A engine
to be at it's best. So really is a direct drive Corvair a good choice
for the Air Camper? Keeping in mind that on a hot day in July when the
densty altitude here in East Texas is going to be a lot more than the
500 feet field elevation . 200 feet per minute is not exactly going up
like a rocket any way. I can vividly recall a takeoff from Fort Smith
AK in the summer of 96 in an over gross and very high time (read very
run out engine) 152. I'm hoping that the takeoff and climb performance
thay you folks typically have is somthing better than my 152 memorys
. It's not a good idea to have to find terrain at you altitude when
most of it is above you.
Gene
Michael Brusilow wrote:
> Robert wrote: < designed to use piper cub
> gear, and I think there are some other things that are a little
> different,
> but I'm not sure>> Hi Bob: There are things that are a lot
> different. For one the airfoil. The GN-1 does not have a Piet airfoil
> which is a major change. Mike B ( Piet N687MB )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Beanlands <kbeanlan(at)spots.ab.ca> |
I know exactly what you mean. I've been in a real tizzy about the engine
question for my Christavia. The engine power reccommended for the
Christavia is 85-150 and the gross is 1500-1650 lbs. I was also interested
in using floats in the future.
So far, I started out with a Lyc. 0-235 that was in rough shape. I sold
that (for what I paid) when I started hearing things about the Subarus and
seeing the price tag on overhauling the Lyc. I eventually bough two EA-81
engines with the intention of tearing them down and rebuilding them. As
several Subaru powered planes started to fly around here, it became
apparent that they are not as good as I had been told. One has been
plagued with oil temp problems and the other had a pushrod fail. Stories
from two other builders reported the same sort of problems. Granted, a
couple of builders have had success, but the failure rate is too high for
me.
Phase three. I came across a C-85 at a reasonable price that was in
"running condition" on an airboat in Florida. That, combined with an A-75
out of BC provided me with what I though was an inexpensive powerplant.
After hearing the rebuild quote of $6000 to $7000 USD, I decided to
rethink my plans.
All the way through, I had been worrying whether or not I had enough power
in an engine < 100 hp. I kept thinking that I could always go to a bigger
engine down the road. I knew I could afford the C-85 rebuild, I just
wasn't sure if that was the best use of mu money. After doing a little
reading and investigating, I ended up looking at the Franklin engines.
These engines are being built in Poland in the 120 hp, 235 CI 4 cyl and
220 hp, 350 CI 6 cyl models at very reasonable prices. The 4 cylinder is
$7900 USD not including accessories. This is a NEW engine! While talking
to Franklin Parts and Service in IN, we got to talking about rebuilt
engines. I ended up ordering a custom built, first run, US manufactured,
150 hp, 235 CI, 4 cyl. engine on Friday for considerably less than the
new price. It's about half of the cost of an O/H'd Lyc at the same power
and about the same price as rebuilding the C-85.
Fortunately, I have done alright with selling the old parts as I moved
from one phase to another. However, the conclusion for me is that if I
ever build another plane, I'll wait until the last minute and buy a zero
timed aircraft engine with exactly the power I want rather than wasting
time and money fooling around with "cheap" alternatives. In the long run,
the "expensive engine" can actually be the least expensive alternative and
the one with the most peace of mind. Besides, with that sort of power,
I'll be able to take off ACROSS the runway RRR RRR RRR!
Ken "I know I'll get flamed on this one" Beanlands
On Wed, 26 May 1999, Gene Tomblin wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> for the Air Camper? Keeping in mind that on a hot day in July when the
> densty altitude here in East Texas is going to be a lot more than the
> 500 feet field elevation . 200 feet per minute is not exactly going up
> like a rocket any way. I can vividly recall a takeoff from Fort Smith
> AK in the summer of 96 in an over gross and very high time (read very
> run out engine) 152. I'm hoping that the takeoff and climb performance
> thay you folks typically have is somthing better than my 152 memorys
> . It's not a good idea to have to find terrain at you altitude when
> most of it is above you.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Sury <jimsury(at)fbtc.net>
Date: Wednesday, May 26, 1999 2:51 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: prop making
>Check out this prop makeing machine. <http://www.wood-carver.com/> The
>only problem is price and the fact that you need a prop to duplicate.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dlwoolsey(at)aol.com |
I am now on my 4th prop and can do all of the carving in one 8 hour day, the
layout takes alot longer but I guess that that is the way it usually goes.
My last prop with the Suburu was 76X50 and still let the engine run a little
fast so I am carving a real wide blade 76X52. I should have it on the plane
next week so I will let you know how it goes.
Duane NX6398
________________________________________________________________________________
Anyone have any pics of the carving process? I'm putting a new page up
on AirCamper.org for prop carving.
--- Dlwoolsey(at)aol.com wrote:
> I am now on my 4th prop and can do all of the carving in one 8 hour
> day, the
> layout takes alot longer but I guess that that is the way it usually
> goes.
> My last prop with the Suburu was 76X50 and still let the engine run a
> little
> fast so I am carving a real wide blade 76X52. I should have it on
> the plane
> next week so I will let you know how it goes.
>
> Duane NX6398
>
===
"Lady, you want me to answer you if this old airplane is safe to fly? Just how
in the world do you think it got to be this old?" - Jim Tavenner
---------------------------------------------------------
Visit www.AirCamper.org - A Low 'n Slow Online Community!
---------------------------------------------------------
My homepage: http://www.AirCamper.org/w3builder
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dlwoolsey(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: prop carving... |
As Steve writes I have carved a few. I am building the prop duplicator for
this next one just to see if it is any quicker.
Duane NX6398
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net> |
Ok, here goes.
Grant Maclaren did I nice write up on watching Howard Henderson carve a prop
for 444MH. It is really detailed and a lot of help.
My first attempt was a good lesson in how not to do it, or how to make a
wall hanger. I tried to use the duplicator to get too close a finished
product. My second attempt is much better. I left about a 1/4" on each
side to finish by hand. Get a sure-form rasp. Removes alot of material if
a lot of sweat is applied.
If I do another one, I might do the whole thing by hand. Can't be that much
more work.
If you use the duplicator try this trick I saw in a photograph somewhere.
Lengthen the center laminations 1 to 1 1/2". Drill them near the end on the
center line and bolt the tip securely to the table with appropriate spacers.
The sucker can't attempt to 'pivot' on you then. When finishing the tips,
you can just cut the excess off.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: dannymac <dannymac@hal-pc.org>
Date: Wednesday, May 26, 1999 10:01 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: PROP SIZE
>ia Mercury MTS v1.44 (NDS)) (via Mercury MTS v1.44 (NDS)) (via Mercury MTS
v1.44 (NDS))
>Message-ID: <3C8E4BE3FC0(at)adena.byu.edu>
>
>John Greenlee wrote:
>>
>> If y'all built airplanes, you should consider carving your own props.
They
>> are not difficult -- just time consuming.
>>
>> John
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Michael King <mikek(at)nstar.net>
>> To: Pietenpol Discussion
>> Date: Tuesday, May 25, 1999 3:57 PM
>> Subject: Re: PROP SIZE
>>
>> >Robert,
>> >
>> >Good to see you had fun last night....I'm on my
>> >to the airport this afternoon to take her up.
>> >
>> >The last time I talked to Hegy, the price was $500
>> >which included shipping and a guarantee. Not
>> >bad considering what the big boys get.
>> >
>> >Nice guy......loves to talk and is VERY informative.
>> >
>> >Will let you know tomorrow if I go up today. May
>> >take the Cherokee up first for a little air work.
>> >
>> >Best regards,
>> >
>> >Mike
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >>-----Original Message-----
>> >>From: Michael King <mikek(at)nstar.net>
>> >>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>> >>Date: Tuesday, May 25, 1999 3:56 PM
>> >>Subject: Re: PROP SIZE
>> >>
>> >>Hi Michael, good to see you on the list today. Let me know what Hegy
>> >>charges you for the prop, I may need one eventually. I flew about 30
>> >>minutes last night, had lots of fun. I flew in formation with Dr.
Carper,
>> >>who was flying his 1942 paint scheme Stearman.
>> >>
>> >>Take Care!
>> >>Robert Hensarling GN-1 N83887
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>Thanks David for the input. The gear on the GN-1
>> >>>is regular Piper Cub gear on 6:00 wheels. I know
>> >>>I could probably go with a 72 but do you think a 74
>> >>>would work too.
>> >>>
>> >>>I could get Ray Hegy in Marfa, Texas to build a wooden
>> >>>72x40.......according to what you are saying that should be
>> >>>better than what is on there now.
>> >>>
>> >>>Again thanks David for the help.
>> >>>
>> >>>Mike
>> >>>GN-1
>> >>>77MK
>> >>>Dallas
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>>Your 69X39 prop is way to short to be efficient. Put a 74X40 or 74X42
on
>> >>>>and you should see an improvement in climb and cruise. If climb is
your
>> >>>>primary concern and your gear legs are long enough, try a 76X34 prop
>> >>>>(seaplane prop for an airknocker). I would also recommend changing to
a
>> >>>>wood prop. The wood prop will save between 11 and 13 pounds on your
>> >>>>empty weight. Weight decreases performance.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Michael King wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> Say Gang,
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> While we are on the subject of prop size, any
>> >>>>> experience from those using an A-80?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I have a 1940 A-80 and currently using a 69x39
>> >>>>> metal prop. Would like better climb performance
>> >>>>> on a hot Texas day with two people onboard.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Thanks.....
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Mike King
>> >>>>> GN-1
>> >>>>> 77MK
>> >>>>> Dallas
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>--
>> >>>>
>>
>> **
>> >>***
>> >>>>
>> >>>>David B.Schober, CPE
>> >>>>Instructor, Aviation Maintenance
>> >>>>Fairmont State College
>> >>>>National Aerospace Education Center
>> >>>>Rt. 3 Box 13
>> >>>>Bridgeport, WV 26330-9503
>> >>>>(304) 842-8300
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>Ok John,
>
>How can I learn how to carve one? How many more power tools will I have
>to buy? How MUCH time are you talking about. I need to start thinking
>about this now.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net> |
Robert,
Good point about the resale thing.
I've ridden in Kim Stricker's GN-1. A lot of fun and he gets a lot of
enjoyment out of owning it. However, if I was starting from scratch and
putting thousands of hours and dollars into a project, I'd opt for the
Real McCoy. I've never heard a Piet owner say he'd rather have a GN-1.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com>
To: Pietenpol Discussion
Date: Wednesday, May 26, 1999 12:16 PM
Subject: Re: GN-1
From: John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net>
To: Pietenpol Discussion
Date: Wednesday, May 26, 1999 9:27 AM
Subject: Re: GN-1
I've never seen the GN-1 plans, but understand it is a totally
different airplane using the general outline and dimensions of the Piet.
One of the things is that it was supposed to use Cub gear and other
stuff that was cheap at one time.
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Build the Piet
that others want to imitate. It has better resale I understand.
John
airplane, I'd use the original plans also (I didn't build my GN-1, but
traded a little ultralight straight across for it, and didn't have but
$2,000 in the ultralight, so as you can see I'm very happy with the
GN-1. When I'm in the air enjoying myself and the world, I don't seem
to worry all that much about the Piet/GN-1 thing). Resale?? Better
resale?? Yes, probably, I'm sure, but why think about selling your Piet
John? :o)
Robert Hensarling GN-1 N83887
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC" |
| Subject: | FW: Longeron Splices |
Follow Cam 18 for scarfing. If done properly it shouldn't matter, however if
you can plan ahead and scarf in different bays it would certainly be better.
And better disptribute the extra weight.
Dom.
----------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Longeron Splices |
Hi guys
I am getting my fuse woodwork done (slowly ;-) and have come up against a
snag. None of my 1" square stock (about 10 pieces 16' long) will give me a
perfect longeron, meaning I need to scarf them to get rid of "bad" sections.
has anyone run the nubers on the best layout for the joints- should the be
all in the same bay, or staggered so none line up ? and best position for
them- front, middle or rear of the fuse?
The wood is 12-16 gpi, straight grain spruce, but has quite a few "red"
knots (1/8" to dime size). there is little to no grain runout due to the
knots, but I'd rather get rid of them.
Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC" |
Richard I found my pamphlet on carving and copy of "Proppeller making for
homebuilts by Ray Hegy"
Send me your address again. I'll get it out today.
Dom.
----------
________________________________________________________________________________
Anyone have any pics of the carving process? I'm putting a new page up
on AirCamper.org for prop carving.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
-----Original Message-----
From: John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net>
To: Pietenpol Discussion
Date: Thursday, May 27, 1999 10:55 AM
Subject: Re: GN-1
Ok John, you arn't going to be able to get me in a flame war on the
list, this is a hobby, that my Dad and I enjoy very much, and quite
frankly that's the main thing that matters to me. However, I certainly
respect your opinions. But if GN-1 owners arn't welcomed on the list or
at Brodhead, someone please let me know now, and we can avoid some of
the comments the list is having to read, which isn't doing anyone any
good. This is about flying and fun, and if my GN-1 resembles a Piet
except for the inside, then it really shouldn't create a problem unless
I was selling it as a true Piet. John, this is all I'll say on this
topic.
Robert Hensarling GN-1 (and proud of it, and no one can take away
the pride my Dad and I have in my airplane away) N83887
Robert,
Good point about the resale thing.
I've ridden in Kim Stricker's GN-1. A lot of fun and he gets a lot
of enjoyment out of owning it. However, if I was starting from scratch
and putting thousands of hours and dollars into a project, I'd opt for
the Real McCoy. I've never heard a Piet owner say he'd rather have a
GN-1.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com>
To: Pietenpol Discussion
Date: Wednesday, May 26, 1999 12:16 PM
Subject: Re: GN-1
totally different airplane using the general outline and dimensions of
the Piet. One of the things is that it was supposed to use Cub gear and
other stuff that was cheap at one time.
that others want to imitate. It has better resale I understand.
another airplane, I'd use the original plans also (I didn't build my
GN-1, but traded a little ultralight straight across for it, and
didn't have but $2,000 in the ultralight, so as you can see I'm very
happy with the GN-1. When I'm in the air enjoying myself and the world,
I don't seem to worry all that much about the Piet/GN-1 thing).
Resale?? Better resale?? Yes, probably, I'm sure, but why think about
selling your Piet John? :o)
________________________________________________________________________________
All welcome. PIET, GN's, Fly-Baby, Heaths, Hatz, Christavia, whatever.....
I fly for FUN. Just happens to be in a piet today.
Steve Eldredge
Steve(at)byu.edu
IT Services
Brigham Young University
-----Original Message-----
hensarling
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 1999 11:05 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: GN-1
-----Original Message-----
From: John Greenlee < jgreenlee(at)morgan.net>
Date: Thursday, May 27, 1999 10:55 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: GN-1
Ok John, you arn't going to be able to get me in a flame war on the list,
this is a hobby, that my Dad and I enjoy very much, and quite frankly that's
the main thing that matters to me. However, I certainly respect your
opinions. But if GN-1 owners arn't welcomed on the list or at Brodhead,
someone please let me know now, and we can avoid some of the comments the
list is having to read, which isn't doing anyone any good. This is about
flying and fun, and if my GN-1 resembles a Piet except for the inside, then
it really shouldn't create a problem unless I was selling it as a true Piet.
John, this is all I'll say on this topic.
Robert Hensarling GN-1 (and proud of it, and no one can take away the pride
my Dad and I have in my airplane away) N83887
Robert,
Good point about the resale thing.
I've ridden in Kim Stricker's GN-1. A lot of fun and he gets a lot of
enjoyment out of owning it. However, if I was starting from scratch and
putting thousands of hours and dollars into a project, I'd opt for the Real
McCoy. I've never heard a Piet owner say he'd rather have a GN-1.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: robert hensarling < rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com>
Date: Wednesday, May 26, 1999 12:16 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: GN-1
-----Original Message-----
From: John Greenlee < jgreenlee(at)morgan.net>
Date: Wednesday, May 26, 1999 9:27 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: GN-1
I've never seen the GN-1 plans, but understand it is a totally different
airplane using the general outline and dimensions of the Piet. One of the
things is that it was supposed to use Cub gear and other stuff that was
cheap at one time.
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Build the Piet that others
want to imitate. It has better resale I understand.
John
Good advise John! I think if I were going to build another airplane,
I'd use the original plans also (I didn't build my GN-1, but traded a little
ultralight straight across for it, and didn't have but $2,000 in the
ultralight, so as you can see I'm very happy with the GN-1. When I'm in the
air enjoying myself and the world, I don't seem to worry all that much about
the Piet/GN-1 thing). Resale?? Better resale?? Yes, probably, I'm sure,
but why think about selling your Piet John? :o)
Robert Hensarling GN-1 N83887
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net> |
I think you misunderstand me. You are attaching much more emotion to
this issue than I am. I have made no comment about who is welcome where
or whether any airplane is better, worse, etc.
Somebody asked about which route to go (I think) and I am giving my
opinion that he'll be more pleased with the Pietenpol. If he or anyone
else builds, buys, or loves a Grega, I hope you get 10,000 hours of fun
out of it. If you already own or have started a Grega, I am not
suggesting you go away or chainsaw it or anything like that.
Lighten up a bit. I get the impression you think I have insulted you
directly. Give me a ride in that Grega one of these days!
John
-----Original Message-----
From: robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com>
To: Pietenpol Discussion
Date: Thursday, May 27, 1999 12:12 PM
Subject: Re: GN-1
From: John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net>
To: Pietenpol Discussion
Date: Thursday, May 27, 1999 10:55 AM
Subject: Re: GN-1
Ok John, you arn't going to be able to get me in a flame war on
the list, this is a hobby, that my Dad and I enjoy very much, and quite
frankly that's the main thing that matters to me. However, I certainly
respect your opinions. But if GN-1 owners arn't welcomed on the list or
at Brodhead, someone please let me know now, and we can avoid some of
the comments the list is having to read, which isn't doing anyone any
good. This is about flying and fun, and if my GN-1 resembles a Piet
except for the inside, then it really shouldn't create a problem unless
I was selling it as a true Piet. John, this is all I'll say on this
topic.
Robert Hensarling GN-1 (and proud of it, and no one can take
away the pride my Dad and I have in my airplane away) N83887
Robert,
Good point about the resale thing.
I've ridden in Kim Stricker's GN-1. A lot of fun and he gets a
lot of enjoyment out of owning it. However, if I was starting from
scratch and putting thousands of hours and dollars into a project, I'd
opt for the Real McCoy. I've never heard a Piet owner say he'd rather
have a GN-1.
John
totally different airplane using the general outline and dimensions of
the Piet. One of the things is that it was supposed to use Cub gear and
other stuff that was cheap at one time.
Piet that others want to imitate. It has better resale I understand.
another airplane, I'd use the original plans also (I didn't build my
GN-1, but traded a little ultralight straight across for it, and
didn't have but $2,000 in the ultralight, so as you can see I'm very
happy with the GN-1. When I'm in the air enjoying myself and the world,
I don't seem to worry all that much about the Piet/GN-1 thing).
Resale?? Better resale?? Yes, probably, I'm sure, but why think about
selling your Piet John? :o)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net> |
And now for something totally different:
I sprayed the first color coat this a.m: Forest Green on the belly of
the fuselage and one side of the fin and rudder. The results are not
going to approach Steve E.'s standard, but overall I am pleased.
I think I am developing bipolar disorder as a result of this finishing
process. I go from tickled pink to ready to chainsaw it and back to
tickled pink in a matter of hours. When I started this project (6 1/2
years ago) I knew zero about building airplanes. A lot of what I now
know is not going to help me much any more on this one but would make a
subsequent project come out better.
Sand anything that comes within a 1/2" or so of the fabric really
smooth! If you are ham handed like me you'll manage to mash the fabric
against the not-quite-smooth structure and sand defects (read craters)
into your fabric. AARRGH!!!
Hope to have a presentable airplane at any rate with a few more weeks
and months of work.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com>
To: Pietenpol Discussion
Date: Wednesday, May 26, 1999 12:16 PM
Subject: Re: GN-1
From: John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net>
To: Pietenpol Discussion
Date: Wednesday, May 26, 1999 9:27 AM
Subject: Re: GN-1
I've never seen the GN-1 plans, but understand it is a totally
different airplane using the general outline and dimensions of the Piet.
One of the things is that it was supposed to use Cub gear and other
stuff that was cheap at one time.
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Build the Piet
that others want to imitate. It has better resale I understand.
John
airplane, I'd use the original plans also (I didn't build my GN-1, but
traded a little ultralight straight across for it, and didn't have but
$2,000 in the ultralight, so as you can see I'm very happy with the
GN-1. When I'm in the air enjoying myself and the world, I don't seem
to worry all that much about the Piet/GN-1 thing). Resale?? Better
resale?? Yes, probably, I'm sure, but why think about selling your Piet
John? :o)
Robert Hensarling GN-1 N83887
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net> |
Robert,
I just re-read your message. You've got only 2 grand in your ship?
What a deal!
John
-----Original Message-----
From: robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com>
To: Pietenpol Discussion
Date: Wednesday, May 26, 1999 12:16 PM
Subject: Re: GN-1
From: John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net>
To: Pietenpol Discussion
Date: Wednesday, May 26, 1999 9:27 AM
Subject: Re: GN-1
I've never seen the GN-1 plans, but understand it is a totally
different airplane using the general outline and dimensions of the Piet.
One of the things is that it was supposed to use Cub gear and other
stuff that was cheap at one time.
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Build the Piet
that others want to imitate. It has better resale I understand.
John
airplane, I'd use the original plans also (I didn't build my GN-1, but
traded a little ultralight straight across for it, and didn't have but
$2,000 in the ultralight, so as you can see I'm very happy with the
GN-1. When I'm in the air enjoying myself and the world, I don't seem
to worry all that much about the Piet/GN-1 thing). Resale?? Better
resale?? Yes, probably, I'm sure, but why think about selling your Piet
John? :o)
Robert Hensarling GN-1 N83887
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
-----Original Message-----
From: John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net>
To: Pietenpol Discussion
Date: Thursday, May 27, 1999 1:04 PM
Subject: Re: GN-1
John,
Well, 2M actual cash that is, but there was some other trading
going on with that deal, so it came out around 10M in total value in
cash and trade items. It's just that 2M sounded good for that
particular post at the time :o) And, I'd be happy to give you a
ride, anytime!
Robert
Robert,
I just re-read your message. You've got only 2 grand in your ship?
What a deal!
John
-----Original Message-----
From: robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com>
To: Pietenpol Discussion
Date: Wednesday, May 26, 1999 12:16 PM
Subject: Re: GN-1
totally different airplane using the general outline and dimensions of
the Piet. One of the things is that it was supposed to use Cub gear and
other stuff that was cheap at one time.
that others want to imitate. It has better resale I understand.
another airplane, I'd use the original plans also (I didn't build my
GN-1, but traded a little ultralight straight across for it, and
didn't have but $2,000 in the ultralight, so as you can see I'm very
happy with the GN-1. When I'm in the air enjoying myself and the world,
I don't seem to worry all that much about the Piet/GN-1 thing).
Resale?? Better resale?? Yes, probably, I'm sure, but why think about
selling your Piet John? :o)
________________________________________________________________________________
Guys;
A lot of the Piets that come thru Broadhead are the GN-1
version.....they are treated the same and hop as many rides as anything
else.........The GN-1 is just another man's version of the original Piet
using (then available cheaply) Cub firewall forward and Cub gear, so on
and so forth. I have talked to the GN-1 designer many times as he lives
a few miles up the road here in Ohio. He didn't want to fuss with wire
wheels, the Ford engine and so forth. Nostalgia aside, this is NOT a bad
idea! Take a solid flier and proven design and attach "off the shelf"
common parts and there is the GN-1......A lot more guys are in the air
that didn't want to fuss with the Piet in it's purest form. I am
building a Scout, fly a Super Champ........down the road is an
Aircamper..........(This is really a Ford/Chevy kinda thing!) Be cool,
go fly, enjoy!
Earl Myers
-----Original Message-----
From: robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com>
To: Pietenpol Discussion
Date: Thursday, May 27, 1999 1:10 PM
Subject: Re: GN-1
From: John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net>
To: Pietenpol Discussion
Date: Thursday, May 27, 1999 10:55 AM
Subject: Re: GN-1
Ok John, you arn't going to be able to get me in a flame war on
the list, this is a hobby, that my Dad and I enjoy very much, and quite
frankly that's the main thing that matters to me. However, I certainly
respect your opinions. But if GN-1 owners arn't welcomed on the list or
at Brodhead, someone please let me know now, and we can avoid some of
the comments the list is having to read, which isn't doing anyone any
good. This is about flying and fun, and if my GN-1 resembles a Piet
except for the inside, then it really shouldn't create a problem unless
I was selling it as a true Piet. John, this is all I'll say on this
topic.
Robert Hensarling GN-1 (and proud of it, and no one can take
away the pride my Dad and I have in my airplane away) N83887
Robert,
Good point about the resale thing.
I've ridden in Kim Stricker's GN-1. A lot of fun and he gets a
lot of enjoyment out of owning it. However, if I was starting from
scratch and putting thousands of hours and dollars into a project, I'd
opt for the Real McCoy. I've never heard a Piet owner say he'd rather
have a GN-1.
John
totally different airplane using the general outline and dimensions of
the Piet. One of the things is that it was supposed to use Cub gear and
other stuff that was cheap at one time.
Piet that others want to imitate. It has better resale I understand.
another airplane, I'd use the original plans also (I didn't build my
GN-1, but traded a little ultralight straight across for it, and
didn't have but $2,000 in the ultralight, so as you can see I'm very
happy with the GN-1. When I'm in the air enjoying myself and the world,
I don't seem to worry all that much about the Piet/GN-1 thing).
Resale?? Better resale?? Yes, probably, I'm sure, but why think about
selling your Piet John? :o)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
>
>
> I fly for FUN. Just happens to be in a piet today.
>
> Steve Eldredge
Steve- So tell us about your smoke system and the police someday......
ok ? I'm waiting for one of the neighbors to call the police on me......but
I've given most of them rides so they are all for it.
Did you get the correct oil and try that yet ??
Mike C.
I fly for FUN. Just
happens to be in a piet today.
Steve Eldredge
Steve- So tell us about your smoke system and the police
someday......
ok ? I'm waiting for one of the neighbors to call the police
on me......but
I've given most of them rides so they are all for it.
Did you get the correct oil and try that yet ??
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Smoke System |
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov>
To: Pietenpol Discussion
Date: Thursday, May 27, 1999 1:38 PM
Subject: Smoke System
Speaking of smoke Michael, I'm having the fitting welded onto my
exhaust pipe today, and will try out the gizmo hopefully this evening.
I'm using a small pump that's sold through model airplane stores for the
same thing, pumping smoke oil. Those guys tell me that the volumn is to
much, and they have to restrict the flow, so it may be just the thing
for a full size airplane, plus it uses a 6 volt lantern battery.
Robert (hope it works!) Hensarling
I fly for FUN. Just happens to be in a piet today.
Steve Eldredge
Steve- So tell us about your smoke system and the police
someday......
ok ? I'm waiting for one of the neighbors to call the police on
me......but
I've given most of them rides so they are all for it.
Did you get the correct oil and try that yet ??
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | pschultz(at)uplogon.com (Paul Schultz) |
Steve;
I'm getting two of each Email message. Please help.
pschultz(at)uplogon.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: Smoke System |
>
>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Michael D Cuy
>> Date: Thursday, May 27, 1999 1:38 PM
>> Subject: Smoke System
>>
>> Speaking of smoke Michael, I'm having the fitting welded onto my exhaust
>> pipe today, and will try out the gizmo hopefully this evening. I'm using a
>> small pump that's sold through model airplane stores for the same thing,
>> pumping smoke oil. Those guys tell me that the volumn is to much, and they
>> have to restrict the flow, so it may be just the thing for a full size
>> airplane, plus it uses a 6 volt lantern battery.
>> Robert (hope it works!) Hensarling
>
Robert !!
Good luck w/ your smoke system...hope you get to try it out tonight. It works
best on calm eves so you can make
a tight 360 turn and fly into your own trail:) It IS fun !!
Mike C.
-----Original
________________________________________________________________________________
Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov
To: Pietenpol Discussion
piet(at)byu.edu
Speaking of smoke Michael, I'm having the
fitting welded onto my exhaust pipe today, and will try out the gizmo
hopefully this evening. I'm using a small pump that's sold through
model airplane stores for the same thing, pumping smoke oil. Those
guys tell me that the volumn is to much, and they have to restrict the
flow, so it may be just the thing for a full size airplane, plus it uses
a 6 volt lantern battery.
Robert (hope it works!) Hensarling
Robert !!
Good luck w/ your smoke system...hope you get to try it out
tonight. It works best on calm eves so you can make
a tight 360 turn and fly into your own trail:) It IS fun
!!
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Beanlands <kbeanlan(at)spots.ab.ca> |
Hear, Hear...
Ken Beanlands
Christavia builder. C-180 floatplane driver. Airplane lover :-)
On Thu, 27 May 1999 steve(at)byu.edu wrote:
> All welcome. PIET, GN's, Fly-Baby, Heaths, Hatz, Christavia, whatever.....
>
> I fly for FUN. Just happens to be in a piet today.
>
> Steve Eldredge
> Steve(at)byu.edu
> IT Services
> Brigham Young University
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> hensarling
> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 1999 11:05 AM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Re: GN-1
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Greenlee < jgreenlee(at)morgan.net>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion < piet(at)byu.edu>
> Date: Thursday, May 27, 1999 10:55 AM
> Subject: Re: GN-1
>
> Ok John, you arn't going to be able to get me in a flame war on the list,
> this is a hobby, that my Dad and I enjoy very much, and quite frankly that's
> the main thing that matters to me. However, I certainly respect your
> opinions. But if GN-1 owners arn't welcomed on the list or at Brodhead,
> someone please let me know now, and we can avoid some of the comments the
> list is having to read, which isn't doing anyone any good. This is about
> flying and fun, and if my GN-1 resembles a Piet except for the inside, then
> it really shouldn't create a problem unless I was selling it as a true Piet.
> John, this is all I'll say on this topic.
> Robert Hensarling GN-1 (and proud of it, and no one can take away the pride
> my Dad and I have in my airplane away) N83887
>
>
>
> Robert,
>
> Good point about the resale thing.
>
> I've ridden in Kim Stricker's GN-1. A lot of fun and he gets a lot of
> enjoyment out of owning it. However, if I was starting from scratch and
> putting thousands of hours and dollars into a project, I'd opt for the Real
> McCoy. I've never heard a Piet owner say he'd rather have a GN-1.
>
> John
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: robert hensarling < rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion < piet(at)byu.edu>
> Date: Wednesday, May 26, 1999 12:16 PM
> Subject: Re: GN-1
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Greenlee < jgreenlee(at)morgan.net>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion < piet(at)byu.edu>
> Date: Wednesday, May 26, 1999 9:27 AM
> Subject: Re: GN-1
>
>
> I've never seen the GN-1 plans, but understand it is a totally different
> airplane using the general outline and dimensions of the Piet. One of the
> things is that it was supposed to use Cub gear and other stuff that was
> cheap at one time.
>
> Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Build the Piet that others
> want to imitate. It has better resale I understand.
>
> John
>
> Good advise John! I think if I were going to build another airplane,
> I'd use the original plans also (I didn't build my GN-1, but traded a little
> ultralight straight across for it, and didn't have but $2,000 in the
> ultralight, so as you can see I'm very happy with the GN-1. When I'm in the
> air enjoying myself and the world, I don't seem to worry all that much about
> the Piet/GN-1 thing). Resale?? Better resale?? Yes, probably, I'm sure,
> but why think about selling your Piet John? :o)
>
> Robert Hensarling GN-1 N83887
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Beanlands <kbeanlan(at)spots.ab.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Smoke System |
Another pump that's quite usable and very cheap is a washer fluid motor
available from most auto parts stores. I used one for years for pumping
glow fuel into and out of model planes. Works great.
Ken
On Thu, 27 May 1999, robert hensarling wrote:
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Date: Thursday, May 27, 1999 1:38 PM
> Subject: Smoke System
>
> Speaking of smoke Michael, I'm having the fitting welded onto my
> exhaust pipe today, and will try out the gizmo hopefully this evening.
> I'm using a small pump that's sold through model airplane stores for the
> same thing, pumping smoke oil. Those guys tell me that the volumn is to
> much, and they have to restrict the flow, so it may be just the thing
> for a full size airplane, plus it uses a 6 volt lantern battery.
> Robert (hope it works!) Hensarling
>
>
>
> I fly for FUN. Just happens to be in a piet today.
>
> Steve Eldredge
>
> Steve- So tell us about your smoke system and the police someday......
> ok ? I'm waiting for one of the neighbors to call the police on me......but
> I've given most of them rides so they are all for it.
> Did you get the correct oil and try that yet ??
>
> Mike C.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Borodent(at)aol.com |
Joe C thanks for the info, I bpught the boat and engine Henry W
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Beanlands <kbeanlan(at)spots.ab.ca> |
| Subject: | Fwd: email etiquette (fwd) |
This is from the Grand Poobah of the Aeronca List, and is just good
advice...
Ken
> Email Program Settings Suggestions:
>
>* Turn off features (like VCards) that create attachments.
>* Avoid sending HTML-formatted messages to lists.
>* Send replies either to the sender or the list, but not both.
>* Make sure the time is set properly on your computer.
>
> Writing and Layout Suggestions:
>
>* Don't use all capital letters for more than a word or two.
>* Insert blank lines between paragraphs.
>* Include full URL schemes, as in <http://www.tidbits.com/>.
>* Surround URLs with angle brackets.
>* Try to use proper grammar, spelling, and punctuation.
>
> Message Content Suggestions:
>
>* Never send unsubscribe commands to the list.
>* Create and maintain descriptive subject lines.
>* Quote original text sparingly in your replies.
>* Don't include email attachments unless explicitly allowed.
>* Use a short signature containing only essential data.
>* Send welcome or congratulation messages via private email.
>* Respect other people's news.
>* Civility is always worthwhile.
>
> Thanks for helping to keep mailing lists useful and pleasant
> places!
>
>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> There are a number of things we can do to improve the quality of
> mailing lists for the benefit of all. Most of these
> recommendations are simple and require little extra work. If you'd
> like to read a more detailed rationale for these suggestions,
> check out the Mailing List Manners 101 and 102 articles published
> by TidBITS at:
>
><http://db.tidbits.com/getbits.acgi?tbser=1141>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | fishin <fishin(at)wwa.com> |
my pleasure Hank,,,,where are you located and what is your building
status.....if I didn't already have a Cont A65 I would have grabbed it
my self.....probably would have played with it as an airboat for
awhile....
regard
JoeC
Borodent(at)aol.com wrote:
> Joe C thanks for the info, I bpught the boat and engine Henry W
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | fishin <fishin(at)wwa.com> |
Pietenpol Discussion piet(at)byu.edu>
Date: Thursday, May 27, 1999
10:55 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: GN-1this
is a hobby, that my Dad and I enjoy very much, and quite frankly that's
the main thing that matters to me.
Robert, I envy you in that you are
able to enjoy building with your dad....
I wish I would have considered my
building project 20 years ago because I just know my dad would have jumped
at the chance to get his hands on it..he was a bit of a perfectionist building
TV cabinets for Motorola for a lot of years..
hearing your comments about you and
your dad and where you're placing your priorities made me sit back and
reminice....dad lasted 91 years ,,been gone 6 years now, I missed my chance
but am glad you're taking advantage of yours.
regards
JoeC
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Re:dad and I |
Robert, I'm with you and your Dad on the enjoyment issue. My Dad (he's
soon to be 77) has been flying since 1938, has built 9 aircraft, owned 7
different planes, flown 22+ aircraft, and says that nothing in aviation
has excited him more than a chance to build a big toy with his big kid!
You've got my vote. Brian Sanders
-----Original Message-----
From: fishin <fishin(at)wwa.com>
To: Pietenpol Discussion
Date: Thursday, May 27, 1999 9:16 PM
Subject: Re:dad and I
To: Pietenpol Discussion
enjoy very much, and quite frankly that's the main thing that matters to
me.
building with your dad....
years ago because I just know my dad would have jumped at the chance to
get his hands on it..he was a bit of a perfectionist building TV
cabinets for Motorola for a lot of years..
you're placing your priorities made me sit back and reminice....dad
lasted 91 years ,,been gone 6 years now, I missed my chance but am glad
you're taking advantage of yours.
________________________________________________________________________________
snip a whole bunch of stuff....
Robert , I can understand your appreciation for your your GN-1 and what
it means to you and how it represents a bond between you and your
father. My dad is 72 and after 30 years of family, expense, college
(for him, my sister, and me) he finally decided to partake of a dream of
learning to fly at 58. Unfortunately, he couldnt pass the medical
because of minor but chronic vertigo problems. But along the way he got
me interested, I got my license, and we both owned a flew a 150 for a
few years. Now he's helping me (when he can) with my project. His
interest in flying got me stoked and now I'm four years into building -
you got it- a GN1. I've heard all this Piet vs GN stuff for years -
dont let it bug you. In my opinion the important thing is building
and/or flying your own homebuilt and the comraderie you share with
friends and other builders.!
I've run up on a very few people who really felt that the Piet is
somehow "better" than the GN and put out an elitist air. So What!
Really, So What! I have a good friend with a Piet - I've flown in it -
I think its great. I also appreciate the GN1. Both are ok. Similar -
but different, too. I have a ford van, but my neighbor has a chevrolet
so what.
But out of respect for Bernard, I call it just that - a GN. For all
you Piet purists - lighten up.
C-C-Cant we all j-just.... Get along ? :)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wayne and Kathy <ktokarz(at)incentre.net> |
please subscribe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
Hi List. We got the smoke fitting welded to the exhaust yesterday, and I
had a chance to test the smoke system last night. There's a few bugs to
work out, and I'll eventually post some pictures, but in a nutshell the
thing worked really good. I used a model airplane smoke pump (available
from the bigger model shops or magazines), it's about 1" x 1" x 4", and very
light. For the oil tank, I used a one quart capacity model airplane gas
tank. To this I added a 6 volt lantern batters, and a little push switch.
The whole unit is small, and I can put it either under the seat, or in a
little glove box in the passenger cockpit, then run the push switch back to
the pilot area.
Initial tests went really well, with lots of smoke with the Cont 65 just at
a fast idle. I first drilled one #60 hole in the exhaust, but later drilled
a second. May want to plug the second, still working on that end. I ran a
1/8" hose from the engine area back to the CSS (Cuy Smoke System, I have to
give Michael credit somewhere:o)), and put a quick disconnect in the line,
so that the oil can't drool out of the line if taken apart.
So I have a little more experimenting to do, but this little unit is
compact, light, and easy to build.
More later!
Robert Hensarling GN-1 N83887
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC" |
Tom,
I found a list in my junk of a number of corvair enthusiasts( at least 12
years old). I started phoning them and the last one on the list is a 74 year
old man who still owns one. He rebuilt his and indicated that he would
supervise my rebuild. I will pull the engine out this week-end. I took a few
nights off this week to regroup and study the corvair parts book, articles,
engine rebuild sections etc. I' ve been in touch with Clark's corvair parts.
They sent me questionaires to help them help me buy the right parts. Will
keep you informed.
Dom.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC" |
Richard,
They have been put in the slow mail last night.
Enjoy,
Dom.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Corvair and Wm. Wynne |
In a message dated 5/27/99 9:57:11 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
mboynton(at)excite.com writes:
<< Larry,
I've still not heard from him and the check I sent has yet to be cashed.
Please let us know if you are able to make contact with him.
Mark
> Did anyone ever get in contact with William Wynne (Corvair authority)? I
> still plan on going down to see him if he's still at the same location.
> Won't be able to go down for a couple of weeks. He seemed to have a real
> knowledge of issues that I've seen posted lately. i.e. Prop sizes,
timing,
> cooling, etc.
>>
I guess we are on our own. I have tried without any sucess to contact him.
I think he is just too busy right now with moving and all. Who knows?
Anyway, I am proceeding on my rebuild with the help of VirtualVairs (mailing
list) and this list. I have the block split, threaded crank, new pistons,
cylinders and rings, heads have a valve job with new valves. I have a block
that Wynne sold me with the stud holes helicoiled. I put the studs in and
they are not lined up, not straight and they seem too loose. I have talked
to guys on Virtualvairs and they say not to remove the studs if you do not
have to. I have a second block that I will use. Wm. Wynne also sold me SS
top studs for a good price. The block he sold me came with the bell end
already cut and bolted on. It was only $50 for the block with the bell
housing all cut out. It is hard to complain even if I don't use this block
(because of the poor job with the helicoiling) because of the work done on
the bell housing. That alone would have been hours for me to do. I am
leaving the lower studs in place in the second block.
William Koucky
Traverse City, MI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chad Johnson <cjohnson(at)jayhawkpl.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Re:dad and I |
My dad has been a carpenter for more than 25 years. He is a
perfectionist with everything from pouring a basement to finishing the
cabinets, yet he has absolutely no interest in participating in a peit
project. I have been flying professionally since 1986 and I think he
still thinks its just a hobby for me.
Anyway, I would dearly love to get him envolved, not just for his
expertice, but for the relationship also. I will build a peit somday,
hearing you guys talk about you fathers makes me realize the true
potential of the task.
PS. Peitenpol.........GN-1...........................WE ALL WIN!!
Love the discusion all.
CJ
-----Original Message-----
From: Sanders Family [SMTP:sanders4(at)paonline.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 1999 10:11 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Re:dad and I
Robert, I'm with you and your Dad on the enjoyment issue. My Dad (he's
soon to be 77) has been flying since 1938, has built 9 aircraft, owned 7
different planes, flown 22+ aircraft, and says that nothing in aviation
has excited him more than a chance to build a big toy with his big kid!
You've got my vote. Brian Sanders
-----Original Message-----
From: Val
Subject: Pietenpol-List: stop sending mail !!!!!
Date: Sat, 29 May 1999 02:02:29 +1200
Please stop sending me mail.
Please stop sending me mail!
Val.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
Congratulations Robert on your initial smoke system check out.
I remember my first flight w/ this setup and upon landing my first
comment to a fellow pilot on the field was "I need a bigger container !"
I use a two quart (Wal-Mart) poly bottle w/ a hand pump/spray setup.
Fun in a can.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov>
Date: Friday, May 28, 1999 10:09 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: smokies
Hi Michael. You're right about the capacity issue, it does seem to empty
out pretty fast. Now if I can figure out how to strap a 55 gal barrel tothe
bottom of the plane, hum....
Robert
>Congratulations Robert on your initial smoke system check out.
>I remember my first flight w/ this setup and upon landing my first
>comment to a fellow pilot on the field was "I need a bigger container !"
>I use a two quart (Wal-Mart) poly bottle w/ a hand pump/spray setup.
>Fun in a can.
>
>Mike C.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Sayre, William G" <William.Sayre(at)PSS.Boeing.com> |
> Now if I can figure out how to strap a 55 gal barrel tothe
> bottom of the plane, hum....
>
>
Hmmmmm.
A Pietenpol with drop tanks?
Bill
> ----------
> From: robert hensarling[SMTP:rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com]
> Reply To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Sent: Friday, May 28, 1999 7:57 AM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Re: smokies
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Date: Friday, May 28, 1999 10:09 AM
> Subject: Re: smokies
>
> Hi Michael. You're right about the capacity issue, it does seem to empty
> out pretty fast. Now if I can figure out how to strap a 55 gal barrel tothe
> bottom of the plane, hum....
> Robert
>
>
> >Congratulations Robert on your initial smoke system check out.
> >I remember my first flight w/ this setup and upon landing my first
> >comment to a fellow pilot on the field was "I need a bigger container !"
> >I use a two quart (Wal-Mart) poly bottle w/ a hand pump/spray setup.
> >Fun in a can.
> >
> >Mike C.
> >
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Dear List Readers,
On the plans from Don Pietenpol, no tubing quality is specified......
(that Ive found)on the Continental motor mount, so must it be made of
4130? Or is this just a good thing to do? I plan on powereing with an
0-200.
DannyMac
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Fay <jefay(at)yahoo.com> |
--- "BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC" wrote:
> Richard I found my pamphlet on carving and copy of
> "Proppeller making for
> homebuilts by Ray Hegy"
> Send me your address again. I'll get it out today.
> Dom.
> ---------> >
>
Domenic,
If I would send you a SASE, would it be possible for me to get one of
those copies also? (jefay(at)yahoo.com)
Also, to anyone about propmaking:
About 3 months ago I called the EAA bookstore to try to obtain the book
by Eric Clutton--they told me they didn't have it, so I had them
transfer my call to the library there at EAA headquarters to see if
they could get me any info about the book, its availability, etc.
The lady in the library recognized the name of the book and said to
call the bookstore, she thought they had it. (Does this kind of
experience sound familiar to
any of you--I"m told it has something to do with Adam and Eve and life
on earth.) I told her what they had told me. She said she would call
me back. About 45 minutes later she did, and that they had found a
number of them stored away someplace. They cost about
$7 each and I got two of them. I thought well worth the price. So you
are welcome to call EAA and see what you can find.
I thought the book complemented the article by Howard Henderson
(available from GEMcClaren), each making some things the other had said
much clearer. The EAA can also get you a reprint of that article by
Fred Wieck about making props. I think their charge for that was only
two or three dollars.
John in Peoria
________________________________________________________________________________
It may this easier... when I get te pamphlet, Im going to scan it and
put it in printable form on aircamper.org. I'll heads-up everyone when
its up.
--- John Fay wrote:
>
>
> --- "BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC" wrote:
> > Richard I found my pamphlet on carving and copy of
> > "Proppeller making for
> > homebuilts by Ray Hegy"
> > Send me your address again. I'll get it out today.
> > Dom.
> > ---------> >
> >
>
>
> Domenic,
>
> If I would send you a SASE, would it be possible for me to get one of
> those copies also? (jefay(at)yahoo.com)
>
>
> Also, to anyone about propmaking:
>
> About 3 months ago I called the EAA bookstore to try to obtain the
> book
> by Eric Clutton--they told me they didn't have it, so I had them
> transfer my call to the library there at EAA headquarters to see if
> they could get me any info about the book, its availability, etc.
>
> The lady in the library recognized the name of the book and said to
> call the bookstore, she thought they had it. (Does this kind of
> experience sound familiar to
> any of you--I"m told it has something to do with Adam and Eve and
> life
> on earth.) I told her what they had told me. She said she would
> call
> me back. About 45 minutes later she did, and that they had found a
> number of them stored away someplace. They cost about
> $7 each and I got two of them. I thought well worth the price. So
> you
> are welcome to call EAA and see what you can find.
>
> I thought the book complemented the article by Howard Henderson
> (available from GEMcClaren), each making some things the other had
> said
> much clearer. The EAA can also get you a reprint of that article by
> Fred Wieck about making props. I think their charge for that was
> only
> two or three dollars.
>
> John in Peoria
>
>
>
===
"Lady, you want me to answer you if this old airplane is safe to fly? Just how
in the world do you think it got to be this old?" - Jim Tavenner
---------------------------------------------------------
Visit www.AirCamper.org - A Low 'n Slow Online Community!
---------------------------------------------------------
My homepage: http://www.AirCamper.org/w3builder
________________________________________________________________________________
Has anyone put a smoke system on a Model A? I wondered if the straight-out
placement of the exhaust stacks would blow the smoke in the pilot's face.
Seems like the Cont. exhaust gets it lower on the side of the plane.
Al Swanson
>> Now if I can figure out how to strap a 55 gal barrel tothe
>> bottom of the plane, hum....
>>
>>
>Hmmmmm.
>A Pietenpol with drop tanks?
>
>Bill
>> ----------
>> From: robert hensarling[SMTP:rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com]
>> Reply To: Pietenpol Discussion
>> Sent: Friday, May 28, 1999 7:57 AM
>> To: Pietenpol Discussion
>> Subject: Re: smokies
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov>
>> To: Pietenpol Discussion
>> Date: Friday, May 28, 1999 10:09 AM
>> Subject: Re: smokies
>>
>> Hi Michael. You're right about the capacity issue, it does seem to empty
>> out pretty fast. Now if I can figure out how to strap a 55 gal barrel tothe
>> bottom of the plane, hum....
>> Robert
>>
>>
>> >Congratulations Robert on your initial smoke system check out.
>> >I remember my first flight w/ this setup and upon landing my first
>> >comment to a fellow pilot on the field was "I need a bigger container !"
>> >I use a two quart (Wal-Mart) poly bottle w/ a hand pump/spray setup.
>> >Fun in a can.
>> >
>> >Mike C.
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Brusilow <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
>Dear List Readers,
>
>On the plans from Don Pietenpol, no tubing quality is specified......
>(that Ive found)on the Continental motor mount, so must it be made of
>4130? Or is this just a good thing to do? I plan on powereing with an
>0-200.
>
>DannyMac
4130! Absolutely. Watch the CG Danny.
Mike B. Piet N687MB (0-200 powered )
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | walter evans <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Fly-in at Sussex NJ |
To all,
There is a EAA fly-in at Sussex NJ today (friday) Sat and sun. Any
Piets going to be there?
This is a tridition where EAA experimental , and Ultralights are
welcome.
walt
To all,
There is a EAA fly-in
at Sussex NJ
today (friday) Sat and sun. Any Piets going to be
there?
This is a tridition where EAA
experimental , and
Ultralights are welcome.
walt
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Borodent(at)aol.com |
I am just starting- am setting up rib jig. I am on long island NY, plan to
drive to chicago and trailer it home. Wanted to include oshgosh and
broadhead on trip but daughter getting married on 7/31. Anyway will be a
nice trip I hope for my son and myself- We want to see, Niagara Falls, Henry
Ford museum and as many air collections as we can. Ive talked to seller and
engine sounds iffy. It may just end up as an airboat. 140 lycoming, wrong
oil pan, one mag only, no carb heat provision
and who knows about the inside. Anyway it will be a nice trip
.
________________________________________________________________________________
Hello Guys,
24" wheels are what Don's plans have on them. Is this the overall,
or the rim size? I'm still looking for 21's min.......was told Model-T
wheels might work. They are 21" X 4" or 21" X 4.5" I am told. Are these
air-anchors or has anyone thought of them before?
DannyMac
P.S. Have a good holiday.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Lund <malund(at)sprint.ca> |
I am using 21" motorcycly rims- I havent got a clue what they are off of, I
just called the local bike wrecker and told him I wanted 2 matching spoked
front rims, 20" or larger. He called me back today and said $75 (cdn) a
piece for excellent condition, $50 for need some work types- I'll be picking
them up next saturday.
Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Conkling <hpvs(at)southwind.net> |
Hi Mike!
Instead of going "full auto" with your smoke -- practice your dots & dashes
so you can communcate with the Pietenpol Aerial Armada!
Have you discovered any colors? -- or is it "any color you want as long as
it is white"?
Mike in Pretty Prairie, KS
> From: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Re: smokies
> Date: Friday, May 28, 1999 9:49 AM
>
> Congratulations Robert on your initial smoke system check out.
> I remember my first flight w/ this setup and upon landing my first
> comment to a fellow pilot on the field was "I need a bigger container !"
> I use a two quart (Wal-Mart) poly bottle w/ a hand pump/spray setup.
> Fun in a can.
>
> Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | oil can <oilcanbob(at)hotmail.com> |
I spent some time a few months ago at the boeing air & space museum in
seattle. While there, I was able to closely inspect a Curtiss Jenney
bi-plane.
Of peticular interest to me were the axles, and the way the axle nuts
appeared to hold the wheels to the axle..
The axle nut did appear to look like Abe Lincoln's top hat. The top of the
hat was cut out to a smooth tube, with no threads, the tube then fit over
the axle, and the brim pressed up aginst the wheel with some minor clearance
fit. The top hat fitting was then attached to the axle with a thru bolt
going thru the stove pipe part of the hat, and thru the axle.
This appeared to be a safe solid way to attach the wheels to the axles, and
if anyone understands my description, would this attach methoud get the ok
in the final inspection?
ocb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
Danny,
In the twenties, alot of automotive tires were measured by the outside
diameter and width. We use the inside diameter now. The Model T wheels would
be too heavy (IMHOP). Keep looking for motocross or dirt bike wheels from
about a 125 to 250 cc bike, they will be about as close as you can get to
the overall size of the original wheels. I was looking at some new ones the
other day that had disk brakes.
John Mc
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
Oil Can,
That is almost exactly the way the 1932 Flying and Gliding Magazine
plans show it. I used 1 1/12" 4130 threaded on a lathe to 16 threads per
inch. I turned flanged nuts out of some scrap 3" aluminum bar. I was going
to mill a hex on the nuts, but instead opted for slotting the nuts for
locking pins and use the slots to turn the nuts. The flange nicely handles
side loads and the thread allows endplay adjustment. Perhaps a bit too
sophisticated for a Piet.
>The axle nut did appear to look like Abe Lincoln's top hat. The top of the
>hat was cut out to a smooth tube, with no threads, the tube then fit over
>the axle, and the brim pressed up aginst the wheel with some minor
clearance
>fit. The top hat fitting was then attached to the axle with a thru bolt
>going thru the stove pipe part of the hat, and thru the axle.
would this attach method get the ok
>in the final inspection?
It should. It has been proven by many decades of use.
John Mc
________________________________________________________________________________
>Perhaps a bit too sophisticated for a Piet.
Easiest is to make a collar out of the next size tubing drill a hole
through it and the axle in the location you want it and bolt it on.
It's simple and works great!
Tom
__________
________________________________________________________________________________
> I'm still looking for 21's min.......
Also consider what tire and tube sizes are readily available in your
area. Visit a few motorcycle shops. Any large one should have some old
bikes out back for parts. That is how I obtained mine.
Tom
__________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Replicraft(at)aol.com |
EVERYTHING I make for Piets is 4130 no matter if it's a fitting, bracket,
landing gear or motor mount. SAFETY should be our first and foremost concern
regardless of what year our aircraft was designed... and that means using
certified materials, AN hardware and lots of common sense.
PLEASE use 4130 for your Continiental mount...
Steve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
-----Original Message-----
From: John McNarry <jmcnarry(at)techplus.com>
Date: Saturday, May 29, 1999 6:30 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wheels
John, do you remember the brand/cost of the wheels you saw?
Robert H.
I was looking at some new ones the
>other day that had disk brakes.
>John Mc
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DonanClara(at)aol.com |
Oil Can...John McNarry and Tom Bowdler both had good points to make re: your
wheel retainers. John's looks like the strongest while Tom's is the simplest.
I am using a variation of each on my Piet and flew my 1930 Buhl Bull Pup for
many years with the same settup. I machined a brass cap that fit over the end
of the axle (closed at the end) and then put a bolt through the cap and axle
as with John and Tom's. One thing I did do strictly for aesthetics and to add
to the olde-timey look was to silver solder a script letter '" B " cut from a
thin sheet of silver with a jeweler's saw onto the end cap ( the "B" for
Buhl ) I'll do the same for the Piet but of course with a script letter " P
" Good luck, Don Hicks
________________________________________________________________________________
OCB;
This is how the axles/ nuts are on my Scout per the plans, simple, easy and
no fussing with threads.............
Earl Myers
-----Original Message-----
From: oil can <oilcanbob(at)hotmail.com>
Date: Saturday, May 29, 1999 3:55 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: axles
>I spent some time a few months ago at the boeing air & space museum in
>seattle. While there, I was able to closely inspect a Curtiss Jenney
>bi-plane.
>
>Of peticular interest to me were the axles, and the way the axle nuts
>appeared to hold the wheels to the axle..
>
>The axle nut did appear to look like Abe Lincoln's top hat. The top of the
>hat was cut out to a smooth tube, with no threads, the tube then fit over
>the axle, and the brim pressed up aginst the wheel with some minor
clearance
>fit. The top hat fitting was then attached to the axle with a thru bolt
>going thru the stove pipe part of the hat, and thru the axle.
>
>This appeared to be a safe solid way to attach the wheels to the axles, and
>if anyone understands my description, would this attach methoud get the ok
>in the final inspection?
>
>ocb
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net> |
I used 21" aftermarket Harley Davidson Sportster front rims. Paid about 45
bucks a piece brand new. Aluminum rims would be lighter but cost more.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Lund <malund(at)sprint.ca>
Date: Saturday, May 29, 1999 12:25 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wheels
>I am using 21" motorcycly rims- I havent got a clue what they are off of, I
>just called the local bike wrecker and told him I wanted 2 matching spoked
>front rims, 20" or larger. He called me back today and said $75 (cdn) a
>piece for excellent condition, $50 for need some work types- I'll be
picking
>them up next saturday.
>
>Mike
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Lund <malund(at)sprint.ca> |
$45 for new- sounds interesting. Who has them at that price (hopefully not
somewhere that shipping is gonna cost me $100 ;-> )
Mike
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net> |
Sent: Saturday, May 29, 1999 1:36 PM
> I used 21" aftermarket Harley Davidson Sportster front rims. Paid about
45
> bucks a piece brand new. Aluminum rims would be lighter but cost more.
>
> John
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Lund <malund(at)sprint.ca>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Date: Saturday, May 29, 1999 12:25 AM
> Subject: Re: Wheels
>
>
> >I am using 21" motorcycly rims- I havent got a clue what they are off of,
I
> >just called the local bike wrecker and told him I wanted 2 matching
spoked
> >front rims, 20" or larger. He called me back today and said $75 (cdn) a
> >piece for excellent condition, $50 for need some work types- I'll be
> picking
> >them up next saturday.
> >
> >Mike
> >
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chad Johnson <cjohnson(at)jayhawkpl.com> |
| Subject: | Trade VP-1 for peit project |
I have a flying Volksplane that I want to trade for a peit project. I
will consider any offer even just the spruce. I have pictures of my
VP-1 that can be sent email. Email if interested. Thanks. Chad.
-----Original Message-----
Date: Sat, 29 May 1999 17:12:16 -0400
Where are you located ? Mike
malund(at)sprint.ca
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chad Johnson <cjohnson(at)jayhawkpl.com> |
Sent: Saturday, May 29, 1999 4:12 PM
| Subject: | Trade VP-1 for peit project |
I have a flying Volksplane that I want to trade for a peit project. I will
consider any offer even just the spruce. I have pictures of my VP-1 that
can be sent email. Email if interested. Thanks. Chad.
-----Original Message-----
| From: | John Fay [SMTP:jefay(at)yahoo.com] |
Sent: Friday, May 28, 1999 3:24 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re:
--- "BELLISSIMO, DOMENIC" wrote:
> Richard I found my pamphlet on carving and copy of
> "Proppeller making for
> homebuilts by Ray Hegy"
> Send me your address again. I'll get it out today.
> Dom.
> ---------> >
>
Domenic,
If I would send you a SASE, would it be possible for me to get one of
those copies also? (jefay(at)yahoo.com)
Also, to anyone about propmaking:
About 3 months ago I called the EAA bookstore to try to obtain the book
by Eric Clutton--they told me they didn't have it, so I had them
transfer my call to the library there at EAA headquarters to see if
they could get me any info about the book, its availability, etc.
The lady in the library recognized the name of the book and said to
call the bookstore, she thought they had it. (Does this kind of
experience sound familiar to
any of you--I"m told it has something to do with Adam and Eve and life
on earth.) I told her what they had told me. She said she would call
me back. About 45 minutes later she did, and that they had found a
number of them stored away someplace. They cost about
$7 each and I got two of them. I thought well worth the price. So you
are welcome to call EAA and see what you can find.
I thought the book complemented the article by Howard Henderson
(available from GEMcClaren), each making some things the other had said
much clearer. The EAA can also get you a reprint of that article by
Fred Wieck about making props. I think their charge for that was only
two or three dollars.
John in Peoria
________________________________________________________________________________
oil can wrote:
>
> I spent some time a few months ago at the boeing air & space museum in
> seattle. While there, I was able to closely inspect a Curtiss Jenney
> bi-plane.
>
> Of peticular interest to me were the axles, and the way the axle nuts
> appeared to hold the wheels to the axle..
>
> The axle nut did appear to look like Abe Lincoln's top hat. The top of the
> hat was cut out to a smooth tube, with no threads, the tube then fit over
> the axle, and the brim pressed up aginst the wheel with some minor clearance
> fit. The top hat fitting was then attached to the axle with a thru bolt
> going thru the stove pipe part of the hat, and thru the axle.
>
> This appeared to be a safe solid way to attach the wheels to the axles, and
> if anyone understands my description, would this attach methoud get the ok
> in the final inspection?
>
> ocb
>
Great Idea. I have a friend building a Scout and he did something
similar. I think I'll try it myself on my GN1.
I've seen it done with a cotter pin through the collar and axle but I
castle nut /cotter pin through the collar and axle.. Looks like this
would protect you against sheer caused by side loads in landing etc.
Noyt that any of us ever make sloppy landings :)
Bert
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
Robert::
They were on a new Kawasaki Motocross bike. I didn't even look at the bike
price tag, just thought the wheels and disk brakes looked suitable. I found
the wheels I used a motocycle salvage yard and paid $40. CDN. each for them.
I originally sawed the knobby tread off of on tire to make a smooth
treadless tire. I have since found 21" racing tires for wet pavement that
look right.
John Mc
>John, do you remember the brand/cost of the wheels you saw?
>Robert H.
>
>
>I was looking at some new ones the
>>other day that had disk brakes.
>>John Mc
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Fuselage glueing |
I now have my 2 fuse sides upside-down in the the jig and all the
various cross-pieces cut. I have been clamping them in place in
preperation for glueing, and have noticed considerable strain on the
wood durring this process. Should I glue the 3/16" ply floor on at the
same time as the cross pieces underneath, or will it hold ok by me just
glueing the cross-pieces in? I dont have the ply for the floor yet, and
wont have for probably 2-3 weeks. If it's too much for just the cross
pieces, Ill wait til I have the ply.
Richard
p.s. it finally looks like a plane! :)
===
"Lady, you want me to answer you if this old airplane is safe to fly? Just how
in the world do you think it got to be this old?" - Jim Tavenner
---------------------------------------------------------
Visit www.AirCamper.org - A Low 'n Slow Online Community!
---------------------------------------------------------
My homepage: http://www.AirCamper.org/w3builder
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fuselage glueing |
Richard DeCosta wrote:
>
> I now have my 2 fuse sides upside-down in the the jig and all the
> various cross-pieces cut. I have been clamping them in place in
> preperation for glueing, and have noticed considerable strain on the
> wood durring this process. Should I glue the 3/16" ply floor on at the
> same time as the cross pieces underneath, or will it hold ok by me just
> glueing the cross-pieces in? I dont have the ply for the floor yet, and
> wont have for probably 2-3 weeks. If it's too much for just the cross
> pieces, Ill wait til I have the ply.
>
> Richard
> p.s. it finally looks like a plane! :)
> ===
> "Lady, you want me to answer you if this old airplane is safe to fly? Just how
in the world do you think it got to be this old?" - Jim Tavenner
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> Visit www.AirCamper.org - A Low 'n Slow Online Community!
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> My homepage: http://www.AirCamper.org/w3builder
>
Richard,
I assembled mine by placing it upside down on the table and inserting
and butt-gluing the cross members in. at the time, I didnt have the
floor board material either. I bar-clamped it all together in the front
and pulled the tail post area together , held them with bar clamps and
let it all dry. I went ahead and made and glued up the ttriangular
gussetts at the tailpost (Top and Bottom). Then I carefully removed
(with the help of the missus and a friend) the whole fuselage. BE VERY
SLOW AND CAREFUL HERE!
Turned it right side up and carefully glued in the gussetts that
connnect the two slab sides . Mine is a GN1 and I dont remember exactly
how a piet is - but mine called for three big gussetts that span from
side to side and are glued to the top of each longeron (locetd just
underneath each instrument panel and one is immediately behind the
firewall). They are about 6" wide by fuse width in length.
I also temporarily made and fastened gussetts ( 2" x fuse width) AHEAD
of the firewall. You see I left about 4 " ahead of station zero on mine
for ease of handling. This was later cut away when I made my firewll.
If this is confusing, sorry.
Bottom Line is yes you can remove and continue work before puttin in the
floor-just think ahead.
Good Luck - Its fun when it starts looking like an airplane. You could
also make it a boat I guess :)
Bert
bwm(at)planttel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fuselage glueing |
Richard;
In my Humble opinion, I would glue the x pieces in place back to the point
of where the fuselage would start to taper when you pull the tail posts
together. Glue the floor in along with all the x piece gussetts. You will be
pleasently surprised at how strong the thing becomes when the floor is in.
After that has dried, pull the two tail posts together and begin filling in
the balance of the x pieces......the floor will keep your nerves calm by
absorbing all that x member compression.....the seat back will do this
too.........The only devation from the stock Scout plans I made was at the
seat back on up to the firewall. I made the fuselage two inches wider to
accompanying my size. A stock A/C is tight....the Scout is two inches
narrower in general and three inches narrower at the seat back. I mention
this because with the seat back in and the floor on, pulling the fuselage
halves together was rough enough with the short fuselage. With the same
length but 3" wider at the seat, it was really a strain to match up the
tailposts! Glueing in the seatback and floor made this pulling fairly easy
but nervewracking non the less.
Earl Myers
Mike Cuy, back to you, 10-4!
-----Original Message-----
From: bwm
Date: Saturday, May 29, 1999 8:32 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuselage glueing
>Richard DeCosta wrote:
>>
>> I now have my 2 fuse sides upside-down in the the jig and all the
>> various cross-pieces cut. I have been clamping them in place in
>> preperation for glueing, and have noticed considerable strain on the
>> wood durring this process. Should I glue the 3/16" ply floor on at the
>> same time as the cross pieces underneath, or will it hold ok by me just
>> glueing the cross-pieces in? I dont have the ply for the floor yet, and
>> wont have for probably 2-3 weeks. If it's too much for just the cross
>> pieces, Ill wait til I have the ply.
>>
>> Richard
>> p.s. it finally looks like a plane! :)
>> ===
>> "Lady, you want me to answer you if this old airplane is safe to fly?
Just how in the world do you think it got to be this old?" - Jim Tavenner
>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>> Visit www.AirCamper.org - A Low 'n Slow Online Community!
>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>> My homepage: http://www.AirCamper.org/w3builder
>>
>
>
>Richard,
>
>I assembled mine by placing it upside down on the table and inserting
>and butt-gluing the cross members in. at the time, I didnt have the
>floor board material either. I bar-clamped it all together in the front
>and pulled the tail post area together , held them with bar clamps and
>let it all dry. I went ahead and made and glued up the ttriangular
>gussetts at the tailpost (Top and Bottom). Then I carefully removed
>(with the help of the missus and a friend) the whole fuselage. BE VERY
>SLOW AND CAREFUL HERE!
>
>Turned it right side up and carefully glued in the gussetts that
>connnect the two slab sides . Mine is a GN1 and I dont remember exactly
>how a piet is - but mine called for three big gussetts that span from
>side to side and are glued to the top of each longeron (locetd just
>underneath each instrument panel and one is immediately behind the
>firewall). They are about 6" wide by fuse width in length.
>
>I also temporarily made and fastened gussetts ( 2" x fuse width) AHEAD
>of the firewall. You see I left about 4 " ahead of station zero on mine
>for ease of handling. This was later cut away when I made my firewll.
>
>If this is confusing, sorry.
>Bottom Line is yes you can remove and continue work before puttin in the
>floor-just think ahead.
>Good Luck - Its fun when it starts looking like an airplane. You could
>also make it a boat I guess :)
>
>Bert
>bwm(at)planttel.net
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dlwoolsey(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: prop carving... |
I will be sure and take a few step by step shots this time through so that I
can send them to whoever is interested.
Duane NX6398
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eric Norris <enorris2(at)earthlink.net> |
Dear Piet freaks:
I'm wondering, what is the performance increase by going to a Corvair or
say O-200 over the traditional Ford A engine? Does the Piet fly faster, or
carry more load, or what? The Ford-powered planes just look so wonderfully
OLD, that is the way I'm leaning.
It seems like it is pretty easy to get 50 or 55hp out of the Ford, does
this help noticably over a stock engine?
Thanks
Eric
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eric Norris <enorris2(at)earthlink.net> |
Nearly all dirt bikes use the same size wheels, 18" or 19" rear and 21"
front. What i would worry about is whether they can take th eload of 1000
lbs landing. They're built to take the weight of the bike (around 350-400
with rider). I noticed some others suggesting Harley wheels, perhaps these
are stronger?
Eric
>Danny,
> In the twenties, alot of automotive tires were measured by the outside
>diameter and width. We use the inside diameter now. The Model T wheels would
>be too heavy (IMHOP). Keep looking for motocross or dirt bike wheels from
>about a 125 to 250 cc bike, they will be about as close as you can get to
>the overall size of the original wheels. I was looking at some new ones the
>other day that had disk brakes.
>John Mc
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fuselage glueing |
Richard-
I agree with Earl's story. I glued everything forward of the rear seat,
including the seat back, before pulling the tail pieces together. One work
of caution- be sure when you glue the floor in, and then when pulling the
tail together, that the fuse is exactly square. I used a plumb line from
the center of the front cross piece to the center of the tail post. I made
marks on each cross piece to be sure I was square all the way to the back.
This was very helpful when mitering the tailpost pieces together.
Its exciting when the tail comes together and it looks like it might fly!
Al Swanson
>Richard;
> In my Humble opinion, I would glue the x pieces in place back to the point
>of where the fuselage would start to taper when you pull the tail posts
>together. Glue the floor in along with all the x piece gussetts. You will be
>pleasently surprised at how strong the thing becomes when the floor is in.
>After that has dried, pull the two tail posts together and begin filling in
>the balance of the x pieces......the floor will keep your nerves calm by
>absorbing all that x member compression.....the seat back will do this
>too.........The only devation from the stock Scout plans I made was at the
>seat back on up to the firewall. I made the fuselage two inches wider to
>accompanying my size. A stock A/C is tight....the Scout is two inches
>narrower in general and three inches narrower at the seat back. I mention
>this because with the seat back in and the floor on, pulling the fuselage
>halves together was rough enough with the short fuselage. With the same
>length but 3" wider at the seat, it was really a strain to match up the
>tailposts! Glueing in the seatback and floor made this pulling fairly easy
>but nervewracking non the less.
>Earl Myers
>
>Mike Cuy, back to you, 10-4!
>-----Original Message-----
>From: bwm
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Date: Saturday, May 29, 1999 8:32 PM
>Subject: Re: Fuselage glueing
>
>
>>Richard DeCosta wrote:
>>>
>>> I now have my 2 fuse sides upside-down in the the jig and all the
>>> various cross-pieces cut. I have been clamping them in place in
>>> preperation for glueing, and have noticed considerable strain on the
>>> wood durring this process. Should I glue the 3/16" ply floor on at the
>>> same time as the cross pieces underneath, or will it hold ok by me just
>>> glueing the cross-pieces in? I dont have the ply for the floor yet, and
>>> wont have for probably 2-3 weeks. If it's too much for just the cross
>>> pieces, Ill wait til I have the ply.
>>>
>>> Richard
>>> p.s. it finally looks like a plane! :)
>>> ===
>>> "Lady, you want me to answer you if this old airplane is safe to fly?
>Just how in the world do you think it got to be this old?" - Jim Tavenner
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>>> Visit www.AirCamper.org - A Low 'n Slow Online Community!
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>>> My homepage: http://www.AirCamper.org/w3builder
>>>
>>
>>
>>Richard,
>>
>>I assembled mine by placing it upside down on the table and inserting
>>and butt-gluing the cross members in. at the time, I didnt have the
>>floor board material either. I bar-clamped it all together in the front
>>and pulled the tail post area together , held them with bar clamps and
>>let it all dry. I went ahead and made and glued up the ttriangular
>>gussetts at the tailpost (Top and Bottom). Then I carefully removed
>>(with the help of the missus and a friend) the whole fuselage. BE VERY
>>SLOW AND CAREFUL HERE!
>>
>>Turned it right side up and carefully glued in the gussetts that
>>connnect the two slab sides . Mine is a GN1 and I dont remember exactly
>>how a piet is - but mine called for three big gussetts that span from
>>side to side and are glued to the top of each longeron (locetd just
>>underneath each instrument panel and one is immediately behind the
>>firewall). They are about 6" wide by fuse width in length.
>>
>>I also temporarily made and fastened gussetts ( 2" x fuse width) AHEAD
>>of the firewall. You see I left about 4 " ahead of station zero on mine
>>for ease of handling. This was later cut away when I made my firewll.
>>
>>If this is confusing, sorry.
>>Bottom Line is yes you can remove and continue work before puttin in the
>>floor-just think ahead.
>>Good Luck - Its fun when it starts looking like an airplane. You could
>>also make it a boat I guess :)
>>
>>Bert
>>bwm(at)planttel.net
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Replicraft(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Fuselage glueing |
Richard-
My methodology for assembling the fuselage is as follows-
1. The side panels are placed up-side-down on a flat work-table and the front
1/2 (cocpit forward) is held in place with 1" aluminum angle (3" long)
screwed into the table. I heve already glued and nailed the crossmember
gussets an the upper and lower faces of the longerons.
2. The plywood floor is set inplace (properly sized in width).
3. The rear of the fuselage is gently brought together with a beam clamp
4. The fuselage section where the gear mounts has a tendency to bow out. Use
two beam clamps to bring the sides back flush with the floor panel.
5. Check for square at the firewall, and adjust as needed.
6.When all is correct, glue and nail the floor and firewall in place.
7. Let this dry for 24 hours.
8. Trim the tailpost for the 1" width, glue, gusset and nail this next.
9. Cut, glue, and nail the crossmembers in place, lots of 2" "C" clamps left
in place overnight helps.
10, Cut, glue, and nail the diagonals in p[lace.
11.When everything has dried, flip the fuselage on it's side and install the
seat backs.
I always make these up with the braces pre-installed, also the gear (Ash)
supports in the floor, are already glued and nailed.
If you have any further questions, e-mail me at Replicraft(at)aol.com.
Steve
Your new web site looks great!!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Brusilow <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
A suggestion:
When constructing the fuselage a useful tool is to run a centerline
at the shop ceiling with moveable plumb bobs. Then it is an easy task to
true up the work at any station on the fuselage.
Mike B - Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )
A suggestion:
When constructing the fuselage a
useful
tool is to run a centerline at the shop ceiling with moveable plumb
bobs. Then
it is an easy task to true up the work at any station on the
fuselage.
Mike B - Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam
)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
>Nearly all dirt bikes use the same size wheels, 18" or 19" rear and 21"
>front. What i would worry about is whether they can take th eload of 1000
>lbs landing. They're built to take the weight of the bike (around 350-400
>with rider). I noticed some others suggesting Harley wheels, perhaps these
>are stronger?
I have no worries about the landing forces on the wheels. Watch a motocross
race someday. Those guys really punish the bikes landing just on the front
wheel sometimes. The impact forces must be imense even with the long stroke
forks they use. My concern is that you don't just put the wheels on at stock
width, although Wilbur Graff did just that and has no problems. A motorcycle
wheel is not subjected to side loading. but anytime we touch down a little
off we can impose some side loading on the wheels and gear. Ground loops
would be worse yet. Therefore widen the hubs!
John Mc
________________________________________________________________________________
Gents;
I agree with John McNary about the pounding of the wheels the motocross
wheels. Something different maybe with something the size of a Jenny, which
coincidentaly, uses the same size wheels as the Piet.......
About the width, I got into a BIG discussion about "Vector Dynamics"
relative to wheel width or especially hub width vs side loads. I guess I
lost that one! I made my Scout wheels per the usual but not nearly as
wide.....we'll see. Notice the WW1 airplanes have narrow wheels......
John, if you read this, fire away about narrow vs wide hubs! Wil Graff lives
just over the horizon from me. I have seen him fly in some nasty crosswinds
(without a care in the world) and has NO problem with thw wire wheels and
the side loads. As I said here before, I know of two guys that landed way
out of kilter but none of the spokes/rims collapsed altho bent beyond
belief.............
Earl Myers
-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Norris <enorris2(at)earthlink.net>
Date: Sunday, May 30, 1999 12:16 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wheels
>Nearly all dirt bikes use the same size wheels, 18" or 19" rear and 21"
>front. What i would worry about is whether they can take th eload of 1000
>lbs landing. They're built to take the weight of the bike (around 350-400
>with rider). I noticed some others suggesting Harley wheels, perhaps these
>are stronger?
>
>Eric
>
>>Danny,
>> In the twenties, alot of automotive tires were measured by the outside
>>diameter and width. We use the inside diameter now. The Model T wheels
would
>>be too heavy (IMHOP). Keep looking for motocross or dirt bike wheels from
>>about a 125 to 250 cc bike, they will be about as close as you can get to
>>the overall size of the original wheels. I was looking at some new ones
the
>>other day that had disk brakes.
>>John Mc
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
>I know of two guys that landed way out of kilter but none of the
spokes/rims collapsed >altho bent beyond belief.............
>Earl Myers
A number of years ago in this locale a Pietenpol Air Camper was
being test flown. The Model A engine lost power, the pilot turned back
for the field, landing hard on one wheel with a considerable sideways
force component. (some use the term "spun in" ) A high degree of damage
occurred to the aircraft, the pilot was virtually uninjured, the
motorcycle wheel suffered a bent rim and spokes but did not collapse.
Both pilot and airplane (after rebuilding) have flown again since.
The owner showed me the wheel in question and I have not been
concerned about my motorcycle wheels since.
I'm using Honda rear wheels with a large hub and shorter spokes,
stock bearing width, on the straight axle gear, copied from Brian Kenney.
Tom
__________
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | not much difference |
Hello All,
I am preparing to start on the hardware and fittings. On the parts
that called for 14ga, 13ga, and 12ga, did everyone use .125 for all?
Or did you all use exact individual thicknesses?
DannyMac
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: not much difference |
>I am preparing to start on the hardware and fittings.
>did everyone use .125 for all?
>Or did you all use exact individual thicknesses?
Use exact thicknesses. There is a chart in one of the catalogs,
Aircraft Spruce, Wicks or one of those that converts gauge to thickness.
I don't remember any that are .125. Save weight where you can. The
plane is plenty strong and 4130 is better than what was used in the 30's.
Since most of the fittings are strap type my Rx would be to buy the
pre-sheared strips
they sell then you just have to cut them to length, drill and bend.
I know the Flying and Glider manuals suggested making metal fittings
first. My feeling is you should build the parts you are going to attatch
the fittings to then build the metal parts so they will fit. Remember to
do as Mike Cuy and others suggest and made the tabs to which other parts
attach longer than plans. It will ease access for assembly later.
Been there,
Tom
__________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net> |
I got mine from a Harley Davidson repair shop (not the dealer) in Wichita
Falls, Tx. He had to order one to sell me two. Maybe catalogs for Harley
stuff would have them.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Lund <malund(at)sprint.ca>
Date: Saturday, May 29, 1999 2:57 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wheels
>$45 for new- sounds interesting. Who has them at that price (hopefully not
>somewhere that shipping is gonna cost me $100 ;-> )
>
>Mike
>----- Original Message -----
>From: John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net>
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Sent: Saturday, May 29, 1999 1:36 PM
>Subject: Re: Wheels
>
>
>> I used 21" aftermarket Harley Davidson Sportster front rims. Paid about
>45
>> bucks a piece brand new. Aluminum rims would be lighter but cost more.
>>
>> John
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Mike Lund <malund(at)sprint.ca>
>> To: Pietenpol Discussion
>> Date: Saturday, May 29, 1999 12:25 AM
>> Subject: Re: Wheels
>>
>>
>> >I am using 21" motorcycly rims- I havent got a clue what they are off
of,
>I
>> >just called the local bike wrecker and told him I wanted 2 matching
>spoked
>> >front rims, 20" or larger. He called me back today and said $75 (cdn) a
>> >piece for excellent condition, $50 for need some work types- I'll be
>> picking
>> >them up next saturday.
>> >
>> >Mike
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net> |
| Subject: | Re: engine choice |
The model A Piets I have ridden in do not have any great excess of power.
They fly fine but do not climb at any steep angle, just sort of "levitate".
The Corvair in the Piet installation is, I bet, somewhere in the range of a
65 Cont. It turns faster, and sure sounds good, and has plenty of power.
I've ridden in an O-200 ship - Brusilow's - and it is noticeably much
stronger. However, the pilot with which I was hopping gets a nosebleed when
he gets much above tree level. Can't say how fast it really climbs.
IMHO anything more than about 65hp is more than is necessary though every
increase in power increases the climb rate. A mildly modified Ford provides
adequate power to fly two people. Just remember to evaluate it in its own
realm and don't expect O-200 performance.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Norris <enorris2(at)earthlink.net>
Date: Saturday, May 29, 1999 11:11 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: engine choice
>Dear Piet freaks:
>
>I'm wondering, what is the performance increase by going to a Corvair or
>say O-200 over the traditional Ford A engine? Does the Piet fly faster, or
>carry more load, or what? The Ford-powered planes just look so wonderfully
>OLD, that is the way I'm leaning.
>
>It seems like it is pretty easy to get 50 or 55hp out of the Ford, does
>this help noticably over a stock engine?
>
>Thanks
>
>Eric
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net> |
| Subject: | Re: not much difference |
Excellent advice -- on all points.
If you make all the fittings first you will have to make them again -- to
fit!
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas E Bowdler
Date: Monday, May 31, 1999 7:06 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: not much difference
>>I am preparing to start on the hardware and fittings.
>>did everyone use .125 for all?
>>Or did you all use exact individual thicknesses?
>
> Use exact thicknesses. There is a chart in one of the catalogs,
>Aircraft Spruce, Wicks or one of those that converts gauge to thickness.
> I don't remember any that are .125. Save weight where you can. The
>plane is plenty strong and 4130 is better than what was used in the 30's.
> Since most of the fittings are strap type my Rx would be to buy the
>pre-sheared strips
>they sell then you just have to cut them to length, drill and bend.
> I know the Flying and Glider manuals suggested making metal fittings
>first. My feeling is you should build the parts you are going to attatch
>the fittings to then build the metal parts so they will fit. Remember to
>do as Mike Cuy and others suggest and made the tabs to which other parts
>attach longer than plans. It will ease access for assembly later.
>Been there,
>Tom
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: engine choice |
I have chosen the Ford instalation and keep reminding myself that if I
ever wanted a fantastic climb rate, I simply would not build a Piet,
I'd build a Glassair or a Pitts or something.
All depends on what you want to do with your plane, I guess. I just
want one to putt around the countryside in, not win medals or break
records. :)
Richard
--- John Greenlee wrote:
> The model A Piets I have ridden in do not have any great excess of
> power.
> They fly fine but do not climb at any steep angle, just sort of
> "levitate".
>
> The Corvair in the Piet installation is, I bet, somewhere in the
> range of a
> 65 Cont. It turns faster, and sure sounds good, and has plenty of
> power.
>
> I've ridden in an O-200 ship - Brusilow's - and it is noticeably much
> stronger. However, the pilot with which I was hopping gets a
> nosebleed when
> he gets much above tree level. Can't say how fast it really
> climbs.
>
> IMHO anything more than about 65hp is more than is necessary though
> every
> increase in power increases the climb rate. A mildly modified Ford
> provides
> adequate power to fly two people. Just remember to evaluate it in
> its own
> realm and don't expect O-200 performance.
>
> John
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Norris <enorris2(at)earthlink.net>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Date: Saturday, May 29, 1999 11:11 PM
> Subject: engine choice
>
>
> >Dear Piet freaks:
> >
> >I'm wondering, what is the performance increase by going to a
> Corvair or
> >say O-200 over the traditional Ford A engine? Does the Piet fly
> faster, or
> >carry more load, or what? The Ford-powered planes just look so
> wonderfully
> >OLD, that is the way I'm leaning.
> >
> >It seems like it is pretty easy to get 50 or 55hp out of the Ford,
> does
> >this help noticably over a stock engine?
> >
> >Thanks
> >
> >Eric
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
===
"Lady, you want me to answer you if this old airplane is safe to fly? Just how
in the world do you think it got to be this old?" - Jim Tavenner
---------------------------------------------------------
Visit www.AirCamper.org - A Low 'n Slow Online Community!
---------------------------------------------------------
My homepage: http://www.AirCamper.org/w3builder
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Adolfo Pando <fitopando(at)yahoo.com> |
I am actually building a Jenny, but I really sympathise with piets and
would surely like to get a bit more involved.
I wonder if you can help me find the piet fans in England, where I
moved to from Argentina. Any information about shipping companies to
move my bird would also be more than welcome. Thanks.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net> |
| Subject: | Re: engine choice |
Excellent thought!
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard DeCosta
Date: Monday, May 31, 1999 10:32 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: engine choice
>I have chosen the Ford instalation and keep reminding myself that if I
>ever wanted a fantastic climb rate, I simply would not build a Piet,
>I'd build a Glassair or a Pitts or something.
>
>All depends on what you want to do with your plane, I guess. I just
>want one to putt around the countryside in, not win medals or break
>records. :)
>
>Richard
>
>
>--- John Greenlee wrote:
>> The model A Piets I have ridden in do not have any great excess of
>> power.
>> They fly fine but do not climb at any steep angle, just sort of
>> "levitate".
>>
>> The Corvair in the Piet installation is, I bet, somewhere in the
>> range of a
>> 65 Cont. It turns faster, and sure sounds good, and has plenty of
>> power.
>>
>> I've ridden in an O-200 ship - Brusilow's - and it is noticeably much
>> stronger. However, the pilot with which I was hopping gets a
>> nosebleed when
>> he gets much above tree level. Can't say how fast it really
>> climbs.
>>
>> IMHO anything more than about 65hp is more than is necessary though
>> every
>> increase in power increases the climb rate. A mildly modified Ford
>> provides
>> adequate power to fly two people. Just remember to evaluate it in
>> its own
>> realm and don't expect O-200 performance.
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Eric Norris <enorris2(at)earthlink.net>
>> To: Pietenpol Discussion
>> Date: Saturday, May 29, 1999 11:11 PM
>> Subject: engine choice
>>
>>
>> >Dear Piet freaks:
>> >
>> >I'm wondering, what is the performance increase by going to a
>> Corvair or
>> >say O-200 over the traditional Ford A engine? Does the Piet fly
>> faster, or
>> >carry more load, or what? The Ford-powered planes just look so
>> wonderfully
>> >OLD, that is the way I'm leaning.
>> >
>> >It seems like it is pretty easy to get 50 or 55hp out of the Ford,
>> does
>> >this help noticably over a stock engine?
>> >
>> >Thanks
>> >
>> >Eric
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>===
>"Lady, you want me to answer you if this old airplane is safe to fly? Just
how in the world do you think it got to be this old?" - Jim Tavenner
>---------------------------------------------------------
>Visit www.AirCamper.org - A Low 'n Slow Online Community!
>---------------------------------------------------------
>My homepage: http://www.AirCamper.org/w3builder
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | FordPiet(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Engine: A Ford Reliable? |
Hi, I'm back from vacation and a lot behind on the e-mails. I have never
flown with a Ford A engine, but I have been driving Model A's on and off
since 1965. I have had lots of times the engine has stopped -- but they were
always my fault. I.e.
1. I ran out of gas
2. The gas tank was rusty and the rust cut off the gas flow to the carb
3. I drove my newly purchased "$100 used car" without checking out the
engine. The fiber timing gear was already worn out and finally the teeth
came off and caused the engine quit. A new fiber gear fixed that problem and
the "used car" continued to run fine.
4. The condenser often died -- standard problem for the Ford distributor in
hot climates. Easy fix, I relocated the condenser about an inch further away
from the head. On the Piet, a magneto is used so the original distributor
won't cause you any problems. The original distributor also had problems in
heavy rain.
With a properly rebuilt and maintained engine, I have not had any unscheduled
stops. The primary reason I am considering building and/or obtaining a Piet,
is that it powered by the A engine. I'm sure the certificated aircraft
engine is more reliable -- i.e dual mags etc, but I'm confident a properly
maintained Ford A engine is safe.
I would like to know why Mike's engine vapor locked and also had a bent
valve. Perhaps he was able to capture some lessons for Ford powered Piets to
avoid? I remember reading one article about the "Great Race" a few years
ago, where so many of the antique autos had vapor lock problems due to the
grade of gasoline, elevation, and heat that they allowed some extra driving
time on that leg of the race. The type of gas, how close the fuel line is to
heat sources, etc, can increase the likely hood of vapor lock. The bent
valve surprises me -- since the Ford is a flat head and the piston is
parallel to the valve stem -- i.e. the piston cannot hit the valve as in some
overhead valve engines. Perhaps there was too much valve lift? Head milled
too much? Wrong or out of specification valve?
Anyway, I believe a good A engine is very reliable. Good luck with your
project.
Hap Tucker, Bossier City, Louisiana
Subj: engine
Date: 99-05-19 22:31:24 EDT
From: mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net (Michael Brusilow)
Sender: Maiser(at)adena.byu.edu
Reply-to: piet(at)byu.edu (Pietenpol Discussion)
<>
Hey, I didn't mean to condem all A engines. I was just relating an isolated
experience.I flew Ed Snyder's A powered Piet quite a bit with no
problems.Don't let me discourage you if you want to go model A.
Mike B ( Piet N687MB )
May 18, 1999 - May 31, 1999
Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-at