Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-bh
September 29, 1999 - October 07, 1999
Nope, you've just got to think everything through very carefully before you
cut wood. It helps to talk with other builders, or look at other
Pietenpols. I just finished my wing and there are a number of places where
it simply can't be done like the plans show. For example, the compression
struts cannot be fitted as they are shown on the plans.
It helps to have the 1932 Flying and Glider Manual (reprinted by EAA)
because it has the original 1929 plans and there are differences between
them and the "improved (1934) plans offered by Don Pietenpol. Between the
two of them you can usually figure out what needs to be done. The Flying
and Glider Manual also has Pietenpol's own commentary on building the plane.
Jack
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Burroughs [SMTP:glenn(at)sysweb.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 2:03 PM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Plans lack details
>
> Hello,
>
> The plans that my friend is using (purchased from Don Pietenpol) for the
> Pietenpol Aircamper really lack details. Just about every description is
> either confusing or has details missing. Is there another set of plans
> available that are more detailed?
>
> Thanks, Glenn
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | LaurenMWilliams(at)webtv.net (Lauren Williams) |
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
Glenn,
The plans do take study! I would suggest that you get the 1932 Flying
and Glider Manual reprint from EAA and all of the back issues of the
Buckeye Pietenpol Assn. news letter that you can. The picture will
start to fill in as you build and study all the sources that you can
find.
There really is no such thing as a complete set of plans, for anything!
Much has to be inferred from common practice in any field. The further
back we go in the history of aviation, the more folks relied on the
inventiveness of the builders and the extensive literature available in
the periodicals of the time. We still have that sort of literature
available from EAA. Tony Bengelis' books are a good example.
One of the reasons that the Pietenpol has been so popular is the quality
of Orin Hoopman's drawings. They combine a solid drawing hand, good
lettering and an intent to include as much as possible in just a few
sheets of drawings. They do require study. I do full size sketches and
mockups of critical assemblies. I have made a lot of poster board
patterns, along the way, to be sure things are going to fit and be to my
liking.
I have seen airplane plans that were little more than a 3-view and a
wing rib pattern. The Pietenpol plans are magnitudes better than this!
Lauren
mailsorter-102-2.iap.bryant.webtv.net (8.8.8-wtv-d/ms.dwm.v7+dul2)
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 14:02:45 -0400
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Burroughs <glenn(at)sysweb.com> |
Subject: | Plans lack details |
(via Mercury MTS v1.44 (NDS)) (via Mercury MTS v1.44 (NDS)) (via
Mercury MTS v1.44 (NDS)) (via Mercury MTS v1.44 (NDS)) (via Mercury
MTS v1.44 (NDS)) (via Mercury MTS v1.44 (NDS))
Hello,
The plans that my friend is using (purchased from Don Pietenpol) for the
Pietenpol Aircamper really lack details. Just about every description is
either confusing or has details missing. Is there another set of plans
available that are more detailed?
Thanks, Glenn
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | claude <claude.plathey(at)wanadoo.fr> |
Subject: | Re: HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE (Again, and again, and again) |
steve(at)byu.edu wrote:
>
> Have you tried going to http://www.aircamper.org/MailingList.cfm ? Simply
> put in your email address, pull down the tab, click on unsubscribe and hit
> go. There your out a here,
>
> PS. It really works!
>
No, it does not work, "subscribe" just blinks and I can't get "unsubscribe".
Please unsubscribe me, I must go for a while. Thanks.
Claude
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | walter evans <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
Glen,
I think that this is the impression that everyone has at first. It is
surprising how much information is there. The more you work with them, the
more you see.
Give some examples of the parts that confuse , or are omitted.
walt
-----Original Message-----
From: Burroughs <glenn(at)sysweb.com>
Date: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 2:05 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Plans lack details
>Hello,
>
>The plans that my friend is using (purchased from Don Pietenpol) for the
>Pietenpol Aircamper really lack details. Just about every description is
>either confusing or has details missing. Is there another set of plans
>available that are more detailed?
>
>Thanks, Glenn
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Meadows <gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
The last couple of posts finally pushed me over the edge, and I ordered the
1932 Flying and Glider Manual reprint from EAA. I also ordered the Tony
Bengelis book on Sportplane Construction, I think that will be helpful also.
Glenn - As for the plans lack of detail, Jack and Lauren summed it up very
well. I guess for myself, I figured that once I got to a part that didn't
seem to be too well drawn, I'd either ask the group, or figure it out based
on what seemed to be needed for that part. From the best that I can tell,
don't worry the details yet, just get started building something, and you'll
figure out/find out what you need to know along the way!
Good Luck!
Gary Meadows
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | walter evans <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Subject: | Re: hydraulic brakes |
Don,
It always seems that when you need something, it's not around. I had put
out the word with the neighbors of what I needed. For months nothing, then
on Sunday ,last, my neighbor Nathan, comes to the door and says " I got your
brakes". He had been down Englishtown NJ. which is a big flea market,
and he had the whole front of a motorcycle removed at the steering post. I
got 2 calipers , 2 discs ( I'll have to make smaller) and one master cyl.
for $8.oo.
Thats the fun of building a plane, so many things going, you can just shift
till the other parts surface.
walt
-----Original Message-----
From: DonanClara(at)aol.com <DonanClara(at)aol.com>
Date: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 8:51 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: hydraulic brakes
> Does anyone know of a small inexpensive( ha ha ) brake caliper for a disc
>brake ? Do any go carts, motor scooters, small motorcycles or small
trailers
>have disc brakes ? Any help or suggestions would be appreciated.
>Don Hicks
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Wow That Was Loud!
----- Original Message -----
From: kyle ray
To: Pietenpol Discussion
Sent: Friday, August 06, 1999 7:00 AM
Subject: Re: dowsing
Yes,
I CAN'T SAY THAT IT'S DOWSING HOWEVER I WORK FOR THE PHONE
COMPANY AND AT ONE TIME I WORKED OUT SIDE AND HAD TO LOCATE
CABLES FOR FOR THE WATER COMPANY AND PRIVATE CONTRACTORS.
I HAD A STANDARD CABLE LOCATOR THAT HAD A TONE THAT NULLED
WHEN IT WAS HELD DIRECTLY OVER THE CABLE THEN YOU COULD MARK
THE LOCATION AND TILT THE UNIT 45 DEGREES AND MOVE TO THE
SIDE THIS WOULD TELL THE DEPTH. SOMETIMES THE BATTERIES
WOULD BE DOWN AND I WOULD TAKE THE 19 AWG STEEL FLAGS
THAT WERE ABOUT 24 TO 30 INCHES IN LENGTH AND I WOULD
BEND ABOUT FIVE INCHES ON THE END DOWN AT A 45 ANGLE
AND HOLD TWO WIRES ONE IN EACH HAND WHEN YOU CROSSED
A PHONE CABLE OR WATER LINE PERPENDICULARLY THE WIRES
WOULD TRY TO LINE THEMSELVES UP WITH THE WATER LINE
OR TELEPHONE CABLE, THIS IS NOT A ESP OR ANYTHING LIKE
THAT THERE IS SOME KIND OF ELECTRIC FIELD AROUND THE
OBJECT THAT CAUSES THE WIRE TO TRY TO ALIGN ITSELF
WITH THE OBJECT, COAT HANGERS ALSO WORK HOWEVER
I NEVER DOWSED A WELL AND THIS IS AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT
THING. YOU CAN ALSO REMOTLY HOLD THE WIRES WITH
SOME DEVISE OTHER THAN YOUR HANDS AND THE WIRES
WILL ALIGN THEMSELVES. IF YA DON'T BELIEVE TRY IT!
RUSSELL RAY
----- Original Message -----
From: walter evans
To: Pietenpol Discussion
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 1999 8:54 PM
Subject: dowsing
Just a strange question.....Does anyone know of anyone who can dowse
for water, tanks, pipes? Just curious about the concept.
Thinking about dowsing and Pietenpols.
walt
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
You would think after 70 years the family would at least fix the errors in
the plans. This has come up before on this list. 1932 Flying and Gliding
manual has the same information and I think it tells of plans changes. But
for 75.00 you should get a complete set without errors.
IMHO
Gordon
IHA#02
http://public.surfree.com/arkiesair/index.htm
WebMaster for IHA
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Burroughs <glenn(at)sysweb.com> |
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 11:02 AM
Subject: | Plans lack details |
> Hello,
>
> The plans that my friend is using (purchased from Don Pietenpol) for the
> Pietenpol Aircamper really lack details. Just about every description is
> either confusing or has details missing. Is there another set of plans
> available that are more detailed?
>
> Thanks, Glenn
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Gower <ggower(at)informador.com.mx> |
Subject: | Re: TEXAS FLY IN |
>Sounds great - Brodhead of the South!
>
>Clay
>San Antonio
>
>
Remember has to be BIGGER :-) :-0
Saludos
Gary Gower
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Gower <ggower(at)informador.com.mx> |
Subject: | DH82a alternate motor (engine :-) |
>Small Chev Alum V8 would work fine.
>
>Gordon
>
The V8 conversion plans by Steve Witman (now sold by Aircraft Spruce & Spec)
probably will work...
Saludos
Gary Gower
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Gower <ggower(at)informador.com.mx> |
Subject: | Re: Light weight Piet |
>>>I think that the outside cover plane on the
>propeller should be keyed to the propeller shaft
>to remove any twisting of the propeller bolts." .
>
>what he is describing is either a rough running
>engine that backfires, one strong enough to shear
>the bolts during acceleration or one that had a
>ground strike. Otherwise there would be no
>"twisting" of the bolts. Unless, of course, he is
>over-revving it during a hand crank.
>
Remember to check (and retorque) the prop bolts twice a year, we do that and
that takes care of any posibility of bolt shear in wooden propellers.
I know that the prop is barnished very well, but maybe humidity changes can
loose the bolt torque when in dry season...
Saludos
Gary Gower.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Shutic, Jeff" <jshutic(at)nordson.com> |
Subject: | Unsubscribe Piet |
Unsubscribe Piet
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ken Beanlands <kbeanlan(at)spots.ab.ca> |
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
Sonex, the new, all metal, light plane charges $500 USD for a set of
plans. The Average rate for a set of plans, most not more detailed than
the Piet, is around the $150-$200 USD range. Paying only $75 for a set of
plans should be considered a bargain. I doubt if they are making much if
any money at that price.
Ken
On Wed, 29 Sep 1999, Gordon Brimhall wrote:
> You would think after 70 years the family would at least fix the errors in
> the plans. This has come up before on this list. 1932 Flying and Gliding
> manual has the same information and I think it tells of plans changes. But
> for 75.00 you should get a complete set without errors.
>
> IMHO
>
> Gordon
> IHA#02
> http://public.surfree.com/arkiesair/index.htm
> WebMaster for IHA
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Burroughs <glenn(at)sysweb.com>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 11:02 AM
> Subject: Plans lack details
>
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > The plans that my friend is using (purchased from Don Pietenpol) for the
> > Pietenpol Aircamper really lack details. Just about every description is
> > either confusing or has details missing. Is there another set of plans
> > available that are more detailed?
> >
> > Thanks, Glenn
> >
> >
>
Ken Beanlands B.Eng (Aerospace)
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Christavia MK 1 C-GREN
<http://www.spots.ab.ca/~kbeanlan>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
Glenn, Start small, then work your way to more complex forms. I found that
by "lofting the plans onto 2 3/4x4x8 sheets of ply wood, all the correct
angles can be transferred directly, and if the pieces are built on the
pattern you get a chance to work out the interferrences beforehand.
Generally, I would say that all the information is there, it is the
interpretation that is the problem. In some cases you have to look at two or
three of the blueprints to get how it actually goes together. There are a
couple of spots that the group can help out with. I know I was helped many
times. You need a clear, description of what the issue/concern is and then
there are lots of folks that can give you a hand. I did find several spots
mainly in the wings that takes some innovation or minor changes to make
work. The 1932 Flying and Glider Manual is a sure help. The more I work
with the plans, the more I recognize just how smart Bernie was. If he had
one fallback, it was the lack of clear concise instructions. To be fair, I
would hate to have someone try to build it following my very detailed log
book.
Starting to ramble, but when the plans start to make sense, its time to cut
small pieces, not before. I keep thinking of the number of times Steve or
Mike or a dozen others gave me some insite. Be specific and there are lots
of ideas and help available.
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Burroughs <glenn(at)sysweb.com> |
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 2:02 PM
Subject: | Plans lack details |
> Hello,
>
> The plans that my friend is using (purchased from Don Pietenpol) for the
> Pietenpol Aircamper really lack details. Just about every description is
> either confusing or has details missing. Is there another set of plans
> available that are more detailed?
>
> Thanks, Glenn
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | RE: HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE (Again, and again, and again) |
Well it does work. I just unsubscribed you with this method. I'll eat my
hat (u know the nice embroidered kind) if you reply to this message claude.
Respectfully,
Steve Eldredge
IT Services
Brigham Young University
> -----Original Message-----
> claude
> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 2:40 PM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Re: HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE (Again, and again, and again)
>
>
> steve(at)byu.edu wrote:
> >
> > Have you tried going to
> http://www.aircamper.org/MailingList.cfm ? Simply
> > put in your email address, pull down the tab, click on
> unsubscribe and hit
> > go. There your out a here,
> >
> > PS. It really works!
> >
>
>
> No, it does not work, "subscribe" just blinks and I can't get
> "unsubscribe".
> Please unsubscribe me, I must go for a while. Thanks.
> Claude
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Copinfo <Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.com> |
Mike the 72x44 or 72x42 are good props for the Continental 65. The 42 is
more climb and the 44 is more speed. Hegy makes great props. Sensenich
props new are a little more and are certified. If you install a certified
engine and certified prop you only have to fly off 25 hours after
inspection. Otherwise you have to go for 40 hours.
Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.Com
Tim Cunningham
Des Moines, Iowa (515) 237-1510
>Would like to know from any PIET and GN-1 builders
>who are using a Cont. 65 through 80 series engine,
>what size prop you suggest. And if any of you are using
>HEGY props, what kind of experience have you encountered.
>
>I am thinking of ordering a new HEGY 72x44 wooden prop
>from Mr. Hegy. I have not talked to anyone who has his
>prop or has done business with the man. Any comments
>or recommendations are appreciated.
>
>Mike
>Dallas
>(214) 905-9299
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: unrelated matters |
amen! water witching? c'mon
--- Michael Brusilow
wrote:
> Hey guys, don't you think it's about time we knocked
> off all those non Piet e-mails including
> interpersonal communications. If you have something
> to say to somebody, e-mail them directly.
>
> Mike B Piet N687MB (Mr Sam )
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael Brusilow <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Subject: | uncalled for comments |
Status: RO
I take extreme exception to the disparaging remarks directed to the
Pietenpol family, especially from some one who proably has not even
built one rib.
I am out of here.
Unsubscribe
Mike B Piet N 687MB ( Mr Sam )
I take extreme exception to the disparaging remarks directed to the
Pietenpol family, especially from some one who proably has not even
built one
rib.
I am out of here.
Unsubscribe
Mike B Piet N 687MB ( Mr Sam )
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Copinfo <Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.com> |
Mike, (Mr Sam) is right about the C.G. on a Continental 65. The motor
only weighs 170 pounds. I wouldn't add any extra weight though. A wood
prop costs about $800 compared to $1500 or so for a new metal prop.
Just make your motor mount 3 to 4 inches longer than the plans and that
will take care of the C.G. If you want to add weight to adjust the C.G.
get a C-85 with a starter and add that battery everyone complains about.
Me, I flip my wood prop because I'm too poor to get a motor with a
starter.
Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.Com
Tim Cunningham
Des Moines, Iowa (515) 237-1510
Mike K wrote:
The size is proably OK, but with a 65 you will need a metal prop to
keep the CG in acceptable limits.
Mike B Piet N687MB (Mr Sam )
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Warren Shoun <wbnb(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Dowsing & Waterwitching? |
Geez guys....I unsubscribed for awhile 'cause a couple of fella's
seemed to think we would all be enthralled with any and everything
EXCEPT Piet building....now I come back to check and we are into dowsing
& waterwitching?
Guess I better wander back to the hanger and to Richard's page and
see if I can find someone who is actually building a Piet.
Cheers and good luck finding your water....I guess.
Warren
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | DonanClara(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: hydraulic brakes |
Thanx Del for the reply...by four wheelers are you talking about ATV's?? It
sounds like that if they have 8 inch wheels.
Don H.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
Glenn- I felt a bit like you do when I first got my plans. But as I got
into my project, I found that almost everything I needed to know was there
somewhere. Whenever I thought there was an error, I just spent more time
studying- and learned that Bernard was one clever individual. When I don't
have time to build, I enjoy spending time just sudying the plans and
building the plane "in my head". It's true that common sense is sometimes
needed to fill in the details, but when you actually start cutting and
gluing it seems to all fit together.
This group is a great source of information. Also the pictures on
aircamper.org of other projects is a treasure trove. Remember that many
hundreds of this plane have been built over the last 70 years, so the plans
can't be all that bad!
Al Swanson
>Hello,
>
>The plans that my friend is using (purchased from Don Pietenpol) for the
>Pietenpol Aircamper really lack details. Just about every description is
>either confusing or has details missing. Is there another set of plans
>available that are more detailed?
>
>Thanks, Glenn
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
As other have said, Study the plans, Read the Flying and Gliding manual
reprints from EAA. Think about it, Ask questions. Lots of good aircraft have
been built from these plans before and if others have done it you can too.
Mr Sam, don't get too upset I've watched this service go from excellent to
annoying and back again. If we stay on the topic it is a great forum. Your
experience is an asset.
John McNarry
-----Original Message-----
From: Burroughs <glenn(at)sysweb.com>
Date: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 12:05 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Plans lack details
>Hello,
>
>The plans that my friend is using (purchased from Don Pietenpol) for the
>Pietenpol Aircamper really lack details. Just about every description is
>either confusing or has details missing. Is there another set of plans
>available that are more detailed?
>
>Thanks, Glenn
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | DonanClara(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
Glenn, I'll certainly concede that plans offered over the last ten to fifteen
years are a great deal more detailed than the Pietenpol, but, hey look at the
number of fine Pietenpol airplanes that came from the same plans you're
describing. That's the beauty of this group. Just throw your questions out to
these guys and they'll help. To answer your question more directly, I'm not
aware of any other Pietenpol or Pietenpol type ( GN-1) plans that are more
detailed.
Don H.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: hydraulic brakes |
yep, thats what Imean
--- DonanClara(at)aol.com wrote:
> Thanx Del for the reply...by four wheelers are you
> talking about ATV's?? It
> sounds like that if they have 8 inch wheels.
>
> Don H.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | DonanClara(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: hydraulic brakes |
Thanks Walt, we do have to shift a lot so I guess I can add the brakes to the
list. Actually, if something surfaces it should be a piece 'o cake to make
the change. The disc can mount onto the same plate that now holds the drum,
and I haven't yet started covering.
Don H.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | DonanClara(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: uncalled for comments |
Mike, I think most of us share your feelings. Your input is far too valuable.
Shake it off and come back to the group!!
Don H.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | walter evans <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Subject: | Re: unrelated matters |
Del,
After all of the talk of the Piet, it's nice to talk about the weather or
sports??? For a minute.
walt
PS dowsing( water witching) Don't knock it till you can do it...it's so
cool.
-----Original Message-----
From: del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com>
Date: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 6:37 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: unrelated matters
>amen! water witching? c'mon
>
>--- Michael Brusilow
>wrote:
>> Hey guys, don't you think it's about time we knocked
>> off all those non Piet e-mails including
>> interpersonal communications. If you have something
>> to say to somebody, e-mail them directly.
>>
>> Mike B Piet N687MB (Mr Sam )
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | walter evans <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Subject: | Re: Dowsing & Waterwitching? |
I'm building a Piet, but I can't spend 24 hours a day in the "Piet shop". I
am a single parent raising three on my own, and working at least 50 hours a
week to make ends , and my project, meet. I just wanted to interject a
little curious question. If I was out of line, I apologize, won't happen
again.
walt
PS Still say " don't knock it till you can do it"
-----Original Message-----
From: Warren Shoun <wbnb(at)earthlink.net>
Date: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 7:13 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Dowsing & Waterwitching?
> Geez guys....I unsubscribed for awhile 'cause a couple of fella's
>seemed to think we would all be enthralled with any and everything
>EXCEPT Piet building....now I come back to check and we are into dowsing
>& waterwitching?
> Guess I better wander back to the hanger and to Richard's page and
>see if I can find someone who is actually building a Piet.
>Cheers and good luck finding your water....I guess.
>Warren
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Leopold <frgtdog(at)worldnet.att.net> |
-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Leopold <frgtdog(at)worldnet.att.net>
Date: Tuesday, September 28, 1999 7:37 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: fuel tank
Leon:
Norwalk, Iowa.
Keep me posted. Thanks
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Leopold <frgtdog(at)worldnet.att.net> |
-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Leopold <frgtdog(at)worldnet.att.net>
Date: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 7:28 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: questions
a few Questions
1. Has anyone installed a trim tab on a piet elevator? and if so how?
2. Looking at the Tail section plans, are the leading edges of the
elevators the same cross section as the trailing edges of the horizontal
stab?
3. Has anyone used Douglas fir for the spars and ribs? I know it has
more weight than spruce but it is available locally.
4. Looking at the fuselage plans there is a box structure behind the
firewall. If a A65 is used, is this structure omitted?
Thanks for any replies.
Gary
Frgtdog(at)worldnet.att.net
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
Still does not matter.
After 70 years you would think the plans would be first rate, You need to
get additional info to built it. I agree this group is the best place for
info.
But nothing you can say makes it right for Don Pietenpol to sell plans that
still have mistakes after all these years.
How many pages in the plans,
What size and how many pages x copy cost = ?? from 75.00 = profit for
Don Pietenpol.
Guess What, I would feel better giving Barnard the money.
IMHO
Gordon
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ken Beanlands <kbeanlan(at)spots.ab.ca> |
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 3:09 PM
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
> Sonex, the new, all metal, light plane charges $500 USD for a set of
> plans. The Average rate for a set of plans, most not more detailed than
> the Piet, is around the $150-$200 USD range. Paying only $75 for a set of
> plans should be considered a bargain. I doubt if they are making much if
> any money at that price.
>
> Ken
>
> On Wed, 29 Sep 1999, Gordon Brimhall wrote:
>
> > You would think after 70 years the family would at least fix the errors
in
> > the plans. This has come up before on this list. 1932 Flying and Gliding
> > manual has the same information and I think it tells of plans changes.
But
> > for 75.00 you should get a complete set without errors.
> >
> > IMHO
> >
> > Gordon
> > IHA#02
> > http://public.surfree.com/arkiesair/index.htm
> > WebMaster for IHA
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Burroughs <glenn(at)sysweb.com>
> > To: Pietenpol Discussion
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 11:02 AM
> > Subject: Plans lack details
> >
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > The plans that my friend is using (purchased from Don Pietenpol) for
the
> > > Pietenpol Aircamper really lack details. Just about every description
is
> > > either confusing or has details missing. Is there another set of plans
> > > available that are more detailed?
> > >
> > > Thanks, Glenn
> > >
> > >
> >
>
> Ken Beanlands B.Eng (Aerospace)
> Calgary, Alberta, Canada
> Christavia MK 1 C-GREN
> <http://www.spots.ab.ca/~kbeanlan>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: uncalled for comments |
Your right if your talking about me but who knows who you are directing
your remarks too.
Bit I'm building the little Baby UL Piet first. Then Big Piet later.
Practice on the Baby will make it easier for the Daddy:-)))
See it on the Pietenpol.org website.
Gordon
IHA#02
WebMaster
RW1 UL Piet
Mohawk MK IV
Super Quickie
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Brusilow
To: Pietenpol Discussion
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 3:45 PM
Subject: uncalled for comments
I take extreme exception to the disparaging remarks directed to the
Pietenpol family, especially from some one who proably has not even
built one rib.
I am out of here.
Unsubscribe
Mike B Piet N 687MB ( Mr Sam )
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Replicraft(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Plans lack details |
I have been in contact with Paul Poberezny the past few weeks, concerning the
"new" Sport Aviation Association, and the (questionable) direction the EAA
has taken the past ten years or so. He really is a fine individual to speak
with.
Moments ago I finished a letter to him where I remarked about the people I
have met through Replicraft Aviation and the EAA , and that there wasn't ONE
I haven't liked or befriended...Then I read Mr. Brimhalls rather harsh
comments about the Pietenpol plans and more directly, the Pietenpol family. I
may need to amend my letter to Paul.
Half the fun of building a Piet IS that you need to do more than just read
the plans and knock out parts. There is something really magical about
building an aircraft from plans that are older than you are...half the fun,
is in finding those lost dimensions, and the builders you meet along the way.
If the plans were so complete and detailed, we wouldn't need ...each other
and this group.
Personally, I rather like it here.
Steve
Replicraft Aviation
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
I think you are right about that for sure, I never complain about a few Off
Topic posts even though I could care less about water witching, even though
I had it done to my property 9 yrs ago. But still some members get ticked
off and want to show that by sending the unsubscribe to the group, Knowing
all the while that is not how you unsubscribe, Just want to be heard is all
it is.
All the good people like Mr. Sam will always come back. Me as I can be a
pain in the butt sometimes I appriciate everything and all the info these
lists provide, I pay back in hard work for other organizations and helping
people whenever I can, just like most of you folks do.
Gordon
Back to Web work.
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | John McNarry <jmcnarry(at)techplus.com> |
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 5:39 PM
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
> As other have said, Study the plans, Read the Flying and Gliding manual
> reprints from EAA. Think about it, Ask questions. Lots of good aircraft
have
> been built from these plans before and if others have done it you can too.
>
> Mr Sam, don't get too upset I've watched this service go from excellent to
> annoying and back again. If we stay on the topic it is a great forum. Your
> experience is an asset.
>
> John McNarry
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Burroughs <glenn(at)sysweb.com>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Date: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 12:05 PM
> Subject: Plans lack details
>
>
> >Hello,
> >
> >The plans that my friend is using (purchased from Don Pietenpol) for the
> >Pietenpol Aircamper really lack details. Just about every description is
> >either confusing or has details missing. Is there another set of plans
> >available that are more detailed?
> >
> >Thanks, Glenn
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | walter evans <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
To all that feel this way,
I still ask " what actual things are not right on the plans?" I've built
fuse, tail assys , ribs, one wing 75%, and have yet to find a major problem,
that didn't turn out to be me not seeing some dimension. 1 1/4 wings , and
I'm done with wood.
As someone said a short time ago.....they wouldn't be building so many if
the plans were that bad.
My first project had a number of differences from print to print
lets do this,,,since most have the same prints,,,state the error and the
page #,,and the rest can add our input. no bad blood,,,just help each other.
walt
PS Still say " the more you look, the more you find"
-----Original Message-----
From: Gordon Brimhall
Date: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 8:57 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans lack details
>Still does not matter.
>
>After 70 years you would think the plans would be first rate, You need to
>get additional info to built it. I agree this group is the best place for
>info.
>
>But nothing you can say makes it right for Don Pietenpol to sell plans that
>still have mistakes after all these years.
>
>How many pages in the plans,
>What size and how many pages x copy cost = ?? from 75.00 = profit for
>Don Pietenpol.
>
>Guess What, I would feel better giving Barnard the money.
>
>IMHO
>
>Gordon
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Ken Beanlands <kbeanlan(at)spots.ab.ca>
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 3:09 PM
>Subject: Re: Plans lack details
>
>
>> Sonex, the new, all metal, light plane charges $500 USD for a set of
>> plans. The Average rate for a set of plans, most not more detailed than
>> the Piet, is around the $150-$200 USD range. Paying only $75 for a set of
>> plans should be considered a bargain. I doubt if they are making much if
>> any money at that price.
>>
>> Ken
>>
>> On Wed, 29 Sep 1999, Gordon Brimhall wrote:
>>
>> > You would think after 70 years the family would at least fix the errors
>in
>> > the plans. This has come up before on this list. 1932 Flying and
Gliding
>> > manual has the same information and I think it tells of plans changes.
>But
>> > for 75.00 you should get a complete set without errors.
>> >
>> > IMHO
>> >
>> > Gordon
>> > IHA#02
>> > http://public.surfree.com/arkiesair/index.htm
>> > WebMaster for IHA
>> >
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: Burroughs <glenn(at)sysweb.com>
>> > To: Pietenpol Discussion
>> > Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 11:02 AM
>> > Subject: Plans lack details
>> >
>> >
>> > > Hello,
>> > >
>> > > The plans that my friend is using (purchased from Don Pietenpol) for
>the
>> > > Pietenpol Aircamper really lack details. Just about every description
>is
>> > > either confusing or has details missing. Is there another set of
plans
>> > > available that are more detailed?
>> > >
>> > > Thanks, Glenn
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>> Ken Beanlands B.Eng (Aerospace)
>> Calgary, Alberta, Canada
>> Christavia MK 1 C-GREN
>> <http://www.spots.ab.ca/~kbeanlan>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | BARNSTMR(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Fw: questions |
In a message dated 9/29/99 7:44:27 PM Central Daylight Time,
frgtdog(at)worldnet.att.net writes:
<< 3. Has anyone used Douglas fir for the spars and ribs? I know it has more
weight than spruce but it is available locally. >>
Gary........
Douglas Fir is certainly acceptable...but in my opinion it is stronger and
heavier than is necessary for capstrips. Awhile back on this email group
there was a lot of discussion about rib capstrip materials. At the time I
was choosing my capstrip material and decided to use red cedar, based on the
following logic.
1. Someone had posted some test results they had conducted on a rib with red
cedar and I was impressed ....not as strong as spruce....but more than 75% as
strong. Weight is roughly the same as spruce. I will look for the old
post...or perhaps the author (I don't remember who) may see this and revive
the information for you.
2. I have always had a feeling (no data to back me up) that the 1/2 X 1/4
cross section shown on the plans was slight overkill on the capstrip size. I
feel this way because I have seen larger/faster type certified airplanes that
have much smaller cross section on capstrips (typically around 1/4X1/4). So
I figured a little less strength wouldn't be missed....except maybe the
margin of safety is dropped from 3.0 to 2.0 (an out right guess). Besides,
the main function of the capstrip is to form the airfoil shape of the
wing....not primary structure.
3. Red Cedar was readily available at the local lumber yard. I sorted
through the 2X4X12' bin for over an hour and picked out several
knottless/straight grained boards.
4. The price was right....I bought more than twice what I needed for the
ribs at a lumber yard that was going out of business....I got it for 65%
0ff...paid less than $50 for nine 2X4X12' boards. I have ripped out twice
what I need into the 1/2X1/4 strips. That way I can do my quality control
exercize to weed out the bad sticks that seem to have defects. I take each
stick and inspect it for wavy or slanted grain...if it looks good, I play
with it a little flexing it listening for crackling sounds or sometimes
they'll just snap. I use the rejected sticks for rib bracing if they are not
too bad.
5. I had built one rib out of douglas Fir and compared its weight to a red
cedar rib a friend had built....the red cedar one was more than 5 ounces
lighter (Douglas Fir = 12.7 oz, red cedar = 7.6 oz).
6. Red Cedar makes the whole shop and living room smell womderful!
I think people tend to use what they can afford or get their hands on. Seems
like there are several different woods that people have used. Even the
CAA/FAA has allowed construction from many different types of wood. Of
course... Spruce is called out on the Piet plans and is the wood of choice by
many manufacturers of type certified airplanes. The FAA guidance materials
say Douglas fir is an acceptable repair alternative to spruce but notes the
weight difference as a consideration. Some airplanes have been certified
with other materials such as Cedar and poplar...and even pine in some cases.
A local oldtimer here in Wichita who used to build Great Lakes airplanes
says that airplane was certified with red cedar ribs. One type certified
airplane I know of (1929 Parks P2A) was rebuilt by a friend of mine. He told
me that the original ribs and some tail components were made of wooden crate
material that still had the East Saint Louis Illinois address stamping still
visible on them.
Anyway....get some opinions from people and sources you can rely on and use
your best judgement. Best Wishes
Terry B
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | walter evans <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
well said
walt
-----Original Message-----
From: Replicraft(at)aol.com <Replicraft(at)aol.com>
Date: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 9:28 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Plans lack details
>I have been in contact with Paul Poberezny the past few weeks, concerning
the
>"new" Sport Aviation Association, and the (questionable) direction the EAA
>has taken the past ten years or so. He really is a fine individual to speak
>with.
>
>Moments ago I finished a letter to him where I remarked about the people I
>have met through Replicraft Aviation and the EAA , and that there wasn't
ONE
>I haven't liked or befriended...Then I read Mr. Brimhalls rather harsh
>comments about the Pietenpol plans and more directly, the Pietenpol family.
I
>may need to amend my letter to Paul.
>
>Half the fun of building a Piet IS that you need to do more than just read
>the plans and knock out parts. There is something really magical about
>building an aircraft from plans that are older than you are...half the fun,
>is in finding those lost dimensions, and the builders you meet along the
way.
>If the plans were so complete and detailed, we wouldn't need ...each other
>and this group.
>
>Personally, I rather like it here.
>
>Steve
>Replicraft Aviation
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
That was rather a nice SLAM Steve.
Please remove my name from your mailing list.
I'll throw away the order forms and catalog I have from your company.
I belong to SAA also and EAA and IHA
I can email Paul also.
Just too bad I can't voice my opinion about a set of plans when it is ok to
talk about water witching and other such things on this.
Not like I don't like Don Pietenpol, I just think the plans could be
improved after 70 yrs, GEE is that a bad thing or is get Gordon Day:-)))
Do your flaming off list, So the good folks don't have to read your junk.
Gordon
IHA#02
SAA#952
EAA#0595215
WebMaster IHA
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | <Replicraft(at)aol.com> |
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 6:25 PM
Subject: | Plans lack details |
> I have been in contact with Paul Poberezny the past few weeks, concerning
the
> "new" Sport Aviation Association, and the (questionable) direction the EAA
> has taken the past ten years or so. He really is a fine individual to
speak
> with.
>
> Moments ago I finished a letter to him where I remarked about the people I
> have met through Replicraft Aviation and the EAA , and that there wasn't
ONE
> I haven't liked or befriended...Then I read Mr. Brimhalls rather harsh
> comments about the Pietenpol plans and more directly, the Pietenpol
family. I
> may need to amend my letter to Paul.
>
> Half the fun of building a Piet IS that you need to do more than just read
> the plans and knock out parts. There is something really magical about
> building an aircraft from plans that are older than you are...half the
fun,
> is in finding those lost dimensions, and the builders you meet along the
way.
> If the plans were so complete and detailed, we wouldn't need ...each other
> and this group.
>
> Personally, I rather like it here.
>
> Steve
> Replicraft Aviation
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | BARNSTMR(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
In a message dated 9/29/99 8:29:26 PM Central Daylight Time,
Replicraft(at)aol.com writes:
<< Half the fun of building a Piet IS that you need to do more than just
read
the plans and knock out parts. There is something really magical about
building an aircraft from plans that are older than you are...half the fun,
is in finding those lost dimensions, and the builders you meet along the
way.
If the plans were so complete and detailed, we wouldn't need ...each other
and this group. >>
AMEN STEVE....
And the other half is sharing plane rides, sharing flying stories, and
developing friendships with all of those people who also have an appreciation
for this unique little machine......Terry B
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | BARNSTMR(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Fw: questions(2) |
Oh...and as for the 2nd part of your question.....Douglas Fir is what I plan
to use for my spars.... In keeping with the way several other Piet builders
have done, I am dropping the thickness from 1 inch routed spruce to 3/4 inch
solid Douglas Fir....I still use the same wing hardware dimensions but use
plywood doublers to fill out to 1 inch in the attach fitting areas. This
also requires use of 1/8th inch shims at each rib (if you are using upright
braces next to the spars)......Terry B
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | oil can <oilcanbob(at)hotmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: Dowsing & Waterwitching? |
It seems to me that a little something different hurts nothing. As for those
who have a problem...look at the header, if it doesn't appeal to an
interest, pass it by.
I saw a UFO the other day. Damdest thing. It was a silver glowing orb.
Slowly moving away in the distance. I wasked to my car, as it was fading
from eyesite, and got field glasses. There was not just a silver glowing
orb, but several silver glowing orbs. And red ones. And the red and silver
came together and went apart. After a 1/2 hour I got bored and drove off.
No Joke.
ocb
>From: Warren Shoun <wbnb(at)earthlink.net>
>Reply-To: Pietenpol Discussion
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Subject: Dowsing & Waterwitching?
>Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 16:10:50 -0700
>
> Geez guys....I unsubscribed for awhile 'cause a couple of fella's
>seemed to think we would all be enthralled with any and everything
>EXCEPT Piet building....now I come back to check and we are into dowsing
>& waterwitching?
> Guess I better wander back to the hanger and to Richard's page and
>see if I can find someone who is actually building a Piet.
>Cheers and good luck finding your water....I guess.
>Warren
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | BARNSTMR(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Dowsing & Waterwitching? |
In a message dated 9/29/99 9:41:21 PM Central Daylight Time,
oilcanbob(at)hotmail.com writes:
<<
I saw a UFO the other day. Damdest thing. It was a silver glowing orb.
Slowly moving away in the distance. >>
Perhaps it was Bernie buzzing the pearly gates in his Piet. The glow must
have been his beaming smile... I hear that in heaven...you never run low on
gas and always have a tailwind....Terry B
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: IHA and Piet People |
Just a note, we have quite a few of the good people from this and other list
as new members of our IHA Organization. What started as a comment has turned
into something all IHA members can be proud of, we are moving and shaking
now with over 250 registered members and Howard still has a stack of new
applications 50 or so downloaded from out IHA web site I created.
Yes even I put alot of time back into the world of homebuilding, Maybe that
is why I don't have a rib completed for my real Piet Steve.
I'll shake off the comments made here tonite as I have more important things
to do than slam my fellow airplane builders.
I will pass on your post to Paul as soon as I get caught up with programming
tonite, looks like another after midnite session for me.
We should pass up SAA in a few weeks in membership, when people work
together you can do so much.
I don't think Replacraft is listed on our Links Page, I will be sure to
check as we want only the best companys listed.
I"m sorry if I sounded like I didn't like the Pietenpol Family. Bernard is
Great.
Gordon
IHA#02 Over 250 members in 6 days.
http://public.surfree.com/arkiesair/index.htm IHA HOME PAGE
SAA#952
EAA#0595215
RW1 Piet
Mohawk MK IV
Super Quickie
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 7:08 PM
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
> That was rather a nice SLAM Steve.
>
> Please remove my name from your mailing list.
> I'll throw away the order forms and catalog I have from your company.
>
> I belong to SAA also and EAA and IHA
>
> I can email Paul also.
>
> Just too bad I can't voice my opinion about a set of plans when it is ok
to
> talk about water witching and other such things on this.
>
> Not like I don't like Don Pietenpol, I just think the plans could be
> improved after 70 yrs, GEE is that a bad thing or is get Gordon Day:-)))
>
> Do your flaming off list, So the good folks don't have to read your junk.
>
> Gordon
> IHA#02
> SAA#952
> EAA#0595215
> WebMaster IHA
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <Replicraft(at)aol.com>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 6:25 PM
> Subject: Plans lack details
>
>
> > I have been in contact with Paul Poberezny the past few weeks,
concerning
> the
> > "new" Sport Aviation Association, and the (questionable) direction the
EAA
> > has taken the past ten years or so. He really is a fine individual to
> speak
> > with.
> >
> > Moments ago I finished a letter to him where I remarked about the people
I
> > have met through Replicraft Aviation and the EAA , and that there wasn't
> ONE
> > I haven't liked or befriended...Then I read Mr. Brimhalls rather harsh
> > comments about the Pietenpol plans and more directly, the Pietenpol
> family. I
> > may need to amend my letter to Paul.
> >
> > Half the fun of building a Piet IS that you need to do more than just
read
> > the plans and knock out parts. There is something really magical about
> > building an aircraft from plans that are older than you are...half the
> fun,
> > is in finding those lost dimensions, and the builders you meet along the
> way.
> > If the plans were so complete and detailed, we wouldn't need ...each
other
> > and this group.
> >
> > Personally, I rather like it here.
> >
> > Steve
> > Replicraft Aviation
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | fishin <fishin(at)wwa.com> |
Subject: | Re: uncalled for comments |
DonanClara(at)aol.com wrote:
> Mike, I think most of us share your feelings. Your input is far too valuable.
> Shake it off and come back to the group!!
> Don H.
hang in there Mike, you're not alone in your feelings, besides Mr Sam is one of
the group icons.
regards
JoeC
Zion, Illinois
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: Fw: questions(2) |
Im not speaking from experience, butfrom different
discussions I have read in this group. keeping the
weight off is a very important,widely excepted, truth.
and by using spruce versus douglass fir is one way of
keeping weight off. I should be recieving my spruce
anyday from mccormick lumber,madison wi. all the
spruce I need for the piet was $389.00. At that price,
would you be saving any more money buying douglass
fir?
--- BARNSTMR(at)aol.com wrote:
> Oh...and as for the 2nd part of your
> question.....Douglas Fir is what I plan
> to use for my spars.... In keeping with the way
> several other Piet builders
> have done, I am dropping the thickness from 1 inch
> routed spruce to 3/4 inch
> solid Douglas Fir....I still use the same wing
> hardware dimensions but use
> plywood doublers to fill out to 1 inch in the attach
> fitting areas. This
> also requires use of 1/8th inch shims at each rib
> (if you are using upright
> braces next to the spars)......Terry B
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ted Brousseau <nfn00979(at)naples.net> |
I have a rudder trim tab, but it is manually done by bending while on the
ground.
Ted B
Naples, FL
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | <mbell1(at)columbiaenergygroup.com> |
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 1999 8:17 AM
> Does this seem to be the only trim that is necessary for a Piet? Rudder
and
> ailerons don't need in flight adjustment for hands off?
>
> Mike Bell
> Columbia, SC
>
>
> Maiser(at)adena.byu.edu on 09/27/99 09:44:27 PM
> Please respond to piet(at)byu.edu @ INTERNET
>
>
> To: piet(at)byu.edu @ INTERNET
> cc:
>
> Subject: Re: CG and Trim
>
> I took a look at the trim tab. It is simply a "flap" about 14" wide and
4"
> deep that is hinged at the bottom with a piano hinge. It is located at
the
> inner rear of the right elevator (as though it were just a piece cut out
of
> the elevator). It has a solid wire inside a flexible cable that runs to
the
> cockpit and is hooked to a lever. Move the lever and the trim tab goes up
> or down. The lever has a friction lock that is simply a large nut that
you
> tighten to make sure it stays where you want.
>
> I hope this helps.
>
> Ted
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <vistin(at)juno.com>
> > To:
> > Sent: Saturday, September 25, 1999 1:18 PM
> > Subject: Re: CG and Trim
> >
> >
> > > I would like some kind of drawing or plans on your trim tab please!
> > >
> > > Steve
> > >
> > > writes:
> > > > Mike,
> > > >
> > > > One of the things that my PartPiet has is a trim tab. Around the
> > > > patch I
> > > > never use it. But, when on a long (anything over 10 miles...) cross
> > > > country
> > > > it is essential when you want to TRY to refold that chart, take a
> > > > picture,
> > > > pick your nose, etc.
> > > >
> > > > Ted B
> > > > Naples, FL/GN-1
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: <mbell1(at)columbiaenergygroup.com>
> > > > To: Pietenpol Discussion
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 1999 9:28 AM
> > > > Subject: Re: CG and Trim
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Your mention of "holding the stick forward" reminds me of a
> > > > question that
> > > > I was
> > > > > going to ask. There doesn't seem to be any mention anywhere of
> > > > trim tabs
> > > > > other than a fixed one on the rudder of some Piets. Is this
> > > > because
> > > > this is
> > > > > not a cross country airplane? ( That can obviously be discounted
> > > > by the
> > > > folks
> > > > > who flew Piets ot Oshkosh and Brodhead this year.)
> > > > >
> > > > > Mike Bell
> > > > > Columbia, SC
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Maiser(at)adena.byu.edu on 09/22/99 08:54:52 AM
> > > > > Please respond to piet(at)byu.edu @ INTERNET
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > To: piet(at)byu.edu @ INTERNET
> > > > > cc:
> > > > >
> > > > > Subject: Re: CG
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Mike C wrote;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > <<-Put in a nose take of 17 gals. >>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hey Mike, any difference when only 5 gal remain.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Move the wing?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Mike B.-- You bet there is. She gets tail heavy.
> > > > > Nothing dangerous as my most aft CG with 3 gals.
> > > > > fuel remaining still falls at 19.75" aft of the LE of the
> > > > > wing. It's just annoying to hold forward stick.
> > > > > Fortunately with the kind of flying I do I never get that
> > > > > low on fuel though.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mike C.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > ---
> > > > ----
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Mike C wrote;
> > > > >
> > > > > -Put in a nose take of 17 gals.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hey Mike, any difference when only 5 gal remain.
> > > > >
> > > > > Move the wing?
> > > > >
> > > > > Mike B.-- You bet there is. She gets tail
> > > > heavy.
> > > > > Nothing dangerous as my most aft CG with 3 gals.
> > > > > fuel remaining still falls at 19.75 aft of the LE of the
> > > > > wing. It's just annoying to hold forward stick.
> > > > > Fortunately with the kind of flying I do I never get that
> > > > > low on fuel though.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mike C.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Piet with 90 Hp Franklin for sale |
Hello all! I had tried to post this on Grant's site but I guess he is
fading from the scene...
After much thought I am selling my Pietenpol, N2410. 90 Hp Franklin, built
in 1967, recovered about 6 years ago. Cub type landing gear with 8.00 x 4
tires. This plane was my dad's and we did a lot of flying together in it as
I was growing up. Lot's of memories... But he can't fly anymore because of
medical problems and I have too many other things going. Located in Oregon.
Price $12,500. Serious inquiries only please.
Jim Skinner
812-385-4588
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | David Swagler <dswagler(at)yahoo.com> |
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
> Just too bad I can't voice my opinion about a set of
> plans when it is ok to
> talk about water witching and other such things on
> this.
Grow up.
What makes you think Don has the ability to update the
plans? Just because his dad was a talented aircraft
designer doesn't mean Don is. Nothing against Don.
I, for one, appreciate the fact that he continues his
father's legacy by making the plans available to those
of us with the desire to build a little slice of
aviation history.
As far as the water witching posts are concerned, they
have all been identified by subject. A simple matter
to delete them unread.
My two cents.
Dave
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
Gents;
I have several sets of plans from planes of that era (Muller seaplane,
Epps Biplane, &on & on) They ALL have the same type of "boo-boos" that the
Piet planes have. The missing details are the "standard" things that are a
given such as fabric covering down to the wood trim pieces used to give the
fabric a nicer appearence (over the fittings). In those days it was just
assumed you knew "basics" that applied to all planes. Read the others
fella's comments here and punt like the rest of us did. It is all part of
the experience! It will come together!
Earl Myers
-----Original Message-----
From: John McNarry <jmcnarry(at)techplus.com>
Date: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 7:39 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans lack details
>As other have said, Study the plans, Read the Flying and Gliding manual
>reprints from EAA. Think about it, Ask questions. Lots of good aircraft
have
>been built from these plans before and if others have done it you can too.
>
>Mr Sam, don't get too upset I've watched this service go from excellent to
>annoying and back again. If we stay on the topic it is a great forum. Your
>experience is an asset.
>
>John McNarry
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Burroughs <glenn(at)sysweb.com>
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Date: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 12:05 PM
>Subject: Plans lack details
>
>
>>Hello,
>>
>>The plans that my friend is using (purchased from Don Pietenpol) for the
>>Pietenpol Aircamper really lack details. Just about every description is
>>either confusing or has details missing. Is there another set of plans
>>available that are more detailed?
>>
>>Thanks, Glenn
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
I was going to buy a set of plans from Don last year and I sent him an
inquery and never did rec an answer. So I went and bought the 1932 Flying
and Gliding Manual that is just as good, just hard to read the fine print.
I'm 57 and 245 lbs, I really don't want to grow anymore or it will be hard
to ride my Harley on our long distance tours each year.
So how old are you as you seem to wantb to talk about age.?
Actually I wanted this crap to end but I will answer every message directed
at me. Only Polite thing to do.
Gordon
IHA#02
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | David Swagler <dswagler(at)yahoo.com> |
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 9:23 PM
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
> > Just too bad I can't voice my opinion about a set of
> > plans when it is ok to
> > talk about water witching and other such things on
> > this.
>
> Grow up.
>
> What makes you think Don has the ability to update the
> plans? Just because his dad was a talented aircraft
> designer doesn't mean Don is. Nothing against Don.
> I, for one, appreciate the fact that he continues his
> father's legacy by making the plans available to those
> of us with the desire to build a little slice of
> aviation history.
>
> As far as the water witching posts are concerned, they
> have all been identified by subject. A simple matter
> to delete them unread.
>
> My two cents.
>
> Dave
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Vernon Hoppes <nc8607k(at)hotmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
Group, I have had the good luck to see plans for a number
of homebuilt aircraft, and no matter who is the designer
the plans will always leave somthing out or not be as
clear as we all would like and I feel this is what most
of the replys have led to not to say that things could
be better but this gives us the reason to have groups
like this and the area to make the changes we like to
make the aircraft our own
TKS Vern...
>From: David Swagler <dswagler(at)yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: Pietenpol Discussion
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Subject: Re: Plans lack details
>Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 21:23:03 -0700 (PDT)
>
> > Just too bad I can't voice my opinion about a set of
> > plans when it is ok to
> > talk about water witching and other such things on
> > this.
>
>Grow up.
>
>What makes you think Don has the ability to update the
>plans? Just because his dad was a talented aircraft
>designer doesn't mean Don is. Nothing against Don.
>I, for one, appreciate the fact that he continues his
>father's legacy by making the plans available to those
>of us with the desire to build a little slice of
>aviation history.
>
>As far as the water witching posts are concerned, they
>have all been identified by subject. A simple matter
>to delete them unread.
>
>My two cents.
>
>Dave
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
Hey, Piet Guys, (and Gals),
This note has generated a lot of heat, a lot of smoke, but not much light.
B.P., in the F&G Manual addresses this issue, himself, saying "The question
of where to draw the line at the exposition of directions for the building of
a ship like this is difficult to settle.......there are a few who, after
having been told how to hold a hammer in the building of a ship, would ask
you how many swipes to clout the nails on the head."
This group gives us all access to an amazing amount of experience and
expertise to help solve any difficulties which might arise. I've been
studying the drawings I bought from B.P. in 1970 for many years, and still
find some areas which are not crystal clear. In looking at numerous
completed Piets, I have found that there are many possible interpretations of
the details, and isn't this what makes our planes special? By law, every
Cessna 150 has to be virtually identical in most details. Where is the fun
in that? (BTW, that was not intended as a slam on C-150's or those who
own/fly them).
Instead of getting prickly with one another, let's focus on the real issue,
which should be deriving the most enjoyment possible from our common interest.
Don Cooley
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Leo Ponton <leo(at)deadly.demon.co.uk> |
> Thinking about dowsing and ... Pietenpols.
A guy I used to work with showed me how to do it with wire coathangers bent
into L-shapes and used as described. He had dug his own well (for drinking
water) and also created a spring fed lake. It worked for him and it worked
for me.
I've worked for a couple of water companies, and they use dowsers to find
lost pipes (distibution mains that were laid in open country 20 years ago,
records lost or inaccurate and the original engineer dead). A water
company using dowsing gives lends some credibility.
As for being off-subject, some of the on-subject exchanges could have been
terminated in their infancy like the 'I just got back from Oshkosh' epic -
I don't give a damn -I live about nine thousand miles away, and it offered
me no information on Piet building, and arguably no information about Piet
flying.
While we're at it, pay attention to the subject line chaps...at random I
just selected a mail with the subject 'Re: Hand Propping' and the body is
about wire feed and stick welding. This may well be useful information,
but how will I find it when I'm browsing through the subjects? As for mail
with blank subject.....
But back to the dowsing, Walt. You mentioned dowsing AND pietenpols - did
you have a connection in mind?
Leo
Nottinghamshire, UK
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Jack Phillips (EUS)" <EUSJCPH(at)am1.ericsson.se> |
Subject: | RE: Plans lack details |
Amen to that. If you want to build something that requires no thought or creativity,
there's a world of kitplanes out there. One of the neat things about Pietenpols
is that no two of them are exactly alike - even the ones built by BHP.
I kind of enjoy figuring out how to do things that are incompletely or incorrectly
shown on the plans.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Replicraft(at)aol.com [SMTP:Replicraft(at)aol.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 9:26 PM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Plans lack details
>
> I have been in contact with Paul Poberezny the past few weeks, concerning the
> "new" Sport Aviation Association, and the (questionable) direction the EAA
> has taken the past ten years or so. He really is a fine individual to speak
> with.
>
> Moments ago I finished a letter to him where I remarked about the people I
> have met through Replicraft Aviation and the EAA , and that there wasn't ONE
> I haven't liked or befriended...Then I read Mr. Brimhalls rather harsh
> comments about the Pietenpol plans and more directly, the Pietenpol family. I
> may need to amend my letter to Paul.
>
> Half the fun of building a Piet IS that you need to do more than just read
> the plans and knock out parts. There is something really magical about
> building an aircraft from plans that are older than you are...half the fun,
> is in finding those lost dimensions, and the builders you meet along the way.
> If the plans were so complete and detailed, we wouldn't need ...each other
> and this group.
>
> Personally, I rather like it here.
>
> Steve
> Replicraft Aviation
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Burroughs <glenn(at)sysweb.com> |
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details - WOW! |
Hello All,
Wow! When I started up my computer this morning I had 58 emails, mostly from
this discussion group, and mostly concerning my question about the
availability of a better set of plans!
Many thanks to those that responded to my question and offered some very
good suggestions.
My question was submitted for a non-computer friend who is building the Air
Camper. He is 75 years old (plus) and tells me that "I don't have much time
to waste, and I want to get this plane in the air". He has finished the 1928
Ford engine (it sounds good!!), and has started building the tail section.
But he really gets frustrated when dimensions are missing and he has to
decide where parts should be positioned, or the plans show two different
ways to accomplish something. He points out that he is not an airplane
designer, and is very concerned about making design decisions, then flying
the plane. He suggested that there might be additional plans that could
clarify some of the problems that he was running into. So I posed the
question to the group.
In any case, my question has been answered.... study the plans, buy the
Flying and Glider Manual, and most importantly, take advantage of the
experience of this group.
Again, thanks for the many helpful responses.
Glenn
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
Guys- Ok, I know it's only October, but are any of you
with Piets/GN-1's thinking about attending this Florida
Fly-In next April, 2000 ?? We are only 6 months away
from that event and I'm seriously considering making the
trip.
PS- I would also welcome any comments on flying N-S
from Ohio to Florida. TED B. ?? Mountains and me don't
have any experience yet.
Thanks !
Mike C.
Clev. Oh
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | mbell1(at)columbiaenergygroup.com |
Subject: | Re: landing lights |
That's a landing light that is probably within my budget. Since you have an
open cockpit airplane, just mount it where you, or your passenger can reach
it. Also, get some windproof matches.
Mike Bell
Columbia, SC
Could I also make a suggestion about signing your responses to this list.
Using a full name would be helpful. There are just too darned many Mikes.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "David B. Schober" <dschober(at)mail.fscwv.edu> |
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
When I made copies of the Parrakeet drawings a few months ago, it cost $125.00
at the local copy shop. The Parrakeet plans are only a few pages more than the
Piet so I doubt Mr. Pietenpol is making much of a profit!
Gordon Brimhall wrote:
> Still does not matter.
>
> After 70 years you would think the plans would be first rate, You need to
> get additional info to built it. I agree this group is the best place for
> info.
>
> But nothing you can say makes it right for Don Pietenpol to sell plans that
> still have mistakes after all these years.
>
> How many pages in the plans,
> What size and how many pages x copy cost = ?? from 75.00 = profit for
> Don Pietenpol.
>
> Guess What, I would feel better giving Barnard the money.
>
> IMHO
>
> Gordon
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Ken Beanlands <kbeanlan(at)spots.ab.ca>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 3:09 PM
> Subject: Re: Plans lack details
>
> > Sonex, the new, all metal, light plane charges $500 USD for a set of
> > plans. The Average rate for a set of plans, most not more detailed than
> > the Piet, is around the $150-$200 USD range. Paying only $75 for a set of
> > plans should be considered a bargain. I doubt if they are making much if
> > any money at that price.
> >
> > Ken
> >
> > On Wed, 29 Sep 1999, Gordon Brimhall wrote:
> >
> > > You would think after 70 years the family would at least fix the errors
> in
> > > the plans. This has come up before on this list. 1932 Flying and Gliding
> > > manual has the same information and I think it tells of plans changes.
> But
> > > for 75.00 you should get a complete set without errors.
> > >
> > > IMHO
> > >
> > > Gordon
> > > IHA#02
> > > http://public.surfree.com/arkiesair/index.htm
> > > WebMaster for IHA
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Burroughs <glenn(at)sysweb.com>
> > > To: Pietenpol Discussion
> > > Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 11:02 AM
> > > Subject: Plans lack details
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > The plans that my friend is using (purchased from Don Pietenpol) for
> the
> > > > Pietenpol Aircamper really lack details. Just about every description
> is
> > > > either confusing or has details missing. Is there another set of plans
> > > > available that are more detailed?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks, Glenn
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > Ken Beanlands B.Eng (Aerospace)
> > Calgary, Alberta, Canada
> > Christavia MK 1 C-GREN
> > <http://www.spots.ab.ca/~kbeanlan>
> >
> >
> >
--
David B.Schober, CPE
Instructor, Aviation Maintenance
Fairmont State College
National Aerospace Education Center
1050 East Benedum Industrial Drive
Bridgeport, WV 26330-9503
(304) 842-8300
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | TXTdragger(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
old construction saying "The camel is a horse that was designed by a
commitee"
so who is going to do this "clarification" of plans" ?????????
John D (IHA #10)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | mbell1(at)columbiaenergygroup.com |
Subject: | Re: BPA Newsletter |
Will someone send me Grant's EMail address? I was going to drop him a note
about taking over the newsletter and can't seem to find hisaddress.
Thanks,
Mike Bell
Columbia, SC
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | TXTdragger(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
Another thought:
Thank God it's 1999 & we have this group, it must have been tuff when you had
no one this handy to ask. You got it.......use it.
John (#10)
________________________________________________________________________________
RE mountain flying. Look but don't touch!
Steve Eldredge
IT Services
Brigham Young University
> -----Original Message-----
> Michael D Cuy
> Sent: Thursday, September 30, 1999 6:53 AM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Sun-N-Fun
>
>
> Guys- Ok, I know it's only October, but are any of you
> with Piets/GN-1's thinking about attending this Florida
> Fly-In next April, 2000 ?? We are only 6 months away
> from that event and I'm seriously considering making the
> trip.
>
> PS- I would also welcome any comments on flying N-S
> from Ohio to Florida. TED B. ?? Mountains and me don't
> have any experience yet.
>
> Thanks !
>
> Mike C.
> Clev. Oh
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Mike Cunningham <mikec(at)microlandusa.com> |
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
Hi David,
I saw your mention of the Parakeet plans and wanted to drop you a note. I am
pretty sure you are talking about the Rose Parakeet. I saw my first one a
year or so ago at the EAA fly in in Abilene. Fell in love with it. My first
plane has to carry 2 people (Hatz) but maybe some day will work on a
Parakeet! I have been meaning to write
EAA or try to find out otherwise if plans are available for the Parakeet.
Evidently they are hard to come by since you had to make copies. Can you
fill me in a little further on the subject?
Thanks
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: David B. Schober <dschober(at)mail.fscwv.edu>
Date: Thursday, September 30, 1999 8:32 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans lack details
>When I made copies of the Parrakeet drawings a few months ago, it cost
$125.00
>at the local copy shop. The Parrakeet plans are only a few pages more than
the
>Piet so I doubt Mr. Pietenpol is making much of a profit!
>
>Gordon Brimhall wrote:
>
>> Still does not matter.
>>
>> After 70 years you would think the plans would be first rate, You need to
>> get additional info to built it. I agree this group is the best place for
>> info.
>>
>> But nothing you can say makes it right for Don Pietenpol to sell plans
that
>> still have mistakes after all these years.
>>
>> How many pages in the plans,
>> What size and how many pages x copy cost = ?? from 75.00 = profit for
>> Don Pietenpol.
>>
>> Guess What, I would feel better giving Barnard the money.
>>
>> IMHO
>>
>> Gordon
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Ken Beanlands <kbeanlan(at)spots.ab.ca>
>> To: Pietenpol Discussion
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 3:09 PM
>> Subject: Re: Plans lack details
>>
>> > Sonex, the new, all metal, light plane charges $500 USD for a set of
>> > plans. The Average rate for a set of plans, most not more detailed than
>> > the Piet, is around the $150-$200 USD range. Paying only $75 for a set
of
>> > plans should be considered a bargain. I doubt if they are making much
if
>> > any money at that price.
>> >
>> > Ken
>> >
>> > On Wed, 29 Sep 1999, Gordon Brimhall wrote:
>> >
>> > > You would think after 70 years the family would at least fix the
errors
>> in
>> > > the plans. This has come up before on this list. 1932 Flying and
Gliding
>> > > manual has the same information and I think it tells of plans
changes.
>> But
>> > > for 75.00 you should get a complete set without errors.
>> > >
>> > > IMHO
>> > >
>> > > Gordon
>> > > IHA#02
>> > > http://public.surfree.com/arkiesair/index.htm
>> > > WebMaster for IHA
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > ----- Original Message -----
>> > > From: Burroughs <glenn(at)sysweb.com>
>> > > To: Pietenpol Discussion
>> > > Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 11:02 AM
>> > > Subject: Plans lack details
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > > Hello,
>> > > >
>> > > > The plans that my friend is using (purchased from Don Pietenpol)
for
>> the
>> > > > Pietenpol Aircamper really lack details. Just about every
description
>> is
>> > > > either confusing or has details missing. Is there another set of
plans
>> > > > available that are more detailed?
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks, Glenn
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> > Ken Beanlands B.Eng (Aerospace)
>> > Calgary, Alberta, Canada
>> > Christavia MK 1 C-GREN
>> > <http://www.spots.ab.ca/~kbeanlan>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>
>
>--
>
**
>David B.Schober, CPE
>Instructor, Aviation Maintenance
>Fairmont State College
>National Aerospace Education Center
>1050 East Benedum Industrial Drive
>Bridgeport, WV 26330-9503
>(304) 842-8300
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Mike Cunningham <mikec(at)microlandusa.com> |
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
Ooops, must have hit the wrong button, meant to send that direct to David.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Cunningham <mikec(at)microlandusa.com>
Date: Thursday, September 30, 1999 10:02 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans lack details
>Hi David,
>I saw your mention of the Parakeet plans and wanted to drop you a note. I
am
>pretty sure you are talking about the Rose Parakeet. I saw my first one a
>year or so ago at the EAA fly in in Abilene. Fell in love with it. My
first
>plane has to carry 2 people (Hatz) but maybe some day will work on a
>Parakeet! I have been meaning to write
>EAA or try to find out otherwise if plans are available for the Parakeet.
>Evidently they are hard to come by since you had to make copies. Can you
>fill me in a little further on the subject?
>
>Thanks
>Mike
>-----Original Message-----
>From: David B. Schober <dschober(at)mail.fscwv.edu>
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Date: Thursday, September 30, 1999 8:32 AM
>Subject: Re: Plans lack details
>
>
>>When I made copies of the Parrakeet drawings a few months ago, it cost
>$125.00
>>at the local copy shop. The Parrakeet plans are only a few pages more than
>the
>>Piet so I doubt Mr. Pietenpol is making much of a profit!
>>
>>Gordon Brimhall wrote:
>>
>>> Still does not matter.
>>>
>>> After 70 years you would think the plans would be first rate, You need
to
>>> get additional info to built it. I agree this group is the best place
for
>>> info.
>>>
>>> But nothing you can say makes it right for Don Pietenpol to sell plans
>that
>>> still have mistakes after all these years.
>>>
>>> How many pages in the plans,
>>> What size and how many pages x copy cost = ?? from 75.00 = profit
for
>>> Don Pietenpol.
>>>
>>> Guess What, I would feel better giving Barnard the money.
>>>
>>> IMHO
>>>
>>> Gordon
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: Ken Beanlands <kbeanlan(at)spots.ab.ca>
>>> To: Pietenpol Discussion
>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 3:09 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Plans lack details
>>>
>>> > Sonex, the new, all metal, light plane charges $500 USD for a set of
>>> > plans. The Average rate for a set of plans, most not more detailed
than
>>> > the Piet, is around the $150-$200 USD range. Paying only $75 for a set
>of
>>> > plans should be considered a bargain. I doubt if they are making much
>if
>>> > any money at that price.
>>> >
>>> > Ken
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, 29 Sep 1999, Gordon Brimhall wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > You would think after 70 years the family would at least fix the
>errors
>>> in
>>> > > the plans. This has come up before on this list. 1932 Flying and
>Gliding
>>> > > manual has the same information and I think it tells of plans
>changes.
>>> But
>>> > > for 75.00 you should get a complete set without errors.
>>> > >
>>> > > IMHO
>>> > >
>>> > > Gordon
>>> > > IHA#02
>>> > > http://public.surfree.com/arkiesair/index.htm
>>> > > WebMaster for IHA
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > ----- Original Message -----
>>> > > From: Burroughs <glenn(at)sysweb.com>
>>> > > To: Pietenpol Discussion
>>> > > Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 11:02 AM
>>> > > Subject: Plans lack details
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > > Hello,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > The plans that my friend is using (purchased from Don Pietenpol)
>for
>>> the
>>> > > > Pietenpol Aircamper really lack details. Just about every
>description
>>> is
>>> > > > either confusing or has details missing. Is there another set of
>plans
>>> > > > available that are more detailed?
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Thanks, Glenn
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> > Ken Beanlands B.Eng (Aerospace)
>>> > Calgary, Alberta, Canada
>>> > Christavia MK 1 C-GREN
>>> > <http://www.spots.ab.ca/~kbeanlan>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>
*
>**
>>David B.Schober, CPE
>>Instructor, Aviation Maintenance
>>Fairmont State College
>>National Aerospace Education Center
>>1050 East Benedum Industrial Drive
>>Bridgeport, WV 26330-9503
>>(304) 842-8300
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | LaurenMWilliams(at)webtv.net (Lauren Williams) |
Subject: | Re: Fw: questions |
his question was about spars
mailsorter-102-3.iap.bryant.webtv.net (8.8.8-wtv-d/ms.dwm.v7+dul2)
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 21:36:47 -0400 (EDT)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | BARNSTMR(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Fw: questions |
Mercury MTS v1.44 (NDS)) (via Mercury MTS v1.44 (NDS)) (via Mercury
MTS v1.44 (NDS)) (via Mercury MTS v1.44 (NDS)) (via Mercury MTS
v1.44 (NDS)) (via Mercury MTS v1.44 (NDS))
In a message dated 9/29/99 7:44:27 PM Central Daylight Time,
frgtdog(at)worldnet.att.net writes:
<< 3. Has anyone used Douglas fir for the spars and ribs? I know it has more
weight than spruce but it is available locally. >>
Gary........
Douglas Fir is certainly acceptable...but in my opinion it is stronger and
heavier than is necessary for capstrips. Awhile back on this email group
there was a lot of discussion about rib capstrip materials. At the time I
was choosing my capstrip material and decided to use red cedar, based on the
following logic.
1. Someone had posted some test results they had conducted on a rib with red
cedar and I was impressed ....not as strong as spruce....but more than 75% as
strong. Weight is roughly the same as spruce. I will look for the old
post...or perhaps the author (I don't remember who) may see this and revive
the information for you.
2. I have always had a feeling (no data to back me up) that the 1/2 X 1/4
cross section shown on the plans was slight overkill on the capstrip size. I
feel this way because I have seen larger/faster type certified airplanes that
have much smaller cross section on capstrips (typically around 1/4X1/4). So
I figured a little less strength wouldn't be missed....except maybe the
margin of safety is dropped from 3.0 to 2.0 (an out right guess). Besides,
the main function of the capstrip is to form the airfoil shape of the
wing....not primary structure.
3. Red Cedar was readily available at the local lumber yard. I sorted
through the 2X4X12' bin for over an hour and picked out several
knottless/straight grained boards.
4. The price was right....I bought more than twice what I needed for the
ribs at a lumber yard that was going out of business....I got it for 65%
0ff...paid less than $50 for nine 2X4X12' boards. I have ripped out twice
what I need into the 1/2X1/4 strips. That way I can do my quality control
exercize to weed out the bad sticks that seem to have defects. I take each
stick and inspect it for wavy or slanted grain...if it looks good, I play
with it a little flexing it listening for crackling sounds or sometimes
they'll just snap. I use the rejected sticks for rib bracing if they are not
too bad.
5. I had built one rib out of douglas Fir and compared its weight to a red
cedar rib a friend had built....the red cedar one was more than 5 ounces
lighter (Douglas Fir = 12.7 oz, red cedar = 7.6 oz).
6. Red Cedar makes the whole shop and living room smell womderful!
I think people tend to use what they can afford or get their hands on. Seems
like there are several different woods that people have used. Even the
CAA/FAA has allowed construction from many different types of wood. Of
course... Spruce is called out on the Piet plans and is the wood of choice by
many manufacturers of type certified airplanes. The FAA guidance materials
say Douglas fir is an acceptable repair alternative to spruce but notes the
weight difference as a consideration. Some airplanes have been certified
with other materials such as Cedar and poplar...and even pine in some cases.
A local oldtimer here in Wichita who used to build Great Lakes airplanes
says that airplane was certified with red cedar ribs. One type certified
airplane I know of (1929 Parks P2A) was rebuilt by a friend of mine. He told
me that the original ribs and some tail components were made of wooden crate
material that still had the East Saint Louis Illinois address stamping still
visible on them.
Anyway....get some opinions from people and sources you can rely on and use
your best judgement. Best Wishes
Terry B
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ken Anderson <kcande19(at)idt.net> |
Quite some time back I had picked up a link to a site from this group
that had mechanical calipers for about $25 for the pair I believe.
Does anyone still have this info
Thanks
Ken Anderson
IHA#59
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | william hutson <wihutson(at)yahoo.com> |
Subject: | Questions for the gang... |
In comparing the "builders manual" from Don P., the
'33 /'34 plans, and the '32 Flying and Glider manual,
I came up with a couple more questions I hope some one
can help me with. First, in the Builders manual from
Don, he states in "note 10" that the wing splice shown
in the plans is in the wrong orientation. He suggests
that the splice be made according to FAA requirements.
Which plans is he refering to, the original in the '32
Flying and Glider manual or the '33/34 plans he sells?
(Both show the spars differently). What is wrong
with the orientation and just what FAA guidance is
being refered to?
Second, In "note 21" he refers to a 2-1/2 inch castor
wheel for use as the tail wheel. He refers to it as a
"fixed position wheel". Now I always thought a fixed
position wheel would be fixed...ie can not turn left
or right. But a castor wheel could turn freely left
or right with either differential breaking or, if
enough wind is on the rudder, with the rudder. Which
is it? And has anyone tried it? In the pictures it
looks very clean and simple but if it is fixed, (can't
swivel), it doesn't seem that it would work all that
well, especially at low speeds with the tail on the
ground.
As always, any input will be greatly appreciated.
Bill Hutson, S.D.
IHA#7
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | mbell1(at)columbiaenergygroup.com |
Subject: | Re: Questions for the gang... |
Glue joints should be oriented so that they are stressed in shear, so for a
spar that would be a vertical scarf joint. The drawing shows front to back
orientation of the scarffed joint which when stressed up and down will bend the
joint and try to peel the two layers apart. A glued joint has lot less
strength this way.
Mike Bell
Columbia, SC
Maiser(at)adena.byu.edu on 09/30/99 12:40:04 AM
Please respond to piet(at)byu.edu @ INTERNET
cc:
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Questions for the gang...
In comparing the "builders manual" from Don P., the
'33 /'34 plans, and the '32 Flying and Glider manual,
I came up with a couple more questions I hope some one
can help me with. First, in the Builders manual from
Don, he states in "note 10" that the wing splice shown
in the plans is in the wrong orientation. He suggests
that the splice be made according to FAA requirements.
Which plans is he refering to, the original in the '32
Flying and Glider manual or the '33/34 plans he sells?
(Both show the spars differently). What is wrong
with the orientation and just what FAA guidance is
being refered to?
Second, In "note 21" he refers to a 2-1/2 inch castor
wheel for use as the tail wheel. He refers to it as a
"fixed position wheel". Now I always thought a fixed
position wheel would be fixed...ie can not turn left
or right. But a castor wheel could turn freely left
or right with either differential breaking or, if
enough wind is on the rudder, with the rudder. Which
is it? And has anyone tried it? In the pictures it
looks very clean and simple but if it is fixed, (can't
swivel), it doesn't seem that it would work all that
well, especially at low speeds with the tail on the
ground.
As always, any input will be greatly appreciated.
Bill Hutson, S.D.
IHA#7
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
I'm glad you hit the wrong button, I wanted to ask the same question..about
the Parakeet. Once again, I've never seen an airplane I didn't want.
BTW, is there a full moon all month? I've never hears so much discontent
from this tight knit group! If we were all face to face at a fly-in, I'm
sure that discussions would stray off Piets to other interests. That's what
makes us individuals. Step away from the conversation for a while, regroup
your thoughts, then come back into the conversation.
We're all getting older, some fatter, hopefully a bit wiser as well. Let's
work together to keep this little gem flying for another 70 years.
Just remember EXPERIMENTAL means quite a lot of thought has to go into the
building, and HOMEBUILT means we ain't all rocket scientists. Buy the plans,
make your decisions based on best available info, detailed or not, then make
that glorious smelling sawdust. With perseverance, you'll wind up with an
item you can bust your buttons with, a rarity of personal achievement in this
"cookie mold" society.
Water dowsing? It's not flying, but I'm not narrow-minded (I hope) enough to
rain on someone else's parade. Details lacking? That's where common sense
and the ability to ask questions comes in. Profit? There's GOTTA be money
in aviation! I PUT AN AWFUL LOT OF IT THERE.
Thoughts of an O.F.
Ed Woerle
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Meadows <gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details |
Ed,
You summed it all up perfectly! Thanks for the nice, balanced perspective!
Gary Meadows
Spring, Texas
IHA #192
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Joe Krzes <jkrzes(at)hotmail.com> |
Subject: | Spars, Spruce, Fir |
I've just about made the decision that I won't purchase 1" spruce stock and
then route half of it away. I too am considering 3/4" stock of spruce or
douglas fir. I think a box spar would even be better, but I wouldn't know
how to calculate the dimensions, although I found the formulas in the wood
handbook. 1" box spar would be strong and would have no hidden defects.
Any body know of a comparable aircraft that uses box spars? What do Pitts
use for spars?
A Skywalker II went down nearby due to what looks like a spar failure so I'm
looking this area over closely.
Joe
Spring, TX
>From: BARNSTMR(at)aol.com
>Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 22:34:40 -0400 (EDT)
>
>Oh...and as for the 2nd part of your question.....Douglas Fir is what I
>plan
>to use for my spars.... In keeping with the way several other Piet
>builders
>have done, I am dropping the thickness from 1 inch routed spruce to 3/4
>inch
>solid Douglas Fir....I still use the same wing hardware dimensions but use
>plywood doublers to fill out to 1 inch in the attach fitting areas. This
>also requires use of 1/8th inch shims at each rib (if you are using upright
>braces next to the spars)......Terry B
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Jon Christians <Jchristians(at)whancock.K12.ia.us> |
Unsubscribe.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | TXTdragger(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Spars, Spruce, Fir (skywalkerII crash) |
every member of my family sent me copy of crash story.....especially w/gyro
crash week before....Montgomery County getting bad press....does make one
hesitate, especialy about building two holer. Post any other info you get.
Paper made it sound like "wing just snapped off" in slow level flight.
John D(#10)
Houston, TX
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | walter evans <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Subject: | Pietenpols and....... |
Leo,
Yea, like to do both.
walt
But back to the dowsing, Walt. You mentioned dowsing AND pietenpols -
did
you have a connection in mind?
Leo
Nottinghamshire, UK
Leo,
Yea,
like to do
both.
walt
snip
But back to the dowsing, Walt. You mentioned dowsing AND
pietenpols -
didyou have a connection in mind?LeoNottinghamshire,
UK
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Copinfo <Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.com> |
Subject: | Re: Questions for the gang... |
Bill, about the castor tail wheel that is fixed, I had a Baby Great Lakes
that had a swivel tailwheel with a spring loaded pin and cable to the
cockpit that would let you lock the tailwheel for takeoff and landing. A
really good Idea for that short coupled little aircraft. I don't know if
that is what he means but it could be. The Piet wheel I use is a Scott
2000. Sometimes I wish I had the 3000 but I'd use a wheel off a grocery
cart if I had to.
Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.Com
Tim Cunningham
Des Moines, Iowa (515) 237-1510
>Second, In "note 21" he refers to a 2-1/2 inch castor
>wheel for use as the tail wheel. He refers to it as a
>"fixed position wheel". Now I always thought a fixed
>position wheel would be fixed...ie can not turn left
>or right. But a castor wheel could turn freely left
>or right with either differential breaking or, if
>enough wind is on the rudder, with the rudder. Which
>is it? And has anyone tried it? In the pictures it
>looks very clean and simple but if it is fixed, (can't
>swivel), it doesn't seem that it would work all that
>well, especially at low speeds with the tail on the
>ground.
>As always, any input will be greatly appreciated.
>
>
>Bill Hutson, S.D.
>IHA#7
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Warren Shoun <wbnb(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpols and....... |
If I might ever so gently point out that your web search engine will
provide you with something in excess of 2,768 available sites for
dowsing and learning about dowsing.
Cheers,
Warren
walter evans wrote:
> Leo, Yea, like to do both.walt But back to the dowsing,
> Walt. You mentioned dowsing AND pietenpols - did
> you have a connection in mind?
>
> Leo
>
> Nottinghamshire, UK
If I might ever so gently point out that your web search
engine will provide you with something in excess of 2,768 available sites
for dowsing and learning about dowsing.
Cheers,
Warren
walter evans wrote:
Leo,
Yea, like to do both.waltsnip>But
back to the dowsing, Walt. You mentioned dowsing AND pietenpols -
did
you have a connection in mind?
Leo
Nottinghamshire, UK
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Copinfo <Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.com> |
Hey gang, I'm on my way out the door to fly Piet NX899TC while the
weather stays above 60 degrees. I'm taking a couple of copper wires I'm
going to put in a coke bottle and fly over the lake to see if that water
witching (Dowsing) thing works. Does anyone have the STC or plans for a
good set I can install on the Piet?
Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.Com
Tim Cunningham
Des Moines, Iowa (515) 237-1510
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Meadows <gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: Spars, Spruce, Fir |
Hey Joe,
Whereabouts in Spring do you live? I live in Cypresswood, just off Ella,
just moved in the past weekend. I haven't started yet, but as soon as the
boxes are empty.....
Gary Meadows
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | leonstefanhutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan) |
Gary Leopold:: I thought you could drive over after work, but It is
about 400 miles.(W. KS) I pulled my tank halves from molds yesterday.
Came out better than I thought. Some pin holes and imperfections to
clean up. My molds took a beating, But that was my fault. Tank is VERY
light. Measured at side wall, 4 layers are about 1/8 in thick. Gary
Price shows no baffels, but I am going to add a couple to the top to get
some stiffness at fille neck area and one across the bottom. Bengalis
says a tank over 5 gal, should have baffles any way. Leon S.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | John Weikel <jandd(at)maverickbbs.com> |
Subject: | Re: Piet Dowsing |
My stepfather (83 yrs old) was going to demonstrate the dowsing
technique and used a forked peach tree switch. Well it was raining when
he started his demo and that peach switch went nuts pointing every which
way and nearly put a catch in the old man's back. He later said that
the ground was covered with water from the rain. And that only a darned
fool would try to dowse in the rain..... Sounds reasonable to me....
John W
-----Original Message-----
From: Copinfo <Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.com>
Date: Thursday, September 30, 1999 3:03 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Piet Dowsing
Hey gang, I'm on my way out the door to fly Piet NX899TC while the
weather stays above 60 degrees. I'm taking a couple of copper wires I'm
going to put in a coke bottle and fly over the lake to see if that water
witching (Dowsing) thing works. Does anyone have the STC or plans for a
good set I can install on the Piet?
Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.Com
Tim Cunningham
Des Moines, Iowa (515) 237-1510
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Jack Phillips (EUS)" <EUSJCPH(at)am1.ericsson.se> |
Subject: | RE: Spars, Spruce, Fir |
A Pitts uses 3/4" Sitka Spruce. I used 3/4" spruce in my spars, routed the rear
spars and left the front spars full. BTW, I tried Douglas fir for the aileron
spars to keep from having to order more aircraft grade spruce and ended up
throwing them away and remaking them out of spruce. Spruce is lighter and considerably
more pleasant to work with (fir splinters pretty badly). Just my preference.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Krzes [SMTP:jkrzes(at)hotmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 30, 1999 3:06 PM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Spars, Spruce, Fir
>
> I've just about made the decision that I won't purchase 1" spruce stock and
> then route half of it away. I too am considering 3/4" stock of spruce or
> douglas fir. I think a box spar would even be better, but I wouldn't know
> how to calculate the dimensions, although I found the formulas in the wood
> handbook. 1" box spar would be strong and would have no hidden defects.
> Any body know of a comparable aircraft that uses box spars? What do Pitts
> use for spars?
> A Skywalker II went down nearby due to what looks like a spar failure so I'm
> looking this area over closely.
>
> Joe
> Spring, TX
>
>
> >From: BARNSTMR(at)aol.com
> >Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 22:34:40 -0400 (EDT)
> >
> >Oh...and as for the 2nd part of your question.....Douglas Fir is what I
> >plan
> >to use for my spars.... In keeping with the way several other Piet
> >builders
> >have done, I am dropping the thickness from 1 inch routed spruce to 3/4
> >inch
> >solid Douglas Fir....I still use the same wing hardware dimensions but use
> >plywood doublers to fill out to 1 inch in the attach fitting areas. This
> >also requires use of 1/8th inch shims at each rib (if you are using upright
> >braces next to the spars)......Terry B
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | TXTdragger(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpols and....... |
don't douse with your Piet lol
John D (#10)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | leonstefanhutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan) |
Subject: | Pans lack details |
My 2 cents worth. I feel Gorden B's pain. I understand his frustration
with rhe plans. I have a box of stuff that I am going to have to do
over, because I misunderstood the plans. Or worst of all, I followed the
plans and and built wrong. Example: center section spar/cabane brkts.
TXTdrager asked"who will draw clarified plans" I am left in amazement
that BHP and Hoopman in their heyday didn't"t take the time to do this.
Off topic questions:::No problem with asking them, but how about
replying directly to poster rather than threw the Piet sight. There are
plenty of sights on dowsing, stock market, etc. Yeh it only takes a
little time to wade threw it, but working 12 hrs a night plus commute,
sleep and other every day duties, extra minuets are valuable. I presume
a lot of folks on this sight are retire, and have all the time in the
world. many are not. Saving miuets out of the day is like saving
grams off theweight of a Pietenpol. Leon S.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | kyle ray <rrobert(at)centuryinter.net> |
Subject: | Re: Piet Dowsing |
It may have been inconsiderate to talk about dowsing, if someone is
offended I
apologize and will try try to remember a singleness of purpose that
being Pietenpols aircraft.
----- Original Message -----
From: John Weikel
To: Pietenpol Discussion
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 1999 3:11 PM
Subject: Re: Piet Dowsing
My stepfather (83 yrs old) was going to demonstrate the dowsing
technique and used a forked peach tree switch. Well it was raining when
he started his demo and that peach switch went nuts pointing every which
way and nearly put a catch in the old man's back. He later said that
the ground was covered with water from the rain. And that only a darned
fool would try to dowse in the rain..... Sounds reasonable to me....
John W
-----Original Message-----
From: Copinfo <Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.com>
To: Pietenpol Discussion
Date: Thursday, September 30, 1999 3:03 PM
Subject: Piet Dowsing
Hey gang, I'm on my way out the door to fly Piet NX899TC while the
weather stays above 60 degrees. I'm taking a couple of copper wires I'm
going to put in a coke bottle and fly over the lake to see if that water
witching (Dowsing) thing works. Does anyone have the STC or plans for a
good set I can install on the Piet?
Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.Com
Tim Cunningham
Des Moines, Iowa (515) 237-1510
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | mike cushway <mcushway(at)gdinet.com> |
Subject: | RIB TEST REPLY/SITKA |
I was the one who posted the info. on the Western Red Cedar ribs. I made the ribs
per Don's full size drawing out of 1/4"x1/2". I used 1/16" Finnish Birch plywood
(GL11)
and T-88 glue. With 27 ribs finished, they average 201grams (7 oz) and vary only
5-6
grams. I spent a considerable amount of time building a rib test fixture to test
the ribs.
I tested one of my ribs up to 358 pounds at which point my fixture ran out of
spring force.
I used engineering grade springs guarenteed to 5% of rated load, so I feel pretty
good about
my figures. If anyone is intested in pics of the test fixture, e-mail me. They
run around
200K each. I recently sorted thru McCormick Lumbers sitka for nearly 2 hours to
find
(2) 16 footers suitable for spars. I got the impression that the guys in the yard
don't have
a clue on grading this stuff. So, be careful if you are ordering sight unseen.
They have a
lot of spruce, but I would say none suitable for solid spars.
Mike Cushway
Mfg. Eng.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Davis, Marc" <marc.davis(at)intel.com> |
Subject: | Avaition history |
Well it not directly Piet related but I thought you guys might like this.
It's the 1941 Annual report from the Curtiss Wright Corp.
http://www.angelfire.com/or2/marc/index.html
<http://www.angelfire.com/or2/marc/index.html>
Marc Davis
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Replicraft(at)aol.com |
Gordon-
I did not intend for my comments to anger of offend. I fear I have done both,
and I do apologize. I simply felt your remarks to be a bit harsh, and only
intended to offer my philosophy concerning the older plans that are about. I
do enjoy the mystery of old plans sets, and spend hours trying to figure out
what the designer must have been thinking when he drew a particular fitting
that makes no sense at all...
I can see how you may have thought I was being, perhaps, superior (?) in
mentioning Paul Poberezney's name, but I was simply trying to establish some
background for my comments. A common theme, or connection that all
homebuilders seem to have. Perhaps I was a bit too zealous.
Again, an apology for anything said that has angered or offended.
Sincerely,
Steven Speidel
Replicraft Aviation
________________________________________________________________________________
Steve
I just zapped you off a message related to our short discussion earlier
about another list member and myself talking about this very same idea as a
joint project between this group and some other piet members of IHA
Not wanting to change Barnards wonderfull ideas and considering it is fun to
build something from age old plans I would even be in aggrement to supply
Don Pietenpol all the changes to sell with his set of plans, would make a
nice package. Or the corrections be part of the Piet Org. I understand Don
may not be a designer so with help form some here and getting all the
information together it could do something to help all those coming in after
us, Help me for sure.
Last nite was no fun but I did stick my foot in my mouth also and I give my
apology to the group as well, we all grow from thses things don't we.
Thanks
Gordon
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | <Replicraft(at)aol.com> |
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 1999 4:29 PM
>
> Gordon-
>
> I did not intend for my comments to anger of offend. I fear I have done
both,
> and I do apologize. I simply felt your remarks to be a bit harsh, and only
> intended to offer my philosophy concerning the older plans that are
about. I
> do enjoy the mystery of old plans sets, and spend hours trying to figure
out
> what the designer must have been thinking when he drew a particular
fitting
> that makes no sense at all...
>
> I can see how you may have thought I was being, perhaps, superior (?) in
> mentioning Paul Poberezney's name, but I was simply trying to establish
some
> background for my comments. A common theme, or connection that all
> homebuilders seem to have. Perhaps I was a bit too zealous.
>
> Again, an apology for anything said that has angered or offended.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Steven Speidel
> Replicraft Aviation
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | DonanClara(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: landing lights |
Too many Mikes???? Oh no, here we go again!!!
Don (Hicks, that is)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Copinfo <Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.com> |
Subject: | Re: Avaition history |
Hey, thanks for the history. I loved it.
Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.Com
Tim Cunningham
Des Moines, Iowa (515) 237-1510
>Well it not directly Piet related but I thought you guys might like this.
>
>It's the 1941 Annual report from the Curtiss Wright Corp.
>
>http://www.angelfire.com/or2/marc/index.html
><http://www.angelfire.com/or2/marc/index.html>
>
>
>Marc Davis
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details - WOW! |
Great Eh? Glenn. I hope your friend figures it all out and sees his
creation in the air. Those A's sure do sound sweet swinging a prop!
John Mc
-----Original Message-----
From: Burroughs <glenn(at)sysweb.com>
Date: Thursday, September 30, 1999 6:48 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans lack details - WOW!
>Hello All,
>
>Wow! When I started up my computer this morning I had 58 emails, mostly
from
>this discussion group, and mostly concerning my question about the
>availability of a better set of plans!
>
>Many thanks to those that responded to my question and offered some very
>good suggestions.
>
>My question was submitted for a non-computer friend who is building the Air
>Camper. He is 75 years old (plus) and tells me that "I don't have much time
>to waste, and I want to get this plane in the air". He has finished the
1928
>Ford engine (it sounds good!!), and has started building the tail section.
>But he really gets frustrated when dimensions are missing and he has to
>decide where parts should be positioned, or the plans show two different
>ways to accomplish something. He points out that he is not an airplane
>designer, and is very concerned about making design decisions, then flying
>the plane. He suggested that there might be additional plans that could
>clarify some of the problems that he was running into. So I posed the
>question to the group.
>
>In any case, my question has been answered.... study the plans, buy the
>Flying and Glider Manual, and most importantly, take advantage of the
>experience of this group.
>
>Again, thanks for the many helpful responses.
>
>Glenn
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Leo Ponton <leo(at)deadly.demon.co.uk> |
Subject: | Re: Piet Dowsing |
hmmmm....don't fly over water - those landing gear legs might just start a
merry little jig.
> And that only a darned fool would try to dowse in the rain.....
>Sounds reasonable to me.... John W -----Original Message-----
Nottinghamshire
England
leo(at)deadly.demon.co.uk
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Fireman <fireman(at)cafes.net> |
Subject: | enthused about starting |
I have been studing the flying glider manual for some time,and now I'm
ready to get this project off the ground. Can anyone tell me how to go
about ordering enough sitka spruce to build my fuselage only for right
now? Thought someone may have a materials list already made. Thanks for
any info.
I have been studing the flying
glider manual for
some time,and now I'm ready to get this project off the ground. Can
anyone tell
me how to go about ordering enough sitka spruce to build my fuselage
only for
right now? Thought someone may have a materials list already made.
Thanks for
any info.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: enthused about starting |
look under the pictures section in the aircamper web
site, someone has posted a materials list. I ordered
(3) 5/4 x 1 x 18ft that is just a rough guestimate. if
i have to order more it will be just short pieces that
can be ups'ed. I have a planer,moulder,straight line
saw, large bandsaw(for resawing) and tablesaw that I
am able to cut all of the different dimensions.
--- Fireman wrote:
> I have been studing the flying glider manual for
> some time,and now I'm ready to get this project off
> the ground. Can anyone tell me how to go about
> ordering enough sitka spruce to build my fuselage
> only for right now? Thought someone may have a
> materials list already made. Thanks for any info.
>
=====
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
are there any piet owners out there who are using the
corvair. It seems the majority are ford or cont users,
but it would be helpful to me to hear some input from
actual users of the corvair. or some that have contact
with users of that engine.Is it walt evans that is
showing pictures of the corvair? what can you tell me
about?
=====
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
Subject: | Re: Plans lack details Well said, Ed! |
>We're all getting older, some fatter, hopefully a bit wiser as well. Let's
>work together to keep this little gem flying for another 70 years.
>
>Just remember EXPERIMENTAL means quite a lot of thought has to go into the
>building, and HOMEBUILT means we ain't all rocket scientists.
I like this way of putting it Ed. That is why this group works. Some of us
are rockect scientists and are building Ford powered Piets. Are you still
out there John O?
Buy the plans,
>make your decisions based on best available info, detailed or not, then
make
>that glorious smelling sawdust. With perseverance, you'll wind up with an
>item you can bust your buttons with, a rarity of personal achievement in
this
>"cookie mold" society.
There's GOTTA be money
>in aviation! I PUT AN AWFUL LOT OF IT THERE.
>
>Thoughts of an O.F.
>
>Ed Woerle
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Meadows <gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: enthused about starting |
Hey Fireman,
Congratulations on being ready to go! I think Walt Evans has a bill of
materials on the Aircamper.Org website. I forget exactly how to get to that
particular part, but just browse around you'll find it in Walt's pictures I
believe. It's got the sticks you need! This is a real neat website-enjoy,
and GOOD LUCK!!
Gary Meadows
(House-painting mode...trying to sell my wife on some woodwork, let's see I
need a new table saw, a miter saw....)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Meadows <gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com> |
Gordon & Steve,
I know we've talked offline a bit about all this, but way to go for both
of you! I respect you both for your notes of apology.
Now, we have that little misunderstanding out of the way, maybe we can
make something good happen from all of that!
Just thinking out loud!
Gary Meadows
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ted Brousseau <nfn00979(at)naples.net> |
Mike,
How dare you risk offending those who seem to think this is a Pietenpol
BUILDERS list? So, let's try to keep it on that subject.
First, those are not really mountains. Mountains are what they have out
where Steve flies. I only had to climb to 2500' to clear (true-not by much)
those "hills" on the trip north. That was around Chatanooga. On the other
hand, if you go a little East, like I did on the way home, you need to climb
to 4500' and fly some low points at that. Ok, Ok, now the building content
part. If you stick to the West route you won't need to install a cabin
heater. Otherwise, a cabin heater with the front cockpit covered will keep
you warm. Another building consideration is if you plan to fill the front
cockpit with gear you will need to install some duct work or you will freeze
and your gear will melt.
Probably the last building tiip is to consider both a wing tank and front
tank if you are going to do much cross country. Otherwise you will probably
have a lot more cross than country.
I will be at Sun n Fun to continue this building discussion.
Ted B
Naples, FL
P.S. I did not intend to mean that those "hills" are not hard. As Steve
says, don't touch them. You can't build or design a Piet strong enough to
get that close.
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 1999 8:52 AM
> Guys- Ok, I know it's only October, but are any of you
> with Piets/GN-1's thinking about attending this Florida
> Fly-In next April, 2000 ?? We are only 6 months away
> from that event and I'm seriously considering making the
> trip.
>
> PS- I would also welcome any comments on flying N-S
> from Ohio to Florida. TED B. ?? Mountains and me don't
> have any experience yet.
>
> Thanks !
>
> Mike C.
> Clev. Oh
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Leo Ponton <leo(at)deadly.demon.co.uk> |
Subject: | Re: Spars, Spruce, Fir and Three Piece Wings |
Jim Wills in the UK designed a box spar for the Piet. The motivation, I
believe, arises from the fact that spruce prices here are extortionate.
The built up spar offers a considerable cost saving, probably a reasonable
weight saving and, no doubt, contributes to the approved maximum all up
weight of 1200lbs.
Before you all throw your hands up in horror, Jim had to make a few
(structural) changes to allow the design to be assessed and approved by our
rigourous PFA.
Anyway, the box dimensions are as follows:
FRONT
upper and lower spar caps - 1-1/4" x 7/8"(thickness)
ply web - 1/8" on one side, with additional web on opposite side and void
filling with spruce where required for strength at attachment points, e.g.
lift struts.
There is also a 7/8" x 1/2" spruce vertical web stiffener at rib locations.
REAR
upper and lower spar caps - 7/8" x 3/4"(thickness)
ply web and strengthening as above.
I can't really tell you more than that as I haven't started building it
yet, but Jim would happily sell you his drawings at (I'm sure) a modest
price. He also designed a neat three piece wing with automatic aileron
connection and transport fittings for the wings.
The whole set of plans, including the original Piet plans cos me 110
sterling - about $160, so his additional drawings shouldn't be too much.
>...I think a box spar would even be better, but I wouldn't know
>how to calculate the dimensions, although I found the formulas in the
>wood handbook. 1" box spar would be strong and would have no >hidden
defects.
>Any body know of a comparable aircraft that uses box spars?
Nottinghamshire
England
leo(at)deadly.demon.co.uk
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
Subject: | Re: Spars, Spruce, Fir and Three Piece Wings |
Leo, How do we contact Jim Wills?
-----Original Message-----
From: Leo Ponton <leo(at)deadly.demon.co.uk>
Date: Friday, October 01, 1999 6:14 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Spars, Spruce, Fir and Three Piece Wings
>Jim Wills in the UK designed a box spar for the Piet. The motivation, I
>believe, arises from the fact that spruce prices here are extortionate.
>The built up spar offers a considerable cost saving, probably a reasonable
>weight saving and, no doubt, contributes to the approved maximum all up
>weight of 1200lbs.
>
>Before you all throw your hands up in horror, Jim had to make a few
>(structural) changes to allow the design to be assessed and approved by our
>rigourous PFA.
>
>Anyway, the box dimensions are as follows:
>
>FRONT
>
>upper and lower spar caps - 1-1/4" x 7/8"(thickness)
>
>ply web - 1/8" on one side, with additional web on opposite side and void
>filling with spruce where required for strength at attachment points, e.g.
>lift struts.
>
>There is also a 7/8" x 1/2" spruce vertical web stiffener at rib locations.
>
>REAR
>
>upper and lower spar caps - 7/8" x 3/4"(thickness)
>
>ply web and strengthening as above.
>
>I can't really tell you more than that as I haven't started building it
>yet, but Jim would happily sell you his drawings at (I'm sure) a modest
>price. He also designed a neat three piece wing with automatic aileron
>connection and transport fittings for the wings.
>
>The whole set of plans, including the original Piet plans cos me 110
>sterling - about $160, so his additional drawings shouldn't be too much.
>
>
>>...I think a box spar would even be better, but I wouldn't know
>>how to calculate the dimensions, although I found the formulas in the
>>wood handbook. 1" box spar would be strong and would have no >hidden
>defects.
>>Any body know of a comparable aircraft that uses box spars?
>Nottinghamshire
>England
>
>leo(at)deadly.demon.co.uk
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | john hodnette <jhodnette(at)tecinfo.com> |
Subject: | Accomodations for larger pilots |
I have read bits and pieces about the modifications of the cabanes, etc.
to accommodate larger pilots and get the CG close to the right place.
Could any of you reply to me regarding your changes, either on the
discussion site or to my email address? Thanks.
John Hodnette
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Leo Ponton <leo(at)deadly.demon.co.uk> |
Subject: | Re: Spars, Spruce, Fir and Three Piece Wings |
Sorry, I was being a little naughty - I wanted to see if anyone showed any
interest.
Jim can be contacted at the following address (he has no online presence
that I am aware of).
Jim Wills
1, Humber Road
Blackheath
LONDON
SE3 7LT
United Kingdom
>Leo, How do we contact Jim Wills?
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Leo Ponton <leo(at)deadly.demon.co.uk>
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Date: Friday, October 01, 1999 6:14 AM
>Subject: Re: Spars, Spruce, Fir and Three Piece Wings
>
>
>>Jim Wills in the UK designed a box spar for the Piet. The motivation, I
>>believe, arises from the fact that spruce prices here are extortionate.
>>The built up spar offers a considerable cost saving, probably a reasonable
>>weight saving and, no doubt, contributes to the approved maximum all up
>>weight of 1200lbs.
>>
>>Before you all throw your hands up in horror, Jim had to make a few
>>(structural) changes to allow the design to be assessed and approved by our
>>rigourous PFA.
>>
>>Anyway, the box dimensions are as follows:
>>
>>FRONT
>>
>>upper and lower spar caps - 1-1/4" x 7/8"(thickness)
>>
>>ply web - 1/8" on one side, with additional web on opposite side and void
>>filling with spruce where required for strength at attachment points, e.g.
>>lift struts.
>>
>>There is also a 7/8" x 1/2" spruce vertical web stiffener at rib locations.
>>
>>REAR
>>
>>upper and lower spar caps - 7/8" x 3/4"(thickness)
>>
>>ply web and strengthening as above.
>>
>>I can't really tell you more than that as I haven't started building it
>>yet, but Jim would happily sell you his drawings at (I'm sure) a modest
>>price. He also designed a neat three piece wing with automatic aileron
>>connection and transport fittings for the wings.
>>
>>The whole set of plans, including the original Piet plans cos me 110
>>sterling - about $160, so his additional drawings shouldn't be too much.
>>
>>
>>
>>>...I think a box spar would even be better, but I wouldn't know
>>>how to calculate the dimensions, although I found the formulas in the
>>>wood handbook. 1" box spar would be strong and would have no >hidden
>>defects.
>>>Any body know of a comparable aircraft that uses box spars?
>>Nottinghamshire
>>England
>>
>>leo(at)deadly.demon.co.uk
>>
>>
>
>
Nottinghamshire
England
leo(at)deadly.demon.co.uk
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: enthused about starting |
Gary
Do the cabinet thing like I did back in 91, Made a nice food cabinet in the
garage, then another 14 cabinets and work benches for myself, needed a new
sears contractor table saw, band saw and sander combo to get her cabinet
completed, a welder for making the hinges.
Now I am hoping she asks for candle stick holders so I can get a lathe.
Gordon
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Meadows <gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com> |
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 1999 10:29 PM
Subject: | Re: enthused about starting |
> Hey Fireman,
> Congratulations on being ready to go! I think Walt Evans has a bill of
> materials on the Aircamper.Org website. I forget exactly how to get to
that
> particular part, but just browse around you'll find it in Walt's pictures
I
> believe. It's got the sticks you need! This is a real neat website-enjoy,
> and GOOD LUCK!!
>
> Gary Meadows
> (House-painting mode...trying to sell my wife on some woodwork, let's see
I
> need a new table saw, a miter saw....)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | fishin <fishin(at)wwa.com> |
Subject: | Re: enthused about starting |
I started with the fuselage myself with a large roll of brown wrapping
paper (24" wide). taped it down on my work bench (16' long) and
proceeded to lay out the fuselage full size (to later become my building
jig)..to me, part of the fun of this building process is to study the
plans, determ the amount of each size needed for that assembly and
placed my order...that way when the spruce arrived and it wasn't correct
I only had myself to blame...as it turned out, the amount of spruce left
over after the fuse was completed was minimul..study the plans,
determine for yourself what you need and order accordingly...it truely
is part of the building enjoyment..
regards
JoeC
Zion, Illinois
ps==end of week two rib building results in 8 ribs completed..slowly but
surely
Fireman wrote:
> I have been studing the flying glider manual for some time,and now
> I'm ready to get this project off the ground. Can anyone tell me how
> to go about ordering enough sitka spruce to build my fuselage only for
> right now? Thought someone may have a materials list already made.
> Thanks for any info.
I started with the fuselage myself with a large roll of brown
wrapping paper (24" wide). taped it down on my work bench (16' long)
and proceeded to lay out the fuselage full size (to later become my building
jig)..to me, part of the fun of this building process is to study the plans,
determ the amount of each size needed for that assembly and placed my order...that
way when the spruce arrived and it wasn't correct I only had myself to
blame...as it turned out, the amount of spruce left over after the fuse
was completed was minimul..study the plans, determine for yourself what
you need and order accordingly...it truely is part of the building enjoyment..
regards
JoeC
Zion, Illinois
ps==end of week two rib building results in 8 ribs completed..slowly
but surely
Fireman wrote:
I have
been studing the flying glider manual for some time,and now I'm ready to
get this project off the ground. Can anyone tell me how to go about ordering
enough sitka spruce to build my fuselage only for right now? Thought someone
may have a materials list already made. Thanks for any info.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | John Duprey <duprey(at)excite.com> |
Subject: | Re: enthused about starting |
Gordon buy her some new candles.
John
> Gary
>
> Do the cabinet thing like I did back in 91, Made a nice food cabinet in
the
> garage, then another 14 cabinets and work benches for myself, needed a
new
> sears contractor table saw, band saw and sander combo to get her cabinet
> completed, a welder for making the hinges.
>
> Now I am hoping she asks for candle stick holders so I can get a lathe.
>
> Gordon
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gary Meadows <gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Sent: Thursday, September 30, 1999 10:29 PM
> Subject: Re: enthused about starting
>
>
> > Hey Fireman,
> > Congratulations on being ready to go! I think Walt Evans has a bill
of
> > materials on the Aircamper.Org website. I forget exactly how to get to
> that
> > particular part, but just browse around you'll find it in Walt's
pictures
> I
> > believe. It's got the sticks you need! This is a real neat
website-enjoy,
> > and GOOD LUCK!!
> >
> > Gary Meadows
> > (House-painting mode...trying to sell my wife on some woodwork, let's
see
> I
> > need a new table saw, a miter saw....)
> >
> >
>
"the Ox is slow, but the Earth is patient"
_______
Get FREE voicemail, fax and email at http://voicemail.excite.com
Talk online at http://voicechat.excite.com
________________________________________________________________________________
Thanks Gary
You live and grow in many different ways.
After all of this Steve and I now send email back and forth and as you know
something good will come out of all of this.
Great Idea on the project both of you. Let me know what I can do,
Thanks
Gordon
IHA#02
WebMaster
SAA#952
EAA#595215
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Meadows <gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com> |
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 1999 11:25 PM
> Gordon & Steve,
> I know we've talked offline a bit about all this, but way to go for both
> of you! I respect you both for your notes of apology.
> Now, we have that little misunderstanding out of the way, maybe we can
> make something good happen from all of that!
>
> Just thinking out loud!
> Gary Meadows
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | walter evans <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Subject: | Re: corvair engines |
Del,
I was the one who posted the corvair pics, for a friend. But that was an
engine( or two) that he had designed and built . One for a Piet and the
other for another homebuilt. They are a very unique design.
walt evans
I'm using A65
-----Original Message-----
From: del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com>
Date: Friday, October 01, 1999 12:16 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: corvair engines
>are there any piet owners out there who are using the
>corvair. It seems the majority are ford or cont users,
>but it would be helpful to me to hear some input from
>actual users of the corvair. or some that have contact
>with users of that engine.Is it walt evans that is
>showing pictures of the corvair? what can you tell me
>about?
>
>
>=====
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: corvair engines |
is there any way to talk to him or find out whose or
what design, and his feelings for the engine?
--- walter evans wrote:
> Del,
> I was the one who posted the corvair pics, for a
> friend. But that was an
> engine( or two) that he had designed and built . One
> for a Piet and the
> other for another homebuilt. They are a very unique
> design.
> walt evans
> I'm using A65
> -----Original Message-----
> From: del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Date: Friday, October 01, 1999 12:16 AM
> Subject: corvair engines
>
>
> >are there any piet owners out there who are using
> the
> >corvair. It seems the majority are ford or cont
> users,
> >but it would be helpful to me to hear some input
> from
> >actual users of the corvair. or some that have
> contact
> >with users of that engine.Is it walt evans that is
> >showing pictures of the corvair? what can you tell
> me
> >about?
> >
> >
> >=====
> >
> >
>
>
=====
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: enthused about starting |
Well she is holding out, she wants a Jacuzzy this winter, so maybe I will
have a lateh this coming winter, I'll make her candle sticks with a new
Plazma Cutting machine, NC
All kidding aside, I have to put T1-11 on walls to do and floor in my new
20' x 33' workshop and that is what is keeping me from starting any big
project. I want to put a (I Beam) down the center to hold a hoist that
rolls. Will probably do my floor myself with part cement and part wood for
wood shop area.
Next part of it is making T section add on to the front so I can use front
part as a hanger.
Whats this got to do with building airplanes, (Everything)
Thanks
Gordon
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | John Duprey <duprey(at)excite.com> |
Sent: Friday, October 01, 1999 10:12 AM
Subject: | Re: enthused about starting |
> Gordon buy her some new candles.
>
> John
>
>
> > Gary
> >
> > Do the cabinet thing like I did back in 91, Made a nice food cabinet in
> the
> > garage, then another 14 cabinets and work benches for myself, needed a
> new
> > sears contractor table saw, band saw and sander combo to get her cabinet
> > completed, a welder for making the hinges.
> >
> > Now I am hoping she asks for candle stick holders so I can get a lathe.
> >
> > Gordon
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Gary Meadows <gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com>
> > To: Pietenpol Discussion
> > Sent: Thursday, September 30, 1999 10:29 PM
> > Subject: Re: enthused about starting
> >
> >
> > > Hey Fireman,
> > > Congratulations on being ready to go! I think Walt Evans has a bill
> of
> > > materials on the Aircamper.Org website. I forget exactly how to get to
> > that
> > > particular part, but just browse around you'll find it in Walt's
> pictures
> > I
> > > believe. It's got the sticks you need! This is a real neat
> website-enjoy,
> > > and GOOD LUCK!!
> > >
> > > Gary Meadows
> > > (House-painting mode...trying to sell my wife on some woodwork, let's
> see
> > I
> > > need a new table saw, a miter saw....)
> > >
> > >
> >
>
> "the Ox is slow, but the Earth is patient"
>
>
> _______
> Get FREE voicemail, fax and email at http://voicemail.excite.com
> Talk online at http://voicechat.excite.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | walter evans <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Subject: | Re: corvair engines |
Sure,
His name is Dick Lawson 973-383-7821 ( Northern NJ) Licenced AP,
building , repairing, and designing airplanes for over 50 years. Still sharp
as a tack. He has been my Mentor , through this, my second project.
He had also built a Piet ( Ford Powered, years ago.) And he had spoken to
Bernard , a number of times.
walt evans
-----Original Message-----
From: del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com>
Date: Friday, October 01, 1999 5:25 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: corvair engines
>is there any way to talk to him or find out whose or
>what design, and his feelings for the engine?
>
>--- walter evans wrote:
>> Del,
>> I was the one who posted the corvair pics, for a
>> friend. But that was an
>> engine( or two) that he had designed and built . One
>> for a Piet and the
>> other for another homebuilt. They are a very unique
>> design.
>> walt evans
>> I'm using A65
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com>
>> To: Pietenpol Discussion
>> Date: Friday, October 01, 1999 12:16 AM
>> Subject: corvair engines
>>
>>
>> >are there any piet owners out there who are using
>> the
>> >corvair. It seems the majority are ford or cont
>> users,
>> >but it would be helpful to me to hear some input
>> from
>> >actual users of the corvair. or some that have
>> contact
>> >with users of that engine.Is it walt evans that is
>> >showing pictures of the corvair? what can you tell
>> me
>> >about?
>> >
>> >
>> >=====
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
>=====
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | B and V Dearinger <dearinge(at)iocc.com> |
Subject: | Re: corvair engines |
Del I flew 150 hours behind a corvair engine.It was a 164 cu in that we
bored .060 and installed forged pistons and put arp bolts in the rods.Also
stainless valves and a 3 angle valve job.Made a prop flange and carved a
wood prop for it.Used a home made intake and a 65 cont carb slung
underneath.Ran battery ignition and used a small harley davidson 6 volt
battery.Worked flawless.Put out 80 solid horsepower on 4 gal per hour of
auto premium gas.Unfortunately it was not on a piet but a small midwing
single seat.Bill
-----Original Message-----
From: del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com>
Date: Friday, October 01, 1999 4:25 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: corvair engines
>is there any way to talk to him or find out whose or
>what design, and his feelings for the engine?
>
>--- walter evans wrote:
>> Del,
>> I was the one who posted the corvair pics, for a
>> friend. But that was an
>> engine( or two) that he had designed and built . One
>> for a Piet and the
>> other for another homebuilt. They are a very unique
>> design.
>> walt evans
>> I'm using A65
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com>
>> To: Pietenpol Discussion
>> Date: Friday, October 01, 1999 12:16 AM
>> Subject: corvair engines
>>
>>
>> >are there any piet owners out there who are using
>> the
>> >corvair. It seems the majority are ford or cont
>> users,
>> >but it would be helpful to me to hear some input
>> from
>> >actual users of the corvair. or some that have
>> contact
>> >with users of that engine.Is it walt evans that is
>> >showing pictures of the corvair? what can you tell
>> me
>> >about?
>> >
>> >
>> >=====
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
>=====
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | John Duprey <j-m-duprey(at)erols.com> |
Subject: | Re: enthused about starting |
Gordon: I know what you are going through, I cant build my Fuselage till
, I re build my Barn.
John Duprey
Gordon Brimhall wrote:
>
> Well she is holding out, she wants a Jacuzzy this winter, so maybe I will
> have a lateh this coming winter, I'll make her candle sticks with a new
> Plazma Cutting machine, NC
>
> All kidding aside, I have to put T1-11 on walls to do and floor in my new
> 20' x 33' workshop and that is what is keeping me from starting any big
> project. I want to put a (I Beam) down the center to hold a hoist that
> rolls. Will probably do my floor myself with part cement and part wood for
> wood shop area.
>
> Next part of it is making T section add on to the front so I can use front
> part as a hanger.
>
> Whats this got to do with building airplanes, (Everything)
>
> Thanks
>
> Gordon
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: John Duprey <duprey(at)excite.com>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Sent: Friday, October 01, 1999 10:12 AM
> Subject: Re: enthused about starting
>
> > Gordon buy her some new candles.
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> > > Gary
> > >
> > > Do the cabinet thing like I did back in 91, Made a nice food cabinet in
> > the
> > > garage, then another 14 cabinets and work benches for myself, needed a
> > new
> > > sears contractor table saw, band saw and sander combo to get her cabinet
> > > completed, a welder for making the hinges.
> > >
> > > Now I am hoping she asks for candle stick holders so I can get a lathe.
> > >
> > > Gordon
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Gary Meadows <gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com>
> > > To: Pietenpol Discussion
> > > Sent: Thursday, September 30, 1999 10:29 PM
> > > Subject: Re: enthused about starting
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hey Fireman,
> > > > Congratulations on being ready to go! I think Walt Evans has a bill
> > of
> > > > materials on the Aircamper.Org website. I forget exactly how to get to
> > > that
> > > > particular part, but just browse around you'll find it in Walt's
> > pictures
> > > I
> > > > believe. It's got the sticks you need! This is a real neat
> > website-enjoy,
> > > > and GOOD LUCK!!
> > > >
> > > > Gary Meadows
> > > > (House-painting mode...trying to sell my wife on some woodwork, let's
> > see
> > > I
> > > > need a new table saw, a miter saw....)
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > "the Ox is slow, but the Earth is patient"
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______
> > Get FREE voicemail, fax and email at http://voicemail.excite.com
> > Talk online at http://voicechat.excite.com
> >
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: enthused about starting |
life is a trade off, got to keep the little women happy. Been married for 32
yrs and she has gone thru all my hobbies with a smile, 1987 I sold her home
to buy a 100K plus sail boat. We had fun for a few years. Now the little
women has a new home again, She informed me I was never going to sell her
home again. OK dear.
Looking for a air strip to buy.
It's all fun and if we don't do it this life, Well??
Gordon
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | John Duprey <j-m-duprey(at)erols.com> |
Sent: Friday, October 01, 1999 7:48 PM
Subject: | Re: enthused about starting |
> Gordon: I know what you are going through, I cant build my Fuselage till
> , I re build my Barn.
>
> John Duprey
>
> Gordon Brimhall wrote:
> >
> > Well she is holding out, she wants a Jacuzzy this winter, so maybe I
will
> > have a lateh this coming winter, I'll make her candle sticks with a new
> > Plazma Cutting machine, NC
> >
> > All kidding aside, I have to put T1-11 on walls to do and floor in my
new
> > 20' x 33' workshop and that is what is keeping me from starting any big
> > project. I want to put a (I Beam) down the center to hold a hoist that
> > rolls. Will probably do my floor myself with part cement and part wood
for
> > wood shop area.
> >
> > Next part of it is making T section add on to the front so I can use
front
> > part as a hanger.
> >
> > Whats this got to do with building airplanes, (Everything)
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Gordon
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: John Duprey <duprey(at)excite.com>
> > To: Pietenpol Discussion
> > Sent: Friday, October 01, 1999 10:12 AM
> > Subject: Re: enthused about starting
> >
> > > Gordon buy her some new candles.
> > >
> > > John
> > >
> > >
> > > > Gary
> > > >
> > > > Do the cabinet thing like I did back in 91, Made a nice food cabinet
in
> > > the
> > > > garage, then another 14 cabinets and work benches for myself, needed
a
> > > new
> > > > sears contractor table saw, band saw and sander combo to get her
cabinet
> > > > completed, a welder for making the hinges.
> > > >
> > > > Now I am hoping she asks for candle stick holders so I can get a
lathe.
> > > >
> > > > Gordon
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: Gary Meadows <gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com>
> > > > To: Pietenpol Discussion
> > > > Sent: Thursday, September 30, 1999 10:29 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: enthused about starting
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Hey Fireman,
> > > > > Congratulations on being ready to go! I think Walt Evans has a
bill
> > > of
> > > > > materials on the Aircamper.Org website. I forget exactly how to
get to
> > > > that
> > > > > particular part, but just browse around you'll find it in Walt's
> > > pictures
> > > > I
> > > > > believe. It's got the sticks you need! This is a real neat
> > > website-enjoy,
> > > > > and GOOD LUCK!!
> > > > >
> > > > > Gary Meadows
> > > > > (House-painting mode...trying to sell my wife on some woodwork,
let's
> > > see
> > > > I
> > > > > need a new table saw, a miter saw....)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > "the Ox is slow, but the Earth is patient"
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______
> > > Get FREE voicemail, fax and email at http://voicemail.excite.com
> > > Talk online at http://voicechat.excite.com
> > >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: corvair engines |
have you flown with a continental? and if you have,
how would you compare the two? thanks for your
thoughts!
del
--- B and V Dearinger wrote:
> Del I flew 150 hours behind a corvair engine.It
> was a 164 cu in that we
> bored .060 and installed forged pistons and put arp
> bolts in the rods.Also
> stainless valves and a 3 angle valve job.Made a prop
> flange and carved a
> wood prop for it.Used a home made intake and a 65
> cont carb slung
> underneath.Ran battery ignition and used a small
> harley davidson 6 volt
> battery.Worked flawless.Put out 80 solid horsepower
> on 4 gal per hour of
> auto premium gas.Unfortunately it was not on a piet
> but a small midwing
> single seat.Bill
> -----Original Message-----
> From: del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Date: Friday, October 01, 1999 4:25 PM
> Subject: Re: corvair engines
>
>
> >is there any way to talk to him or find out whose
> or
> >what design, and his feelings for the engine?
> >
> >--- walter evans wrote:
> >> Del,
> >> I was the one who posted the corvair pics, for
> a
> >> friend. But that was an
> >> engine( or two) that he had designed and built .
> One
> >> for a Piet and the
> >> other for another homebuilt. They are a very
> unique
> >> design.
> >> walt evans
> >> I'm using A65
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com>
> >> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> >> Date: Friday, October 01, 1999 12:16 AM
> >> Subject: corvair engines
> >>
> >>
> >> >are there any piet owners out there who are
> using
> >> the
> >> >corvair. It seems the majority are ford or cont
> >> users,
> >> >but it would be helpful to me to hear some input
> >> from
> >> >actual users of the corvair. or some that have
> >> contact
> >> >with users of that engine.Is it walt evans that
> is
> >> >showing pictures of the corvair? what can you
> tell
> >> me
> >> >about?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >=====
> >> >
> >>
> http://auctions.yahoo.com
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >=====
> >
>
>
=====
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | leonstefanhutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan) |
Walter Evans: Thanks for the tip about having a perfectly clean tank
interior. When I laid up my glass layers, I painted every loose glass
strand down with extra resin to insure there won't be anything loose
inside. With my brother helping me, we started laying fiberglass at
noon and finished at 5:30. It went well, but on finishing I hope I never
have to build another one. I'm using the Gary(Keri Ann) Price plans. 2
halves in female molde that I will join together at te seam. After I
have bonded all of my nuts in place, Price calls for another wet coat of
resin inside before joining the 2 halves. A local Piet builder with a
glass tank had a piece of debree get to his carb. and caused an off
airprt landing, but when he built his gascolater he didn"t realise that
it is supose to have a screen in it! Yes, I'm very conserned about that.
Leon S.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | B and V Dearinger <dearinge(at)iocc.com> |
Subject: | Re: corvair engines |
Del We came across a C90-8 cont real cheap in good condition and removed
the corvair and installed the cont.Had to make the motor mount several
inches longer as it was considerably lighter.Was not nearly so smooth
running but takeoff and climb were much better.Cruise about the same.Fuel
consumption about the same.This was 10 years ago but seems like there was
about 40 pounds difference in weight.Had a 64 inch wood prop on corvair and
69 inch metal prop on c90.Of course cont had 200 cu in and corvair had about
170 but corvair compression ratio much higher. Was around 9 to 1.Continental
was much easier to mount, cool ,and cowl .Used factory parts mostly.Corvair
had to be fabricated.Thats where the big difference is.Building speed.Spent
money for cont and build faster or fabricate with corvair and take longer
but much cheaper.If had to complain on corvair ,would be was hard to baffle
to cool evenly because of design.We did not use fan.Without an extension on
prop hub , prop is close to engine. Bill
-----Original Message-----
From: del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com>
Date: Friday, October 01, 1999 10:18 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: corvair engines
>have you flown with a continental? and if you have,
>how would you compare the two? thanks for your
>thoughts!
>del
>
>--- B and V Dearinger wrote:
>> Del I flew 150 hours behind a corvair engine.It
>> was a 164 cu in that we
>> bored .060 and installed forged pistons and put arp
>> bolts in the rods.Also
>> stainless valves and a 3 angle valve job.Made a prop
>> flange and carved a
>> wood prop for it.Used a home made intake and a 65
>> cont carb slung
>> underneath.Ran battery ignition and used a small
>> harley davidson 6 volt
>> battery.Worked flawless.Put out 80 solid horsepower
>> on 4 gal per hour of
>> auto premium gas.Unfortunately it was not on a piet
>> but a small midwing
>> single seat.Bill
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com>
>> To: Pietenpol Discussion
>> Date: Friday, October 01, 1999 4:25 PM
>> Subject: Re: corvair engines
>>
>>
>> >is there any way to talk to him or find out whose
>> or
>> >what design, and his feelings for the engine?
>> >
>> >--- walter evans wrote:
>> >> Del,
>> >> I was the one who posted the corvair pics, for
>> a
>> >> friend. But that was an
>> >> engine( or two) that he had designed and built .
>> One
>> >> for a Piet and the
>> >> other for another homebuilt. They are a very
>> unique
>> >> design.
>> >> walt evans
>> >> I'm using A65
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com>
>> >> To: Pietenpol Discussion
>> >> Date: Friday, October 01, 1999 12:16 AM
>> >> Subject: corvair engines
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >are there any piet owners out there who are
>> using
>> >> the
>> >> >corvair. It seems the majority are ford or cont
>> >> users,
>> >> >but it would be helpful to me to hear some input
>> >> from
>> >> >actual users of the corvair. or some that have
>> >> contact
>> >> >with users of that engine.Is it walt evans that
>> is
>> >> >showing pictures of the corvair? what can you
>> tell
>> >> me
>> >> >about?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >=====
>> >> >
>> >>
>> http://auctions.yahoo.com
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >=====
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
>=====
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | leonstefanhutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan) |
Subject: | Fuel tank posting |
The reply posting I sent for Walter Evans's comments about glass tanks
went out on 9/27 but didn't appear on this sight until 10/2! weird!
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | John Weikel <jandd(at)maverickbbs.com> |
Subject: | Re: Fuel tank posting |
Could be his date is set incorrectly..
-----Original Message-----
From: Leon Stefan <leonstefanhutks(at)webtv.net>
Date: Saturday, October 02, 1999 8:09 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tank posting
The reply posting I sent for Walter Evans's comments about glass tanks
went out on 9/27 but didn't appear on this sight until 10/2! weird!
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: if you had to do it over |
Without the cutout it is very hard to get in and out of the plane.
John Langston
writes:
>Really getting into the wings and wondering,,,from the guys who are
>already flying. The center section cutout......should I ?
>It's hard to picture a Piet( cause I've never seen one for real). If
>I leave the wing center complete, will it be hard to get into? If do
>the cut out will the visibility be worth it? Can't decide.
>If you flyers had to do it over again,,,with all you've seen,,,,how
>would you build the center section " on your next one"?
>walt
__________
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Light weight Piet |
PIET LIST; ALERT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I have been in contact with the gentlemEn that have the two Ford powered
Piets from New York State, almost identical, one of which had thrown a prop
on the way to Broadhead '99 near Cleveland, Ohio. The fella that threw the
prop may be on this list too....(Mike Troy)
Anyways, I am bringing this up because that fella had "volunteered" to
submit a report to the N.T.S.B. as to what happened with his prop incident.
I got involved because I was in the aircraft fastener business for 15 years
to include manufacturing them. I also got involved because I wanted to know
what happened here as this was a "totally plans built" Piet (x2) right down
to the Model T prop hub......
This fella has indicated as noted below >>>>>that changes need to be made
to the Piet prop hub as it is ..."a bad design" ...and prone to
failure....The 4 bolt plans hub is no good and we should ALL use the 6 bolt
Continental units that are out there. The 4 bolt unit has it's bolt circle
to close to the crank centerline, so on and so forth. <<<<< This was HIS
OPINION not based on anything scientific. The down side of this is that the
N.T.S.B., because of this fella's allegations may recommend that ANYONE
ASKING THE FAA/MIDOs FOR AN EXPERIMENTAL HOMEBUILT certificate POWERED BY
A FORD MODEL A ENGINE...CANNOT USE THE PLANS BUILT 4 BOLT
HUB!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
A couple more facts here...This fella stated that >>>>>>the hub was built
EXACTLY to the plans EXCEPT for the addition of a spacer disc of mild steel
of .090" thickness added between the hub and the backside of that prop. My
intent was to have that spacer a bigger diameter to match the diameter of
the prop boss say 5" instead of the 3.5" of the hub, in other words, spread
out the bearing area over the wood <<<<<(not a bad idea?). >>>>>He torked
the quantity FOUR, GRADE 5 commercial bolts down by the "hearing the wood
start to crush method instead of using a tork wrench as I didn't have the
tork values anyway"<<<<<<>>>>>.3 of the 4 bolts severed just below the
shoulder of the bolt about 2 threads down OR there was 2 threads showing
above the nut, either way, the bolts let go right at the vicinity where the
shank meets the threads which is ALWAYS the weakest tork point......I
didn't use Grade 8 or 12 bolts as he didn't want them to work-harden any
farther.<<<<<
The second Piet's owner removed his prop upon their return to N.Y. State.
This second owner found that his prop, the backside against the hub spacer,
was severly burned as in smelling of burned wood and had the appearence of
being burned ! That was that and there goes the above report.............
This NTSB recommendation comment did not come from that fella, it came from
THE FAA in a round about manner (from my friends that work for the FAA and
have their collective heads on straight) as something they (the Feds) would
or could adopt as an unwritten rule since they would have read the NTSB's
suggestion or something to this effect. I did not mention the Ford 4 bolt
issue, just "a mechanical issue with a vintage engine"........
I don't want to trash this guy or us jump on his "case". I would
like you guys to anaylize this issue and pass this around to those of whom
you guys trust that can educatedly comment on the mechanics of what is
going on here. Have ANYONE who has a scientific opinion to contact me at
allaire(at)raex.com with any info that would be helpfull. I am doing this
because this incident happened in the CLEVELAND, Ohio MIDO / FSDO area where
I live. I have a 4 bolt hub SIMILAR to the plans unit. If this gets out of
hand, I will have to deal with it then ultimately the reast of you. This
way, I can collect GOOD data to combat this for all of us! Remember, with
the Feds, all it takes is ONE unsubstantiated comment to get their
monolithic ball rolling which is danged hard to stop!
Anybody ever hear of ANYTHING happening like this before? Details?
In my humble opinion, I don't think the guy had the prop bolts any way
near tight enough.........YES? NO?
Earl Myers, Ohio...humble and curious!
-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Gower <ggower(at)informador.com.mx>
Date: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 5:14 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Light weight Piet
>>>>I think that the outside cover plane on the
>>propeller should be keyed to the propeller shaft
>>to remove any twisting of the propeller bolts." .
>>
>>what he is describing is either a rough running
>>engine that backfires, one strong enough to shear
>>the bolts during acceleration or one that had a
>>ground strike. Otherwise there would be no
>>"twisting" of the bolts. Unless, of course, he is
>>over-revving it during a hand crank.
>>
>Remember to check (and retorque) the prop bolts twice a year, we do that
and
>that takes care of any posibility of bolt shear in wooden propellers.
>
>I know that the prop is barnished very well, but maybe humidity changes can
>loose the bolt torque when in dry season...
>
>Saludos
>
>Gary Gower.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | walter evans <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Subject: | Re: Glass fuel tank |
This brings up a point that my mentor had told me....Make sure that you put
a "finger strainer" in the tank. This is like a screen made in the shape of
a cigar,sticking up. This is so any debris like fiberglass flake, leaf, bug
wing, etc. that might fall into the tank, can't find it's way to the fuel
output, and cover it. This goes for any tank, no matter what the mat'l. He
said that a number of planes have gone down because of this.
walt evans-
-----Original Message-----
From: Leon Stefan <leonstefanhutks(at)webtv.net>
Date: Saturday, October 02, 1999 3:00 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Glass fuel tank
Walter Evans: Thanks for the tip about having a perfectly clean tank
interior. When I laid up my glass layers, I painted every loose glass
strand down with extra resin to insure there won't be anything loose
inside. With my brother helping me, we started laying fiberglass at
noon and finished at 5:30. It went well, but on finishing I hope I never
have to build another one. I'm using the Gary(Keri Ann) Price plans. 2
halves in female molde that I will join together at te seam. After I
have bonded all of my nuts in place, Price calls for another wet coat of
resin inside before joining the 2 halves. A local Piet builder with a
glass tank had a piece of debree get to his carb. and caused an off
airprt landing, but when he built his gascolater he didn"t realise that
it is supose to have a screen in it! Yes, I'm very conserned about that.
Leon S.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | B and V Dearinger <dearinge(at)iocc.com> |
Subject: | Re: Light weight Piet |
In ref to the message about the prop hub,if you put a piece of paper between
the rear of the prop and the drive plate it will keep the slipping from
happening and will not burn the back of the prop.Bill
-----Original Message-----
From: Earl Myers
Date: Saturday, October 02, 1999 12:30 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Light weight Piet
>PIET LIST; ALERT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> I have been in contact with the gentlemEn that have the two Ford powered
>Piets from New York State, almost identical, one of which had thrown a prop
>on the way to Broadhead '99 near Cleveland, Ohio. The fella that threw the
>prop may be on this list too....(Mike Troy)
> Anyways, I am bringing this up because that fella had "volunteered" to
>submit a report to the N.T.S.B. as to what happened with his prop incident.
>I got involved because I was in the aircraft fastener business for 15 years
>to include manufacturing them. I also got involved because I wanted to know
>what happened here as this was a "totally plans built" Piet (x2) right down
>to the Model T prop hub......
> This fella has indicated as noted below >>>>>that changes need to be
made
>to the Piet prop hub as it is ..."a bad design" ...and prone to
>failure....The 4 bolt plans hub is no good and we should ALL use the 6 bolt
>Continental units that are out there. The 4 bolt unit has it's bolt circle
>to close to the crank centerline, so on and so forth. <<<<< This was HIS
>OPINION not based on anything scientific. The down side of this is that the
>N.T.S.B., because of this fella's allegations may recommend that ANYONE
>ASKING THE FAA/MIDOs FOR AN EXPERIMENTAL HOMEBUILT certificate POWERED BY
>A FORD MODEL A ENGINE...CANNOT USE THE PLANS BUILT 4 BOLT
>HUB!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> A couple more facts here...This fella stated that >>>>>>the hub was
built
>EXACTLY to the plans EXCEPT for the addition of a spacer disc of mild steel
>of .090" thickness added between the hub and the backside of that prop. My
>intent was to have that spacer a bigger diameter to match the diameter of
>the prop boss say 5" instead of the 3.5" of the hub, in other words, spread
>out the bearing area over the wood <<<<<(not a bad idea?). >>>>>He torked
>the quantity FOUR, GRADE 5 commercial bolts down by the "hearing the
wood
>start to crush method instead of using a tork wrench as I didn't have the
>tork values anyway"<<<<<<>>>>>.3 of the 4 bolts severed just below the
>shoulder of the bolt about 2 threads down OR there was 2 threads showing
>above the nut, either way, the bolts let go right at the vicinity where the
>shank meets the threads which is ALWAYS the weakest tork point......I
>didn't use Grade 8 or 12 bolts as he didn't want them to work-harden any
>farther.<<<<<
>
> The second Piet's owner removed his prop upon their return to N.Y.
State.
>This second owner found that his prop, the backside against the hub spacer,
>was severly burned as in smelling of burned wood and had the appearence of
>being burned ! That was that and there goes the above report.............
>
>
>This NTSB recommendation comment did not come from that fella, it came
from
>THE FAA in a round about manner (from my friends that work for the FAA and
>have their collective heads on straight) as something they (the Feds) would
>or could adopt as an unwritten rule since they would have read the NTSB's
>suggestion or something to this effect. I did not mention the Ford 4 bolt
>issue, just "a mechanical issue with a vintage engine"........
>
> I don't want to trash this guy or us jump on his "case". I would
>like you guys to anaylize this issue and pass this around to those of whom
>you guys trust that can educatedly comment on the mechanics of what is
>going on here. Have ANYONE who has a scientific opinion to contact me at
>allaire(at)raex.com with any info that would be helpfull. I am doing this
>because this incident happened in the CLEVELAND, Ohio MIDO / FSDO area
where
>I live. I have a 4 bolt hub SIMILAR to the plans unit. If this gets out of
>hand, I will have to deal with it then ultimately the reast of you. This
>way, I can collect GOOD data to combat this for all of us! Remember, with
>the Feds, all it takes is ONE unsubstantiated comment to get their
>monolithic ball rolling which is danged hard to stop!
>
> Anybody ever hear of ANYTHING happening like this before? Details?
>
> In my humble opinion, I don't think the guy had the prop bolts any way
>near tight enough.........YES? NO?
>Earl Myers, Ohio...humble and curious!
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Gary Gower <ggower(at)informador.com.mx>
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Date: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 5:14 PM
>Subject: Re: Light weight Piet
>
>
>>>>>I think that the outside cover plane on the
>>>propeller should be keyed to the propeller shaft
>>>to remove any twisting of the propeller bolts." .
>>>
>>>what he is describing is either a rough running
>>>engine that backfires, one strong enough to shear
>>>the bolts during acceleration or one that had a
>>>ground strike. Otherwise there would be no
>>>"twisting" of the bolts. Unless, of course, he is
>>>over-revving it during a hand crank.
>>>
>>Remember to check (and retorque) the prop bolts twice a year, we do that
>and
>>that takes care of any posibility of bolt shear in wooden propellers.
>>
>>I know that the prop is barnished very well, but maybe humidity changes
can
>>loose the bolt torque when in dry season...
>>
>>Saludos
>>
>>Gary Gower.
>>
>>
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | LaurenMWilliams(at)webtv.net (Lauren Williams) |
Subject: | Burnt props and grade 5 bolts. |
Haven't we seen this before?
The Volkswagen engined guys have had this problem for years. They have
lost a few props too. If they don't keep their prop bolts tight, the
surface against the driving flange will char because of the friction
caused by movement between the prop and flange..
Grade 5 bolts!!!! That's common, autoparts store stuff. I thought that
the word had gotten to everyone about using aircraft (AN) hardware in
all structural applications in homebuilts, regardless of what the 1930s
plans say. Certainly the prop bolts are the most structural fastener in
the whole plane. There are wonderful aircraft propeller bolts availiable
for all dimensions with fine threads, drilled heads for safety wire and
huge strength.
I am afraid that I would want to look over the rest of the plane and see
if the lift and cabane strut attach fittings, the wire attach fittings,
etc. had correct AN fasteners.
I wonder what the FAA inspector looked at on this aircraft if he didn't
look at the type of fasteners being used. A first time builder, who
hasn't been following the literature for 20 years can be forgiven a
mistake like this. What is the inspector's excuse?
I am building a Pietenpol so that I can experience and share the
adventures of the early day aviators. I really have no intrest in
reexperiancing their "misadventures".
I guess this got me excited!
Lauren
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Leopold <frgtdog(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Does anyone know anything about Azusa aluminum wheels and Azusalite
nylon wheels? What about JDM wheels and brakes?.
Does anyone know anything about
Azusa aluminum
wheels and Azusalite nylon wheels? What about JDM wheels and
brakes?.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Burnt props and grade 5 bolts. |
LAUREN;
The threads in the Ford crank flange are COARSE thread, hence the use of
the commercial bolts. The two engine mfgr's , Lycoming and Continental both
use commercial bolts on their engines as do many component mfgrs.
(alternators, pumps & so on). These two Piets otherwise are reported to be
VERY nice!
You said the VW guys have had this problem for years while using the
direct drive I assume?
This friction is from the bolts not being torked enough.......I will pass
that on to see what reaction I get. Guys, this is the kind of info I need,
keep it coming!
Earl Myers
-----Original Message-----
From: Lauren Williams <LaurenMWilliams(at)webtv.net>
Date: Saturday, October 02, 1999 10:50 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Burnt props and grade 5 bolts.
Haven't we seen this before?
The Volkswagen engined guys have had this problem for years. They have
lost a few props too. If they don't keep their prop bolts tight, the
surface against the driving flange will char because of the friction
caused by movement between the prop and flange..
Grade 5 bolts!!!! That's common, autoparts store stuff. I thought that
the word had gotten to everyone about using aircraft (AN) hardware in
all structural applications in homebuilts, regardless of what the 1930s
plans say. Certainly the prop bolts are the most structural fastener in
the whole plane. There are wonderful aircraft propeller bolts availiable
for all dimensions with fine threads, drilled heads for safety wire and
huge strength.
I am afraid that I would want to look over the rest of the plane and see
if the lift and cabane strut attach fittings, the wire attach fittings,
etc. had correct AN fasteners.
I wonder what the FAA inspector looked at on this aircraft if he didn't
look at the type of fasteners being used. A first time builder, who
hasn't been following the literature for 20 years can be forgiven a
mistake like this. What is the inspector's excuse?
I am building a Pietenpol so that I can experience and share the
adventures of the early day aviators. I really have no intrest in
reexperiancing their "misadventures".
I guess this got me excited!
Lauren
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: 1/2x1/2 diaginals question |
Center.
John Langston
writes:
>The 1/2x1/2 bracing in the wing, such as at wing tip ,at aileron cut
>out etc. The plans show a top view only, is this bracing at the
>centerline , or is it to top and bottom of spar?
>walt
__________
________________________________________________________________________________
We're going to use one in ours. I plan to make it out of aluminum and
weld it myself. We should be into this this coming winter as the wing is
nearly complete. I've done some aluminum welding before and feel I can do
it if I practice a little on scraps left over. I'm sure we'll use 5052
aluminum, possibly 3003, as each of these weldable. We plan to do some
figuring to get a ten gallon tank also. I've read where many people have
eleven or twelve gallons which might be nice for range, but two hours is
long enough in a Piet (unless you can't find an acceptable place to
land!)
John Langston
writes:
>What does everyone think about the center section wing tank?
__________
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Just starting |
The Model A is quite reliable and quiet -- I like that. The Continental
has more power, makes more noise and is very reliable. We're putting a
Model A in ours simply because we want to. What engine you use is to suit
your personal desires. We just like the looks of a Model A powered Piet
and as I've overhauled well over a hundred aircraft engines and a few car
engines, I'm not worried about building up a Ford to run OK. There are
also ways to get more power out of a Model A and we plan to go this
route.
John Langston
writes:
> Hi! My name is Dan Badger(not Robin Goodfellow, from
>A Midsummer Night's Dream). I fell in love with the
>Air Camper last October while sitting in Jim Hammond's
>beautiful machine and making engine noises. I got a
>copy of the plans and am about to order metal for the
>fittings, unless I can find some that someone is
>willing to sell. I am building per 1933 plans and am
>trying to decide between a Ford model A and a
>Continental A-65. Any suggestions?Thanx.
>_danbadger
>PIETENPOLS FOR EVER!!
>
>
__________
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Just starting |
If you already have an engine, it's cheaper to rebuild it than to buy
another engine (usually). Depends on how much is wrong with engine.
Continental engines do not allow grinding down the crank .020, but there
is an STC available through Engine Components Inc. in San Antonio, TX.
They supply the bearings with their STC. The catch is that the crankcase
has to be modified to accept the new front main bearings. I overhauled a
A-65 about three or four years ago and went through this procedure. I
had the case reworked at Ajax, also in San Antonio (I live near there).
John Langston
writes:
>
>hi my name is shad bell i am from delaware ohio. my
>father and i just started building the aircamper. we
>just started on the building today. we are starting
>with the ribs and next the fusealage. we are wondering
>which engine to use. we have an 0-200 which needs
>rebuilt and needs the crank ground down to 20 under to
>be useable. does anyone know where to get bearings fo
>a 20 under crank? would it be worth rebuilding the
>0-200 or better to get a rebuilt cont-75 or 85?
>sincerely
>aviatorbell
>
__________
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Ribs and Wings |
Years ago I tore apart a 1940 Aeronca Chief and these wings also had
cardboard gussets. Light aircraft built during this time period were
like cars; they were only expected to last so long. I did a considerable
amount of work on a 1941 Defender awhile back and it was obvious looking
at the structure that it was never intended by Aeronca that it would
still be flying fifty years later. Incidently, this Defender was not an
L-3 and was licensed December 5, 1941. It could possibly have been the
last civil aircraft licensed before Pearl Harbor. Who knows?
John Langston
>Your damaged Chief brings back fond memories...
>Way back in 195something, I bought an Aeronca O-58B (L3B). When I had
>to
>recover a wing, I was amazed to find that the gussets were
>CARDBOARD!!!
>Seems that in an effort to conserve plywood, which was scarce
>everywhere
>except Howard Hughes' hangar, Aeronca utilized this readily available
>
>substitute. Since the wings were already almost twenty years old, and
>the
>cardboard was still in pretty good condition, I would venture that
>they made
>a good decision.
>
>Sure wish I still had that bird. For that matter, I wish I had every
>
>airplane I ever flew in.
>
>Ed
>
>P.S.--sign me up for the Impoverished Airplane Builders Association
>too.
__________
________________________________________________________________________________
You Need to be carefull with sloshing compound. It does work very well
though. Be sure the tank is absolutely clean before sloshing and
continually check the sloshing compund for flaking while in service.
There was an AD note on Piper Cherokee's several years ago in which all
Cherokee tanks that had been sloshed had to be inspected for peeling or
flaking. I found a couple that were flaking and found sloshing material
in the gascolator. Although I don't know anyone who had an engine
failure due to this, I've heard of several.
John Langston
writes:
>Walter,
>
>Even with ternplate you might want to use a sloshing compound to seal
>the
>tank. I've got a 52 year old Cessna 140 (yeah, it's a Spam-can, but
>at
>least it doesn't have one of those training wheels up front) with the
>original ternplate fuel tanks. I'm beginning to get considerable
>rust
>flaking every time I drain the gascolator. of course, you could look
>at it
>like 50+ years is a pretty good endorsement. Ternplate is pretty
>heavy,
>when compared with aluminum. I'm planning to make my tank out of
>5052
>aluminum which I will pop-rivet together, then take to a professional
>welder
>to weld it up. That way I know it will fit in the centersection, and
>I can
>put in all the baffling I need.
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: walter evans [SMTP:wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net]
>> Sent: Sunday, September 26, 1999 3:01 PM
>> To: Pietenpol Discussion
>> Subject: Re: fuel tank
>>
>> Gary,
>> I'm putting in both the center sect. tank and a nose tank. I may be
>nuts,
>> but I'm making them out of Ternplate. Didn't even know what that
>was BP (
>> before Piet). Located some in NJ by me. But yet to get into that.
>> walt
>>
>> From: Gary Leopold < frgtdog(at)worldnet.att.net
>> To: Pietenpol Discussion < piet(at)byu.edu
>> Date: Sunday, September 26, 1999 12:36 PM
>> Subject: fuel tank
>>
>>
>> What does everyone think about the center section wing
>tank?
>>
__________
________________________________________________________________________________
The Aeronca Defender I used to work on a few years ago belonged to my
main "pride and joy" customer. The reason I worked on it so much and
became so familiar with its structure is that he wrecked it three times
in four years! The last wreck was bad and totaled the airplane. His
engine failed on take off, this after I told him and told him that
something had to be done with that engine. I did not do the last annual.
The second wreck was due to his hand propping the plane. He had owned
it for years and was very familiar with starting the engine, but on this
particular day he flooded the engine. Following the normal procedure, he
turned off the switch and began pulling the prop through several times to
clear the engine. Now fate enters in. He gets a phone call up at the
house and he goes to answer it, talking for some twenty minutes. Back to
the plane he goes, forgets that the throttle is wide open, turns on the
switch, and props it. The engine started on the first pull and race to
full power. How he got out of the way, I'll never know. As the Defender
went by, he grabbed the tail and the airplane began to drag him all over
his field. Two of his neighbors saw his predicament and came to the
resque, all three hanging onto the tail as this little Defender drug them
all around the field for about twenty minutes. Finally the owner decided
someone was going to get hurt (there were several opportunities) and they
let it go. As the plane started to lift off and become an unguided
missile, it ran into a group of live oak trees, the right wing (the one I
had just recovered eight months before after the first wreck) hitting and
bending a strut but stopping the airplane.
John Langston
writes:
>Yes I was trying to start a 7AC at farmers pride airport just north
>of Lebanon Pa. It was a cold day and It just would not start
>so I thought I could get away with cracking the throttle 1/16''
>and hand propping. It worked the plane started right up but
>began to crawl forward I thought no problem I'll step to the side
>that the door's on and grab the plane by the strut and it'll stop.
> Have you ever squared danced with an Aronaca
>Champ, the plane went in circles
> I was able to jump inside and stop it
>but from that day on I tied
>the plane to my pickup with a rope.
>
>Russell
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>
>
>From: Ken Beanlands <kbeanlan(at)spots.ab.ca>
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Sent: Thursday, September 23, 1999 12:04 PM
>Subject: Re: Battery Box.
>
>
>> OK, let's not get nasty. I had a friend back in university days that
>lost
>> his foot while hand propping a Chief. He had owned the plane for
>years and
>> flew it regularly. His girlfriend was in the plane and on the brakes
>at
>> the time. When he pulled the prop through, he lost his footing on
>some ice
>> and ended up slipping down and sort of under the prop. His leg
>naturally
>> came up and was caught by the prop. There was a lot of blood and it
>> sprayed onto the windscreen where his girlfriend was. Somehow, the
>plane
>> was damaged, but I can't remember how. In any case, I became rather
>> reluctant to go for a non electric plane.
>>
>> Besides, have you ever tried
>> hand propping on floats? It's hard enough to stand on the floats at
>the
>> best of times. If you had a heavy wind, you'd have to let the ropes
>go and
>> try to hand start while drifting back down the pond. If it didn't
>start,
>> you could easily end up on the rocks. With electric start, I
>generally
>> untie the plane as I head in the cabin. I hold onto the rope until
>the
>> plane starts and idles and then toss the rope out the door and clear
>of
>> the plane. Even that sometimes requires a third hand ;-).
>>
>> Ken.
>>
>> On Wed, 22 Sep 1999, walter evans wrote:
>>
>> > Good one Mike.
>> > My input would be to give the battery a test flight.
>> > Mark out a reduced pattern. Pick up the battery and carry it
>down the
>> > runway, to the trees, turn right till you hit the bushes, now
>right
>again
>> > and go all the way down parallel to the runway to the other end
>to the
>> > bushes, right again, and right again when you are in line with
>the
>runway.
>> > When you reach the numbers, put it down. Do you want to carry
>that in
>> > flight?
>> > walt
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov>
>> > To: Pietenpol Discussion
>> > Date: Wednesday, September 22, 1999 6:20 PM
>> > Subject: Re: Battery Box.
>> >
>> >
>> > >Ken- We hand prop.....:))))
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >Just funning with you. Seriously, I swear I've seen
>> > >poly type containers in Wicks or ACS catalogs just for this
>> > >purpose...not sure on the cost though.
>> > >
>> > >Mike C.
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>> Ken Beanlands B.Eng (Aerospace)
>> Calgary, Alberta, Canada
>> Christavia MK 1 C-GREN
>> <http://www.spots.ab.ca/~kbeanlan>
>>
>>
>
__________
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | John Weikel <jandd(at)maverickbbs.com> |
I am using AZUSA Aluminum wheels on my RW-6 (450 lbs gross) and so far
have no complaints. I am also using the external band go-kart brakes
that are made for these wheels and they work fine too... The airport
owner where I keep my plane has a large cardboard box full of broken
AZUSALITE wheels. I put my AZUSALITE wheels on my tool box.
John W
Kerrville, Tx
RW-6
KR-2S
jandd(at)maverickbbs.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Leopold <frgtdog(at)worldnet.att.net>
Date: Saturday, October 02, 1999 10:39 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: wheels
Does anyone know anything about Azusa aluminum wheels and Azusalite
nylon wheels? What about JDM wheels and brakes?.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | John Weikel <jandd(at)maverickbbs.com> |
Subject: | Texas Piet Flyin |
I haven't heard recent mention of the proposed Texas Piet Flyin that was
supposed to take place next Saturday. Does anyone know if it is still a go?
John W
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | F10DRVR <F10DRVR(at)ims.msn.com> |
I just bought two 19 inch motorcycyle wheels from the salvage
yard. I also bought a couple of brake calipers, I have taken
the bearings out of the wheels and could have the center of the
of the wheels machined to accept a bushing for my 1.5 inch axle
and use them as is. I am concerned about the side load issue
and would like to know if anyone has used motorcycle wheels
without the wide hubs and if so how they worked. Also if I do have
to make a new hub how wide does it need to be?
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Lauren Williams <LaurenMWilliams(at)webtv.net> |
Sent: Sunday, September 26, 1999 10:48 AM
> Del,
>
> Howard Henderson's wire wheels are bronze bushed. Bushings are an easy
> solution as they are available from any bearing house by dimension. I
> bought a set myself. I haven't built the wheels yet.
>
> One cosideration is rotational speed. With the large diameter wire
> wheels, the bearing speeds are going to be quite slow. With smaller
> diameter wheels and tires these speeds could be a lot higher. check it
> out.
>
> You should be able to find stock ball bearings to fit your axels at
> reasonable cost too. Then design your wheels around them.
>
> Lauren
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | DonanClara(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Ribs and Wings |
John ...very interesting that you mentioned the Aeronca Defender may have
been the last civil aircraft manufactured befor Pearl Harbor. An historical
point of interest (that you may already know as a Defender owner is that the
small civilian plane that got caught in the air early on the morning of
December 7th as the Japanese planes arrived at Pearl was an Aeronca Defender.
He was certainly startled but made it down safely, the plane survived the war
was rebuilt and I believe is flying to this day!!!
Don Hicks
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | kyle ray <rrobert(at)centuryinter.net> |
I wonder which location is the safest center section or fuselage?
If a person crashed landed which location would be more prone
to rupture and feed a fire. Which tank would be less likely to rupture
in a crash aluminum or fiberglass?
What paint and covering systems least support combustion.
Are there any other considerations to fire proof a homebuilt plane?
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | BARNSTMR(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 10/3/99 10:06:51 AM Central Daylight Time,
rrobert(at)centuryinter.net writes:
<< What paint and covering systems least support combustion.
Are there any other considerations to fire proof a homebuilt plane? >>
Russell
Nitrate dope is the more flammable product in its cured state. For years the
finishing processes were developed around the requirements for cotton.
Nitrate acts to tauten cotton fabric which (unlike the dacron we use now) is
tautened by heat. The butyrate dope finishing system was developed to be
used in combination with nitrate dope as a replacement for an all nitrate
dope finish. This significantly reduced the finished product down to a flame
retardent (fire resistant) level. This included some first stage doping with
nitrate for tautening and then butyrate was used with aluminum powder
(silver) and also with color pigment for filling and finishing. Processes
like Cooper and Randolph still include variations of this. Many including my
dad still swear by these tried and true finishing systems. Many others use
the Stits process. From a fire resistant standpoint, I am guessing that ol'
Ray Stits did his homework. But I don't have my Stits book handy to read up
on this aspect, as I loaned it out recently. Interesting question though.
My guess is that the more recent systems probably have improved materials
that are better than the older ones.
Terry B
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | BARNSTMR(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 10/3/99 10:06:51 AM Central Daylight Time,
rrobert(at)centuryinter.net writes:
<< Which tank would be less likely to rupture
in a crash aluminum or fiberglass? >>
Russell....
Here's the 1st of my 2 cents...
I think aluminum would bend a long way before cracking in comparison to
fiberglass which I think would splinter and break up if deformed outside its
elastic region.
Terry B
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
I was just going back thru some old kitplane mags and
reread the article about a new technology. Putting a
special foam or foam pieces in the fuel tank that kept
the fuel from vaporizing in the tank, keeping it from
exploding in a crash. Has anybody used that? or could
comment on it. I sent for some info on it. I have
learned much from this discussion on tanks. has
anybody used or had much experiance with a fuel
bladder?
--- kyle ray wrote:
> I wonder which location is the safest center
> section or fuselage?
> If a person crashed landed which location would be
> more prone
> to rupture and feed a fire. Which tank would be less
> likely to rupture
> in a crash aluminum or fiberglass?
> What paint and covering systems least support
> combustion.
> Are there any other considerations to fire proof a
> homebuilt plane?
>
> russell
>
>
=====
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: 1/2x1/2 diaginals question |
It goes to the middle of the spar and it is corner blocked to avoid the end
grain joint from not sticking
Earl Myers
-----Original Message-----
From: nle97(at)juno.com <nle97(at)juno.com>
Date: Sunday, October 03, 1999 3:50 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: 1/2x1/2 diaginals question
>Center.
>
>John Langston
>
> writes:
>>The 1/2x1/2 bracing in the wing, such as at wing tip ,at aileron cut
>>out etc. The plans show a top view only, is this bracing at the
>>centerline , or is it to top and bottom of spar?
>>walt
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | BARNSTMR(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 10/3/99 10:06:51 AM Central Daylight Time,
rrobert(at)centuryinter.net writes:
<< If a person crashed landed which location would be more prone
to rupture and feed a fire. >>
These are rather morbid thoughts....but all in the interest of
safety....Certainly we all plan to be safe builders and pilots so we never
have to find out. Anyway...for the 2nd of my 2 cents...
The fuselage tank is certainly surrounded by more structure than the wing
tank. One of the other items to think about is the fuel line. Say the crash
significantly altered the location of the wing, relative to the
Fuselage....the fuel line can only stretch so far until it breaks. Just some
thoughts.
Terry B
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | BARNSTMR(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 10/3/99 10:30:00 AM Central Daylight Time,
BARNSTMR(at)aol.com writes:
<< Nitrate acts to tauten cotton fabric which (unlike the dacron we use now)
is
tautened by heat. >>
OOPS....That came out wrong....I meant to get across that cotton fabric is
tautened by nitrate and dacron fabric is tautened by heat. ..Oh well...you
all knew what I meant, right?
Terry B
________________________________________________________________________________
Jerry;
There are numerous builders on this list using "stock" cycle hubs and
tyres. If you land hard enough to bend these rims, you will have to worry
about other things you bent that cost more..........they all have the axle
bushing put in as you described....go fly!!
Earl Myers
-----Original Message-----
From: F10DRVR <F10DRVR(at)ims.msn.com>
Date: Sunday, October 03, 1999 10:00 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: wheels
>I just bought two 19 inch motorcycyle wheels from the salvage
>yard. I also bought a couple of brake calipers, I have taken
>the bearings out of the wheels and could have the center of the
>of the wheels machined to accept a bushing for my 1.5 inch axle
>and use them as is. I am concerned about the side load issue
>and would like to know if anyone has used motorcycle wheels
>without the wide hubs and if so how they worked. Also if I do have
>to make a new hub how wide does it need to be?
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Lauren Williams <LaurenMWilliams(at)webtv.net>
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Sent: Sunday, September 26, 1999 10:48 AM
>Subject: Re: wheels
>
>
>> Del,
>>
>> Howard Henderson's wire wheels are bronze bushed. Bushings are an easy
>> solution as they are available from any bearing house by dimension. I
>> bought a set myself. I haven't built the wheels yet.
>>
>> One cosideration is rotational speed. With the large diameter wire
>> wheels, the bearing speeds are going to be quite slow. With smaller
>> diameter wheels and tires these speeds could be a lot higher. check it
>> out.
>>
>> You should be able to find stock ball bearings to fit your axels at
>> reasonable cost too. Then design your wheels around them.
>>
>> Lauren
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | BARNSTMR(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: fuel tank - foam tuff |
In a message dated 10/3/99 10:39:20 AM Central Daylight Time,
farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com writes:
<< I was just going back thru some old kitplane mags and
reread the article about a new technology. Putting a
special foam or foam pieces in the fuel tank that kept
the fuel from vaporizing in the tank, keeping it from
exploding in a crash. Has anybody used that? or could
comment on it. >>
Del.... One version of that foam material is used on the Learjet model 31
around the outside of the fuselage fuel cell. The theory is that it is
highly absorbent and will slow the run-off and inhibit vaporization to add a
few seconds to a passenger's time to get out in a crash. We have considered
using it on other Learjet models...but it is quite costly for the effect it
offers. On the model 45, we have twin wall fuel cell to accomplish the same
level of safety. The people who market the stuff cite other design
usage...for example, they sell various grades in varied porosities...that are
intended to be installed inside the fuel cell to prevent sloshing and slow
the rupture flow. I think the A-10 warthog uses this. Perhaps it helped the
A-10 earn its reputation as a tough bird.
Terry B
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | BARNSTMR(at)aol.com |
We've all had a lot of good discussion about welded aluminum and fiberglass
tank construction. Weight, cost, leaks, cracks, ease of construction...all
great discussion and good considerations. I still feel that I want an
aluminum one. I see two things that are a pretty major hurdle for me to wind
up with a welded one.
1. I lack the experience. (But this is nothing new...haha...part of the
fun) I need to learn more about properly designing the welded seams to
prevent cracking. We know that a slight joggle at the seams should prevent
this. Does anyone have a good reference source that gives guidance on this?
2. I don't have the tools. Compared to the cost of fiberglass lay-up, the
cost of buying or renting a TIG welder rig seems prohibitive as is hiring a
professional welder.
In view of hurdle #2, I have decided that I will construct both fuselage and
wing tanks of aluminum with riveted seams, sealed with fuel tank sealant.
Here's my logic:
1. Why not....I can name lots of airplanes with wet-wing fuel cells that
seem to work just fine.
2. I have the experience from repairing wet-wing fuel cells.
3. I have the tools to do the job.
4. I think I can afford the materials. Surely between Boeing, Learjet,
Cessna, and Beech here in town....sealant materials should be available.
5. I like the idea of the challenge to come up with the proper design.
Still need to learn about crack considerations.
6. I am confident that I can wind up with a light weight tank in the end.
I think I am home free....does anyone have any other suggestions, pro's, or
con's to think about? By the way, Leon....you are nearing completion of your
fiberglass tank aren't you? How's the weight? Has anyone else weighed their
tanks?
Terry B
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Leopold <frgtdog(at)worldnet.att.net> |
What is terplate and how is it used?
What is terplate and how is it
used?
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
Subject: | Re: Burnt props and grade 5 bolts. |
I wonder about the front plate on the prop that was lost. Wood is a soft
material and needs to have the clamping load spread out over a large area.
If the front plate was to thin, or soft, it would deform at the fastener
and no amount of retightening could keep it fronm working loose. Most
factory prop hubs I have seen for wood props have the front plate splined to
the hub to eliminate the twisting action as the crank tranfers to the prop.
The bolts then are only in tension between the plates and the plates are
compressing the wood prop hub. The torque is tranfered to the prop by the
STATIC friction between the hub and flanges. Any evidence of burning infers
that there has been considerable motion between the two parts.
If the plate under the bolt heads deforms, the bolts would try to
stretch as they are now the hypotenuse of a right triangle (a longer
distance) as the prop moves on the hub. This stretch and relax cycle would
happen twice per revolution on a 4 cylinder four stroke. That makes it about
5000 cycles per minute ! The bolts, even "proper prop" hardware would never
stand this for long. Properly done the bolts that hold the prop to a Ford
Crank could be Grade 5 but they must be torqued using a thrust plate between
the head of the bolt and the prop. The tension on the bolt's shaft must be
higher at installation than it will ever be subjected to as the engine runs.
I have never heard of a flywheel coming off of a Model A but then they
are dowelled as well as bolted to ensure the bolts only act in tension.
I still have a Ford B engine that I could use in my aircraft but I will most
likely use an adapter to Continetal or Lycoming bolt pattern just so that if
I ever needed a different prop in a hurry it would be much easier to find
one.
John McNarry
-----Original Message-----
From: Earl Myers
Date: Saturday, October 02, 1999 10:17 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Burnt props and grade 5 bolts.
>LAUREN;
> The threads in the Ford crank flange are COARSE thread, hence the use of
>the commercial bolts. The two engine mfgr's , Lycoming and Continental
both
>use commercial bolts on their engines as do many component mfgrs.
>(alternators, pumps & so on). These two Piets otherwise are reported to be
>VERY nice!
> You said the VW guys have had this problem for years while using the
>direct drive I assume?
>This friction is from the bolts not being torked enough.......I will pass
>that on to see what reaction I get. Guys, this is the kind of info I need,
>keep it coming!
>Earl Myers
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Lauren Williams <LaurenMWilliams(at)webtv.net>
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Date: Saturday, October 02, 1999 10:50 PM
>Subject: Burnt props and grade 5 bolts.
>
>
>Haven't we seen this before?
>
>The Volkswagen engined guys have had this problem for years. They have
>lost a few props too. If they don't keep their prop bolts tight, the
>surface against the driving flange will char because of the friction
>caused by movement between the prop and flange..
>
>Grade 5 bolts!!!! That's common, autoparts store stuff. I thought that
>the word had gotten to everyone about using aircraft (AN) hardware in
>all structural applications in homebuilts, regardless of what the 1930s
>plans say. Certainly the prop bolts are the most structural fastener in
>the whole plane. There are wonderful aircraft propeller bolts availiable
>for all dimensions with fine threads, drilled heads for safety wire and
>huge strength.
>
>I am afraid that I would want to look over the rest of the plane and see
>if the lift and cabane strut attach fittings, the wire attach fittings,
>etc. had correct AN fasteners.
>
>I wonder what the FAA inspector looked at on this aircraft if he didn't
>look at the type of fasteners being used. A first time builder, who
>hasn't been following the literature for 20 years can be forgiven a
>mistake like this. What is the inspector's excuse?
>
>I am building a Pietenpol so that I can experience and share the
>adventures of the early day aviators. I really have no intrest in
>reexperiancing their "misadventures".
>
>I guess this got me excited!
>
>Lauren
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
I used 21" aluminum rims and widened the hubs. I bored the hubs to take a
bronze bushing that also centers the width extension. I have aluminum
spacers between the drum brake backing plate, ( bolted to a flange on the
axle,) and the wheel hub. The outer nut has a flange on it that takes up the
endplay. I ended up with about 5 1/2" between the spoke flanges.
John Mc
-----Original Message-----
From: F10DRVR <F10DRVR(at)ims.msn.com>
Date: Sunday, October 03, 1999 7:58 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: wheels
>I just bought two 19 inch motorcycyle wheels from the salvage
>yard. I also bought a couple of brake calipers, I have taken
>the bearings out of the wheels and could have the center of the
>of the wheels machined to accept a bushing for my 1.5 inch axle
>and use them as is. I am concerned about the side load issue
>and would like to know if anyone has used motorcycle wheels
>without the wide hubs and if so how they worked. Also if I do have
>to make a new hub how wide does it need to be?
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Lauren Williams <LaurenMWilliams(at)webtv.net>
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Sent: Sunday, September 26, 1999 10:48 AM
>Subject: Re: wheels
>
>
>> Del,
>>
>> Howard Henderson's wire wheels are bronze bushed. Bushings are an easy
>> solution as they are available from any bearing house by dimension. I
>> bought a set myself. I haven't built the wheels yet.
>>
>> One cosideration is rotational speed. With the large diameter wire
>> wheels, the bearing speeds are going to be quite slow. With smaller
>> diameter wheels and tires these speeds could be a lot higher. check it
>> out.
>>
>> You should be able to find stock ball bearings to fit your axels at
>> reasonable cost too. Then design your wheels around them.
>>
>> Lauren
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Model A Prop Hub |
In a message dated 10/2/99 12:31:06 PM Central Daylight Time,
allaire(at)raex.com writes:
<< Anybody ever hear of ANYTHING happening like this before? Details? >>
I have heard of problems with the prop bolts / Model A engine. It seems, as
I remember, a vibration was felt, he landed immediatly (at the homebase
airport), and found the problem before an inflight emergency occured...3 of
the 4 bolts were broken. I originally thought it was an isolated incident,
but now I'm very concerened about this set up. Last week I went up to see
Gus Webe, and had him get started on my prop blank, and hole pattern. I
plan on finishing the carving myself. Should I have him hold off drilling
the holes, till we find more info ?????? I think I'll call Gus tomorrow...I
hope he didn't drill the holes yet !!!
Chuck Gantzer
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | dotcom(at)emaster.net |
Subject: | Re: Glass fuel tank |
Please don't e mail me any more
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | dotcom(at)emaster.net |
Subject: | Re: Glass fuel tank |
PLEASE REFRAIN from emailing me in the future
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | walter evans <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
It's like a "tin can". It is steel sheet that is "tinned" or solder
coated. Easy to form and solder the seams.
Found one place by me that has .015" thk 36"x50 ft.
Passaic metal prods.
In NJ.
I priced it and will use it, but not ready yet.
Let me see if I can find that old post, and repost it after this.
walt evans
-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Leopold <frgtdog(at)worldnet.att.net>
To: Pietenpol Discussion
Date: Sunday, October 03, 1999 2:24 PM
Subject: ternplate
What is terplate and how is it used?
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | walter evans <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
-----Original Message-----
From: walter evans <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net>
Date: Monday, September 27, 1999 4:03 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: terne plate
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: walter evans <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net>
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Date: Sunday, September 26, 1999 7:16 PM
>Subject: Re: fuel tank
>
>
>>
>>Passaic metal prod
>>5 Central Ave
>>Clifton, NJ 07011
>>(973) 546-9000
>> They had .015" thk. 36" x 50 ft. I think about $100.00. I didn't ask
>>about selling partial roll. This is probably 3 times what you need. If
>>they don't split the roll , maybe we can buy it and pass it around.
>>walt.
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Camera Man
>>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>>Date: Sunday, September 26, 1999 3:19 PM
>>Subject: Re: fuel tank
>>
>>
>>>Hello
>>>What is your source for Ternplate? I haven't been able to find any.
>>>Mike Madrid
>>>
>>>>Gary,
>>>>I'm putting in both the center sect. tank and a nose tank. I may be
>nuts,
>>>but I'm making them out of Ternplate. Didn't even know what that was BP
(
>>>before Piet). Located some in NJ by me. But yet to get into that.
>>>>walt
>>>
>>>
>>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | WacoTpilot(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE (Again, and again, and again) |
Hello please take my name off your piet discussion...my email is
wacotpilot(at)aol.com...thanks DWG
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
I didn't know gas tanks could be such a big
discussion. I guess I thought when I got to that
point. I would just go buy one. but it has been very
interesting. I have come to a tentative conclusion
that an alum tank rivited and sealed at the joints
would be my prefered method. It seems like the rivits
and elasticity of the sealer would help the cracking
problem. It would have to be a sealer with good
elasticity so that it wouldn't dry up and crack. does
anybody have any suggestions to that? Also I was
wondering if anybody has used a fuel bladder. by the
way, what is the function of a gascolater?
=====
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | BARNSTMR(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: alum gas tank - sealant |
Del...
The sealant I was referring to is a 2-part epoxy that is made
specifically for aircraft fuel tank sealant. I am sure there are several
different trade names for it. One is Pro-Seal. Another is PRC. But then I
think PRC was bought out by Aultoids. I haven't ever looked to see if
Aircraft Spruce carries it. It is dark brown (almost black) in color. I
will look up the specs we have at Learjet and see which part number is
recommended for aviation fuels. It may be different for avgas & car gas as
opposed to what we use for JetA. I remember from using it on piston twin
cessna fuel cells that we could get it in two different versions. PRC 890-B2
or PRC 890-B1/2. The half would set-up in about an hour...and cure took
about 8 hours when under a heat lamp. The B2 took longer to set and around
24 to 36 hours to cure. I imagine it is expensive stuff...but man it is good
stuff. Those twin Cessnas were more than 20 years old and the sealant was
still as flexible as new. Cessna used it in many other locations too....
for example it is used as the sealant for the pressurized section of the
cabin. Sometimes we had to remove it in certain places to get access or make
repairs. Paint stripper didn't seem to phase it so our only method was to
use a wire wheel and remove it mechanically. Makes a huge mess. Also, glass
bead blasting parts which have that stuff on doesn't work either. The beads
just bounce off. That stuff was like trying to peel the hyde off of a pig.
Terry B
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
Subject: | Re: alum gas tank |
Del , a gascolator is a sediment and water trap that is usually the lowest
part of the fuel system and is most often mounted on the engine side of the
firewall. A very important part of your preflight inspection is to drain the
gascolator and check the drainage for water and impurities. I have no info
on sealants for riveted tanks although many homebuilts use this method. The
RV series for one. Any RV builders listening?
John Mc
-----Original Message-----
From: del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com>
Date: Sunday, October 03, 1999 8:56 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: alum gas tank
>I didn't know gas tanks could be such a big
>discussion. I guess I thought when I got to that
>point. I would just go buy one. but it has been very
>interesting. I have come to a tentative conclusion
>that an alum tank rivited and sealed at the joints
>would be my prefered method. It seems like the rivits
>and elasticity of the sealer would help the cracking
>problem. It would have to be a sealer with good
>elasticity so that it wouldn't dry up and crack. does
>anybody have any suggestions to that? Also I was
>wondering if anybody has used a fuel bladder. by the
>way, what is the function of a gascolater?
>
>
>=====
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | BARNSTMR(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: alum gas tank |
In a message dated 10/3/99 9:57:59 PM Central Daylight Time,
farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com writes:
<< by the
way, what is the function of a gascolater? >>
Del...The gascolator is installed at the lowest point in the fuel system as
an inline sediment/water trap. It is a cylindrical "bowl" usually with a
cast aluminum head with the inlet and outlet bosses to accommodate pipe
thread fittings. It should have a drain cock. Also its an ideal place to
install a screen to catch foreign debris. Most I have seen have a means to
disassemble rather easily without disconnecting lines so you can clean the
screen. Doesn't your tractor have something like this? You should be able
to find one made for aircraft at any of the supply houses. And you might
even find one at Tractor Supply that would work with little or no
modification.
Terry B.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | LaurenMWilliams(at)webtv.net (Lauren Williams) |
Subject: | Re: alum gas tank |
Del,
A Gascolator is a combination strainer and water trap. They have an
easily activated drain on the bottom which you use to check for water,
fuel grade (in case someone put jet fuel in your airplane) and flow rate
each morning before you fly and after each fuelling. They make neat
clear plastic cups with a drain activation probe or teeth in the top to
fit which ever type drain your gascolater has.
The gascolater is located at the lowest point in the fuel system,
usually at the bottom of the firewall in the engine compartment. Some
aircraft have to have two, because they have two lowest points (low wing
aircraft often) one when parked and another when flying.
Fuel tanks should also have these drains located at the tank's lowest
point when the aircraft is in the attitude that it takes when parked on
the ground. You drain a little off of these before you fly too.
Bladders have been used on many planes. Cessna and others have used them
and then gone back to wet wings or separate metal tanks. The big
problem with bladders seems to come if they are not kept full when on
the ground. A friend had a partner who always left the tanks nearly
empty. Empty tanks collect moisture, through condensation, as the
temperature changes morning and night. Moisture from the air condenses
on the inside of the tank; full tank, no air, no air, no moisture. In
addition, a full tank keeps the bladder stretched out and flat on the
bottom. My buddy had two engine outs and one off field landing
(successful, no damage) in this Cessna 210 before he decided that
bladders and partnerships in airplanes weren't for him. Since then he
has had his own wet wing 210 for 15 years.
mailsorter-102-3.iap.bryant.webtv.net (8.8.8-wtv-d/ms.dwm.v7+dul2)
Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 20:03:50 -0700 (PDT)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
Mercury MTS v1.44 (NDS)) (via Mercury MTS v1.44 (NDS)) (via Mercury
MTS v1.44 (NDS)) (via Mercury MTS v1.44 (NDS)) (via Mercury MTS
v1.44 (NDS))
I didn't know gas tanks could be such a big
discussion. I guess I thought when I got to that
point. I would just go buy one. but it has been very
interesting. I have come to a tentative conclusion
that an alum tank rivited and sealed at the joints
would be my prefered method. It seems like the rivits
and elasticity of the sealer would help the cracking
problem. It would have to be a sealer with good
elasticity so that it wouldn't dry up and crack. does
anybody have any suggestions to that? Also I was
wondering if anybody has used a fuel bladder. by the
way, what is the function of a gascolater?
=====
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | oil can <oilcanbob(at)hotmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: alum gas tank - sealant |
Just a memory from the back of my mind, but I think the aluminium gastank
sealers being talked about cannot be used when the gasoline is mixted with
alcohol. Also called Oxygenated gasoline,,, I think,,, as the alcohol will
melt out the 2 part epoxy sealant in the aluminium gastank.
>From: BARNSTMR(at)aol.com
>Reply-To: Pietenpol Discussion
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Subject: Re: alum gas tank - sealant
>Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 23:31:35 -0400 (EDT)
>
>Del...
> The sealant I was referring to is a 2-part epoxy that is made
>specifically for aircraft fuel tank sealant. I am sure there are several
>different trade names for it. One is Pro-Seal. Another is PRC. But then
>I
>think PRC was bought out by Aultoids. I haven't ever looked to see if
>Aircraft Spruce carries it. It is dark brown (almost black) in color. I
>will look up the specs we have at Learjet and see which part number is
>recommended for aviation fuels. It may be different for avgas & car gas as
>opposed to what we use for JetA. I remember from using it on piston twin
>cessna fuel cells that we could get it in two different versions. PRC
>890-B2
>or PRC 890-B1/2. The half would set-up in about an hour...and cure took
>about 8 hours when under a heat lamp. The B2 took longer to set and around
>24 to 36 hours to cure. I imagine it is expensive stuff...but man it is
>good
>stuff. Those twin Cessnas were more than 20 years old and the sealant was
>still as flexible as new. Cessna used it in many other locations too....
>for example it is used as the sealant for the pressurized section of the
>cabin. Sometimes we had to remove it in certain places to get access or
>make
>repairs. Paint stripper didn't seem to phase it so our only method was to
>use a wire wheel and remove it mechanically. Makes a huge mess. Also,
>glass
>bead blasting parts which have that stuff on doesn't work either. The
>beads
>just bounce off. That stuff was like trying to peel the hyde off of a pig.
>Terry B
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | LaurenMWilliams(at)webtv.net (Lauren Williams) |
Subject: | Bladder tanks, more |
Del,
The wrinkles in the bottom of the bladder tank, in the 210, held water
even through the fuelling process and preflight draining of tanks and
gascolater. After the aircraft was taxied and accelerated with take off
power, sloshing the fuel well, the water was kicked loose from the folds
of the tank and plugged the fuel system. Gary made a 90 degree right
turn from 400 ft., got the gear back down, and landed in a farmers
field. This is not a trick that I would like to try. For one thing,
today there is a church parking lot there.
Lauren
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: alum gas tank |
I guess I've flown enough to know about checking for
water with the "cup" but didn't know that it was
called a gascolater. wonder how that term was
origanated. on my tractor I call it a sediment bowl.
--- BARNSTMR(at)aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 10/3/99 9:57:59 PM Central
> Daylight Time,
> farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com writes:
>
> << by the
> way, what is the function of a gascolater? >>
>
> Del...The gascolator is installed at the lowest
> point in the fuel system as
> an inline sediment/water trap. It is a cylindrical
> "bowl" usually with a
> cast aluminum head with the inlet and outlet bosses
> to accommodate pipe
> thread fittings. It should have a drain cock. Also
> its an ideal place to
> install a screen to catch foreign debris. Most I
> have seen have a means to
> disassemble rather easily without disconnecting
> lines so you can clean the
> screen. Doesn't your tractor have something like
> this? You should be able
> to find one made for aircraft at any of the supply
> houses. And you might
> even find one at Tractor Supply that would work with
> little or no
> modification.
> Terry B.
>
=====
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | John Weikel <jandd(at)maverickbbs.com> |
Subject: | Re: alum gas tank |
I got mine at a NAPA auto parts store. About $20 and I made the bracket to
hang it. Kabota tractor parts places have them too but they are more
expensive.
John W
-----Original Message-----
From: BARNSTMR(at)aol.com
Date: Sunday, October 03, 1999 10:43 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: alum gas tank
>In a message dated 10/3/99 9:57:59 PM Central Daylight Time,
>farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com writes:
>
><< by the
> way, what is the function of a gascolater? >>
>
>Del...The gascolator is installed at the lowest point in the fuel system as
>an inline sediment/water trap. It is a cylindrical "bowl" usually with a
>cast aluminum head with the inlet and outlet bosses to accommodate pipe
>thread fittings. It should have a drain cock. Also its an ideal place to
>install a screen to catch foreign debris. Most I have seen have a means to
>disassemble rather easily without disconnecting lines so you can clean the
>screen. Doesn't your tractor have something like this? You should be able
>to find one made for aircraft at any of the supply houses. And you might
>even find one at Tractor Supply that would work with little or no
>modification.
>Terry B
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | leonstefanhutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan) |
ACS has a nice light weight gascolator, but their ad says "not for use
with auto fuel". Ad says nothing about alcohol. Any one know what that
is all about? Leon S.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | john hodnette <jhodnette(at)tecinfo.com> |
I just checked the Aircraft Spruce online catalog. Looks like about $60
plus shipping for their "homebuilders gascolator."
That means a visit to the NAPA store.
John Hodnette
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Jack Phillips (EUS)" <EUSJCPH(at)am1.ericsson.se> |
Subject: | RE: aluminum tank |
Hi Terry,
I may end up doing the same thing, riveting a fuel tank together. However, I will
first try to find a good TIG professional through the Good Ol' Boy network.
If you do proceed with the riveted tank, I can offer a little advice. I spent
the first 5 years of my engineering career after college working for General Dynamics
on the design of the F-16, which had a "wet wing". Two different types
of rivets were used in the construction of the wing, normal "bucked" rivets
and Cherry type structural blind fasteners (not "pop" rivets). With both types,
before installation of the rivet, the rivet hole was cleaned with a solvent
such as MEK to remove any trace of oil or grease. The rivet shank and head were
then coated with a wet sealant (sloshing sealer) and installed normally.
If using bucked rivets, the shop formed head is then filleted and coated over
with the sealant. The outside head of either type of rivet was then coated with
an epoxy primer. All seams should also receive the sloshing compound sealing.
One other note - if you plan on running auto gas in your plane, be sure the sealant
you use can withstand alcohol. Most auto gas contains some alcohol these
days, and it can play havoc with your tank if the sealant is not formulated to
withstand it.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: BARNSTMR(at)aol.com [SMTP:BARNSTMR(at)aol.com]
> Sent: Sunday, October 03, 1999 12:27 PM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: aluminum tank
>
> We've all had a lot of good discussion about welded aluminum and fiberglass
> tank construction. Weight, cost, leaks, cracks, ease of construction...all
> great discussion and good considerations. I still feel that I want an
> aluminum one. I see two things that are a pretty major hurdle for me to wind
> up with a welded one.
> 1. I lack the experience. (But this is nothing new...haha...part of the
> fun) I need to learn more about properly designing the welded seams to
> prevent cracking. We know that a slight joggle at the seams should prevent
> this. Does anyone have a good reference source that gives guidance on this?
> 2. I don't have the tools. Compared to the cost of fiberglass lay-up, the
> cost of buying or renting a TIG welder rig seems prohibitive as is hiring a
> professional welder.
>
> In view of hurdle #2, I have decided that I will construct both fuselage and
> wing tanks of aluminum with riveted seams, sealed with fuel tank sealant.
> Here's my logic:
>
> 1. Why not....I can name lots of airplanes with wet-wing fuel cells that
> seem to work just fine.
> 2. I have the experience from repairing wet-wing fuel cells.
> 3. I have the tools to do the job.
> 4. I think I can afford the materials. Surely between Boeing, Learjet,
> Cessna, and Beech here in town....sealant materials should be available.
> 5. I like the idea of the challenge to come up with the proper design.
> Still need to learn about crack considerations.
> 6. I am confident that I can wind up with a light weight tank in the end.
>
> I think I am home free....does anyone have any other suggestions, pro's, or
> con's to think about? By the way, Leon....you are nearing completion of your
> fiberglass tank aren't you? How's the weight? Has anyone else weighed their
> tanks?
> Terry B
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Jack Phillips (EUS)" <EUSJCPH(at)am1.ericsson.se> |
Subject: | RE: alum gas tank |
The gascolator is a filter and trap installed at the lowest point of the
fuel system, certainly lower than the carburetor, which acts as a final
filter for dirt and a trap for water in the fuel before the fuel gets to the
engine. It has a quick drain which should be drained during the pre-flight
inspection and checked for the presence of water (use a clear container to
drain it and look for blobs of water on the bottom, under the fuel (water is
heavier than gasoline and won't mix with the gas). If water is found,
continue checking ti until no water is found.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: del magsam [SMTP:farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, October 03, 1999 11:04 PM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: alum gas tank
>
> I didn't know gas tanks could be such a big
> discussion. I guess I thought when I got to that
> point. I would just go buy one. but it has been very
> interesting. I have come to a tentative conclusion
> that an alum tank rivited and sealed at the joints
> would be my prefered method. It seems like the rivits
> and elasticity of the sealer would help the cracking
> problem. It would have to be a sealer with good
> elasticity so that it wouldn't dry up and crack. does
> anybody have any suggestions to that? Also I was
> wondering if anybody has used a fuel bladder. by the
> way, what is the function of a gascolater?
>
>
> =====
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Jack Phillips (EUS)" <EUSJCPH(at)am1.ericsson.se> |
Subject: | RE: aluminum tank |
What is the matter with this discussion list? It deleted about half of what I
said! I will try again.
... With both types, before installation of the rivet, the rivet hole was cleaned
with a solvent such as MEK to remove any trace of oil or grease.
The rivet shank and head were then coated with a wet sealant (sloshing sealer)
and installed normally. If using bucked rivets, the shop formed head is then
filleted and coated over with the sealant. The outside head of either type of
rivet was then coated with an epoxy primer. All seams should also receive the
sloshing compound sealing.
One other note - if you plan on running auto gas in your plane, be sure the sealant
you use can withstand alcohol. Most auto gas contains some alcohol these
days, and it can play havoc with your tank if the sealant is not formulated to
withstand it.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jack Phillips (EUS) [SMTP:EUSJCPH(at)am1.ericsson.se]
> Sent: Monday, October 04, 1999 7:52 AM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: RE: aluminum tank
>
> Hi Terry,
>
> I may end up doing the same thing, riveting a fuel tank together. However, I
will first try to find a good TIG professional through the Good Ol' Boy network.
>
> If you do proceed with the riveted tank, I can offer a little advice. I spent
the first 5 years of my engineering career after college working for General
Dynamics on the design of the F-16, which had a "wet wing". Two different types
of rivets were used in the construction of the wing, normal "bucked" rivets
and Cherry type structural blind fasteners (not "pop" rivets). With both types,
before installation of the rivet, the rivet hole was cleaned with a solvent
such as MEK to remove any trace of oil
> One other note - if you plan on running auto gas in your plane, be sure the sealant
you use can withstand alcohol. Most auto gas contains some alcohol these
days, and it can play havoc with your tank if the sealant is not formulated
to withstand it.
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: BARNSTMR(at)aol.com [SMTP:BARNSTMR(at)aol.com]
> > Sent: Sunday, October 03, 1999 12:27 PM
> > To: Pietenpol Discussion
> > Subject: aluminum tank
> >
> > We've all had a lot of good discussion about welded aluminum and fiberglass
> > tank construction. Weight, cost, leaks, cracks, ease of construction...all
> > great discussion and good considerations. I still feel that I want an
> > aluminum one. I see two things that are a pretty major hurdle for me to wind
> > up with a welded one.
> > 1. I lack the experience. (But this is nothing new...haha...part of the
> > fun) I need to learn more about properly designing the welded seams to
> > prevent cracking. We know that a slight joggle at the seams should prevent
> > this. Does anyone have a good reference source that gives guidance on this?
> > 2. I don't have the tools. Compared to the cost of fiberglass lay-up, the
> > cost of buying or renting a TIG welder rig seems prohibitive as is hiring a
> > professional welder.
> >
> > In view of hurdle #2, I have decided that I will construct both fuselage and
> > wing tanks of aluminum with riveted seams, sealed with fuel tank sealant.
> > Here's my logic:
> >
> > 1. Why not....I can name lots of airplanes with wet-wing fuel cells that
> > seem to work just fine.
> > 2. I have the experience from repairing wet-wing fuel cells.
> > 3. I have the tools to do the job.
> > 4. I think I can afford the materials. Surely between Boeing, Learjet,
> > Cessna, and Beech here in town....sealant materials should be available.
> > 5. I like the idea of the challenge to come up with the proper design.
> > Still need to learn about crack considerations.
> > 6. I am confident that I can wind up with a light weight tank in the end.
> >
> > I think I am home free....does anyone have any other suggestions, pro's, or
>
> > con's to think about? By the way, Leon....you are nearing completion of your
> > fiberglass tank aren't you? How's the weight? Has anyone else weighed their
> > tanks?
> > Terry B
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Shaw, Jim" <jshaw(at)hydro.mb.ca> |
unsubscribe jshaw(at)hydro.mb.ca
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Monday, October 04, 1999 5:16 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Gascolator
I just checked the Aircraft Spruce online catalog. Looks like about $60
plus shipping for their "homebuilders gascolator."
That means a visit to the NAPA store.
John Hodnette
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
Subject: | Re: alum gas tank |
collate, to separate or sort. separates gasoline from dirt water
fuel tank debris etc.
-----Original Message-----
From: del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com>
Date: Monday, October 04, 1999 4:28 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: alum gas tank
>I guess I've flown enough to know about checking for
>water with the "cup" but didn't know that it was
>called a gascolater. wonder how that term was
>origanated. on my tractor I call it a sediment bowl.
>
>--- BARNSTMR(at)aol.com wrote:
>> In a message dated 10/3/99 9:57:59 PM Central
>> Daylight Time,
>> farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com writes:
>>
>> << by the
>> way, what is the function of a gascolater? >>
>>
>> Del...The gascolator is installed at the lowest
>> point in the fuel system as
>> an inline sediment/water trap. It is a cylindrical
>> "bowl" usually with a
>> cast aluminum head with the inlet and outlet bosses
>> to accommodate pipe
>> thread fittings. It should have a drain cock. Also
>> its an ideal place to
>> install a screen to catch foreign debris. Most I
>> have seen have a means to
>> disassemble rather easily without disconnecting
>> lines so you can clean the
>> screen. Doesn't your tractor have something like
>> this? You should be able
>> to find one made for aircraft at any of the supply
>> houses. And you might
>> even find one at Tractor Supply that would work with
>> little or no
>> modification.
>> Terry B.
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
Subject: | Alcohol in Fuel & Sealers don't mix |
>Just a memory from the back of my mind, but I think the aluminium gastank
>sealers being talked about cannot be used when the gasoline is mixted with
>alcohol. Also called Oxygenated gasoline,,, I think,,, as the alcohol will
>melt out the 2 part epoxy sealant in the aluminium gastank.
Oil Can Bob is correct about this. You can buy a sealant that is
'resistant to alcohol" but none that are totally safe.
We had an Acrosport II here that had tons of sloshing gunk from
using auto fuel w/ alcohol and it was about to totally plug up the finger
screen in his fuel outlet drain port. Yikes !!!
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Gower <ggower(at)informador.com.mx> |
Subject: | Re: Burnt props and grade 5 bolts. |
If there is no front plate (or is to thin) the bolt will shear, no matter if
they are grade 5, AN, Titanium or any space age material. The force of the
bolts have to be AGAINST the WOOD BOTH SIDES, so you dont need to much
torque to fasten them, is the "area of wood" in contact to the flange what
is doing most of the work. Keep them torqued in specifications and they
will do they work perfectly. let them loose and they will shear AN or not.
Saludos
Gary Gower
>I wonder about the front plate on the prop that was lost. Wood is a soft
>material and needs to have the clamping load spread out over a large area.
>If the front plate was to thin, or soft, it would deform at the fastener
>and no amount of retightening could keep it fronm working loose. Most
>factory prop hubs I have seen for wood props have the front plate splined to
>the hub to eliminate the twisting action as the crank tranfers to the prop.
>The bolts then are only in tension between the plates and the plates are
>compressing the wood prop hub. The torque is tranfered to the prop by the
>STATIC friction between the hub and flanges. Any evidence of burning infers
>that there has been considerable motion between the two parts.
>
> If the plate under the bolt heads deforms, the bolts would try to
>stretch as they are now the hypotenuse of a right triangle (a longer
>distance) as the prop moves on the hub. This stretch and relax cycle would
>happen twice per revolution on a 4 cylinder four stroke. That makes it about
>5000 cycles per minute ! The bolts, even "proper prop" hardware would never
>stand this for long. Properly done the bolts that hold the prop to a Ford
>Crank could be Grade 5 but they must be torqued using a thrust plate between
>the head of the bolt and the prop. The tension on the bolt's shaft must be
>higher at installation than it will ever be subjected to as the engine runs.
> I have never heard of a flywheel coming off of a Model A but then they
>are dowelled as well as bolted to ensure the bolts only act in tension.
>I still have a Ford B engine that I could use in my aircraft but I will most
>likely use an adapter to Continetal or Lycoming bolt pattern just so that if
>I ever needed a different prop in a hurry it would be much easier to find
>one.
> John McNarry
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Earl Myers
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Date: Saturday, October 02, 1999 10:17 PM
>Subject: Re: Burnt props and grade 5 bolts.
>
>
>>LAUREN;
>> The threads in the Ford crank flange are COARSE thread, hence the use of
>>the commercial bolts. The two engine mfgr's , Lycoming and Continental
>both
>>use commercial bolts on their engines as do many component mfgrs.
>>(alternators, pumps & so on). These two Piets otherwise are reported to be
>>VERY nice!
>> You said the VW guys have had this problem for years while using the
>>direct drive I assume?
>>This friction is from the bolts not being torked enough.......I will pass
>>that on to see what reaction I get. Guys, this is the kind of info I need,
>>keep it coming!
>>Earl Myers
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Lauren Williams <LaurenMWilliams(at)webtv.net>
>>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>>Date: Saturday, October 02, 1999 10:50 PM
>>Subject: Burnt props and grade 5 bolts.
>>
>>
>>
>>Haven't we seen this before?
>>
>>The Volkswagen engined guys have had this problem for years. They have
>>lost a few props too. If they don't keep their prop bolts tight, the
>>surface against the driving flange will char because of the friction
>>caused by movement between the prop and flange..
>>
>>Grade 5 bolts!!!! That's common, autoparts store stuff. I thought that
>>the word had gotten to everyone about using aircraft (AN) hardware in
>>all structural applications in homebuilts, regardless of what the 1930s
>>plans say. Certainly the prop bolts are the most structural fastener in
>>the whole plane. There are wonderful aircraft propeller bolts availiable
>>for all dimensions with fine threads, drilled heads for safety wire and
>>huge strength.
>>
>>I am afraid that I would want to look over the rest of the plane and see
>>if the lift and cabane strut attach fittings, the wire attach fittings,
>>etc. had correct AN fasteners.
>>
>>I wonder what the FAA inspector looked at on this aircraft if he didn't
>>look at the type of fasteners being used. A first time builder, who
>>hasn't been following the literature for 20 years can be forgiven a
>>mistake like this. What is the inspector's excuse?
>>
>>I am building a Pietenpol so that I can experience and share the
>>adventures of the early day aviators. I really have no intrest in
>>reexperiancing their "misadventures".
>>
>>I guess this got me excited!
>>
>>Lauren
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "David B. Schober" <dschober(at)mail.fscwv.edu> |
Subject: | Re: Burnt props and grade 5 bolts. |
AC 43.13-1B says to retorque after the first 25 hours and each 50 hours
thereafter. It goes on to state that no definite time interval can be specified
since it is dependant on changes to the wood caused by moisture. In short if you
are having a dry spell, retorque. If the relative humidty stays constant you
shouldn't have a problem.
Gary Gower wrote:
> If there is no front plate (or is to thin) the bolt will shear, no matter if
> they are grade 5, AN, Titanium or any space age material. The force of the
> bolts have to be AGAINST the WOOD BOTH SIDES, so you dont need to much
> torque to fasten them, is the "area of wood" in contact to the flange what
> is doing most of the work. Keep them torqued in specifications and they
> will do they work perfectly. let them loose and they will shear AN or not.
>
> Saludos
>
> Gary Gower
>
> >I wonder about the front plate on the prop that was lost. Wood is a soft
> >material and needs to have the clamping load spread out over a large area.
> >If the front plate was to thin, or soft, it would deform at the fastener
> >and no amount of retightening could keep it fronm working loose. Most
> >factory prop hubs I have seen for wood props have the front plate splined to
> >the hub to eliminate the twisting action as the crank tranfers to the prop.
> >The bolts then are only in tension between the plates and the plates are
> >compressing the wood prop hub. The torque is tranfered to the prop by the
> >STATIC friction between the hub and flanges. Any evidence of burning infers
> >that there has been considerable motion between the two parts.
> >
> > If the plate under the bolt heads deforms, the bolts would try to
> >stretch as they are now the hypotenuse of a right triangle (a longer
> >distance) as the prop moves on the hub. This stretch and relax cycle would
> >happen twice per revolution on a 4 cylinder four stroke. That makes it about
> >5000 cycles per minute ! The bolts, even "proper prop" hardware would never
> >stand this for long. Properly done the bolts that hold the prop to a Ford
> >Crank could be Grade 5 but they must be torqued using a thrust plate between
> >the head of the bolt and the prop. The tension on the bolt's shaft must be
> >higher at installation than it will ever be subjected to as the engine runs.
> > I have never heard of a flywheel coming off of a Model A but then they
> >are dowelled as well as bolted to ensure the bolts only act in tension.
> >I still have a Ford B engine that I could use in my aircraft but I will most
> >likely use an adapter to Continetal or Lycoming bolt pattern just so that if
> >I ever needed a different prop in a hurry it would be much easier to find
> >one.
> > John McNarry
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Earl Myers
> >To: Pietenpol Discussion
> >Date: Saturday, October 02, 1999 10:17 PM
> >Subject: Re: Burnt props and grade 5 bolts.
> >
> >
> >>LAUREN;
> >> The threads in the Ford crank flange are COARSE thread, hence the use of
> >>the commercial bolts. The two engine mfgr's , Lycoming and Continental
> >both
> >>use commercial bolts on their engines as do many component mfgrs.
> >>(alternators, pumps & so on). These two Piets otherwise are reported to be
> >>VERY nice!
> >> You said the VW guys have had this problem for years while using the
> >>direct drive I assume?
> >>This friction is from the bolts not being torked enough.......I will pass
> >>that on to see what reaction I get. Guys, this is the kind of info I need,
> >>keep it coming!
> >>Earl Myers
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Lauren Williams <LaurenMWilliams(at)webtv.net>
> >>To: Pietenpol Discussion
> >>Date: Saturday, October 02, 1999 10:50 PM
> >>Subject: Burnt props and grade 5 bolts.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>Haven't we seen this before?
> >>
> >>The Volkswagen engined guys have had this problem for years. They have
> >>lost a few props too. If they don't keep their prop bolts tight, the
> >>surface against the driving flange will char because of the friction
> >>caused by movement between the prop and flange..
> >>
> >>Grade 5 bolts!!!! That's common, autoparts store stuff. I thought that
> >>the word had gotten to everyone about using aircraft (AN) hardware in
> >>all structural applications in homebuilts, regardless of what the 1930s
> >>plans say. Certainly the prop bolts are the most structural fastener in
> >>the whole plane. There are wonderful aircraft propeller bolts availiable
> >>for all dimensions with fine threads, drilled heads for safety wire and
> >>huge strength.
> >>
> >>I am afraid that I would want to look over the rest of the plane and see
> >>if the lift and cabane strut attach fittings, the wire attach fittings,
> >>etc. had correct AN fasteners.
> >>
> >>I wonder what the FAA inspector looked at on this aircraft if he didn't
> >>look at the type of fasteners being used. A first time builder, who
> >>hasn't been following the literature for 20 years can be forgiven a
> >>mistake like this. What is the inspector's excuse?
> >>
> >>I am building a Pietenpol so that I can experience and share the
> >>adventures of the early day aviators. I really have no intrest in
> >>reexperiancing their "misadventures".
> >>
> >>I guess this got me excited!
> >>
> >>Lauren
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
--
David B.Schober, CPE
Instructor, Aviation Maintenance
Fairmont State College
National Aerospace Education Center
1050 East Benedum Industrial Drive
Bridgeport, WV 26330-9503
(304) 842-8300
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ken Beanlands <kbeanlan(at)spots.ab.ca> |
All that's left from my C-85-12F is the flanged crank and rods. Rods have
not been checked and are in "as-is" condition. The Crank is at limits for
M010 and needs to go to M020. It's been checked for cracks and run-out and
is fine. It's not tagged but can be certifiable (I'm also certifiable,
but that's a diferent story. I'll take $550 OBO USD plus shipping for the
works.
Ken Beanlands B.Eng (Aerospace)
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Christavia MK 1 C-GREN
<http://www.spots.ab.ca/~kbeanlan>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | DonanClara(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Piet related computer help |
Like many of you, I like to make copies of subjects that pertain to my type
of project a good example being the current discussion on Model A prop hubs,
prop bolts,etc. When there are numerous responses to the original message and
they become cumulative on the screen it becomes a bit overwhelming to print
them out especially when the length of the headers also increases and it sure
goes through ink in a hurry. Could one of our talented discussion group
computer gurus please tell me if there is some way that I can eliminate the
duplication and the headers when I make copies. Maybe this is pretty
elementary but I don't have a kindergarten kid in the house to advise me. Any
help would be appreciated. Who knows there just might be others on the list
with the same question. Thanks
Don Hicks
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | DonanClara(at)aol.com |
Is anyone in the group flyng an "A" powered Piet using the Bumfield Standard
head (cast iron, 5.9-1 compression...not the Super head) or know anyone who
is. I just wanted to get some idea about its good or bad points. I' m not
really interested in the aluminum heads with less weight and higher
compression that are currently on the market
Don Hicks
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Patcoolnet(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Piet related computer help |
Hi there--highlight what you want to print, click "control and C together".
Go down and click your start button, click programs, accessories, word pad.
(This applies to Windows). When word pad comes up, click "control and V
together". What you want to print should come up on the word pad screen.
Click the print button and voila, what you want with out extras. Once it is
printed out, click edit, select all, then the delete key on your keyboard to
clear the screen. Then hit minimize (the minus button in the top right
corner) and your e mail screen will come back. Repeat the highlight, control
c, control v, print, and delete as you want to. Good Luck!!
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | dotcom(at)emaster.net |
Subject: | Re: HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE (Again, and again, and again) |
Please take me off your mailing list thank you
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Piet related computer help |
Don,
I use the mouse to highlight the desired text, select EDIT from the menu bar,
click on COPY.
Then open a word doc labeled Piettips.doc, find the correct area (of the
currently 30 pages). position the cursor with the mouse, select EDIT and
click on PASTE.
After it is in the word doc you can massage the structure as you wish.
Easy,
DG
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Piet related computer help |
Don
What I do is probably slow but it gives me what I want,
Open new message then open message rec, highlite what you want and save in
new open message, do this to all of the same type messages, after I get it
all done I send it to myself. then when it comes back I can put it in
another file, print or anything else. Like getting a digest.
I do this with alot of URL's that come thru.
I'm sure someone else will have a better way.
Gordon
IHA#02
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | <DonanClara(at)aol.com> |
Sent: Monday, October 04, 1999 2:28 PM
Subject: | Piet related computer help |
> Like many of you, I like to make copies of subjects that pertain to my
type
> of project a good example being the current discussion on Model A prop
hubs,
> prop bolts,etc. When there are numerous responses to the original message
and
> they become cumulative on the screen it becomes a bit overwhelming to
print
> them out especially when the length of the headers also increases and it
sure
> goes through ink in a hurry. Could one of our talented discussion group
> computer gurus please tell me if there is some way that I can eliminate
the
> duplication and the headers when I make copies. Maybe this is pretty
> elementary but I don't have a kindergarten kid in the house to advise me.
Any
> help would be appreciated. Who knows there just might be others on the
list
> with the same question. Thanks
>
> Don Hicks
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Piet related computer help |
Works good with Lotus Word Pro also.
Even better than what I was doing.
Thanks
Gordon
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | <GREA738(at)aol.com> |
Sent: Monday, October 04, 1999 3:52 PM
Subject: | Re: Piet related computer help |
> Don,
> I use the mouse to highlight the desired text, select EDIT from the menu
bar,
> click on COPY.
> Then open a word doc labeled Piettips.doc, find the correct area (of the
> currently 30 pages). position the cursor with the mouse, select EDIT and
> click on PASTE.
> After it is in the word doc you can massage the structure as you wish.
> Easy,
> DG
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | fishin <fishin(at)wwa.com> |
Subject: | Re: Piet related computer help |
hey!! it works and it's easy----thnx
JoeC
Zion, Illinois
Patcoolnet(at)aol.com wrote:
> Hi there--highlight what you want to print, click "control and C together".
> Go down and click your start button, click programs, accessories, word pad.
> (This applies to Windows). When word pad comes up, click "control and V
> together". What you want to print should come up on the word pad screen.
> Click the print button and voila, what you want with out extras. Once it is
> printed out, click edit, select all, then the delete key on your keyboard to
> clear the screen. Then hit minimize (the minus button in the top right
> corner) and your e mail screen will come back. Repeat the highlight, control
> c, control v, print, and delete as you want to. Good Luck!!
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | kyle ray <rrobert(at)centuryinter.net> |
Subject: | Re: alum gas tank |
Yes i have a friend that uses epoxy same stuff that he builds
his plane with! or they same epoxy that you would build a fiber glass
tank with you could seal the seams of a riveted tank!
russell
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
Sent: Sunday, October 03, 1999 10:03 PM
> I didn't know gas tanks could be such a big
> discussion. I guess I thought when I got to that
> point. I would just go buy one. but it has been very
> interesting. I have come to a tentative conclusion
> that an alum tank rivited and sealed at the joints
> would be my prefered method. It seems like the rivits
> and elasticity of the sealer would help the cracking
> problem. It would have to be a sealer with good
> elasticity so that it wouldn't dry up and crack. does
> anybody have any suggestions to that? Also I was
> wondering if anybody has used a fuel bladder. by the
> way, what is the function of a gascolater?
>
>
> =====
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Copinfo <Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.com> |
I know we've all been through the glue thing so many times, but I want to
use T-88 on the ribs for my Aeronca Ribs and 43.13-1B says the epoxy
adhesive must have a Mil Spec, Aerospace Material Specification (AMS) or
Technical Service Order (TSO) for wooden aircraft structures. Does anyone
know if T-88 fits into any of those categories? Thanks
Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.Com
Tim Cunningham
Des Moines, Iowa (515) 237-1510
________________________________________________________________________________
Steve wrote:
Anyone living in the Dallas/FtWorth area please drop me an email.
Thanks
Steve
Steve W GN-1 builder
#6
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
Subject: | Re: Dallas/Ftworth. |
-----Original Message-----
From: vistin(at)juno.com <vistin(at)juno.com>
Date: Monday, October 04, 1999 9:32 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Dallas/Ftworth.
Mike King lives up there somewhere. Hey Mike, WHERE ARE YOU??
Robert Hensarling
http://www.mesquite-furniture.com
rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com
Uvalde, Texas
>Steve wrote:
>Anyone living in the Dallas/FtWorth area please drop me an email.
>
>Thanks
>Steve
>
>Steve W GN-1 builder
>#6
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Patcoolnet(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Piet related computer help |
Your very welcome. My sis taught me how (she has a 19 year old son who has
had a computer in his class room since kindergarden). Learning this stuff is
easy if you can put it in terms we computer challenged adults can understand.
Enjoy! Pat
________________________________________________________________________________
Check the Archives PLease
Gordon
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Copinfo <Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.com> |
Sent: Monday, October 04, 1999 6:12 PM
> I know we've all been through the glue thing so many times, but I want to
> use T-88 on the ribs for my Aeronca Ribs and 43.13-1B says the epoxy
> adhesive must have a Mil Spec, Aerospace Material Specification (AMS) or
> Technical Service Order (TSO) for wooden aircraft structures. Does anyone
> know if T-88 fits into any of those categories? Thanks
> Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.Com
> Tim Cunningham
> Des Moines, Iowa (515) 237-1510
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Piet related computer help |
Who are you replying too?
Please leave message in that you are answering too, It makes no since to us.
GB
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
Sent: Monday, October 04, 1999 9:09 PM
Subject: | Re: Piet related computer help |
> Your very welcome. My sis taught me how (she has a 19 year old son who
has
> had a computer in his class room since kindergarden). Learning this stuff
is
> easy if you can put it in terms we computer challenged adults can
understand.
> Enjoy! Pat
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Mike Kay <mkay(at)uoguelph.ca> |
Subject: | Pietenpol Air Camper |
Hi there ! I'm new to the list and I was just wondering if I could get some
info:
I am considering building 1 of 3 planes:
I was just wondering how hard the corvair engines are to come across
compared to the VW engine that the volksplane uses, and how much it would
cost to rebuild one to work in an aircraft. I was also wondering what
approximate costs are to get the Air camper up and flying. (considering I
have almost all the tools needed) Please include necessary parts for the
engine considering if I could find an engine lying around somewhere for low
cost.
Thanks alot in advance to anyone who replies :)
Mike Kay
Engineering Systems and Computing
University of Guelph
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Dave and Connie <dmatt(at)frontiernet.net> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Air Camper |
Mike,
Keep in mind that two of these are single seat planes and one
is a two seater. Makes a big difference if you want to take
a friend :-).
Dave
>Hi there ! I'm new to the list and I was just wondering if I could get some
>info:
>
> I am considering building 1 of 3 planes:
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Amiral, Bob (NLC-EX)" |
Subject: | RE: Pietenpol Air Camper |
Please remove me from this list!
Regards,
Bob Amiral
Next Level Communications
6085 State Farm Drive
Rohnert Park, CA 94928
707-584-6110
707-584-6199 (fax)
one
I could get some
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Air Camper |
welcome to the group. I've been on this list for a
month and found that there is very good support for
the aircamper. I have learned much. I would like to
build a corvair according to william wynns plans but
I'm keeping an eye out for a bargain on a continental
just to shorten my build time. I think both would work
good. cost for the corvair sounds like $2500. and
total for the aircamper $4500 to $10000 depending on
whether you buy quick build components and what you
pay for the power.
--- Mike Kay wrote:
> Hi there ! I'm new to the list and I was just
> wondering if I could get some
> info:
>
> I am considering building 1 of 3 planes:
>
> I was just wondering how hard the corvair engines
> are to come across
> compared to the VW engine that the volksplane uses,
> and how much it would
> cost to rebuild one to work in an aircraft. I was
> also wondering what
> approximate costs are to get the Air camper up and
> flying. (considering I
> have almost all the tools needed) Please include
> necessary parts for the
> engine considering if I could find an engine lying
> around somewhere for low
> cost.
>
> Thanks alot in advance to anyone who replies :)
>
> Mike Kay
> Engineering Systems and Computing
> University of Guelph
>
>
=====
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael King <mikek(at)nstar.net> |
Subject: | Re: Dallas/Ftworth. |
Mike King
GN-1
77MK
Dallas, Texas
(214) 905-9299....the number is good
>Steve wrote:
>Anyone living in the Dallas/FtWorth area please drop me an email.
>
>Thanks
>Steve
>
>Steve W GN-1 builder
>#6
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Air Camper |
PT2S is two place but can be built single place.
VP1 is single place
Piet is 2 place as he is talking about the Real Pietenpol I think, not the
RW1 UL Piet.
In the RW8/11 plans I have you can also build the Vagabond version also a 2
place like Piper Vagabond, See his video and does a walk a round of a Stand
Off Piper J-3 he built form same plans as a single place.
But if you want good real Pietenpol information this is the right place to
be.
Gordon
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Dave and Connie <dmatt(at)frontiernet.net> |
Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 1999 4:58 AM
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Air Camper |
> Mike,
>
> Keep in mind that two of these are single seat planes and one
> is a two seater. Makes a big difference if you want to take
> a friend :-).
>
> Dave
>
> >Hi there ! I'm new to the list and I was just wondering if I could get
some
> >info:
> >
> > I am considering building 1 of 3 planes:
> > Volksplane VP-1
> > Ragwing PT2S
> > Pietenpol Air Camper
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ken Beanlands <kbeanlan(at)spots.ab.ca> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Air Camper |
On Tue, 5 Oct 1999, Gordon Brimhall wrote:
> But if you want good real Pietenpol information this is the right place to
> be.
>
>
> Gordon
Even if you don't want "real Pietenpol information" and just generally
good info on building planes the traditional way, It's still a great list.
I've found out tonnes of good information here that was very applicable to
my Christavia.
Ken Beanlands B.Eng (Aerospace)
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Christavia MK 1 C-GREN
<http://www.spots.ab.ca/~kbeanlan>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Pitz, Rick (NLC-EX)" <RPitz(at)nlc.com> |
Subject: | RE: Dallas/Ftworth. |
This series of messages appears to be directed to "info(at)tn.com". Please
remove this e-mail address from this mail thread immediately. We have no
interest in receiving this type of information.
--------------------
Rick Pitz
Director of Marketing and Engineering
Telenetworks / Next Level Communications
6085 State Farm Drive
Rohnert Park, CA 94928
707-584-6166 (voice)
707-584-6199 (fax)
rpitz(at)nlc.com
www.telenetworks.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael King [SMTP:mikek(at)nstar.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 1999 7:08 AM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Re: Dallas/Ftworth.
>
>
>
> Mike King
> GN-1
> 77MK
> Dallas, Texas
>
> (214) 905-9299....the number is good
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >Steve wrote:
> >Anyone living in the Dallas/FtWorth area please drop me an email.
> >
> >Thanks
> >Steve
> >
> >Steve W GN-1 builder
> >#6
> >
> >
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
Listers,
Selling my 1977 GN-1 (w/65 HP Cont) for $8,500 or best offer. Buying a
PT-19. Will scratch-build a Piet for my next project. If anyones
interested, please email me privately. Photo on website.
Thanks!
Robert Hensarling
http://www.mesquite-furniture.com
rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com
Uvalde, Texas
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Burroughs <glenn(at)sysweb.com> |
Subject: | Need Hinges (also Model A engine Pics) |
Hello All,
My friend is cutting wood for the stabilizer and elevator. Looks like he
will be needing the aluminum hinges for these parts, plus for the rudder and
ailerons. Does anyone know where these aluminum hinges can be purchased, and
what is the cost? Any information would be appreciated.
By the way, pictures of his 1928 Model A Ford engine can be seen at:
http://www.sysweb.com/ebay/pietenpol.html
Thanks in advance, Glenn
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | walter evans <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Subject: | aileron hinges question |
Group,
Haven't seen mention of aileron hinges for a while. Now I'm at that
point, and need input. I'm trying to build to original, but when I put
the Home Depot strap hinges on the wing......hmmmmm.
Did anyone use these?
If so , did you weld up the split in the ring?
I even bought 4130 tubing and sheet to fabricate lookalikes, but started
and found that they will be intense to build.
Did anyone build to the original prints?
walt evans
Group,
Haven't seen mention of aileron
hinges for a
while. Now I'm at that point, and need input. I'm trying to
build to
original, but when I put the Home Depot strap hinges on the
wing......hmmmmm.
Did anyone use these?
If so , did you weld up the split in
the
ring?
I even bought 4130 tubing and sheet
to fabricate
lookalikes, but started and found that they will be intense to
build.
Did anyone build to the original
prints?
walt
evans
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Meadows <gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: Need Hinges (also Model A engine Pics) |
Glenn,
Replicraft lists the hinges for the tail surfaces in their catalog. They
can be reached at replicraft(at)aol.com, they also have a website, but I'm not
sure of the address. The person you'll deal with is Steve Speidel, a first
rate guy!
Gary
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jguyette <jguyette(at)chi.navtech.com> |
Subject: | RE: Need Hinges (also Model A engine Pics) |
Would you please release me (and my e-mail address) from this list -- I am
not sure how I got on, but I want off.
Thanks
> -----Original Message-----
> Gary Meadows
> Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 1999 4:24 PM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Re: Need Hinges (also Model A engine Pics)
>
>
> Glenn,
> Replicraft lists the hinges for the tail surfaces in their
> catalog. They
> can be reached at replicraft(at)aol.com, they also have a website,
> but I'm not
> sure of the address. The person you'll deal with is Steve
> Speidel, a first
> rate guy!
>
> Gary
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael King <mikek(at)nstar.net> |
Howdy from Texas,
I know we were trying to put together a TEXAS
FLY-IN for this weekend in Burnet. The City of
Burnet in conjunction with the Confederate Air
Force, will host their own fly-in this Saturday. We had
hoped to have a gathering of PIET and GN-1
pilots, builders, and enthusiasts to meet and talk
about our planes and maybe give a few rides.
My A&P called a few minutes ago and said he will not
have my GN-1 annualled and ready for this weekend.
The plane flew through the end of September, but he will
not have the time to sign it off for another year of fun and pleasure.
Maybe we can give it another try in the near future somewhere
else. If you have guys have an event in your area, let us know
so we might try this again.
Anybody in the Dallas - Fort Worth area that wants to look my
plane, just give me a call.....214 905-9299.
In the meantime keep up the great work guys.......
Mike King
GN-1
77MK
Dallas, Texas
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | fishin <fishin(at)wwa.com> |
Subject: | $6.00 turnbuckles |
have only a few left and it doesn't look like there'll be more
coming---what I have left is 49pcs of AN130-16L and 8pcs of AN130-16S...
if anyone is interested they are still 6 bucks ea plus s&h...please
e-mail me direct with any requests.
thanks
JoeC
Zion, Illinois
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | DonanClara(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: aileron hinges question |
Walt, I used the 3-inch strap hinges spelled out in the 1933 plans. They work
quite well and I have no concern with them other than the gap you mention. I
have not welded it up on the premise that the aileron stops I installed will
keep much of the strain off of them. However as I get closer to covering I
keep eyeballing that gap and have just about convinced myself to braze them.
I just hope they won't distort to where I loose the the real clean alignment
I now have.
Don H.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: Need Hinges (also Model A engine Pics) |
Vi Kapler makes, and offers:
Corvair propeller hub . . . . $200
Corvair intake manifold . . . . $175
Air Camper tail group hinges
nine pair, holes drilled, need
some finishing with file . . . $35
Coming soon:
Mechanical tach drive for Corvair
=== 1033 Forest Hills Drive SW
=== Rochester MN 55902
=== 507-288-3322
I bought mine from val, they look very nice. just send
him a check for $35.00(the price includes shipping) he
doesnt use credit cards.
--- Burroughs wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> My friend is cutting wood for the stabilizer and
> elevator. Looks like he
> will be needing the aluminum hinges for these parts,
> plus for the rudder and
> ailerons. Does anyone know where these aluminum
> hinges can be purchased, and
> what is the cost? Any information would be
> appreciated.
>
> By the way, pictures of his 1928 Model A Ford engine
> can be seen at:
>
> http://www.sysweb.com/ebay/pietenpol.html
>
> Thanks in advance, Glenn
>
>
=====
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ted Brousseau <nfn00979(at)naples.net> |
John,
You might want to reconsider that 10 gallon tank if you think you might want
to fly for 2 hours. I had 16 gallons this summer and didn't fly for over
2:20 on any leg. You have to figure on having some gas left in the tank
when you land. Depending on how little you can live with (pun intended) add
that to the amount that is unusable and you have a lot less actually usable
than you might think when you are starting with only 10 gallons.
Ted B.
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | <nle97(at)juno.com> |
Sent: Sunday, October 03, 1999 3:30 AM
> We're going to use one in ours. I plan to make it out of aluminum and
> weld it myself. We should be into this this coming winter as the wing is
> nearly complete. I've done some aluminum welding before and feel I can do
> it if I practice a little on scraps left over. I'm sure we'll use 5052
> aluminum, possibly 3003, as each of these weldable. We plan to do some
> figuring to get a ten gallon tank also. I've read where many people have
> eleven or twelve gallons which might be nice for range, but two hours is
> long enough in a Piet (unless you can't find an acceptable place to
> land!)
>
> John Langston
>
> writes:
> >What does everyone think about the center section wing tank?
>
> __________
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Landing gear welding question |
To the group,
I am building a split axle landing gear almost to the plans. After much
putzing, I got the angle just right so the hinges that attach to the
fuselage are the right distance. I then tack welded them to just the right
dimension. Then, you guessed it- when I did the final welding of the two
pieces of the legs together, the angle between them contracted to the point
where the hinges are 5/8 inch too close together.
I put some threaded rod with nuts between the hinges to put some spreading
force between them. I then heated the joint as evenly as I could to just
between red and orange. Not enough to melt the weld, but to soften
slightly. Actually, I think most of the adjustment was in the "point" of the
joint, not in the crotch where most of the filler metal is. I then spread
the legs slowly to the correct point. It wasn't much of an adjustment in
the weld joint.
My question- did I do a bad thing to the weld joint? My rationale was that
I wasn't doing anything different from when we stress relieve a cluster
joint. Is this correct?
Thanks for the help.
Al Swanson
Trying to get legs on this bird.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: aileron hinges question |
Walt;
Use piano hinges, also serve as gap seal & much tighter control
feel......
Earl Myers
-----Original Message-----
From: walter evans <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net>
To: Pietenpol Discussion
Date: Tuesday, October 05, 1999 5:21 PM
Subject: aileron hinges question
Group,
Haven't seen mention of aileron hinges for a while. Now I'm at that
point, and need input. I'm trying to build to original, but when I put
the Home Depot strap hinges on the wing......hmmmmm.
Did anyone use these?
If so , did you weld up the split in the ring?
I even bought 4130 tubing and sheet to fabricate lookalikes, but
started and found that they will be intense to build.
Did anyone build to the original prints?
walt evans
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
Subject: | Re: Landing gear welding question |
As long as you let it cool slowly. No problem. It is very normal for
weldments to change sape as the cool it is one of the more fustrating parts
of tube fabrication.
John Mc
-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Swanson
Date: Tuesday, October 05, 1999 9:07 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Landing gear welding question
>To the group,
>I am building a split axle landing gear almost to the plans. After much
>putzing, I got the angle just right so the hinges that attach to the
>fuselage are the right distance. I then tack welded them to just the right
>dimension. Then, you guessed it- when I did the final welding of the two
>pieces of the legs together, the angle between them contracted to the point
>where the hinges are 5/8 inch too close together.
>
>I put some threaded rod with nuts between the hinges to put some spreading
>force between them. I then heated the joint as evenly as I could to just
>between red and orange. Not enough to melt the weld, but to soften
>slightly. Actually, I think most of the adjustment was in the "point" of
the
>joint, not in the crotch where most of the filler metal is. I then spread
>the legs slowly to the correct point. It wasn't much of an adjustment in
>the weld joint.
>
>My question- did I do a bad thing to the weld joint? My rationale was that
>I wasn't doing anything different from when we stress relieve a cluster
>joint. Is this correct?
>
>Thanks for the help.
>
>Al Swanson
>Trying to get legs on this bird.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Jack Phillips (EUS)" <EUSJCPH(at)am1.ericsson.se> |
Subject: | RE: aileron hinges question |
Hi Walt,
I had the same feeling you do about the "Barn Door" hinges called out on the
plans.
I used MS20001 piano hinges. They are stronger, and they allow a much
smaller gap between the aileron and the wing. I originally intended to us
the piano hinges for the full span of each aileron to provide gap seals, but
I elected to just use two hinges per aileron. I used hinge sections about
12" long that fit in between the ribs. if I feel more gap seal is
necessary, I can use cloth tape to seal the rest of the gap.
If you use piano hinges, a couple of words of caution. The MS20001 hinge is
extruded and is much stronger than the MS20257. (Of course, it costs more).
If you decide to use full span hinges, be sure to make them in sections so
the hinge won't bind and lock your controls when the wing flexes under load.
And be sure to provide some means of locking the hinge pin in place.
Tony Bingelis has a good chapter on using piano hinges in his book
"Sportplane Construction Techniques". Like all his books, it's worth
reading.
Jack Phillips
> -----Original Message-----
> From: walter evans [SMTP:wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 1999 5:13 PM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: aileron hinges question
>
> Group,
> Haven't seen mention of aileron hinges for a while. Now I'm at that
> point, and need input. I'm trying to build to original, but when I put
> the Home Depot strap hinges on the wing......hmmmmm.
> Did anyone use these?
> If so , did you weld up the split in the ring?
> I even bought 4130 tubing and sheet to fabricate lookalikes, but started
> and found that they will be intense to build.
> Did anyone build to the original prints?
> walt evans
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
Jack and Earl are right on about using alum. extruded
piano hinge as an alternative to the aileron hinge question.
I used the full six foot length on each aileron (or something
close to 6 ft.) and have no problem with binding of any
sort. This serves as the complete gap seal then- no tapes
to mess with. You can, of course, use smaller sections
of piano hinge though.
Earl M. passed this idea of using piano hinge on down to
me and I'm very, very pleased with the results.
Before covering the wing/aileron I installed self-locking
floating nut plates avail. thru ACS or Wicks of a small
machine screw size. These were wood screwed with
a dab of epoxy on the wood screw threads. The hinge
is then marked and drilled and the inside faces of the
hinge countersunk to accept countersunk phillips head
machine screws. The distance between attachments
is up to you- I used about 8" between for mine as I recall.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | michael list <mclist(at)ptw.com> |
Well, it's time to leave the Southern California high desert and head
back east. I'm transferring from Lockheed's Skunk Works to their mod &
logistics center in Greenville, SC. Let's see what all that humidity
does to my wing ribs! Going to unsubscribe for awhile, catch ya'll from
SC.
Mike List
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Jack Phillips (EUS)" <EUSJCPH(at)am1.ericsson.se> |
I forgot to mention the nutplates. I used them too, this allows you to remove
and reinstall the aileron without having to cut access through the fabric to tighten
the nuts. I'm sure Mike is right, the amount of flexing a Pietenpol wing
would experience under load would probably not cause any binding of the hinges.
The primary reason I did not use full length hinges was that it is very
easy to align two short sections of hinge, but more difficult to align a long
one. My ailerons move extremely easily and smoothly.
Jack
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael D Cuy [SMTP:Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 1999 8:25 AM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: piano hinge
>
> Jack and Earl are right on about using alum. extruded
> piano hinge as an alternative to the aileron hinge question.
> I used the full six foot length on each aileron (or something
> close to 6 ft.) and have no problem with binding of any
> sort. This serves as the complete gap seal then- no tapes
> to mess with. You can, of course, use smaller sections
> of piano hinge though.
> Earl M. passed this idea of using piano hinge on down to
> me and I'm very, very pleased with the results.
> Before covering the wing/aileron I installed self-locking
> floating nut plates avail. thru ACS or Wicks of a small
> machine screw size. These were wood screwed with
> a dab of epoxy on the wood screw threads. The hinge
> is then marked and drilled and the inside faces of the
> hinge countersunk to accept countersunk phillips head
> machine screws. The distance between attachments
> is up to you- I used about 8" between for mine as I recall.
>
> Mike C.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Eugene Hubbard <gsquid(at)earthlink.net> |
I've been lurking on the list for a few months. I've finally started building
ribs for a 3-piece wing and am looking at ordering material for the tail. What
thoughts does anyone have on the use of bass plywood for the tip doublers on the
tail pieces. Or anywhere else for that matter. This looks like a low-stress
area and saving some weight that far from the CG seems like a good idea. I've
seen a lot of discussion on alternate wood for construction, but not for
plywood.
Gene Hubbard
San Diego
________________________________________________________________________________
Hey mike that is quite a transfer! left coast to the right in one day!
Take it easy,
Steve Eldredge
IT Services
Brigham Young University
> -----Original Message-----
> michael list
> Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 1999 6:43 PM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Transfer
>
>
> Well, it's time to leave the Southern California high desert and head
> back east. I'm transferring from Lockheed's Skunk Works to
> their mod &
> logistics center in Greenville, SC. Let's see what all that humidity
> does to my wing ribs! Going to unsubscribe for awhile, catch
> ya'll from
> SC.
>
> Mike List
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | RE: Landing gear welding question |
You did just fine, Ed. This is going to happen again and again since as
someone posted before it is the nature of welding tubing. When I did mine I
cut the fishmouth out of the tip of the vee and after trial fitting and
finding the vee to tight, bent the gear manually back into the position I
wanted and then welded in the axle tube on a jig. After that was done it
stayed in the right position.
Steve Eldredge
IT Services
Brigham Young University
> -----Original Message-----
> Alan Swanson
> Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 1999 9:02 PM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Landing gear welding question
>
>
> To the group,
> I am building a split axle landing gear almost to the plans.
> After much
> putzing, I got the angle just right so the hinges that attach to the
> fuselage are the right distance. I then tack welded them to
> just the right
> dimension. Then, you guessed it- when I did the final
> welding of the two
> pieces of the legs together, the angle between them
> contracted to the point
> where the hinges are 5/8 inch too close together.
>
> I put some threaded rod with nuts between the hinges to put
> some spreading
> force between them. I then heated the joint as evenly as I
> could to just
> between red and orange. Not enough to melt the weld, but to soften
> slightly. Actually, I think most of the adjustment was in the
> "point" of the
> joint, not in the crotch where most of the filler metal is. I
> then spread
> the legs slowly to the correct point. It wasn't much of an
> adjustment in
> the weld joint.
>
> My question- did I do a bad thing to the weld joint? My
> rationale was that
> I wasn't doing anything different from when we stress relieve
> a cluster
> joint. Is this correct?
>
> Thanks for the help.
>
> Al Swanson
> Trying to get legs on this bird.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael King <mikek(at)nstar.net> |
Subject: | Aileron Gap Seals |
I have been reading with interest on and off
the last several months the use of aileron gap
seals.
Before I bought my GN-1, I was told that the
PIET and the Grega GN-1 Aircampers flew
like a J-3 Cub. I then got my taildragger
indorsement in the Cub before flying the Grega.
When I flew my GN-1 for the first time, I noticed
it did NOT fly like the Cub, and was not as responsive
on the controls.....the ailerons were slower to respond
and the pitch was more sensitive than the Cub.
Since then I have been reading on this list about gap
seals to improve aileron response performance. Has
anyone with a GN-1 used aileron gap seals and if so
how and what were the results?
Thank you again for your input.
Mike King
GN-1
77MK
Dallas
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Meadows <gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com> |
Mike, et al,
I saw the piano hinge on your video, and that is a great idea, which I
will use, but I have a question about the gap sealing properties discussed.
I know gap-sealing is important for drag-reduction on higher speed aircraft,
but on a Piet, is it more for improved control response? Is flutter a
potential problem, or does the extra drag make a noticeable difference in
speed. I bet it's also a pride of workmanship thing, too. I was just
curious.
Thanks,
Gary Meadows
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Warren Shoun <wbnb(at)earthlink.net> |
Hi Gary,
Without a gap seal at the aileron hinge point, the airfoil lift sucks air
flow thru this gap. This seriously disturbs things, right where you need a
smooth flow for aileron effectiveness. Your ailerons will work without the gap
seal, but, they work so much better with them.
Cheers,
Warren
Gary Meadows wrote:
> Mike, et al,
>
> I saw the piano hinge on your video, and that is a great idea, which I
> will use, but I have a question about the gap sealing properties discussed.
> I know gap-sealing is important for drag-reduction on higher speed aircraft,
> but on a Piet, is it more for improved control response? Is flutter a
> potential problem, or does the extra drag make a noticeable difference in
> speed. I bet it's also a pride of workmanship thing, too. I was just
> curious.
>
> Thanks,
> Gary Meadows
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Craig Lawler <clawler(at)ptd.net> |
Subject: | Re: aileron hinges question |
x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Walt,
I just used the hardware store version like the plans call for and
welded the end of the hinge down. Bought aircraft piano hinges and
decided I did like it as well because it did reach down over the wood
surface on the aileron and wing as far.
Craig
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | walter evans <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Mike,
So that means that , in cross section, the hinge would be standing like an
"A", with the hinge fastened to the inside of the " aileron spars"?
If this is right, do you have to modify anything to get the gap spacing the
same? And finally, is the pin center at the same point as original?
thanks
walt evans
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov>
Date: Wednesday, October 06, 1999 8:27 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: piano hinge
>Jack and Earl are right on about using alum. extruded
>piano hinge as an alternative to the aileron hinge question.
>I used the full six foot length on each aileron (or something
>close to 6 ft.) and have no problem with binding of any
>sort. This serves as the complete gap seal then- no tapes
>to mess with. You can, of course, use smaller sections
>of piano hinge though.
> Earl M. passed this idea of using piano hinge on down to
>me and I'm very, very pleased with the results.
>Before covering the wing/aileron I installed self-locking
>floating nut plates avail. thru ACS or Wicks of a small
>machine screw size. These were wood screwed with
>a dab of epoxy on the wood screw threads. The hinge
>is then marked and drilled and the inside faces of the
>hinge countersunk to accept countersunk phillips head
>machine screws. The distance between attachments
>is up to you- I used about 8" between for mine as I recall.
>
>Mike C.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
>Mike,
> So that means that , in cross section, the hinge would be standing like an
>"A", with the hinge fastened to the inside of the " aileron spars"?
>If this is right, do you have to modify anything to get the gap spacing the
>same? And finally, is the pin center at the same point as original?
>thanks
>walt evans
Walt- Exactly right. The gap spacing seemed to work out just
fine with piano hinge. I'd guess the thickness of the folded hinge
is about 1/8" to 3/16's. You just install the edge of the hinge
flush with the top of the wing and aileron and the pin falls where it's
supposed to.
Mike C.
Mike,
So that means that , in cross section, the hinge would be
standing like an
A, with the hinge fastened to the inside of the
aileron spars?
If this is right, do you have to modify anything to get the gap
spacing the
same? And finally, is the pin center at the same point as
original?
thanks
walt evans
Walt- Exactly right. The gap spacing seemed to work out
just
fine with piano hinge. I'd guess the thickness of the folded
hinge
is about 1/8 to 3/16's. You just install the edge of
the hinge
flush with the top of the wing and aileron and the pin falls where
it's
supposed to.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Jim Wright <jgw(at)village.uunet.be> |
Michael,
Skunk Works!....You mean that there's a Piet somewhere in the same family
tree as the SR71! I think I have a new respect for Bernie!
Although I'm over in Belgium right now, Georgia is my home. I know you'll
love Greenville.
Regards,
Jim Wright
jgw(at)village.uunet.be
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | michael list <mclist(at)ptw.com> |
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 1999 02:43
> Well, it's time to leave the Southern California high desert and head
> back east. I'm transferring from Lockheed's Skunk Works to their mod &
> logistics center in Greenville, SC. Let's see what all that humidity
> does to my wing ribs! Going to unsubscribe for awhile, catch ya'll from
> SC.
>
> Mike List
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Copinfo <Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.com> |
Subject: | Re: Aileron Gap Seals |
Put the aileron in the full down position on one side and put duct tape over
the wing and aileron then do the other side. Now fly it and see the
difference. I couldn't believe the difference it made on my Piet. I'm sure
the GN-1 will be the same.
Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.Com
Tim Cunningham
Des Moines, Iowa (515) 237-1510
>I have been reading with interest on and off
>the last several months the use of aileron gap
>seals.
>
>Before I bought my GN-1, I was told that the
>PIET and the Grega GN-1 Aircampers flew
>like a J-3 Cub. I then got my taildragger
>indorsement in the Cub before flying the Grega.
>
>When I flew my GN-1 for the first time, I noticed
>it did NOT fly like the Cub, and was not as responsive
>on the controls.....the ailerons were slower to respond
>and the pitch was more sensitive than the Cub.
>
>Since then I have been reading on this list about gap
>seals to improve aileron response performance. Has
>anyone with a GN-1 used aileron gap seals and if so
>how and what were the results?
>
>Thank you again for your input.
>
>Mike King
>GN-1
>77MK
>Dallas
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Copinfo <Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.com> |
Subject: | Re: aileron hinges question |
Walt, I have Home Depot strap hinges on my Piet. There is no load on
the ailerons that will casue them to fail. They looked kind of
inadequate at first, but after reassurance fromother builders I stayed
with them and have 55 trouble free hours since July.
Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.Com
Tim Cunningham
Des Moines, Iowa (515) 237-1510
Group,
Haven't seen mention of aileron hinges for a while. Now I'm at that
point, and need input. I'm trying to build to original, but when I put
the Home Depot strap hinges on the wing......hmmmmm.
Did anyone use these?
If so , did you weld up the split in the ring?
I even bought 4130 tubing and sheet to fabricate lookalikes, but
started and found that they will be intense to build.
Did anyone build to the original prints?
walt evans
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Mike Kay <mkay(at)uoguelph.ca> |
Can anyone give me an exact cost for a completed airframe?
(ie. no engine but with gear and covered and such)
Also, how long does it take to completely remove the wing for
transportation?
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "David B. Schober" <dschober(at)mail.fscwv.edu> |
Subject: | Re: Aileron Gap Seals |
On gliders we use surface tapes doped to the wing and aileron. Don't go to heavy
on the dope and it will flex but still seal the gap.
Copinfo wrote:
> Put the aileron in the full down position on one side and put duct tape over
> the wing and aileron then do the other side. Now fly it and see the
> difference. I couldn't believe the difference it made on my Piet. I'm sure
> the GN-1 will be the same.
> Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.Com
> Tim Cunningham
> Des Moines, Iowa (515) 237-1510
>
> >I have been reading with interest on and off
> >the last several months the use of aileron gap
> >seals.
> >
> >Before I bought my GN-1, I was told that the
> >PIET and the Grega GN-1 Aircampers flew
> >like a J-3 Cub. I then got my taildragger
> >indorsement in the Cub before flying the Grega.
> >
> >When I flew my GN-1 for the first time, I noticed
> >it did NOT fly like the Cub, and was not as responsive
> >on the controls.....the ailerons were slower to respond
> >and the pitch was more sensitive than the Cub.
> >
> >Since then I have been reading on this list about gap
> >seals to improve aileron response performance. Has
> >anyone with a GN-1 used aileron gap seals and if so
> >how and what were the results?
> >
> >Thank you again for your input.
> >
> >Mike King
> >GN-1
> >77MK
> >Dallas
> >
> >
--
David B.Schober, CPE
Instructor, Aviation Maintenance
Fairmont State College
National Aerospace Education Center
1050 East Benedum Industrial Drive
Bridgeport, WV 26330-9503
(304) 842-8300
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: aileron hinges question |
Jack,
Most of the small planes I've been around have three (3) hinges on a
control surface. This way if one fails, the surface will stay on.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Aileron Gap Seals |
Mike,
You must be sure that the tape you use for the gap seals does not pucker
(up). If it does you could find yourself in a spin. It makes a little air
damn on the front of the aileron. I had a real surprise one day after
sealing the wings on my sailplane. It's a good thing this happened with some
altitude, other wise I might not be on this mailing list.
Howdy
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Airframe costs |
Mike, I would put it at about $3500 U.S. for the completed airframe, maybe
$4000. From what I see so far, it will be major effort to take the wings
off. Can't give you an example as it's taken me about a thousand hours so
far and I haven't got the wings on yet. BNest guess would be 2 to 3 hours,
with a helper.
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Mike Kay <mkay(at)uoguelph.ca> |
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 1999 4:53 PM
> Can anyone give me an exact cost for a completed airframe?
>
> (ie. no engine but with gear and covered and such)
>
> Also, how long does it take to completely remove the wing for
> transportation?
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | kyle ray <rrobert(at)centuryinter.net> |
Subject: | Re: Aileron Gap Seals |
Mike King,
No the GN1 isn't the same its aileron's are set up different than
the Pietenpols and this is one area that is not an improvement.
and is not as simple and functional as the Pietenpol. (my opinion)
order a set of GN-1 plans ($25.00) it is hinged by eyebolts with
equal gap on top and bottom
the air pressure is sealed differently by putting cloth diagonally across
the gap, if I remember correctly, if you like give me
your address I'll mail you copy of the aileron. However if you
own and fly a GN1 maybe a full set of plans would be well
worth $25.00.
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Copinfo <Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.com> |
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 1999 3:22 PM
Subject: | Re: Aileron Gap Seals |
> Put the aileron in the full down position on one side and put duct tape
over
> the wing and aileron then do the other side. Now fly it and see the
> difference. I couldn't believe the difference it made on my Piet. I'm
sure
> the GN-1 will be the same.
> Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.Com
> Tim Cunningham
> Des Moines, Iowa (515) 237-1510
>
> >I have been reading with interest on and off
> >the last several months the use of aileron gap
> >seals.
> >
> >Before I bought my GN-1, I was told that the
> >PIET and the Grega GN-1 Aircampers flew
> >like a J-3 Cub. I then got my taildragger
> >indorsement in the Cub before flying the Grega.
> >
> >When I flew my GN-1 for the first time, I noticed
> >it did NOT fly like the Cub, and was not as responsive
> >on the controls.....the ailerons were slower to respond
> >and the pitch was more sensitive than the Cub.
> >
> >Since then I have been reading on this list about gap
> >seals to improve aileron response performance. Has
> >anyone with a GN-1 used aileron gap seals and if so
> >how and what were the results?
> >
> >Thank you again for your input.
> >
> >Mike King
> >GN-1
> >77MK
> >Dallas
> >
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael King <mikek(at)nstar.net> |
Subject: | Re: Aileron Gap Seals |
Howdy,
Thanks for the heads-up on the "pucker" factor
in using tape for gap seals. Will keep a close
eye on it. Any way to ensure the tape will not
pucker along the aileron?
Thnaks again...
Mike
>Mike,
> You must be sure that the tape you use for the gap seals does not pucker
>(up). If it does you could find yourself in a spin. It makes a little air
>damn on the front of the aileron. I had a real surprise one day after
>sealing the wings on my sailplane. It's a good thing this happened with
some
>altitude, other wise I might not be on this mailing list.
>Howdy
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael King <mikek(at)nstar.net> |
Subject: | Re: Aileron Gap Seals |
Thanks for the info. I have a set of plans
coming.
I would like to improve aileron response.
Some days we have very windy days and
quickly compensating for crosswind and
gusts makes it very challenging.
Other than that, it is a great plane to
fly.
Mike
>Mike King,
>
>No the GN1 isn't the same its aileron's are set up different than
>the Pietenpols and this is one area that is not an improvement.
>and is not as simple and functional as the Pietenpol. (my opinion)
>order a set of GN-1 plans ($25.00) it is hinged by eyebolts with
>equal gap on top and bottom
>the air pressure is sealed differently by putting cloth diagonally across
>the gap, if I remember correctly, if you like give me
>your address I'll mail you copy of the aileron. However if you
>own and fly a GN1 maybe a full set of plans would be well
>worth $25.00.
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Copinfo <Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.com>
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 1999 3:22 PM
>Subject: Re: Aileron Gap Seals
>
>
>> Put the aileron in the full down position on one side and put duct tape
>over
>> the wing and aileron then do the other side. Now fly it and see the
>> difference. I couldn't believe the difference it made on my Piet. I'm
>sure
>> the GN-1 will be the same.
>> Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.Com
>> Tim Cunningham
>> Des Moines, Iowa (515) 237-1510
>>
>> >I have been reading with interest on and off
>> >the last several months the use of aileron gap
>> >seals.
>> >
>> >Before I bought my GN-1, I was told that the
>> >PIET and the Grega GN-1 Aircampers flew
>> >like a J-3 Cub. I then got my taildragger
>> >indorsement in the Cub before flying the Grega.
>> >
>> >When I flew my GN-1 for the first time, I noticed
>> >it did NOT fly like the Cub, and was not as responsive
>> >on the controls.....the ailerons were slower to respond
>> >and the pitch was more sensitive than the Cub.
>> >
>> >Since then I have been reading on this list about gap
>> >seals to improve aileron response performance. Has
>> >anyone with a GN-1 used aileron gap seals and if so
>> >how and what were the results?
>> >
>> >Thank you again for your input.
>> >
>> >Mike King
>> >GN-1
>> >77MK
>> >Dallas
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
Subject: | Re: Aileron Gap Seals |
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael King <mikek(at)nstar.net>
Date: Wednesday, October 06, 1999 7:07 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Aileron Gap Seals
Mike, I'll try to take a digital of the gap seal on my GN-1 tomorrow. It's
a strip of thin metal toat goes the full length of the aileron. It's
attached to the trailing edge of the wing, and just barely touches the
aileron when it's in the full up position. Seems to work fine, as I have
excellant roll response.
Sorry you can't make it to Burnet this weekend. I'm still trying for
Saturday, but i'm not real hopeful, however there's still a slight chance.
Robert Hensarling
http://www.mesquite-furniture.com
rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com
Uvalde, Texas
>Thanks for the info. I have a set of plans
>coming.
>
>I would like to improve aileron response.
>Some days we have very windy days and
>quickly compensating for crosswind and
>gusts makes it very challenging.
>Other than that, it is a great plane to
>fly.
>
>Mike
>
>
>>Mike King,
>>
>>No the GN1 isn't the same its aileron's are set up different than
>>the Pietenpols and this is one area that is not an improvement.
>>and is not as simple and functional as the Pietenpol. (my opinion)
>>order a set of GN-1 plans ($25.00) it is hinged by eyebolts with
>>equal gap on top and bottom
>>the air pressure is sealed differently by putting cloth diagonally across
>>the gap, if I remember correctly, if you like give me
>>your address I'll mail you copy of the aileron. However if you
>>own and fly a GN1 maybe a full set of plans would be well
>>worth $25.00.
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: Copinfo <Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.com>
>>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>>Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 1999 3:22 PM
>>Subject: Re: Aileron Gap Seals
>>
>>
>>> Put the aileron in the full down position on one side and put duct tape
>>over
>>> the wing and aileron then do the other side. Now fly it and see the
>>> difference. I couldn't believe the difference it made on my Piet. I'm
>>sure
>>> the GN-1 will be the same.
>>> Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.Com
>>> Tim Cunningham
>>> Des Moines, Iowa (515) 237-1510
>>>
>>> >I have been reading with interest on and off
>>> >the last several months the use of aileron gap
>>> >seals.
>>> >
>>> >Before I bought my GN-1, I was told that the
>>> >PIET and the Grega GN-1 Aircampers flew
>>> >like a J-3 Cub. I then got my taildragger
>>> >indorsement in the Cub before flying the Grega.
>>> >
>>> >When I flew my GN-1 for the first time, I noticed
>>> >it did NOT fly like the Cub, and was not as responsive
>>> >on the controls.....the ailerons were slower to respond
>>> >and the pitch was more sensitive than the Cub.
>>> >
>>> >Since then I have been reading on this list about gap
>>> >seals to improve aileron response performance. Has
>>> >anyone with a GN-1 used aileron gap seals and if so
>>> >how and what were the results?
>>> >
>>> >Thank you again for your input.
>>> >
>>> >Mike King
>>> >GN-1
>>> >77MK
>>> >Dallas
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | DonanClara(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: aileron hinges question |
Thanks Tim for the reassurance. For a while there I was beginning to think I
was the only one around who did it Bernie's way. On second thought Alan
Weiss's Piet (which was built by another gent) was done according to the
plans and has been flying quite successfully.with those hardware store hinges
for many, many years.
Don H.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | robert hensarling <rhrocker(at)admin.hilconet.com> |
Jerry, you just email me about my GN-1, but when I tried to reply, it got
kicked back. Could you possible resend your message?
Thanks!
Robert (sorry for this listers)Hensarling
________________________________________________________________________________
Walt;
The barrel or hinge pin side or whatever you want to call it basically lies
flush with the top of the wing and aileron the whole length of the 6' hinge.
This achieves the same hinge point that the hardware store hinges had as per
the plans. I originally bought Stanley hinges for the ailerons and just
didn't like the feel or sloppiness of them, hence the piano hinge. I choose
the extruded hinge as I had some laying around and it is stronger than the
other..... I realize now that was overkill after seeing numerous high
performance planes with the regular wrapped hinge. I choose MS 21059 L08
floating nut plates that screw to the insides of the ailerons and inside the
wing. This way the hinge is totally exposed for removal of it via attach
screws. Long story made short, if you give me your snail address off line
here, I will mail you a copy of my drawing. There are a lot more tidbits on
it about trim strips for fabric and so forth. This is what The Honorable Mr.
Cuy used on his ship and it seems to work fine. I used it on my Scout too
but it hasn't flown yet.
Earl Myers
-----Original Message-----
From: walter evans <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net>
Date: Wednesday, October 06, 1999 3:59 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: piano hinge
>Mike,
> So that means that , in cross section, the hinge would be standing like
an
>"A", with the hinge fastened to the inside of the " aileron spars"?
>If this is right, do you have to modify anything to get the gap spacing the
>same? And finally, is the pin center at the same point as original?
>thanks
>walt evans
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov>
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Date: Wednesday, October 06, 1999 8:27 AM
>Subject: piano hinge
>
>
>>Jack and Earl are right on about using alum. extruded
>>piano hinge as an alternative to the aileron hinge question.
>>I used the full six foot length on each aileron (or something
>>close to 6 ft.) and have no problem with binding of any
>>sort. This serves as the complete gap seal then- no tapes
>>to mess with. You can, of course, use smaller sections
>>of piano hinge though.
>> Earl M. passed this idea of using piano hinge on down to
>>me and I'm very, very pleased with the results.
>>Before covering the wing/aileron I installed self-locking
>>floating nut plates avail. thru ACS or Wicks of a small
>>machine screw size. These were wood screwed with
>>a dab of epoxy on the wood screw threads. The hinge
>>is then marked and drilled and the inside faces of the
>>hinge countersunk to accept countersunk phillips head
>>machine screws. The distance between attachments
>>is up to you- I used about 8" between for mine as I recall.
>>
>>Mike C.
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
Subject: | Re: Aileron Gap Seals |
That is also the way DeHavilland did it on the Moth. I removed the elevator
for repairs and was able to lift the pinked edge of the gap seal, double it
bacon itself and it pulled cleanly away with no damage to the elevator or
horizontal stabilizer fabric.
John Mc
-----Original Message-----
From: David B. Schober <dschober(at)mail.fscwv.edu>
Date: Wednesday, October 06, 1999 3:24 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Aileron Gap Seals
>On gliders we use surface tapes doped to the wing and aileron. Don't go to
heavy
>on the dope and it will flex but still seal the gap.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ron Gipson <ronr(at)onlinemac.com> |
Subscribe
I have no idea how I all of a sudden stopped receiving mail from this
group. I greatly enjoy the lively discussions and the helpfull
information.
Without this mail I feel like the guy that drove off and left his wife
at the rest area. He thought he had gone deaf.
Now that we are getting back into "plane building weather" it is most
important that I have you all available so I can ask questions.
Thanx for getting me back on line.
Ron Gipson
Building two at a time.
Subscribe
I have no idea how I all of a sudden stopped receiving mail from
this
group. I greatly enjoy the lively discussions and the
helpfull
information.
Without this mail I feel like the guy that drove off and left his
wife at
the rest area. He thought he had gone deaf.
Now that we are getting back into "plane building weather" it is
most
important that I have you all available so I can ask questions.
Thanx for getting me back on line.
Ron Gipson
Building two at a time.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Jack Phillips (EUS)" <EUSJCPH(at)am1.ericsson.se> |
Subject: | RE: aileron hinges question |
Good point! Maybe I should add another one in the middle of each aileron.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: VAHOWDY(at)aol.com [SMTP:VAHOWDY(at)aol.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 1999 5:28 PM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Re: aileron hinges question
>
> Jack,
> Most of the small planes I've been around have three (3) hinges on a
> control surface. This way if one fails, the surface will stay on.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Lawrence V Williams <lnawms(at)juno.com> |
Subject: | Re: Airframe costs and other observations |
>Can anyone give me an exact cost for a completed airframe?
>
>(ie. no engine but with gear and covered and such)
>
>Also, how long does it take to completely remove the wing for
>transportation?
>
Aking for an EXACT cost made me wonder, so I added up all my reciepts and
came up with $2083 spread out over the past 5 years. Made me feel pretty
good, $400/yr for something so wonderful is a cheap way to keep
entertained.
I bought my long boards of spruce (longerons and stab spars)at a lumber
company along with the ply for the fuse sides. My fuse bottom, seats,
and panels are marine ply and the balance of the spruce came from two of
Acft Spruce's "bargain bags" and I still have a lot left over. I am using
motorcycle wheels ala Brian Kenney and Alan Wise, and made my own tank
from 28 ga. galvanized following advice from Ed Samson at B'head a couple
of years ago.
My bird is on it's gear with the tail all covered and the center-section
complete. As soon as I get a couple more wires run and cable-ends
finished and installed, it will be ready to cover.
OTHER OBSERVATIONS
>From what I have observed from 5-6 yrs of association with Piets/Piet
people, strap hinges as called out on the plans are preferred because
they spread the mounting holes across the face of the aileron spars
rather than concentrating them along one line AND 1. they work just fine
AND 2. they are cheap. Some people weld the eyes closed, others don't. A
clevis pin with a split pin to retain it replaces the stock hinge pin.
It has been repeated over and over again in the newsletter and from
pilots that aileron gap seals are mandatory for a good flying Piet. The
preferred method seems to be dacron lightly doped into the bottom of the
vee, although I have seen tape used, too.
As far as the wing attachment goes........beats me!! I have barely
started on mine, but I DO know that the Air Camper isn't one of those
designs that you would trailer around and set up quickly on a whim like
an ultralight.
Hope this helps
Larry
p.s. Does anybody know if GM died or just lost interest? The webpage has
been idle since prior to the reunion. Also, has a successor for
newsletter editor been found?
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | fishin <fishin(at)wwa.com> |
Lawrence V Williams wrote:
> p.s. Does anybody know if GM died or just lost interest? The webpage has
> been idle since prior to the reunion. Also, has a successor for
> newsletter editor been found?
I also wonder ifanyone has received more than the one newsletter last
spring???
Joe C
Zion, Illinois
Lawrence V Williams wrote:
p.s. Does anybody know if GM died or just lost interest?
The webpage has
been idle since prior to the reunion. Also, has a successor for
newsletter editor been found?
I also wonder ifanyone has received more than the one newsletter last
spring???
Joe C
Zion, Illinois
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Clay Spurgeon <cspurgeon(at)baseballexp.com> |
Was wondering the same - my e-mials to Grant have gone unanswered for
a while.......
Clay
> From: fishin <fishin(at)wwa.com>
> Subject: Re:newsletter
> Reply-to: Pietenpol Discussion
>
>
>
>
> Lawrence V Williams wrote:
>
> > p.s. Does anybody know if GM died or just lost interest? The webpage has
> > been idle since prior to the reunion. Also, has a successor for
> > newsletter editor been found?
>
> I also wonder ifanyone has received more than the one newsletter last
> spring???
> Joe C
> Zion, Illinois
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Lawrence V Williams wrote:
> p.s. Does anybody know if GM died or just lost interest?
> The webpage has
> been idle since prior to the reunion. Also, has a successor for
> newsletter editor been found?
> I also wonder ifanyone has received more than the one newsletter last
> spring???
> Joe C
> Zion, Illinois
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
Guys- I know this is off the subject, but Scout builder
(and he WILL fly it this Spring, won't he, Earl.....?)
Earl Myers birthday is TODAY !!
He'll never tell his age, but at least his wife looks young:))
Earl is a good friend ( or was...) about 1 hour away from
me in the Cleveland/Akron Ohio area.
Best wishes, stud.
Mike C.
Guys- I know this is off the subject, but Scout builder
(and he WILL fly it this Spring, won't he, Earl.....?)
Earl Myers birthday is TODAY !!
He'll never tell his age, but at least his wife looks young:))
Earl is a good friend ( or was...) about 1 hour away from
me in the Cleveland/Akron Ohio area.
Best wishes, stud.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | fishin <fishin(at)wwa.com> |
Subject: | Re: Earl's Birthday |
Michael D Cuy wrote:
> Guys- I know this is off the subject, but Scout builder
> (and he WILL fly it this Spring, won't he, Earl.....?)
> Earl Myers birthday is TODAY !!
> He'll never tell his age,
>
> Best wishes, stud.
stud? like in an old rough cut 2x4??? anyway, best wishes to a fellow
Piet builder---birthdays are an unaviodable annual event that are we
tend to ignore but others keep reminding us of---
happy birthday fella
JoeC
Zion, Illinois
>
>
Michael D Cuy wrote:
Guys- I know this is off the subject, but Scout
builder
(and he WILL fly it this Spring, won't he, Earl.....?)
Earl Myers birthday is TODAY !!
He'll never tell his age,
Best wishes, stud.
stud? like in an old rough cut 2x4??? anyway, best wishes to a fellow
Piet builder---birthdays are an unaviodable annual event that are we tend
to ignore but others keep reminding us of---
happy birthday fella
JoeC
Zion, Illinois
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Davis, Marc" <marc.davis(at)intel.com> |
Walt
It you'll send me a copy I'll scan it and put it on the web.
Intel Corporation
Marc Davis
2111 25th Ave, JF2-53
Hillsboro OR 97124
Marc
-----Original Message-----
From: Earl Myers [SMTP:allaire(at)raex.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 1999 9:35 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: piano hinge
Walt;
The barrel or hinge pin side or whatever you want to call it basically lies
flush with the top of the wing and aileron the whole length of the 6' hinge.
This achieves the same hinge point that the hardware store hinges had as per
the plans. I originally bought Stanley hinges for the ailerons and just
didn't like the feel or sloppiness of them, hence the piano hinge. I choose
the extruded hinge as I had some laying around and it is stronger than the
other..... I realize now that was overkill after seeing numerous high
performance planes with the regular wrapped hinge. I choose MS 21059 L08
floating nut plates that screw to the insides of the ailerons and inside the
wing. This way the hinge is totally exposed for removal of it via attach
screws. Long story made short, if you give me your snail address off line
here, I will mail you a copy of my drawing. There are a lot more tidbits on
it about trim strips for fabric and so forth. This is what The Honorable Mr.
Cuy used on his ship and it seems to work fine. I used it on my Scout too
but it hasn't flown yet.
Earl Myers
-----Original Message-----
From: walter evans <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net
Date: Wednesday, October 06, 1999 3:59 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: piano hinge
>Mike,
> So that means that , in cross section, the hinge would be
standing like
an
>"A", with the hinge fastened to the inside of the " aileron spars"?
>If this is right, do you have to modify anything to get the gap
spacing the
>same? And finally, is the pin center at the same point as
original?
>thanks
>walt evans
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov
>To: Pietenpol Discussion >
>Date: Wednesday, October 06, 1999 8:27 AM
>Subject: piano hinge
>
>
question.
something
to
recall.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | LaurenMWilliams(at)webtv.net (Lauren Williams) |
Subject: | Re: Aileron Gap Seals |
One way to make sure that the aileron gap seal doesn't pucker would be
to stick the forward/upper side of the seal to the aft face of the
aileron gap spar in the stationary part of the wing. The upper/aft
facing part of the seal then lays down on the top surface of the
aileron. This way the seal crosses the centerline of the hinge and it's
length does not change with aileron movement. This is the method used
to seal steel tube empanage gaps.
Lauren
mailsorter-102-3.iap.bryant.webtv.net (8.8.8-wtv-d/ms.dwm.v7+dul2)
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 18:26:50 -0500
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael King <mikek(at)nstar.net> |
Subject: | Re: Aileron Gap Seals |
(via Mercury MTS v1.44 (NDS)) (via Mercury MTS v1.44 (NDS)) (via
Mercury MTS v1.44 (NDS)) (via Mercury MTS v1.44 (NDS))
Howdy,
Thanks for the heads-up on the "pucker" factor
in using tape for gap seals. Will keep a close
eye on it. Any way to ensure the tape will not
pucker along the aileron?
Thnaks again...
Mike
>Mike,
> You must be sure that the tape you use for the gap seals does not pucker
>(up). If it does you could find yourself in a spin. It makes a little air
>damn on the front of the aileron. I had a real surprise one day after
>sealing the wings on my sailplane. It's a good thing this happened with
some
>altitude, other wise I might not be on this mailing list.
>Howdy
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Copinfo <Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.com> |
Subject: | Re: Airframe costs |
Mike, I would guess about $4000. The wings, struts and flying wires take
almost 30 minutes to remove. It takes two hours to put back on and a few
flights to re-rig the wings to fly right.
Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.Com
Tim Cunningham
Des Moines, Iowa (515) 237-1510
>Can anyone give me an exact cost for a completed airframe?
>
>(ie. no engine but with gear and covered and such)
>
>Also, how long does it take to completely remove the wing for
>transportation?
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Earl's Birthday |
Thanks, Mr. fishin....that "stud" is Mr. Cuy and a ruff cut at that!
-----Original Message-----
From: fishin <fishin(at)wwa.com>
To: Pietenpol Discussion
Date: Thursday, October 07, 1999 11:45 AM
Subject: Re: Earl's Birthday
Michael D Cuy wrote:
Guys- I know this is off the subject, but Scout builder
(and he WILL fly it this Spring, won't he, Earl.....?)
Earl Myers birthday is TODAY !!
He'll never tell his age,
Best wishes, stud.
stud? like in an old rough cut 2x4??? anyway, best wishes to a
fellow Piet builder---birthdays are an unaviodable annual event that are
we tend to ignore but others keep reminding us of---
happy birthday fella
JoeC
Zion, Illinois
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: aileron hinges question |
Steve wrote:
I am interested in what manner did yall mount yer piano hinges. I am
building a GN-1 and now I will switch to piano hinges too but just dont
understand how and where to install them. Hepme yall.
Steve
> Walt,
>
> I just used the hardware store version like the plans call for and
> welded the end of the hinge down. Bought aircraft piano hinges and
> decided I did like it as well because it did reach down over the
> wood
> surface on the aileron and wing as far.
>
> Craig
>
Steve W GN-1 builder
#6
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
Subject: | Re: Subscribe/ aviation addicts |
Addicting isn't it. You get a small sliver of spruce, an injection of
aluminum, a little dope and you are hooked for life! then some day you
really are flying high, oops excuse me, Low and Slow. ;-)
J Mc
-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Gipson <ronr(at)onlinemac.com>
To: Pietenpol Discussion
Date: Wednesday, October 06, 1999 10:59 PM
Subject: Subscribe
Subscribe
I have no idea how I all of a sudden stopped receiving mail from
this group. I greatly enjoy the lively discussions and the helpfull
information.
Without this mail I feel like the guy that drove off and left his
wife at the rest area. He thought he had gone deaf.
Now that we are getting back into "plane building weather" it is
most important that I have you all available so I can ask questions.
Thanx for getting me back on line.
Ron Gipson
Building two at a time.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
Subject: | 1934 construction handbook |
People keep mentioning a flying and glider
construction handbook,1934 or there abouts. It sounds
like something I need. where do I get my hands on one?
=====
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: 1934 construction handbook |
EAA Bookstore. I think it is still 5.95 or 6.95 or they were running a
special to buy all 5 for the price of 4.
Gordon
----- Original Message -----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 5:46 PM
Subject: | 1934 construction handbook |
> People keep mentioning a flying and glider
> construction handbook,1934 or there abouts. It sounds
> like something I need. where do I get my hands on one?
September 29, 1999 - October 07, 1999
Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-bh