Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-bw
February 24, 2001 - March 09, 2001
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
It has been said then that the 1-19 cable is too rigid
to flex around to make a loop on the end. what are
your thoughts on using ball ends that are swaged on?
also if 3/32 cable is used that would be the
turnbuckles with the 10-24 threads, which will
withstand about 1400 lbs of pull (approximately) Is
that sufficent?
del
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | K0BLR(at)webtv.net (Ben Ramler) |
Hay all one more question!
As it turns out we have One other Fusealge from 1996 that my dad
started on. My question is this Do I need the reciepes from all the
purchases? as far the construction log that is no where in sight either?
Thanks,
Ben Ramler
St.Joesph,MN
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Woodflier(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | RE: 11 ga. fence wire drag wires |
Steve, I did use turnbuckles to get my tensions right and to fine tune my
trammel adjustments.
Another writer expressed concern that the fence wire might stretch at the
loops where it goes through the turnbuckle eyes, and I have thought about
that too. I may end up changing out the wire for a/c cable.
Matt Paxton
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Loar" <skycarl(at)megsinet.net> |
They say to get your numbers 90 days before you plan on getting inspected.
It takes a couple of months to get them.
Carl
Piet # NX40044
Please visit my website at
www.megsinet.net/skycarl
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
Doug413(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: E mail address.
In a message dated 2/23/01 10:43:21 AM Pacific Standard Time,
Isablcorky(at)aol.com writes:
> Would someone please furnish Mr. Pietenpol's e mail address. I need to
find
> out the serial number assigned my plans so I can acquire a registration
> number. I'm careless about those things.
> Corky
>
>
Corky,
You don't need a plans serial number to get a registration, just apply for
it. You also don't the registration until you are ready to license and fly.
Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
I wonder why it takes so long. You look and see what the next number is
and give it out or you see if a one that is requested is on the list of
available numbers and you issue it. What a government.
Chris Bobka
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Malley <jgmalley(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: E mail address. |
Doug is right, you can assign you own serial number. Mine is JM-1. My
wife worries (rightfully) what JM-2 might be.
Jim Malley
Doug413(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> In a message dated 2/23/01 10:43:21 AM Pacific Standard Time,
> Isablcorky(at)aol.com writes:
>
> > Would someone please furnish Mr. Pietenpol's e mail address. I need to find
> > out the serial number assigned my plans so I can acquire a registration
> > number. I'm careless about those things.
> > Corky
> >
> >
> >
>
> Corky,
>
> You don't need a plans serial number to get a registration, just apply for
> it. You also don't the registration until you are ready to license and fly.
> Doug Bryant
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Malley <jgmalley(at)home.com> |
I had little trouble bending the 1-19 cable around the thimbles, at
least that a rubber mallet doesn't solve. I did use two Nicopress
sleeves instead of one (the 1-19 has less twist than 7-19 and apparently
requires more holding surface).
Jim Malley
del magsam wrote:
>
>
> It has been said then that the 1-19 cable is too rigid
> to flex around to make a loop on the end. what are
> your thoughts on using ball ends that are swaged on?
> also if 3/32 cable is used that would be the
> turnbuckles with the 10-24 threads, which will
> withstand about 1400 lbs of pull (approximately) Is
> that sufficent?
> del
>
> Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RE: 11 ga. fence wire drag wires |
In a message dated 2/24/01 8:57:29 AM Central Standard Time,
Woodflier(at)aol.com writes:
<< I may end up changing out the wire for a/c cable. >>
Good decision, Matt
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 2/24/01 9:13:53 AM Pacific Standard Time,
jgmalley(at)home.com writes:
> I had little trouble bending the 1-19 cable around the thimbles, at
> least that a rubber mallet doesn't solve. I did use two Nicopress
> sleeves instead of one (the 1-19 has less twist than 7-19 and apparently
> requires more holding surface).
>
> Jim Malley
>
>
7x7 cable is a good all aound cable for gen aviation. Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 2/24/01 5:50:32 AM Pacific Standard Time, K0BLR(at)webtv.net
writes:
> !
>
> As it turns out we have One other Fusealge from 1996 that my dad
> started on. My question is this Do I need the reciepes from all the
> purchases? as far the construction log that is no where in sight either?
>
> Thanks,
> Ben Ramler
> St.Joesph,MN
>
>
>
Ben,
You don't much documentation these days. Just a three view and an afidavit
that says you built the aircraft for education and recreation. Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 2/24/01 5:50:37 AM Pacific Standard Time,
farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com writes:
> It has been said then that the 1-19 cable is too rigid
> to flex around to make a loop on the end. what are
> your thoughts on using ball ends that are swaged on?
> also if 3/32 cable is used that would be the
> turnbuckles with the 10-24 threads, which will
> withstand about 1400 lbs of pull (approximately) Is
> that sufficent?
> del
>
>
Del,
7x7 cable is a good all around cable and it is common. The turnbuckle will
probably have 10-32 threads. It is strong enough. Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | K0BLR(at)webtv.net (Ben Ramler) |
Thanks Doug That Helps me out alot and saves me aggony of having to
rebuild.
Ben
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Drag/antidrag wires |
Doug,
I am not a metals guy. Maybe you are and can shed more light on this or
refer me to a book I can understand on the subject.
I have been told that you can't really heat treat the straight carbon
steels (10XX series). There is not much you can do with it. It comes hard
and it stays hard or it comes soft and it stays soft or it comes somehwere
in between and stays that way. I thought it is only when you add other
metals to the carbon and iron mix that you begin to have the ability to
soften and harden the metal through the various heat treated processes. Is
this true? Anybody?
We need to nail down this aircraft wire thing once and for all.
Chris Bobka
Technical Counselor
________________________________________________________________________________
Del,
There was quite a discussion on drag wires a while back. We're going to
use 1/8" stainless cable and turnbuckles, the same as several others are
using. We did figure the strength of cables several months ago and this
1/8" cable is a lot stronger than the hard wire BHP called for. I
believe 3/32" cable is still stronger, but is closer in line with the
tensile strength of the hard wire the plans specify. Most production
aircraft use 1/8" cable or simular threaded rods for drag wires.
John Langston
Pipe Creek, TX
nle97(at)juno.com
________________________________________________________________________________
Doug,
You were wise to remove the old brake parts from the Goodyear wheels.
These things were the standard equipment on nearly everything for years
and years and they worked quite well, but the biggest problem was that
the brake disc was designed to float in the wheel and engage on some
built-in splines on the wheel. Occasionally the disc would not set
straight and would bind causing the wheel to lock up, as disaster for a
taildragger.
This didn't happen often, but it could and has happened. I had one lock
up n me on a Bonanza a long time ago and I know of another mechanic who
had one do the same thing when a small peddle from a gravel runway got
caught in the brake on a Cessna 170 causing it to go over on its back.
Goodyear wheels are just fine without the brakes.
John Langston
Pipe Creek, TX
nle97(at)juno.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: metal fittings |
Mark,
There is no aircraft grade steel as such, but the common steel used in
aircraft construction today is 4130 Chrome-Moly steel. This is much
stronger and is more corrosion resistant than the old 1025 that was the
standard for years prior to WW II. The original Piet plans call for
using 1025 and there is nothing wrong with this. It is plenty strong
enough, but we are using 4130 on ours. Just decided to do so.
John Langston
Pipe Creek, TX
nle97(at)juno.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: leadng edge 8-32 bolts |
Del,
We glued our leading edge on and used regular dry wall screws to hold
everything in place while the glue dried. Afterward, we removed the
screws, drilled out the holes to 3/16" and glued in dowels to fill the
holes. The dowels have nothing to do with structure, but just fill the
holes to prevent a source of moisture collecting to cause rot and to
eliminate another place for dirt or mud daubers to do their thing.
John Langston
Pipe Creek, TX
nle97(at)juno.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: covering fabric |
Walt,
I attended a dope and fabric seminar put on by Alexander Airplane Supply
a few years ago. The differnce between the certified fabric and the
non-certified is that a big roll of fabric is placed on a spool and
rolled out in preset lengths. Each of the lengths on the first part of
the roll is checked for strength and certified. when Alexander had
enough of this, they would sell the rest of the smae roll as uncertified.
All came from the same roll.
We are way behind where we wanted to be on our project because of the
weather, but at this time we are planning on using unbleached musslin
which is the same as Grade A cotton. Naturally, this will not be
certified nor even purchased at a aircraft supply house. We plan on
making a pull tester out of a clamp and a fish acale to test it before we
use it or even buy a large quantity. This is really easy to do and it
wouldn't hurt to chaeck any fabric before using it. New cotton shuold
exceed 8o lbs pull in both directions whereas dacron should exceed 200
lbs if it is really new. One year old dacron will loose about half its
strength, so be sure to get new fabric if you want to use dacron.
John Langston
Pipe Creek, TX
nle97(at)juno.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Cleveland wheels |
Ed,
The 6:00 X 6 Cleveland wheels are basically the same, but there are
differences between the various part numbers. None of these are terribly
important and I don't know the weight difference. We built the same type
gear and I just ordered some Cleveland wheels from a salvage yard in
Omak, Washington and was quite happy with what we got. They turned out
to be from a Piper Cherokee 140 and include tne brakes which we wanted
because we had originally intended to fly from a field with a couple
rather substantial hills. We are still installing the brakes, but they
are heavy -- surprisingly so. Our present airport is flat and I really
think about the brakes often (we're not flying yet). Weight is a really
big consideration as you know.
I was able to scrounge up a couple of Paramount master cylinders from an
old Mooney and these are very light, so that helps. One thing to keep in
mind if you go this route is that in the 70s and early 80s Cessna did not
use Cleveland wheels and brakes, but went to the cheaper Gerdes wheels
and brakes. They look identical, but the brake pad size on the Gerdes
has its rivet holes closer together and a Cleveland pad will often break
when you try to install the rivets. I believe Gerdes has since gone out
of business, but their brake pads are still available at supply houses.
John Langston
Pipe Creek, TX
nle97(at)juno.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
Actually, according to my data from early NACA reports on the subject, and
the Roebling Wire Rope Company, the solid wire is the strongest because it
has the most metal for the given cross sectional area. The main detractor
is that, with one nick in the wire (a stress riser) and a subsequent
failure in that one wire, you have a short flight and a very hard landing.
Put a bunch of little wires together in a bundle and you would have to nick
all of them to achieve the same result. Not likely. Nick one side and the
rest will hold til the next annual. Maybe.
chris bobka
Technical Counselor
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: covering fabric |
What is the source of the unbleached muslin? I would love to do some tests
on it using linseed oil and varnish and then put it out to weather for a
few years.
Chris bobka
TC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Owen Davies" <owen(at)davies.mv.com> |
| Subject: | Tube fuselage mod? |
The recent discussion of 4130 for fittings has me thinking
about the steel-tube fuselage from the Flying & Glider Manual.
I've always had a prejudice that if it isn't wood it isn't really
a Piet. Trouble is, I really enjoy welding, and I understand that
the steel fuselage is somewhat lighter than the original wood.
With a view to adding still more lightness, does anyone know
whether you could safely go one size thinner on the tubing?
I know that 4130 is a lot stronger than the 1025 Bernie used,
and the fuselage was overbuilt even with that. However,
I'm not enough of an engineer to know how much fiddling
one can do without excessively weakening the structure.
Thanks.
Owen Davies
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Part I of my new article for the NL |
At the request of the MNANG Museum, who are scratchbuilding a JN-4H Jenny
replica, Greg Cardinal, Dale Johnson, and I have done lots of research on
the origins of "aircraft wire". They needed some. The Jenny uses it all
over for bracing. Dale and Greg had selfish motives as well for they
wanted to use some in their Pietenpol. We have determined from period
literature that "aircraft wire" is defined as "tinned piano wire". We have
also determined that "music wire" is not the same thing as "piano wire".
Ask your piano tuner. He will tell you that music wire would not last very
long in a piano because it develops stress cracks from vibration at the
bending points at the tuning pegs and it would fail there. Also, Jim
Ladwig, with a view from the balsa and tissue model constructor's
perspective, states that what hobby shops sell as music wire today is
different from music wire from the old days. So maybe in the past, music
wire was the same as piano wire but the case does not hold true today. To
solve the mystery, then, we need to know what "piano wire" is.
Look in the index for Machinery's Handbook and there it is. Piano wire.
Yes, just turn to page 535 or 539. But nothing on the page discusses piano
wire. Music wire, yes. Piano wire, no. The words are not even on the
page. They are talking about making springs. Close. Oh well.
But we did strike paydirt. Greg works in downtown Minneapolis. On a
hunch, knowing that before the days of the AN specs, the Society of
Automotive Engineers was really big into specifications for aircraft, I
asked him to see if the main branch of the Minneapolis Public Library had
any copies of the annually updated SAE Handbook for years in the late
'twenties. Sure enough, they did but they did not know where they were.
The books were in limbo. A librarian's nightmare. "We have the book but we
don't know where it is other than somewhere amongst these million or two
volumes." It seems that robotic machines in the closed stacks shelve the
books and these were just in a pile somewhere deep underground. But the
librarian remembered seeing them once and after a few days, called Greg and
said he located a couple copies!!
The Society of Automotive Engineers did have a specification for aircraft
wire in 1928 and 1929 in their Handbook which lists all SAE specs. We
found that, although the tensile strength varies based on the gauge of
wire, it was all in the neighborhood of 200,000 psi but never anything
less. I don't have the Piet drawings in front of me now but the typical
size used in a Jenny is around .100 inches in diameter. This equates to
(.100)(.5)(.100)(.5)(3.1416) or .0079 square inches of cross section. The
wire should be able to withstand a pull of (200,000 lbs/sq in)(.0079 sq in)
or 1580 lbs. This is the pull strength of the wire. Notice that the
turnbuckles we use are rated at numbers in this vicinity.
The closest thing we found here in Minneapolis with a 200,000 psi tensile
strength is fence wire at Mill's Fleet Farm. It is the only wire we found
easily that had any tensile strength spec at all. We bought a 2000 foot
roll for about 32 dollars. The tag attached to it said: "p/n A43-2 2000
ft. - 12 1/2" ga. Class III Galvanized Gauranteed min. 200,000 PSI
Hi-Tensile Wire Common Sense Fence/Geotek, Inc. Stewartville, MN Made
in USA Southwestern Wire, Inc. P.O. Box CC Norman, OK 73070 50# coils
12 1/2 gage extra-high tensile wire". SKU number is 7 1600299016 3. It
appears that it is made by Southwestern WIre and marketed by the Common
Sense Fence people.
We have a lot. The coil is about 32 inches in diameter and would
litterally explode if you don't build a box around it first before you cut
the wires holding it all together.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Part II of my article for the NL |
We used three old pulleys to make a straightener so that we could run the
end of the coil in one end and push it through the pulleys that were
stagger mounted on a piece of micarta so that the wire would come out
straight.
It seemed to form reasonable well. We fabricated an eye using the methods
demonstrated in Brimm & Boggess and in recent articles by Bob Whittier in
the Experimenter and put on a cable eye from a turnbuckle. The Jenny
drawings and many other drawings of aircraft of the era like the Waco and
the Travelair show a ferrule made to look like a squashed spring. We could
not find them available anywhere. We also determined that they were too
difficult to make. At the suggestion of Andrew King, who said that the
Standard used to fly down Main Street, Taylor, Texas, at the opening scene
of The Great Waldo Pepper used them, we decided to use a regular nicopress
copper ferrules. We cleaned the wire, dipped it in non acid flux, and
nicopressed on the copper ferrule, the kind used on 3/32" galvanized
aircraft cable. We turned the loose end of the wire back over the end of
the ferrule. Once this was done, we soldered the fitting with 50-50
lead/tin solder. Dip soldering is preferred. Other than using a copper
ferrule instead of the squashed spring, it looked just like in Brimm &
Boggess.
Dale Johnson developed a pull testing device using a long metal beam, some
manufactured fittings, and a calibrated hydraulic bottle jack. When this
wire was tested, he took it to 2000 lbs and it held without stretching or
pulling the wire through the ferrules. He didnot test it to the breaking
point although I wish Tom Weir would have his crew manufacture some more
for testing purposes.
I think this is the stuff to use.
I have talked to guys like Andrew King and Gene Demarco, who builds and
rebuilds stuff at Old Rhinebeck Aerodrome, and they both agree that music
wire is way too stiff and cannot be formed. Yet the Gary Underlin bunch
that built the big Sikorsky S-38 at Born Again Restorations swear that
music wire is the only thing to use. But they have lots of expensive tools
to form stuff (and make more tools) and we don't.
Don Geng gave me a copy of a book on how the aeroplanes were made for the
movie, Those Magnificent Men and Their Flying Machines. They had the same
problem trying to come up with the right wire in the early 'sixties. They
referenced a biography of Tony Fokker who pioneered the welded tube
fuselage crossbraced with wires and turnbuckles. Originally, Fokker used
the hardest and strongest wire he could find. The higher the tensile
strength, he thought, the better. But the wires kept breaking due to
brittleness, stress cracks from bending, and metal fatigue from vibration.
After a couple of in flight breakups, he went to a softer wire and he did
not have anymore failures. I believe the current day music wire fits in
the hardest and strongest and highest tensile strength category, and it is
not the stuff to use. The "Magnificent Men" book also said they were able
to find the squashed spring type of ferrules in England in the early
'sixties. "We don't know what in the world someone would use them for, but
there they were, thousands of them", the book said. It seems that I might
remember crawling under the bed when I was a kid and the mattress box
springs used them to tie the spring wires together. Or maybe it was the
upholstery in my 1967 Chevelle?
Any mattress salesman out there? Or car restorers?
If anyone has turned up anything else on this subject, please let me know.
This is definitely in the realm of lost technology. I can't believe we
can't figure out something that was commonplace merely 70 years ago!!!
Christian Bobka
Technical Counselor
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | leonstefanhutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan) |
| Subject: | Paramount master cyls. |
John Langston: How do you actuate the brakes? Are you using petals in
lieu of the rudder bar? Leon S.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Tube fuselage mod? |
Some old articles from early sixties vintage Sport Aviations refer to the
question of 4130 substituting 1025 as used in the early light aircraft such
as the Taylortcraft, Aeronca, and Cub. It seems that when in tension, the
4130 is definitely superior. But when used in compression, then the
buckling of the column becomes the critical factor. For instance, a small
diameter tube of thick wall section, or a solid section for that matter,
that is really long would tend to bow out in the middle and fold over under
a given compressive load. Take a really large diameter tube of the same
material but with a thin wall, make it the same length, have both tubes
weigh the same (same quantity of metal), put it under the same load and
then it will not buckle. But you can't weld the thin wall easily and the
rule for welding as to not join two pieces of metal if the thinner one is
less than half the thickness of the thicker one. So something in the middle
is used.
As it turns out, the tubing sizes we typically use are weldable to each
other and do the job for the compressive and tension loads we encounter.
When it comes to preventing buckling, you just have to have a certain
amount of material in the right place. A compressively weaker material, in
more quantity, is often times more desireable than one that is
compressively stronger, and in less quantity. This is exactly where we are
on the 4130 substituting 1025. What do you think would work better to hold
up the 8 foot cieling in the room you are in now, an 8" diameter section of
3/8 " wall PVC pipe or an equally strong piece of 5/8" diameter - .049 wall
4130 steel tube? The 4130 would bend right over.
If you know for sure that the load through a truss member is only under
tension loads (and this is what most designers try to do because it is more
effiecient for weight savings), then it is probably ok to substitute a
thinner wall with the same tubing diameter. But we don't know what the
situation is for a certain member for sure because often the loads reverse,
sometimes tensile, sometimes compressive. That is where the professional
engineer comes into the game to make the determination as to degree of
load.
When you look at a Jenny fuselage with the fabric off, you will see that
there is a wire X between all the wood sections of the truss. If load
reversal was not a consideration, then we would only see the wire going
across one way, the direction of the tensile load. Since the wires don't
work in compression, loads are carried by the wires alternately as the load
reverses. That is why we see an X of wires, proof that both tensile and
compressive loads exist just about everywhere in the structure and why we
should not mess with changing wall thicknesses.
chris bobka
TC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Mosher <docshop(at)tds.net> |
Prospective EAA bookshop purchasers:
We have spoken before about the April-May bargain on books (50% off!) from
the EAA book shop when they are purchased thru your EAA Chapter. Chris
Bobka has offered to act as a Chapter purchaser for any of you who are not
able to work thru your local EAA Chapter. If you run into problems with
EAA, let me know and I will walk over to EAA and try to expedite the
shipments with Cathy Chomo, who is the person in charge of that whole
operation.
Until you get your official listing from EAA, here is what I know is
available, along with the regular price:
1929 Flying and Glider Manual (F-14167) $6.95
Contains information on flight lessons plus building the Heath Super
Parasol, Russell-Henderson Light Monoplane and an easy-to-build glider. (72
pages)
1930 Flying and Glider Manual (F-14168) $6.95
Contains plans for building a Heath Baby Bullet, set of light plane metal
floats, the Northrup Glider, Lincoln Biplane and Alco Sport plane. Other
tips on building and welding. (72 pages)
1931 Flying and Glider Manual (F-14169) $6.95
Building the "Longster," Georgias Special, a glider and secondary glider,
Driggs Dart, the Church Midwing, the Heath Seaplane Parasol and its
pontoons, the Northrup Glider and other gliders. (72 pages)
1932 Flying and Glider Manual (F-14170) $6.95
Building the Pietenpol Aircamper with Ford motor conversion, Powell "P-H"
Racer, the Heath Super Soar Glider, Penguin practice plane, Ramsey "Flying
Bathtub" and other kits. Also, build your own hangar. (72 pages)
1933 Flying and Glider Manual (F-14171) $6.95
Building the Gere Sport Biplane, Pietenpol floats, Pietenpol Sky Scout, and
Henderson Longster. Also Long Harlequin motor planes, a hydroglider and
information on building propellers. (76 pages)
Flying and Glider Manual Combo (F-14172) $29.95
All five Flying and Glider Manuals. Save $4.80.
Sportplane Builder (F-30140) $24.95
By Tony Bingelis (Vol.1) Aircraft construction methods and techniques for
the homebuilder. Articles taken from Tony's columns in Sport Aviation
magazine. (319 pages)
Sportplane Construction Techniques (F-01395) $24.95
By Tony Bingelis (Vol.2) More aircraft construction tips for the
homebuilder. Chapters dedicated to fiberglass construction, control
systems, interiors, landing gear, instrumentation, electrical, and
painting. Articles taken from Tony's columns in Sport Aviation
magazine. (366 pages)
Firewall Forward (F-13950) $24.95
By Tony Bingelis (Vol.3) Manual on piston engine
installations. Information includes engine selection, mounts,
firewalls,mufflers, fuel systems, and much more. One of the best engine
reference manuals for the amateur builder. (302 pages)
Tony Bingelis on Engines (F-15691) $24.95
By Tony Bingelis (Vol.4) A treasury of practical engine information for
aircraft builders, owners, restorers, and mechanics. Things you need to
know about engine selection, engine installation, firewall preparation,
baffles, cooling, fuel systems, ignition and electrical, exhaust systems,
props and spinners. Articles taken from Tony's columns in Sport Aviation
magazine. (224 pages)
Tony Bingelis Four Volume Set (F-15692) $79.95
Save $19.85 by ordering all four books.
Aircraft Welding (F-37864) $11.95
Fundamental welding techniques for the building and repair of aircraft,
from the pages of Sport Aviation and other sources. This book is filled
with aircraft welding tips and information. (116 pages)
Wood Aircraft Building Techniques (F-18100) $11.95
Excellent resource book on "how to" build or repair wooden aircraft. (136
pages)
Custom Built Sport Aircraft Handbook (F-13510) $14.95
A guide to construction standards for amateur aircraft building and
detailed information on FAA contacts and applicable FARs. (141 pages)
Custom Built Sport Aircraft Handbook / EAA Welding Manual / EAA Wood
Building Techniques
Combo (F-18104) $29.95
Save $8.90 buying all three at once.
Alternative Engines (F-17878) $44.95
By Mick Myal. (Vol.1) A comprehensive look at automobile based engines as
a logical source for affordable alternative aircraft power (304 pages)
Alternative Engines (Unlisted code number) $44.95
By Mick Myal. (Vol.2) A continuation of articles form Contact!
magazine. (312 pages)
There are a number of videos available. This is a portion of the listings:
Building Your Own Airplane: How to get started (F-10429) $19.99
The first of a series of videos that will give you insight into the
exciting world of home-building. Topics include the right kit for you, the
definition of experimental, Federal Aviation Regulations, insurance, how to
set a realistic budget, FAA inspections, and many other topics. (45 min.)
Basic Aircraft Covering with Ray Stits (F-36141) $29.99
Learn the delicate art of fabric covering from the best - Ray Stits - the
man who developed the Stits Poly-Fiber Aircraft Coating
Process. Step-by-step instructions are detailed in this excellent
video. (120 min.)
Basic Aircraft Woodworking (F-35776) $19.99
Woodworking knowledge is essential to any home-building project. Power
tool safety is also discussed. A great starter tape. (30 min.)
EAA Wood Building Techniques/Basic Woodworking Video Combo (F-11619) $23.99
Save $7.95 by buying this 2 piece combo.
Building Your Own Airplane: Welding (F-36687) $19.99
Take the mystery out of welding. Your video instructors will take you
step-by-step through the process of oxyacetylene welding. Learn how to
"read" a puddle, run a bead, tack weld, weld a 90 degree intersection,
cluster weld, and more. Whether you've never held a torch before or
haven't welded for years, this video will provide the background to get you
started. (50 min.)
EAA Welding Manual/Building Your Own Airplane: Welding Video
Combo (F-36688) $23.99
Save $7.95 buying the combo.
Custom Built Sport Aircraft Handbook/EAA Welding Manual/EAA Wood Building
Techniques Combo (F-18104) $29.95
Save $8.90 by buying all three books at once.
- - - - - - - - - -
- - -
I do not have the EAA code number or price of FAA's Advisory Circular
43.13-1B/2A "Acceptable Methods, Techniques, and Practices - Aircraft
Inspection, Repair & Alterations" but I know you can buy it thru the EAA
bookstore. This is the manual which sets the standards to which you should
be building. It's a heavy, thick, expensive "how to" book, but one that
every A&P and IA must have.
You will have to pay shipping charges from Oshkosh, which can get
expensive. But you can get the approximate costs when you order the books
and tapes.
Doc Mosher
Oshkosh USA
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 2/24/01 11:44:07 AM Pacific Standard Time, nle97(at)juno.com
writes:
> Doug,
> You were wise to remove the old brake parts from the Goodyear
> wheels.
> These things were the standard equipment on nearly everything for years
> and years and they worked quite well, but the biggest problem was that
> the brake disc was designed to float in the wheel and engage on some
> built-in splines on the wheel. Occasionally the disc would not set
> straight and would bind causing the wheel to lock up, as disaster for a
> taildragger.
> This didn't happen often, but it could and has happened. I had one lock
> up n me on a Bonanza a long time ago and I know of another mechanic who
> had one do the same thing when a small peddle from a gravel runway got
> caught in the brake on a Cessna 170 causing it to go over on its back.
> Goodyear wheels are just fine without the brakes.
>
> John Langston
> Pipe Creek, TX
> nle97(at)juno.com
>
>
>
John,
Thanks for the info. I machined off the brake flange. I put this type
wheel on 2 aircampers here and spoke type on my first one. Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Drag/antidrag wires |
In a message dated 2/24/01 10:58:22 AM Pacific Standard Time,
BOBKA(at)compuserve.com writes:
> I am not a metals guy. Maybe you are and can shed more light on this or
> refer me to a book I can understand on the subject.
>
> I have been told that you can't really heat treat the straight carbon
> steels (10XX series). There is not much you can do with it. It comes hard
> and it stays hard or it comes soft and it stays soft or it comes somehwere
> in between and stays that way. I thought it is only when you add other
> metals to the carbon and iron mix that you begin to have the ability to
> soften and harden the metal through the various heat treated processes. Is
> this true? Anybody?
>
> We need to nail down this aircraft wire thing once and for all.
>
>
Chris,
Carbon content of .3% or greater in steel will generally respond to heat
treating processes. 1020 has .2 % so it would not heat treat generally.
1095 as used to make hard wire would respond to heat treating with .9%. With
all this, I just had a concern for making a look alike product for a piet
when it may not be adequate. There are some things on the piet, being a
design from the past, which are truely gone or at least very hard to
reproduce. I had to find a suitable substitute for some of these items. I
made a list of them. Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
Doc,
There is max dollar shipping amount from Oshkosh. I think 12 dollars on an
order of 100 dollars or more. After that EAA eats it. The whole idea is
to get the dollar volume up and then everyone saves. Once I get the
shipment, then it is bookrate us mail which is pretty darn cheap if you
ever priced it. I imagine about 2.00 per book for OSH to here and then
from here to everywhere else. This presupposes that people will order more
than one book. F & G manual set would count as one book more or less. I
would have to use my judgement to make it fair, I want everybody to save
$$$$, any way you look at it.
I would like to see more Piets flying and this is one way to see that
happen!!!
Thanks for listing the info for other to see.
Chris Bobka
TC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack Phillips <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
del magsam wrote:
>
>
> I'd like to hear some input on what you people have
> used for drag wires. the hard wire called out in the
> plans from the hardware store, cable(what size), or
> threaded rods
> thanks much for the input onthe leading edge. I think
> I'll leave it without bolts or screws unless someone
> comes up with a good reason to add them.
> del
>
> Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices! http://auctions.yahoo.com/
>
I used 1/8" 1 x 19 stainless cable, with nicopress fittings. Worked
real well. I made a jig by screwing wood screws into my workbench the
correct distance apartand pulling the cable around the thimbles which
were set over the screws. 1 x 19 is very stiff and it's really a two
person job to stretch the cable around the thimble and crimp the
nicopress sleeve in place. 7 x 7 or 7 x 19 would be easier, but is not
as strong.
Jack
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack Phillips <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Drag/antidrag wires |
Christian Bobka wrote:
>
>
> Doug,
>
> I am not a metals guy. Maybe you are and can shed more light on this or
> refer me to a book I can understand on the subject.
>
> I have been told that you can't really heat treat the straight carbon
> steels (10XX series). There is not much you can do with it. It comes hard
> and it stays hard or it comes soft and it stays soft or it comes somehwere
> in between and stays that way. I thought it is only when you add other
> metals to the carbon and iron mix that you begin to have the ability to
> soften and harden the metal through the various heat treated processes. Is
> this true? Anybody?
>
> We need to nail down this aircraft wire thing once and for all.
>
> Chris Bobka
> Technical Counselor
>
10xx Steels can certainly be heat treated. The primary effects of heat
treat have to do with the carbon which is in solid solution in the
crystalline structure of the steel. The SAE number system of steel
identification identifies how much carbon is in the alloy, since it is
the most important constituent. The last two digits of the number
represent the percentage of carbon. 1025 steel is 0.25% carbon, with no
other alloying elements. 4130 is a chromium-molybdenum stell with 0.30%
carbon. 1025 is pretty soft, whereas 1095 (with its 0.95% carbon) is
extremely hard and brittle.
Heat treating allows the carbon to change its postion within the
crystalline matrix. Whether the part is heated and then cooled rapidly
or slowly determines what the final crystalline arrangement is. I
chuckle when I look at the sheet on the Pietenpol plans where Bernie
says "leave the fitting a little loose to avoid crystalizing the metal".
All metals are crystalized. He was probably referring to metal
fatigue, but leaving the fitting loose is not a good idea.
The bottom line is, if you're building a fence use fence wire. If
you're building an airplane to fly your children in, use aircraft grade
materials. This is not a contest to see just how cheaply you can build
something that will fly. Aircraft grade materials are readily available
and if they cost more, there is good reason for it.
Sorry, I had to get up on my soapbox. I've seen some beautifully built
Pietenpols. I've also seen some I wouldn't let anyone I know except my
ex-wife fly in. It's your choice which you will build.
Good luck,
Jack Phillips
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Drag/antidrag wires |
Ditto
Corky
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Owen Davies" <owen(at)davies.mv.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Tube fuselage mod? |
Christian Bobka prefaced some useful comments with:
> Some old articles from early sixties vintage Sport Aviations refer to the
> question of 4130 substituting 1025 as used in the early light aircraft
such
> as the Taylortcraft, Aeronca, and Cub. It seems that when in tension, the
> 4130 is definitely superior. But when used in compression, then the
> buckling of the column becomes the critical factor. (etc.)
Yes, thanks. In fact, it was the compressive loads that concerned me.
Owen Davies
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Drag/antidrag wires |
Jack,
That is the big question. If I knew were to get what is called "aircraft
wire", I would be the first to use it since it does its job the best.
Everything else is a distant second. Twisted multistranded cable has too
much stretch as anything that is twisted will. WIth utmost safety in mind,
and our kids lives at stake, that is why EVERY wire and cable fabricated by
us is tested to its rated strength
If anyone knows a source for true "aircraft wire", let me know and I will
spread the word among every antique rebuilder on where it can be bought.
Nobody I know of can tell me of a supplier. For now, we are just trying to
rediscover it.
Thank you for the explanation.
I have a book on rigging aircraft from the mid twenties. In it is
described a field test that should be used to determine the suitablility of
wire to be used in the field repair of aircraft. It involves a ninety
degree bend around a certain radius and then an inspection with a
magnifying glass in sunlight. I will find it and put it on the board here.
There is some clothes line wire sold as such that is available at Mill's
Fleet Farm, Knox Lumber, Payless Cashways, and probably other places. It
comes in a roll about 8" in diameter and is in dark green packaging. That
stuff looks nice and forms nice but it stretches at 300 lbs test and
ultimately yields to failure slightly higher. I hope that nobody used it.
If you did, take it off and get the better wire or test your pieces.
No matter what your Technical Counselor says on the precover inspection,
test your pieces.
christian bobka
Technical Counselor
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Drag/antidrag wires |
Are you saying your exwife deserves the privilege of a flight in a
Pietenpol?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Conkling" <hpvs(at)southwind.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 1-19 cable & hard wire |
Hi all
Visit with the folks at World War 1 Aeroplanes, Inc. if you want more info
on wire ferrules, hard wire & even wire splicing -- these (defintely hard
core!)guys deal regularly with technology 20 years older than the Piet --
the editor built a full size replica of a 1914 Bristol Scout with LeRhone
rotory engine!.
I have a copy of thier journal "WW1 Aero" (#110) with info from a 1918
Aircraft Mechanics Handbook on specs for ferrules & how to form the loop
On this matter of dealing with 1 x19 cable, wasn't there a picture of a "C"
clamp affair (for forming cable around the thimble) in the Experimenter"
article about cable this last year -- looked like a useful item!
For what it's worth, the Fly Baby uses 1 x19 Stainless cable for both the
drag wires & wing bracing.
Mike
----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Malley <jgmalley(at)home.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: 1-19 cable
>
> I had little trouble bending the 1-19 cable around the thimbles, at
> least that a rubber mallet doesn't solve. I did use two Nicopress
> sleeves instead of one (the 1-19 has less twist than 7-19 and apparently
> requires more holding surface).
>
> Jim Malley
>
> del magsam wrote:
> >
> >
> > It has been said then that the 1-19 cable is too rigid
> > to flex around to make a loop on the end. what are
> > your thoughts on using ball ends that are swaged on?
> > also if 3/32 cable is used that would be the
> > turnbuckles with the 10-24 threads, which will
> > withstand about 1400 lbs of pull (approximately) Is
> > that sufficent?
> > del
> >
> > Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mckellars" <mckellar(at)bluebonnet.net> |
The plans that I got from DDP have three different total length drawings
of the fusalage from the firewall back. They are ; 161", 163", and
172.5". I understand that the longest version is for lighter weight
engines. What length is the most commonly used? Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fusalage length |
Mark,
I am not sure what the most common length fuselage being built is. I
built the short fuse and now have to figure out the proper distance for the
engine mount of a Cont 65 or 75hp. How about it guys, any input onto the
correct distance from the firewall to the back of the engine case. Also
looking at adding a front cockpit door. Anyone add this in after the fuse
was built?
Mark, after have sat in my Piet several times, I would build the long
fuse, you get more room overall.
Scott.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ian Holland" <iholland(at)telusplanet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Part II of my article for the NL |
In one of the older issues of the BPN there is a real neat jig for
making the ferrules. I think this is the same critter that you are
talking about. It is real simple and works extremely well. It is
referenced as Buckeye Pietenpol Association Newsletter, Issue 39, 1st
Quarter 1993, pages 6 and 7. If you don't have it, I can scan and
forward to you.
Best regards,
-=Ian=-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Meadows" <gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fusalage length |
Mark,
I've built the long fuselage version, and added 3 more inches in the
front, 1" in each of the front 3 bays. The distance that your engine will be
in front of the firewall will depend on your own particular plane.
Differences in building material/technique will make each Piet unique.
You'll be able to fine-tune your weight and balance later by moving the
cabane struts - ie moving the wing fore or aft.
I've sat in short fuselage Piets, well actually a GN-1 and felt like the
panel was a little too close. Now that I've got my fuselage pretty much
built, the cockpit is nice and roomy. I also added 2" to the width. I guess
I'll have a "Jumbo Piet", at least it'll fit my "Jumbo" body!
Have fun!
Gary Meadows
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Loar" <skycarl(at)megsinet.net> |
I built the long fuse ( called for the corvair engine) and even though the
rear pit is narrower in the long version, I fell like I have plenty of room
in it and I'm a big boy. I also extended the motor mount 2 inches. This
should help in not having to slant the wing back too far. I'm wondering how
many builders have did a pre weight and balance before covering the plane. I
would think that doing one would give a reasonable guess as to where one
would be when covered.
Carl
Please visit my website at
www.megsinet.net/skycarl
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Gary Meadows
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fusalage length
Mark,
I've built the long fuselage version, and added 3 more inches in the
front, 1" in each of the front 3 bays. The distance that your engine will be
in front of the firewall will depend on your own particular plane.
Differences in building material/technique will make each Piet unique.
You'll be able to fine-tune your weight and balance later by moving the
cabane struts - ie moving the wing fore or aft.
I've sat in short fuselage Piets, well actually a GN-1 and felt like the
panel was a little too close. Now that I've got my fuselage pretty much
built, the cockpit is nice and roomy. I also added 2" to the width. I guess
I'll have a "Jumbo Piet", at least it'll fit my "Jumbo" body!
Have fun!
Gary Meadows
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | please fill me in again on Brodhead |
My dream is to go to Brodhead before I finish my Aircamper. Believe it or
not, I've never seen a Piet in the flesh, and I'd like to see them up close.
I'm a builder from NJ and I need some very basic information about getting
to Brodhead. like.....
When is it?
How many days?
Where do you fly into(commercially)?
How far from commercial airport?
Can I drive my rental car to the site and camp?
Is there camping at the field?
Is there food there or nearby?
I just spoke to a 70'ish CFI near me and he said that Brodhead is one of his
favorite places to go.
Thanks guys, I'd love to go there this year.
walt
-----------------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Haines" <robertsjunk(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 34 Msgs - 02/24/01 |
Chris,
You touched on the subject that Jack Phillips was refering to when you
were talking about "Those Magnificant Men..." and the wires failing
because they were brittle. Anything you do to steel (with the
exception of melting it and adding additional elements) to change its
strength is only affecting the crystiline structure of the metal.
Anyone who doesn't want a lesson on steel accept my appoligies and
delete this message.
Here we go...
In materials, the arrangement of atoms has much to do about the
material's properties. Imagine the atom as a ball and to make a
strong, dense material, the trick is to get as many of these balls
packed into a fixed space. If you had four balls, you could make a
cube. But you look at the cube and you see that there is space in the
center where the round balls don't fit. So try it with three balls
arrange in a triangle. Then stack another triange top of it but
rotated 120 degrees so the two sets fit tighter. What I am trying to
say is that there are many ways that atoms stack together. I'm going
to use carbon as an example. Coal and a diamond are the same
material, only the atoms are arrange differently. Actually, a diamond
is the most efficient and dense way carbon atoms can be arranged. The
same situation happens with iron.
The next idea to understand is that the cubes or trianges formed don't
always fit together. Imagine if you had a bunch of blocks, all cubes.
Most times, these blocks are not stacked and packed neatly together
(If you have kids, you know that the blocks are all over the damn
house... oh, sorry). If they were packed neatly together, they would
actually be one bigger block, but they never are. There is always
some misalignment. This is fundamentally a crystaline structure; a
bunch of blocks packed tightly together but not perfectly aligned.
Now to steel. 10xx steel is just a little more complex in that
sometimes you have blocks made from just iron, and sometimes they're
made from iron and carbon (Fe3C). So now your large iron blocks
surrounded by small blocks of Fe3C. If you understand how sand and
gravel work together to make strong concrete, you understand this.
4130 has iron, carbon, manganese, silicon, and chromium all doing
different things making several types of blocks.
Those three ideas are what you need to know to understand 10xx steel.
You have two different flavors of blocks, the blocks can change shape
if the atoms are arranged differently, and the block can be arranged
differently.
Cold work, fatigue, and annealing - Take a dozen blocks and arrange
them in neat rows and columns on the floor. If you want to push some
of the columns but not all, it's not that hard because they are neatly
arranged. Now push on a row. It's not that easy because you just
screwed up your neat arrangement by moving a couple of columns. It
becomes HARDER TO DO. Because they weren't neat, the edge of some
blocks hit the blocks in other rows and they pushed more and so on and
so on. This is cold working or fatiguing a metal. When you bend a
metal, you move the crystiline structure and create voids and
misalignments. This makes it harder to bend it the next time. You
can create a harder steel by cold working (which is just beating it
and screwing up the arrangement of the blocks). You can also do this
by heating the metal and quickly cooling it by throwing it into water
(quinch hardening). You can fix this by moderately heating the metal
hot enough (80 - 170 C) so the crystal structures move into positions
of less stress and allowing them the time to do so (anealing).
If you heat to a higher temperatures (200 - 900 C) and control the
cooling in different ways, you can destroy and regrow the crystiline
structures themselves and change the relationships of the iron and the
iron and carbon.
Most of us do not have the capabilities to do this type of heat
treatment so we are limited to anealing and cold working to modify the
strength. Chris, with this statement, I hope I have answered your
question.
Robert Haines
Murphysboro, Illinois
****snip****
I have been told that you can't really heat treat the straight carbon
steels (10XX series). There is not much you can do with it. It comes
hard
and it stays hard or it comes soft and it stays soft or it comes
somehwere
in between and stays that way. I thought it is only when you add
other
metals to the carbon and iron mix that you begin to have the ability
to
soften and harden the metal through the various heat treated
processes. Is
this true? Anybody?
We need to nail down this aircraft wire thing once and for all.
Chris Bobka
Technical Counselor
**********
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Haines" <robertsjunk(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 34 Msgs - 02/24/01 |
Not necessarily so. Why are there antidrag wires in the wing? I
don't plan on going in reverse.
The cross wire bracing is so that you can tension the tension wire
without warping the structure. One wire only may be required to
counter the design load, the other is to counter that wires tension.
Robert Haines
*******
When you look at a Jenny fuselage with the fabric off, you will see
that
there is a wire X between all the wood sections of the truss. If load
reversal was not a consideration, then we would only see the wire
going
across one way, the direction of the tensile load. Since the wires
don't
work in compression, loads are carried by the wires alternately as the
load
reverses. That is why we see an X of wires, proof that both tensile
and
compressive loads exist just about everywhere in the structure and why
we
should not mess with changing wall thicknesses.
chris bobka
TC
*******
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re. drag/antidrag bracing... |
Hello group,
I have been folowing with interest the discussion about drag
truss bracing for the Pietenpol, and decided to share my own
experiences with aircraft cable bracing with you.
Don't worry about using 1/8 inch 7x19 galvanized steel cable
and appropriate turnbuckles (if you can afford them!) for your
drag/antidrag truss. Stainless steel would be better because
of its corrosion resistance qualities, particularly if your airplane
is going to live in a corrosive environment.
Stretching does not seem to be a problem in the Piets I have
dealt with---except when they have been involved in an accident.
About ten years ago two Piets landed from opposite directions
and ran into each other, heavily damaging the right wings of both
machines. No injuries to either pilot resulted. They didn't see each
other until the last second because the view ahead is limited with
the tail down. (There is a lesson here.)
One a/c had 3/32 inch cable drag bracing and the other had 1/8
inch cable bracing. The lighter cable broke, but the heavier stuff
did not; a testimonial to its strength. Both were repaired and re-
turned to service. It seems that 3/32 inch cable would be OK for
the outboard bay of the drag truss with 1/8 inch cable for the in-
board bay, if you want to save some weight. I used 1/8 inch cable
on mine (which was not involved in the above incident) for both
inboard and outboard bays.
Years ago, I had a 21 foot sailboat which used 1/8 inch 1x19 stain-
less steel cable, thimbles, nicopress sleeves and turnbuckles to
brace the mast. Two nicopress sleeves about an inch apart were
used at each end, with the second one just covering the cable wire
ends to prevent snagging. Those cables really took a beating, hand-
ling loads that would, I'm sure, far exceed the flight loads imposed
on a Pietenpol drag truss---mainly because they were not preload-
ed and gusts would snap them taut with a twang. Bending this cable
around a thimble to make a cable eye didn't seem to be a problem,
either.
One thing I would never use is fencing wire, and I am suspicious of
any solid wire (or tie rod) which can fail completely without warning
if nicked or damaged. It's much better to use aircraft quality cables
and turnbuckles for your Pietenpol drag truss. If in good condition, a
cable will fail all at once only when the load imposed exceeds its ul-
timate strength. If protected from corrosion with a light oil, even gal-
vanized 7x19 steel cable will last a long time (over thirty years in the
case of my own Pietenpol). Incidentally, I used 3/32 inch SS cable
for tail bracing on my a/c and it has been trouble-free.
Cheers,
Graham Hansen
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JOEL CARROLL <drcarroll_2000(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: please fill me in again on Brodhead |
hi walt
broadhead is approx 50 miles n of rockford il. thats
north central il for you out of towners. broadhead is
in wisconsin. planes fly into rockford and you can
rent cars there. it's friday-sat sun. end of
july/early aug.i think you can camp, but not
sure.dinners are served apporx $10 worth every penny.
food is available in town, and several motels in the
area.
--- walter evans wrote:
>
>
> My dream is to go to Brodhead before I finish my
> Aircamper. Believe it or
> not, I've never seen a Piet in the flesh, and I'd
> like to see them up close.
> I'm a builder from NJ and I need some very basic
> information about getting
> to Brodhead. like.....
> When is it?
> How many days?
> Where do you fly into(commercially)?
> How far from commercial airport?
> Can I drive my rental car to the site and camp?
> Is there camping at the field?
> Is there food there or nearby?
> I just spoke to a 70'ish CFI near me and he said
> that Brodhead is one of his
> favorite places to go.
> Thanks guys, I'd love to go there this year.
> walt
>
-----------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> through
>
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
> Matronics!
>
>
>
>
>
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JOEL CARROLL <drcarroll_2000(at)yahoo.com> |
no, he who dies with the most toys is still dead.
were there is a will,there is a relative.
lol
--- Gary Gower wrote:
>
>
> GREAT!
>
> This is what my wife says about me :-)
>
> "Would you never stop beeing kid?"
>
> Saludos
> Gary Gower
> "The one who dies with more toys wins!"
> "Price of toys is proportional to the age of the
> kid"
>
> --- kgardner(at)odu.edu wrote:
> > kgardner(at)odu.edu
>
> >
> > Bumper Sticker of the Week:
> > "When I Grow Up, I Want To Be A Kid!
> >
> >
> >
> > through
> >
> > http://www.matronics.com/archives
> > http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
> >
> > Matronics!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great
> prices! http://auctions.yahoo.com/
>
>
>
> through
>
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
> Matronics!
>
>
>
>
>
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Greg Cardinal" <gcardinal(at)startribune.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Drag/antidrag wires, and 1x19 cable |
An inexpensive source for hardware, including swaged fittings, is B&B Aircraft
Supplies, 31905 W. 175th St., Gardner Municipal Airport, Gardner, KS 66030 Ph.
(913) 884-6533. Address and phone were accurate as of 3 years ago.
He gets surplus stocks so he may not have everything on hand but he sure has good
prices.
Greg Cardinal
>>> "Lou Larsen" 02/23 6:51 PM >>>
You noted that you were thinking of using 1x19 cable for your brace cables.
This what the 1x19 is for as it is stiff and you can't form it around a
thimble . You will have to use a swaged end fitting and these are quite
expensive. I'd think again before buying 1x19.
----- Original Message -----
From: <Woodflier(at)aol.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Drag/antidrag wires
>
> I too wondered about the material for the drag/antidrag wires, and ended
up
> using 11 ga. fence wire from my local farm supply store. It was cheap, is
> heavier gauge than the 13 ga. hard wire called for in the plans. I had an
EAA
> Technical Counselor check over the first wing panel I built and he said it
> should be fine - in fact he said, "Bernie would be proud." I did follow
his
> recommendation and redid the wires, allowing about an inch of wire to
> protrude beyond the nicopress sleeves and then bent that end back over the
> sleeve. The Tech Counselor said this provided additional resistance to the
> wire possibly pulling back through the sleeve, unlikely in any case.
Bacause
> the wire comes in rolls, there is a little wavyness to the wires once
> installed. A little bendin to get the biggest jogs out gives a pretty
> straight wire.
>
> I plan on using 1X19 for the tail and strut bracing.
>
> Matt Paxton
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: please fill me in again on Brodhead |
| From: | "Mike Bell" <mbell(at)sctcorp.com> |
02/26/2001 08:18:12 AM
I flew into Madison Wisconsin two years ago. The year it was 100 plus
degrees everyday. This was closer to Brodhead (about an hour) than
Oshkosh (Closer to two hours with the traffic). Check both places for
prices, you might save enough to pay for your rental car by choosing
one over the other.
Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 34 Msgs - 02/24/01 |
> One wire only may be required to
>counter the design load, the other is to counter that wires tension
It is not necessary to tension the wires. Taking the slack out is all that
is required so there is no slamming when load reversals take place. The
only time I have seen pretensioning is when flutter is a consideration as
in a B model Pitts.
If a wire is required to take a 2000 lb load and you use a wire rated at
2000 lbs and you tighten the wire to 300 lbs tension, how much more load
can it takes before it reaches its design limit? 2000-300=1700lbs. But
you needed 2000 lbs. Failure.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fusalage length |
| From: | kgardner(at)odu.edu |
02/26/2001 10:08:53 AM
Mark,
William Wynne, the guy who publishes the Corvair conversion manual, has a
short fuselage Piet that he bought as his 'test bed' for his engine
conversion. When I visited him in FL, I asked him how far forward he had to
extend his engine mount to compensate for the short fuse. He said an extra
6". Of course, he had a Corvair mounted on this plane (approx. 210lbs. dry
gross wt.), I don't know how that compares to a Continental or Franklin.
BTW, he sells an improved engine mount for the Corvair that is lighter than
BHP's design & is very reasonably priced.
Good Luck!
Kip Gardner
Laboratory Manager, ODU
Dept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmospheric Sciences
4600 Elkhorn Avenue
Norfolk, VA 23529
(757)683-5654
Bumper Sticker of the Week:
"When I Grow Up, I Want To Be A Kid!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kgardner(at)odu.edu |
02/26/2001 10:15:51 AM
Thanks to everyone who answered my wood question & especially to Walt for
sending on the attached list, it will be a big help. Walt, Re your ? about
Brodhead, I sure hope to get there myself in the next year or so. You can
get the 'straight from the horses mouth' info from the 'new' BPA (Brodhead
Pietenpol Association). They have a web site at: www.pietenpol.org Right
now the site is a little short on content, but it has contact info, etc.
Like the 'old' BPA, annual membership is $10, not a bad deal.
Kip Gardner
Laboratory Manager, ODU
Dept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmospheric Sciences
4600 Elkhorn Avenue
Norfolk, VA 23529
(757)683-5654
Bumper Sticker of the Week:
"When I Grow Up, I Want To Be A Kid!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Beanlands <kbeanlan(at)spots.ab.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Re. drag/antidrag bracing... |
On the same token, we did have a 1/8", 7x19 cable fail on the Cessna
180. Somewhere along the way somebody added a cable joininf the two fron
cleats of the Edo 2960's At first we did not realize why it was there and
theorized that it may have had to do with the plane being operated in
weeds or reeds (the cable was ahead of the propellor. Somebody finally
pointed out that it was probably added to allow people to walk from one
float to the other while holding on to the spinner. Of course, we
immediately started using it that way.
This worked out fine until one October morning when our hunting and flying
partner, Maurice, decided to cross the wire with a full pack on his
back. There ewas a tremendous splash followed by some loud hollering as
Maurice hit the 2 degree water! After we stopped laughing and helped him
out, we has to get rid of the wire that wan now only attached to one
cleat. We had only basic tools but we soon discovered that the cable had
corroded almost completely through at the sleeve (so had the one that
failed). Granted, we had no idea how long the wire had been attached
before the fall swim, but we had never operated out of salt water but they
were never lubricated either. I assume that the wire was galv. as the
stainless probably would not have failed the same.
Another interesting observation. The plane used to generate a lo frequency
hum at abotu 75 mph with 3 notches of flap (it was always easy to tell
when we strayed below the 80 mph approach speed). This went away with the
cable. I'm sure that this was not a "good vibration" and probably factored
in the cable's failure. In other words, chec thost tail wires on occassion
for wear, and maybe add replacing them to the maintenance schedule (cable,
thimbles and sleeves are inexpensive when compared to turnbuckles.
BTW, I decided to use the Bob Barrows tail wire approach
<http://www.airbum.com/pireps/Bearhawk260-11.jpg> However, I do not plan
on turning down the wires.
Ken Beanlands B.Eng (Aerospace)
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Christavia MK 1 #363, C-GREN
Barrows Bearhawk #468
<http://www.spots.ab.ca/~kbeanlan>
On Sun, 25 Feb 2001, Graham Hansen wrote:
>
> One thing I would never use is fencing wire, and I am suspicious of
> any solid wire (or tie rod) which can fail completely without warning
> if nicked or damaged. It's much better to use aircraft quality cables
> and turnbuckles for your Pietenpol drag truss. If in good condition, a
> cable will fail all at once only when the load imposed exceeds its ul-
> timate strength. If protected from corrosion with a light oil, even gal-
> vanized 7x19 steel cable will last a long time (over thirty years in the
> case of my own Pietenpol). Incidentally, I used 3/32 inch SS cable
> for tail bracing on my a/c and it has been trouble-free.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Graham Hansen
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Woodflier(at)aol.com |
OK, I give. I plan on replacing my "fence wire" drag/antidrag wires with 1/8"
stainless 7X19.
Thank all of you who added to this discussion. Obviously, I had some
misgivings and you all gave me some good reasons to change. Now I just have
to get the dang wing panels down out of the shop ceiling.
Matt Paxton
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mckellars" <mckellar(at)bluebonnet.net> |
How many and what size stringers should there be in the turtle deck ? I
know the plans show 7 but some pictures of work in progress show more
.Is there a former where the fuse joins the stab or do the stringers
just come together at the front of the stab. Kip, Thanks for the info on
William Wynne. I'm planning on using a Corvair engine. Thanks to
everyone. I know I've asked a bunch of questions. Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kgardner(at)odu.edu |
02/26/2001 03:01:39 PM
Mark,
When I visited Andrew Pietenpol, he said put in 9 stringers, it looks
better. Just replot the distribution evenly across the space. The new one
he is working on is done that way. BTW, if you haven't gotten William's
conversion manual, do so, it's very good. You can reach him at
, a year ago his price was $49.00. Also get a copy of
"Keeping Your Corvair Alive" by Richard Finch. It's available through
Amazon.
mckellar(at)bluebonnet.net@matronics.com on 02/26/2001 02:43:14 PM
Please respond to pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent by: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
cc:
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Stringers
How many and what size stringers should there be in the turtle deck ? I
know the plans show 7 but some pictures of work in progress show more
.Is there a former where the fuse joins the stab or do the stringers
just come together at the front of the stab. Kip, Thanks for the info on
William Wynne. I'm planning on using a Corvair engine. Thanks to
everyone. I know I've asked a bunch of questions. Mark
Cheers!
Kip Gardner
Laboratory Manager, ODU
Dept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmospheric Sciences
4600 Elkhorn Avenue
Norfolk, VA 23529
(757)683-5654
Bumper Sticker of the Week:
"Don't Drink and Park - 'Accidents' Cause People"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mckellars" <mckellar(at)bluebonnet.net> |
Kip, I cant find the size of the stringers on my plans. What size did
you use? Thanks Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Meadows" <gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com> |
Mark,
I just finished that part, and I used 9 stringers for a smoother look. I
also brought mine together and had a very small former to give them a
circular profile. I then cut small spruce wedges and filled in between the
stringers at that point to reinforce them. I think I'll probably add a small
plywood "cap" at the very end to give a smooth place for the covering to
fold over. I haven't done that last part yet.
I went with plywood bulkhead formers along the way, and cut notches in
them for the stringers. I figured out where the stringer would cross each
bulhead by snapping a chalkline. I lot of guys use individual strips to hold
each stringer. I think it's be easier to keep the stringer height under
control that way. Either way is fine. I wanted to make a small storage
compartment aft of rear seat ala Mike Cuy.
For me, this turtle deck was one of the biggest head-scratcher areas that
I've run into so far! I say that as I plow into the wooden, straight axle
gear/spoke wheel area.....
Gary Meadows
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kgardner(at)odu.edu |
02/26/2001 03:32:22 PM
Mark,
I haven't started work yet, still getting stuff together! I am in the
process of moving to OH, & didn't think actually starting to build made
sense until that's done. I did look over Andrew's plane real well when I
went to see him, but I can't tell you exactly what size the stringers were.
My ballpark guess is that they are 1/4 x1", but if it's not on the plans,
then hopefully someone else on the list can tell you.
Good luck!
Kip
Laboratory Manager, ODU
Dept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmospheric Sciences
4600 Elkhorn Avenue
Norfolk, VA 23529
(757)683-5654
Bumper Sticker of the Week:
"Don't Drink and Park - 'Accidents' Cause People"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Meadows" <gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com> |
Mark, Kip,
Yep - 1/4" x 1". I almost went with pine lattice. it's 1/4" x 1 1/4". I went
with Doug Fir, and ripped them out myself. Worked fine. Strength is not a
real big issue here thats why I almost used pine. The Doug Fir ended up
being cheaper, a touch heavier, but definitely strong!
Gary
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "ED GRENTZER" <flyboy_120(at)hotmail.com> |
I just went through that with the turtle deck stringers. they are 1/4" X
1".The dimension is not on the plans but it is in the Flying & Glider
manual.
Ed G.
>From: "Mckellars" <mckellar(at)bluebonnet.net>
>Reply-To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: stringers
>Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 14:22:03 -0600
>
>
>Kip, I cant find the size of the stringers on my plans. What size did
>you use? Thanks Mark
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Part I of my new article for the NL |
| From: | kgardner(at)odu.edu |
02/26/2001 04:44:14 PM
Chris,
I can't really contribute much to the whole discussion of old wire
technology, except to add one point. Many years ago my best friend ran a
piano repair business, and I spent my late teenage years hanging out in his
shop learning the trade. Piano wire is softer and more flexible than the
'music wire' stuff sold in hobby shops. It comes on rolls & we used a LOT
of it to restring one piano! Obviously, though, it has a pretty high
tensile strength, or it wouldn't withstand the loads put on it in a piano.
I've been out of that business for a long time, but there are several of
wholesale piano repair supply houses still around if someone wanted to do
some research & experimenting.
Cheers!
Kip Gardner
Laboratory Manager, ODU
Dept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmospheric Sciences
4600 Elkhorn Avenue
Norfolk, VA 23529
(757)683-5654
Bumper Sticker of the Week:
"Don't Drink and Park - 'Accidents' Cause People"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Part I of my new article for the NL |
Thanks for the info, Kip. It contributes to the knowledge base.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Duprey <J-M-Duprey(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Re: please fill me in again on Brodhead |
Hi Walt: I too am looking forward to my first trip to Brodhead this year. I have
spoken to a lot of people about it. This ia what I have learned, Friday Saturday
and
Sunday July 20, 21, 22. Camping is a Big YES (that is what we plan to do) Food
provided at a modest fee or McDonalds is right around the corner. I have a copy
of
last years menu as follows:
"Friday Night BarBQ (sloppy Joe) and sweet corn
Saturday Night Pork Chop dinner
Friday & Sat nooish Sandwiches available
Sat/Sunday Morning Pancake breakfast"
"Location: Brodhead Airport C37, 36 miles south of Madison on routes 11 and 81
'around the corner from McDonalds'"
Mapquest will provide a map and directions list Brodhead Airport, Broadhead
Wisconsin as your destination.
Michelle and I hope you can make it, we would love to see you again. Next year
you
will have to fly the Pietenpol to Brodhead.
John Duprey
walter evans wrote:
>
> My dream is to go to Brodhead before I finish my Aircamper. Believe it or
> not, I've never seen a Piet in the flesh, and I'd like to see them up close.
> I'm a builder from NJ and I need some very basic information about getting
> to Brodhead. like.....
> When is it?
> How many days?
> Where do you fly into(commercially)?
> How far from commercial airport?
> Can I drive my rental car to the site and camp?
> Is there camping at the field?
> Is there food there or nearby?
> I just spoke to a 70'ish CFI near me and he said that Brodhead is one of his
> favorite places to go.
> Thanks guys, I'd love to go there this year.
> walt
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack Phillips <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Drag/antidrag wires |
Christian Bobka wrote:
>
>
> Are you saying your exwife deserves the privilege of a flight in a
> Pietenpol?
>
since she never enjoyed anything to do with airplanes).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack Phillips <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fusalage length |
Mckellars wrote:
>
>
> The plans that I got from DDP have three different total length drawings
> of the fusalage from the firewall back. They are ; 161", 163", and
> 172.5". I understand that the longest version is for lighter weight
> engines. What length is the most commonly used? Mark
>
what glue to use and whether to use sitka spruce or douglas fir.
It's pretty much a matter of personal preference. I'm 6'2" with long
legs. I opted for the longest of the three (the one Don Pietenpol sells
in the "supplemental plans"), even though I think the shorter fuselage
looks better. In the long version, each cockpit has about 2" more
legroom and since I intend to fly mine from North Carolina to Brodhead
and Oshkosh, that trip would give me a long time to wish for those extra
2" if I built the shorter version. I'm also using an A-65 Continental
engine rather than the model A, so the longer fuselage means I won't
have to move my wing quite so far aft to make it balance properly.
You're going about this the right way. Ask your questions now, before
you get deeply into the project and wish you had done something
different. The Pietenpol is a challenging project. If you want to get
in the air quickly, build a Kitfox or some other kit plane. With the
Pietenpol even though there are some parts available from Replicraft,
you pretty much have to make everything yourself. For myself, I like
the challenge and the ability to build exactly what I want. I don't
think a kit plane would be quite as rewarding.
Good luck,
Jack
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack Phillips <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 34 Msgs - 02/24/01 |
Christian Bobka wrote:
>
>
> > One wire only may be required to
> >counter the design load, the other is to counter that wires tension
>
> It is not necessary to tension the wires. Taking the slack out is all that
> is required so there is no slamming when load reversals take place. The
> only time I have seen pretensioning is when flutter is a consideration as
> in a B model Pitts.
>
> If a wire is required to take a 2000 lb load and you use a wire rated at
> 2000 lbs and you tighten the wire to 300 lbs tension, how much more load
> can it takes before it reaches its design limit? 2000-300=1700lbs. But
> you needed 2000 lbs. Failure.
>
Thermal expansion can lengthen a cable considerably (particularly when
the bays are as long as a Pietenpol's)and a slack cable can allow things
to move around more than you would want. production airplanes with wire
braced wings (Citabria's, Husky's, etc.) all have some tension
pre-stressed into the wires. Besides, unless your spars are perfectly
straight, you will need some tension to straighten them out when you
trammel the wing.
Jack
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "D.Dale Johnson" <dd5john(at)juno.com> |
I would like to add my 2 cents to this stringer debate. I used 1/4 x 1"
redwood then at each bay I recessed 1/16 inch plywood scalloped at each
stringer. The helmet box is big with 1/16 plywood glued to the in side of
the stringers. The back of the helmet box has 1/8 " clear plastic. This
allows you to open the helmet box door and inspect the tail section and
all the cables. I used 9 stringers 9" high this will give more height for
shoulder belts. Dale
Johnson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Part I of my new article for the NL |
Having been in the Piano business for over forty-five years I have a lot of
old spools of wire unusable for piano stringing because of surface rust.
State your case and I will furnish free of charge all the wire you need.
Corky in La where piano wire rusts.
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 2/26/01 4:19:04 PM Pacific Standard Time, dd5john(at)juno.com
writes:
> I would like to add my 2 cents to this stringer debate. I used 1/4 x 1"
> redwood then at each bay I recessed 1/16 inch plywood scalloped at each
> stringer. The helmet box is big with 1/16 plywood glued to the in side of
> the stringers. The back of the helmet box has 1/8 " clear plastic. This
> allows you to open the helmet box door and inspect the tail section and
> all the cables. I used 9 stringers 9" high this will give more height for
> shoulder belts. Dale
> Johnson
>
>
>
The 1/4 X1 stringer dimension is on page 19 of the 1932 F&GM. It is also in
the 1933 F&GM for the scout. Couldn't find it on the improved aircamper
plans. Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Part I of my new article for the NL |
In a message dated 2/26/01 4:37:39 PM Pacific Standard Time,
Isablcorky(at)aol.com writes:
> Having been in the Piano business for over forty-five years I have a lot of
> old spools of wire unusable for piano stringing because of surface rust.
> State your case and I will furnish free of charge all the wire you need.
> Corky in La where piano wire rusts.
>
>
>
I was in on some of this discussion earlier. I would be sure that the wire
is obtainable in the lengths needed, but it's the ferrules which would not be
readily found or made by an individual. The Kansas Aviation Museum here in
Wichita is building a 1923 Laird Swallow and they had some ferrules made
somewhere here and donated, but because the Swallow is not going to be
airworthy I'm not sure if the ferrules are heat treated. Guess I could ask
them Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack Phillips <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: please fill me in again on Brodhead |
John Duprey wrote:
>
>
> Hi Walt: I too am looking forward to my first trip to Brodhead this year. I have
> spoken to a lot of people about it. This ia what I have learned, Friday Saturday
and
> Sunday July 20, 21, 22. Camping is a Big YES (that is what we plan to do) Food
> provided at a modest fee or McDonalds is right around the corner. I have a copy
of
> last years menu as follows:
> "Friday Night BarBQ (sloppy Joe) and sweet corn
> Saturday Night Pork Chop dinner
> Friday & Sat nooish Sandwiches available
> Sat/Sunday Morning Pancake breakfast"
>
> "Location: Brodhead Airport C37, 36 miles south of Madison on routes 11 and 81
> 'around the corner from McDonalds'"
>
> Mapquest will provide a map and directions list Brodhead Airport, Broadhead
> Wisconsin as your destination.
>
> Michelle and I hope you can make it, we would love to see you again. Next year
you
> will have to fly the Pietenpol to Brodhead.
>
> John Duprey
>
> walter evans wrote:
>
> >
> > My dream is to go to Brodhead before I finish my Aircamper. Believe it or
> > not, I've never seen a Piet in the flesh, and I'd like to see them up close.
> > I'm a builder from NJ and I need some very basic information about getting
> > to Brodhead. like.....
> > When is it?
> > How many days?
> > Where do you fly into(commercially)?
> > How far from commercial airport?
> > Can I drive my rental car to the site and camp?
> > Is there camping at the field?
> > Is there food there or nearby?
> > I just spoke to a 70'ish CFI near me and he said that Brodhead is one of his
> > favorite places to go.
> > Thanks guys, I'd love to go there this year.
> > walt
> > -----------------------------------------------------
> >
>
Hi Walt,
I heartily recommend Brodhead, particularly if you can't find another
Pietenpol to look at. I went last year and picked up a number of tips:
1. Using AN42 eyebolts for tail group hinges
2. Adding small blocks of spruce between the ribs of the tail to keep
the fabric from pulling them in
3. trying out a number of cockpits to see what length fuselage I wanted
to build
The list goes on and on. if you have time, it would be well worth it to
go on to Oshkosh, either for the Airventure fly-in , or just to go to
the museum and look at the Pietenpols on display there. In the section
where they restore airplanes they used to have a Pietenpol wing hanging.
I don't know if it is still there or not.
Jack
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Part I of my new article for the NL |
doug,
Is that what how they would be manufactured? Wind them in the annealed
condition and then heat treat?
Chris Bobka
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Brusilow" <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fusalage length |
Jack Phillips wrote:
." I'm also using an A-65 Continental
engine rather than the model A, so the longer fuselage means I won't
have to move my wing quite so far aft to make it balance properly"
I don't think so. The 65 is about 60 lbs lighter that the "A" engine.
With the long fuselage, the wing will have to come back 4-6 inches. The
will depend on how far fwd you place the 65.
My Piet has the long fuselage with a 0-200, starter, alternator & metal
prop. My wing is back 31/2 in & this is a much heavier installation than
you are contemplating.
Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack Phillips <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Joystick Connecting Link |
I just finished building my control system torque tube and installed it
in my cockpit. When I installed the rudder bar, I noticed that at full
aileron deflection to the left, the connecting link that connects the
front and rear stick can hit the rudder bar. Since the pins that the
link attaches to were already welded in place on the sticks, I thought
about making a new link with a couple of bends at the ends to raise it
high enough to clear the rudder bar.
I thought before I put those kinks in the tube I'd better run a little
stress analysis (I'm a mechanical engineer) to make sure it would still
be strong enough, and to my surprise, I found that the original design
is only marginal!
Most light planes have stick forces that average about 25 lbs per "G".
It is not unheard of to pull 4 "G's" in maneuvers or turbulence, so I
calculated the load that the connecting link would see if the front seat
passenger pulled hard enough on the stick to put a 4.0 G load on the
plane, and found that the link would see about 464 lbs. of compressive
load. Then I used a standard formula known as Euler's equation to see
if there was any danger of the link buckling with that kind of
compressive load, and I found that with 1/2" x .035 wall tubing (and a
link length of 31.5" in my long fuselage),the critical load is only 363
lbs., so my theoretical 100 lb. load on the front stick could
permanently buckle the link, possibly jamming the controls!
To see how real these theoretical numbers are, I tried grabbing the
front stick in my left hand and the rear stick in my right and then
pulled them together. I'm not real strong, but in the gym I can
generate about 80 lbs on the machine that simulates this kind of
movement. I haven't cut my sticks to length yet so they are about 2"
longer than normal. I figure I was putting close to an equivalent 100
lbs load at the correct stick length. With this load I was able to put
a distinct bow (maybe 3/4") in the connecting link. It relaxed straight
with no permanent damage when i released the load, but I don't know how
much harder I would have had to pull to put a permanent kink in the
tube.
To make a long story longer, I decided to move the pins to 4" above the
stick pivots instead of the 3-1/2" the plans call for, and make the link
out of 1/2" x .049" wall tubing. This should be able to resist a load
of over 500 lbs without buckling.
I have never heard of a problem with the link buckling in a Pietenpol,
but then how many times does the front seat passenger go honking back
that hard on the stick? It would only take once to ruin your whole day.
Another scenario is trying to teach someone to land the Pietenpol.
they are trying to flare too fast and the pilot in the rear seat tries
to get the nose down. They are fighting over the sticks and the link
could buckle with possibly disastrous results.
Maybe I'm overly cautious, but it seems raising the link a half inch and
using the next gage of tubing is a prudent design change. Any thougths
out there?
Jack Phillips
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Part I of my new article for the NL |
In a message dated 2/26/01 6:01:47 PM Pacific Standard Time,
BOBKA(at)compuserve.com writes:
> doug,
>
> Is that what how they would be manufactured? Wind them in the annealed
> condition and then heat treat?
>
>
Yes, that is why it would be difficult for an individual to guaranty proper
heat treat and temper. Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Joystick Connecting Link |
In a message dated 2/26/01 6:23:37 PM Pacific Standard Time,
jackphillips(at)earthlink.net writes:
> Maybe I'm overly cautious, but it seems raising the link a half inch and
> using the next gage of tubing is a prudent design change. Any thougths
> out there?
>
> Jack Phillips
>
>
>
Jack,
I appreciate your analysis on the tube. I suppose 1/2 inch higher and
heavier wall would be all right, but this would further irritate the
interference you mentioned. I have built six sets of controls and have about
90 hours on my first piet ('A' powered) and haven't experienced any kind of
heavy control forces during G loading. I've had it in some rough air, but
don't do any abrupt maneuvers. In fact, A pinkie is all that's needed on
mine. It is very very easy to land; it behaves so well.
I did not have the clearance problem you mentioned hitting the rudder bar or
the rudder bar stand, but it does lightly hit the cutout in the front seat
bulkhead on full left aileron, but I haven't needed nearly that much so far.
I had an engineer fiend help me design my lift struts so I wouldn't have to
use jury struts. Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | javier cruz <javcr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | welding landing gear |
Hello friends
I don't know if i have been making something wrong,
but look this: for test the landing gear tubing i
made a "V" 4 feets long with .095 tubing, it was
welding with oxi-ace an cms32 welding rod, looks fine,
but with 150 lbs apx. of pressure for try to open the
"V" it brake easy, so i try to weld with electrical
arc 1/8 6013 electrode , and i was much better. Maybe
my skills on oxi-ace welding not be good, but i took
the way for the electrical welding.
thanks for your comments.
Saludos desde Mexico
Javier Cruz
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Joystick Connecting Link |
In a message dated 2/26/01 7:06:29 PM Pacific Standard Time, Doug413(at)aol.com
writes:
> I appreciate your analysis on the tube. I suppose 1/2 inch higher and
> heavier wall would be all right, but this would further irritate the
> interference you mentioned. I have built six sets of controls and have
> about
> 90 hours on my first piet ('A' powered) and haven't experienced any kind of
> heavy control forces during G loading. I've had it in some rough air, but
> don't do any abrupt maneuvers. In fact, A pinkie is all that's needed on
> mine. It is very very easy to land; it behaves so well.
>
> I did not have the clearance problem you mentioned hitting the rudder bar
> or
> the rudder bar stand, but it does lightly hit the cutout in the front seat
> bulkhead on full left aileron, but I haven't needed nearly that much so
> far.
>
>
Jack,
I did not have a set of plans in front of me earlier and may have mis stated
some things. Do you have a short or long fuselage? I remember installing
the second set of controls in a long fuselage and because the long fuse floor
is a little less curved, the fit was different than in the short fuse. I
had pre made the safety strap to the plan for the short fuse and had to
remake it because the torque tube sat closer to the ash beam. This could be
some of what you are experiencing. I know that built to the plans, the
aileron will reach full stop before the controls hit. The amount of raising
you suggested may be close to the amount it is lower if any of this true on
you bird.
My approach to this aircraft is somewhat different than most, I chose to
build as close to the plan as I could interperet and manufacture, and see the
out come. When the plane was completed, it amazingly worked as advertised
and so I didn't experience many of the things I hear about which don't fit or
work. Needless to say, I am impressed with the design overall, but I know
there are differences between some installations on the short and the long
fuse. There are two long fuses here with controls installed which I can
check for this problem. I will do this tomorrow.
Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Joystick Connecting Link |
Hello Jack Phillips and group,
You have me thinking about that link tube. Like you, I have
never heard of a buckling problem with it in a Pietenpol.
The stick forces of the four different Pietenpols (including
my own) that I have flown are very light, and this is probably
why there have been no reports of a problem (as far as we
know). However, as you correctly state, opposing inputs be-
tween two pilots could buckle that tube. With this in mind, it
certainly is a good idea to go to.049" wall thickness.
When the weather warms up, I shall take a look at mine to
see if it tends to buckle with opposing stick forces. Over the
past thirty years I have had people fly from the front seat on
many occasions and never suspected there could be a prob-
lem. My fuselage was built according to the blueprints for the
"Improved Air Camper", and is shorter than yours. Likely the
link tube is shorter too, and the tendency to buckle should be
somewhat reduced. We'll see.
Regarding moving the link tube 1/2" higher on the sticks, you
could wind up raising the front seat a bit for clearance. I'm
not sure about a clearance problem between the link tube
and the rudder bar since I use rudder pedals for the rear rud-
der control, but in any case the aileron travel is restricted by
the stick running into one's legs in the Piets I have flown---par-
ticularly those with standard cockpit width (mine is two inches
wider than the width shown in the plans). If you can, take a look
at a Piet with a rudder bar in the rear and see if there is indeed
a clearance problem between the bar and the link tube.
Thanks for calling this to our attention. Cheers,
Graham Hansen (CF-AUN)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Greg Cardinal" <gcardinal(at)startribune.com> |
We used a total of 9 stringers, 1/4" X 1", redwood. Yes, there is a former at the
aft end.
Greg Cardinal
>>> "Mckellars" 02/26 1:43 PM >>>
How many and what size stringers should there be in the turtle deck ? I
know the plans show 7 but some pictures of work in progress show more
.Is there a former where the fuse joins the stab or do the stringers
just come together at the front of the stab. Kip, Thanks for the info on
William Wynne. I'm planning on using a Corvair engine. Thanks to
everyone. I know I've asked a bunch of questions. Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Brusilow" <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
A suggestion;
Two methods to attach the stringers to the formers:
1) notch the formers or:
2) no sweat method, lay the stringers on the formers, line them up,then
notch individual pieces of ply, notch them, set them on the stringers, &
glue them to the formers.
Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Part I of my new article for the NL |
There was an excellent article in the 1st Quarter 1993 issue of the
Buckeye Pietenpol Association Newsletter that Gary and Edward price sowed
how to make ferrules for the tail brace wires and we intend to do this on
our plane. It really looks neat and reasonably easy to do.
I'm sure it would work for the drag/anti-drag wires too, but I would be
reluctant to use them in this application because they would be difficult
to inspect and see if anything is going wrong. We are going to use 1/8"
stainless steel control cabbles for this purpose.
John Langston
Pipe Creek, TX
nle97(at)juno.com
________________________________________________________________________________
Gary,
You should have seen the problems we ran into when making our turtledeck
and all those stringers. We figured it would take us a couple of weeks,
working one night a week, but ended up spending about three months. We
finally proved we had it right by laying an old bed sheet across the
turtledeck and pulling it tight to see if it looked right.
John Langston
Pipe Creek, TX
nle97(at)juno.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Meadows" <gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com> |
Hey John,
That sounds just like me! I worried it and messed with it, then I talked
with Mike Cuy, and he said he basically laid it out best he could, then
shaved wood off or laminated on thin strips to get the right height! I used
the chalk line eyeballed it, and it turned out pretty good - not perfect,
but I think I can live with it!
Mike Cuy said to take a flat piece of wood and rock over all the
stringers, if you didn't skip any stringers cause they were too low, then
your okay!
My final test - my wife and I took a bedsheet and stretched over it - good
enough!!! Sound familiar??!! Great minds or something like that!
Thanks,
Gary
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "ED GRENTZER" <flyboy_120(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | elevator cables connections |
Hi Everyone
Can someone tell me the most common way of connecting the two upper and
two lower elevator cables to the bellcrank. The plans show each pair
connected via a single shackle but I have not been able to find an
aircraft shackle large enough to handle two cables with thimbles. I figure
the best way would be to Nicropress an eye with a thimble in the center of
one continuous cable and run each tail out to an elevator, that way I could
use one of the small a/c shackles to connect the thimble to the bellcrank
but I'm not sure if that would be acceptable.
Or maybe someone knows of a source for larger a/c shackles??
Thanks
Ed G.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: elevator cables connections |
Ed,
I made a special link fitting for this location by bending a 2" strip
of .065" 4130 around a 1/4" dia. rod and edge welding it where
the strip comes together. Two are required.
Then a slot was cut out in the middle to go over the bellcrank and
two 3/16" dia. holes were drilled for the two elevator cables to fas-
ten to, using the fork ends of two turnbuckles. A 1/4" bolt links this
fitting to the bellcrank. I also reinforced the bellcrank (streamlined
tubing with flattened ends) using a couple of .049" x 3/4" 4130
straps at each end to provide more bearing surface for the 1/4" bolt.
Top and bottom ends of the bellcrank are identical.
Without a drawing, it is difficult to describe this thing and I hope you
can figure it out. It has been entirely satisfactory on my Piet.
In addition, I fashioned similar links for the elevator cable attach-
ments to the elevator horns in lieu of shackles which were (and are)
expensive. These were made from lighter 4130 strips (about .049"
thick) approximately 1" wide. Four are required.
These links provide a universal, self-aligning connection for the
cables and are not difficult to make. Again, I hope you can visualise
these parts from my description.
Cheers,
Graham
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Loar" <skycarl(at)megsinet.net> |
| Subject: | Part I of my new article for the NL |
Ian Holland sent me the article on ferrules that was in the BPA letter in
93. I can put that on my website with the other piet stuff so any one can
either read it from there or copy it. I have to thin it out a bit as the way
I have it now it is rather large. ( Trying to save on space so I can post as
much as possible.) Give me a bit and I will have it up with the weight and
balance and rib tool and other stuff. I'll post when it's ready online.
PS.... Got my spars together finally. Glad I'm over that hurdle. Now I just
have to finish the ribs.
Carl
Please visit my website at
www.megsinet.net/skycarl
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
nle97(at)juno.com
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Part I of my new article for the NL
There was an excellent article in the 1st Quarter 1993 issue of the
Buckeye Pietenpol Association Newsletter that Gary and Edward price sowed
how to make ferrules for the tail brace wires and we intend to do this on
our plane. It really looks neat and reasonably easy to do.
I'm sure it would work for the drag/anti-drag wires too, but I would
be
reluctant to use them in this application because they would be difficult
to inspect and see if anything is going wrong. We are going to use 1/8"
stainless steel control cabbles for this purpose.
John Langston
Pipe Creek, TX
nle97(at)juno.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Eldredge <steve(at)byu.edu> |
| Subject: | Joystick Connecting Link |
Remove the front stick.
Just a little tongue in cheek.
Steve E.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jack
Phillips
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Joystick Connecting Link
I just finished building my control system torque tube and installed it
in my cockpit. When I installed the rudder bar, I noticed that at full
aileron deflection to the left, the connecting link that connects the
front and rear stick can hit the rudder bar. Since the pins that the
link attaches to were already welded in place on the sticks, I thought
about making a new link with a couple of bends at the ends to raise it
high enough to clear the rudder bar.
I thought before I put those kinks in the tube I'd better run a little
stress analysis (I'm a mechanical engineer) to make sure it would still
be strong enough, and to my surprise, I found that the original design
is only marginal!
Most light planes have stick forces that average about 25 lbs per "G".
It is not unheard of to pull 4 "G's" in maneuvers or turbulence, so I
calculated the load that the connecting link would see if the front seat
passenger pulled hard enough on the stick to put a 4.0 G load on the
plane, and found that the link would see about 464 lbs. of compressive
load. Then I used a standard formula known as Euler's equation to see
if there was any danger of the link buckling with that kind of
compressive load, and I found that with 1/2" x .035 wall tubing (and a
link length of 31.5" in my long fuselage),the critical load is only 363
lbs., so my theoretical 100 lb. load on the front stick could
permanently buckle the link, possibly jamming the controls!
To see how real these theoretical numbers are, I tried grabbing the
front stick in my left hand and the rear stick in my right and then
pulled them together. I'm not real strong, but in the gym I can
generate about 80 lbs on the machine that simulates this kind of
movement. I haven't cut my sticks to length yet so they are about 2"
longer than normal. I figure I was putting close to an equivalent 100
lbs load at the correct stick length. With this load I was able to put
a distinct bow (maybe 3/4") in the connecting link. It relaxed straight
with no permanent damage when i released the load, but I don't know how
much harder I would have had to pull to put a permanent kink in the
tube.
To make a long story longer, I decided to move the pins to 4" above the
stick pivots instead of the 3-1/2" the plans call for, and make the link
out of 1/2" x .049" wall tubing. This should be able to resist a load
of over 500 lbs without buckling.
I have never heard of a problem with the link buckling in a Pietenpol,
but then how many times does the front seat passenger go honking back
that hard on the stick? It would only take once to ruin your whole day.
Another scenario is trying to teach someone to land the Pietenpol.
they are trying to flare too fast and the pilot in the rear seat tries
to get the nose down. They are fighting over the sticks and the link
could buckle with possibly disastrous results.
Maybe I'm overly cautious, but it seems raising the link a half inch and
using the next gage of tubing is a prudent design change. Any thougths
out there?
Jack Phillips
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Loar" <skycarl(at)megsinet.net> |
| Subject: | Ferrules article |
Ok ,,,, got it posted. Here is the article from the newsletter on making a
ferrule jig. Go to my site and arrow down to the piet area and when you are
on page one you should see the link. Hope this helps .
Carl
Please visit my website at
www.megsinet.net/skycarl
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | flyboy_120(at)webtv.net (Ed G.) |
| Subject: | Re: elevator cables connections |
Thanks Graham
This sounds like something I dreamed up but didn't put in my note to
the list.
I had thought about simply bolting a strap type fitting to each side of
the belcrank with a pivot bolt and then pinning the turnbuckles to them.
But I wanted to get some other peoples ideas before I just went ahead
and did it since I'm relatively new at this home building stuff.thanks
for the input.
I also like your strap idea at the elevator end since those little
shackles are almost five bucks each and they're everywhere.
Ed Grentzer
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
WOW! I had mine cut out and installed inside of 2 hrs.
I wonder what I did wrong. I was suprised at how easy
it was. I made mine to plans, I suppose that helps.
del
--- nle97(at)juno.com wrote:
>
> Gary,
> You should have seen the problems we ran
> into when making our turtledeck
> and all those stringers. We figured it would take
> us a couple of weeks,
> working one night a week, but ended up spending
> about three months. We
> finally proved we had it right by laying an old bed
> sheet across the
> turtledeck and pulling it tight to see if it looked
> right.
>
> John Langston
> Pipe Creek, TX
> nle97(at)juno.com
>
>
>
> through
>
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
> Matronics!
>
>
>
>
>
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Meadows" <gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com> |
Del,
That's pretty impressive - 2 hours for your turtledeck! You musta got your
fuselage done in like 6 hours!
Imagine that, and John and both being A&P's, maybe we just make things too
hard sometimes. Which plans did you use by the way?
Gary
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Part I of my new article for the NL |
What Garry Price did was make ROUND ferrules which are not what they are
supposed to be. If you take his ferrule and look at it end on, it is round
with the ID 2 wire diameters across.
What the standard ferrule looks like, and the ones that would have been
used way back when, look the same in sideview but totally different from
the endview and I think this is where Garry Price made a mistake.
When you look at the ferrule from the end, it should look as if it was
wound around two pieces of wire that are laid side by side. In other
words, the center hole should be 1 wire diameter high and 2 wire diameters
in width. The original Curtiss Jenny drawing for this part which pretty
much sets the standard for the era, shows a pretty tight tolerence for
these dimensions, too.
Due to this oblong shape, it fits over the wires snugly and once the
bracing wire has its end turned over the ferrule and the assembly dip
soldered, it is very strong. The photos of Garry Price's ferrules look
nice but I would not trust them very far. Greg Cardinal can probably point
people in the right direction toward an early NACA report that talks of all
the different wire end treatments and how good they do their job. After
reading the report, you will agree that Garry Price's fall short on
performance.
Take two big finishing nails and put them side by side in a vise so they
are touching each other. Then take a length of coat hanger wire and wrap
it around the nails so that they touch the nail half way around one nail
and then go tangent from one nail to the other and then wrap around the
second nail half way and then go tangent from one to the other, etc. This
is what it should look like. Now do it with a piece of 200,000 psi tensile
strength wire and you will see it really can't be done.
Obviously, we are learning form the pros like Doug that these must be
manufactured using annealed wire and then heat treated to the required
strength.
If you look at an unsquashed nicopress fitting, this is about what it
should look like. It should have very little slop around the bracing wire.
Chris Bobka
Tech Counselor
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
Dear Joe C,
I feel strongly that you should get on this list and explain to the group how
you solved the high cost of shackles in such an inexpensive manner. There has
been a lot of traffic on this subject lately and you could solve many of
their problems if you would care to do so. Thanks
Corky inLa using inexpensive Joe C shackles.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Sippola" <sippola(at)escape.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Re. drag/antidrag bracing... |
Excellent link for a nice neat cheap and light approach! While browsing
thru the parent sight I found a very good article on flying wires and how
the two main companies in the world differed in their construction method.
Turns out one uses rolled threads on 316 stainless and the other used cut
threads! ( http://airbum.com/articles/Flyingwires.html )
What I have started with for my tail braces and may or may not change is
3/16" 316 stainless rod threaded on the lathe with a die. With something
like 8 times the cross sectional area (probably only 6 times or so at the
thread root) than the 14 gauge wire I would expect there is plenty of
strength. I distinctly believe the whole rolled versus cut thread debate
is great theory but much less applicable in practice unless you are
engineering things to minimum diameters. I would be surprised if there is
a single rolled thread on any of BHP's first several piets.
To insure no one takes my word as gospel I must add I am not an engineer
or have any background in the threaded fasteners industry but what I have
read on the subject does not give any outright answers like the Though
shalt not use cut threads that is propagating in this "thread."
Wayne Sippola, Winnipeg
> BTW, I decided to use the Bob Barrows tail wire approach
> <http://www.airbum.com/pireps/Bearhawk260-11.jpg> However, I do not plan
> on turning down the wires.
>
> Ken Beanlands B.Eng (Aerospace)
> Calgary, Alberta, Canada
> Christavia MK 1 #363, C-GREN
> Barrows Bearhawk #468
> <http://www.spots.ab.ca/~kbeanlan>
>
>
> On Sun, 25 Feb 2001, Graham Hansen wrote:
>
<grhans@cable-lynx.net>
> >
> > One thing I would never use is fencing wire, and I am suspicious of
> > any solid wire (or tie rod) which can fail completely without warning
> > if nicked or damaged. It's much better to use aircraft quality cables
> > and turnbuckles for your Pietenpol drag truss. If in good condition, a
> > cable will fail all at once only when the load imposed exceeds its ul-
> > timate strength. If protected from corrosion with a light oil, even
gal-
> > vanized 7x19 steel cable will last a long time (over thirty years in
the
> > case of my own Pietenpol). Incidentally, I used 3/32 inch SS cable
> > for tail bracing on my a/c and it has been trouble-free.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Graham Hansen
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Brusilow" <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Brusilow
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Stringers
A suggestion;
Two methods to attach the stringers to the formers:
1) notch the formers or:
2) no sweat method, lay the stringers on the formers, line them up,then
notch individual pieces of ply, notch them, set them on the stringers, &
glue them to the formers.
Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Drag/Antidrag of wood instead of wires |
Ben,
It could be done but would be very heavy especially in a two bay
arrangement. The length of the pieces are such that they would tend to
buckle under the compressive loads unless very large pieces were used.
Wood is not very good in tension because of the limitations of fastening
the ends (gluing in tension is worthless).
Your best bet would be to add two more compression braces per side making
the wings have twice as many bays. Then maybe the length of the
drag/antidrag pieces wood be short enough to take an adequate compressive
load.
Look for a book by a guy named Bruhn on www.bookfinder.com called something
like Aircraft Structures. If this book does not do it for you then nothing
will.
A recent matronics message discussing the elevator control pushrod being
too weak in compression talked of Euler's Formula. That same formula would
apply here.
If you could over come these hurdles then goodluck.
Bernard designed it so simply. Why not keep it that way?
Chris Bobka
Tech Counselor
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Brusilow" <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Remove the front stick.
Just a little tongue in cheek.
Steve E."
I haven't had a front stick for years.
Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr sam )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Joe <fishin(at)wwa.com> |
OK Corky, I'll give it a whirl. what I used are available from any marine supply
house. I got mine from West Marine. they are SS strap eyes. they kind of look
like the omega symble with elongated legs. get the ones with 3/16 mounting holes
in the legs. I simply put the strap eye in a vise with a 1/4" drill rod in the
half circle opening and started closing the vise to close the legs around the
drill rod. when the legs came flat against one another it came out of the vice.
there was enough spring back to allow it to fit over any mounting strap. now the
loop portion is already rounded to accept the thimble. I hope this makes some
kind of sense to you. now to test this low cost shackle ( last ones I purchased
were a dollar and some change each) I took 1/8 7/19 galv aircraft wire, thimble
and nicopress both ends, attached to turnbuckle (155-16L) with this shackle.
other end of turn buckle had another shackle and 1/8" cable . one end wrapped
around a large tree, the other end on the trailer hitch on my explorer. now I
put the explorer in 4 wheel drive low range, slowly took the slack out of the
cable, then proceeded to give it the gas untill something gave. the results
were a very slight elongation in the shackle 3/16 shackle pin hole, about 5-6
strands of the cable broke loose, and the loop end of the turnbuckle seperated
mid way between the threads and the loop. now the cable is 2000# test, the
turnbuckle is rated at 1600#. it seems to me that this unscientific test was
proof enough that this home made strap eye/shackle is strong enough to do the
job. of course that is only my opinion and all the normal disclaimers apply.
hope this will save a few $ for some of you. they also look good.
regards
JoeC in NE IL where is seems winter will never end
N99621
Isablcorky(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> Dear Joe C,
> I feel strongly that you should get on this list and explain to the group how
> you solved the high cost of shackles in such an inexpensive manner. There has
> been a lot of traffic on this subject lately and you could solve many of
> their problems if you would care to do so. Thanks
> Corky inLa using inexpensive Joe C shackles.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack Phillips <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Joystick Connecting Link |
Doug413(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> In a message dated 2/26/01 7:06:29 PM Pacific Standard Time, Doug413(at)aol.com
> writes:
>
> > I appreciate your analysis on the tube. I suppose 1/2 inch higher and
> > heavier wall would be all right, but this would further irritate the
> > interference you mentioned. I have built six sets of controls and have
> > about
> > 90 hours on my first piet ('A' powered) and haven't experienced any kind of
> > heavy control forces during G loading. I've had it in some rough air, but
> > don't do any abrupt maneuvers. In fact, A pinkie is all that's needed on
> > mine. It is very very easy to land; it behaves so well.
> >
> > I did not have the clearance problem you mentioned hitting the rudder bar
> > or
> > the rudder bar stand, but it does lightly hit the cutout in the front seat
> > bulkhead on full left aileron, but I haven't needed nearly that much so
> > far.
> >
> >
>
> Jack,
>
> I did not have a set of plans in front of me earlier and may have mis stated
> some things. Do you have a short or long fuselage? I remember installing
> the second set of controls in a long fuselage and because the long fuse floor
> is a little less curved, the fit was different than in the short fuse. I
> had pre made the safety strap to the plan for the short fuse and had to
> remake it because the torque tube sat closer to the ash beam. This could be
> some of what you are experiencing. I know that built to the plans, the
> aileron will reach full stop before the controls hit. The amount of raising
> you suggested may be close to the amount it is lower if any of this true on
> you bird.
>
> My approach to this aircraft is somewhat different than most, I chose to
> build as close to the plan as I could interperet and manufacture, and see the
> out come. When the plane was completed, it amazingly worked as advertised
> and so I didn't experience many of the things I hear about which don't fit or
> work. Needless to say, I am impressed with the design overall, but I know
> there are differences between some installations on the short and the long
> fuse. There are two long fuses here with controls installed which I can
> check for this problem. I will do this tomorrow.
>
> Doug Bryant
>
Hi Doug,
I have the long fuselage. I think if I built the short fuselage as you
say the curve being greater would lift the link above the rudder bar.
All my parts were built exactly to the plans dimensions, but I haven't
built my front seat yet. It looks like I will have plenty of clearance,
even with my link raised one half inch. By raising the link, it now
clears the rudder bar nicely, and as soon as I get some .049 wall tubing
I will make a new link.
I've analyzed nearly every part of the structure (at least parts I have
already built) and I'm very impressed with the seat of the pants
engineering BHP did on this plane. This is the first area I've found
that is marginal, and I don't know if anyone would ever put enough load
on the stick to bend the link. The only Pietenpol I've flown had very
nice light controls.
Jack
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Part I of my new article for the NL |
In a message dated 2/27/01 4:53:00 PM Pacific Standard Time,
BOBKA(at)compuserve.com writes:
> If you look at an unsquashed nicopress fitting, this is about what it
> should look like. It should have very little slop around the bracing wire.
>
> Chris Bobka
> Tech Counselor
>
>
>
Gents ,
I called the Kansas Aviation Museum today and they did have some ferrules
made per the vintage spec for the Laird Swallow. They were made by the
Kansas Coil Spring company and cost 2$ ea. They also told of a person who
winds them from 3/32 or 1/8 4130 welding rod, sqwishes them and then heats
cherry red and quenches in oil (not sure what he does for the temper). I am
going to make a couple of these and take them to Raytheon (where I work) and
test them. I can wind the coils on my lathe in back gear. I have a copy of
the spec. I wouldn't trust anything like this unless I was confident that it
met its design criteria. The first and only ride I had in a piet until I
built my own, had hard wire on the tail. Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 2/27/01 5:09:41 PM Pacific Standard Time,
Isablcorky(at)aol.com writes:
> Dear Joe C,
> I feel strongly that you should get on this list and explain to the group
> how
> you solved the high cost of shackles in such an inexpensive manner. There
> has
> been a lot of traffic on this subject lately and you could solve many of
> their problems if you would care to do so. Thanks
> Corky inLa using inexpensive Joe C shackles.
>
>
>
I make mine from motorcycle chain master link covers and clevis bolts. I
found this method in an old BPA news letter and was able to find all the
parts new at a surplus store here in Wichita. I am not sure if I could find
the chain link covers any more. Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net> |
| Subject: | Re: elevator cables connections |
I did exactly what you described. One cable thru a thimble and back out.
Dick N.
----- Original Message -----
From: "ED GRENTZER" <flyboy_120(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: elevator cables connections
>
>
> Hi Everyone
>
> Can someone tell me the most common way of connecting the two upper and
> two lower elevator cables to the bellcrank. The plans show each pair
> connected via a single shackle but I have not been able to find an
> aircraft shackle large enough to handle two cables with thimbles. I figure
> the best way would be to Nicropress an eye with a thimble in the center of
> one continuous cable and run each tail out to an elevator, that way I
could
> use one of the small a/c shackles to connect the thimble to the bellcrank
> but I'm not sure if that would be acceptable.
> Or maybe someone knows of a source for larger a/c shackles??
>
> Thanks
> Ed G.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John or Jean Dilatush" <Dilatush(at)amigo.net> |
| Subject: | Elevator cable connections |
In response to the conversations about connections, shackles etc., here
is what I have used.
Find a source for number 50 chain such as used in the drive chain on
motorcyles. Break it apart by grinding the ends of the pins holding it
together. Save the two sides of each connecting link (one on each side
of the connecting link.). Now using two 3/16" clevis pins put them in
place of the original connecting pins that you ground out and removed.
Secure the clevis pins with cotter keys. Presto, you now have a
connector that can be used in place of those expensive shackles. I
believe that I figured the cost at less than a buck each. I read this
in one of the old magazines and the author stated that using 1/8 " cable
with cable thimbles and nicopress sleeves that the test fixture broke at
about 2500 lbs pull and the test cable and fastening remained intact.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Part I of my new article for the NL |
Doug,
I have the Curtiss drawing if you want I can mail it to you. SAE aviation
committee probably had a spec to that I could look for.
Chris Bobka
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Part I of my new article for the NL |
Doug,
I would not mind seeing a copy of the spec you have.
Chris Bobka
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
Dear Joe C. and Corky,
Thanks for the blow by blow on the shackles. The drawings I have seen for
shackles going back to the twenties show that they started out exactly as
you described and then they were wrapped around a rod as you described. I
knew I saw them somewhere but neglected to look in the marine catalogs.
Chris Bobka
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Uncertified fabric |
Walt- In talking with all the fabric/finishing vendors at Oshkosh I found
out that dacron is dacron. It all comes from the same mill !!!!! The
Superflight
fabric is the same as the Polyfiber fabric is the same as Ceconite fabric.
Hah ! Funny, isn't it ? Now the way they finish the fabric all varies
from mfg.
to mfg.
Anyway, yes- I used the 1.7 oz fabric. Worked well. Fills easier too
since the
weave is finer. Also- I bought my fabric from Superflight since they sold the
widest rolls. 71" I think ? They called it uncertified fabric, but
told me it is
exactly the same as the certified stuff, but sells for much less. Go figure.
Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John or Jean Dilatush" <Dilatush(at)amigo.net> |
| Subject: | Elevator connections & shackles |
As an addendum to my message about using number 50 chain for shackles, I
checked my invoices today and found that I was able to purchase the
chain at a farm implement dealer for $2.99 per foot. This was in Feb of
1998. I think that about 2 feet will provide more that enough material
for all the shackles you need for a Pietenpol. Cheap, huh?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ian Holland" <iholland(at)telusplanet.net> |
I used industrial drive chain links. I ground off the pin heads and
pressed out the remainder. The holes are a tight 3/16 inch. A couple
of washers are used for spacing. The industrial chain is a Reynolds
#40, I believe, and can withstand a lot more than 2000 pounds force.
per link.(I saw an article that claimed 4500 pounds to distortion.
Total cost for the plane would be about $30 if you had to buy a
length. I was able to pick up the tag end off a 100ft length for free
at work. I believe that these are stronger than the motorcycle links.
my 2c worth
-=Ian=-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ian Holland" <iholland(at)telusplanet.net> |
The concern on the "roundness" or "squashed" ferules is starting to
get to me a bit.
1. The round ones "via Gary Price method" gives a ferule that is
extremely tight to place over the two strands. I.e. there is no slop.
I went out and looked at them and see that any loads in the wires are
in tension only, that is, the ferule is a keeper only. The bent back
end tends to compress the ferule on one side only and prevents the
wire from pulling loose. I would suspect that bend back is the weak
point. The ferule after being formed is very solid , tight and
unmoving. I am not an engineer and don't see the concern on having the
oval, absolutely tight ferule. Can someone explain what I am missing?
2. If any one has access to the "Original Piet" can they look and see
what Bernie used? Round or oval?
The next step will be to take the round unit and test tension to
failure. The manual from Don explains that the brace wires should only
be tensioned enough to allow the tail to be lifted off the ground by
lifting on the outer tip. As this load (about 30 pounds) is divided by
2, it indicates to me that the wires are only loaded in tension by
about 15 pounds each. The turnbuckles are rated at 2000 pounds. The
wire will be much less than that. The coiled ferule will be much
stronger than the wire.
Is this the case of us trying to "over-engineer" the working design?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator connections & shackles |
I seem to be missing the point on these shackles.
where are you using them? is it to connect the cable
loop to the fittings on the spar?
--- John or Jean Dilatush wrote:
> Dilatush"
>
> As an addendum to my message about using number 50
> chain for shackles, I
> checked my invoices today and found that I was able
> to purchase the
> chain at a farm implement dealer for $2.99 per foot.
> This was in Feb of
> 1998. I think that about 2 feet will provide more
> that enough material
> for all the shackles you need for a Pietenpol.
> Cheap, huh?
>
>
>
> through
>
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
> Matronics!
>
>
>
>
>
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator cable connections |
What I have used for years conecting my cables is the
locks in the chain from the Honda 250 offroad
motorcycle, got the first one from a spare my brother
Larry takes with him in the Enduro trips.
If it can stand that driving, can stand the pull from
the control stick :-)
I make a aluminum spacer each side of the cable.
When everything is perfectly fitted, I also make a
little "v" notch in the middle of the aluminum spacer
and use a safety wire, just in case.
To pull the "C" locking piece, I need plyers and a
screwdriver, to pull it out, so is practically
impossible for it to come apart, even without the
safety wire.
Hope this helps, They cost here about US$ 0.40 a
piece. Can be found in any Motorcycle dealer.
Not in Harley Davidson place, they use a band :-)
I attach a photo, not a good one but hope it helps.
Saludos
Gary Gower
--- John or Jean Dilatush wrote:
> Dilatush"
>
> In response to the conversations about connections,
> shackles etc., here
> is what I have used.
>
> Find a source for number 50 chain such as used in
> the drive chain on
> motorcyles. Break it apart by grinding the ends of
> the pins holding it
> together. Save the two sides of each connecting
> link (one on each side
> of the connecting link.). Now using two 3/16"
> clevis pins put them in
> place of the original connecting pins that you
> ground out and removed.
> Secure the clevis pins with cotter keys. Presto,
> you now have a
> connector that can be used in place of those
> expensive shackles. I
> believe that I figured the cost at less than a buck
> each. I read this
> in one of the old magazines and the author stated
> that using 1/8 " cable
> with cable thimbles and nicopress sleeves that the
> test fixture broke at
> about 2500 lbs pull and the test cable and fastening
> remained intact.
>
>
>
> through
>
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
> Matronics!
>
>
>
>
>
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: welding landing gear |
Hi Friends,
This is for Javier and his landing gear, is in spanish
for a better explanation... you can use this
translator page:
http://www.systransoft.com/
Helps to improve your spanish.
Javier,
Te recomiendo lleves tu tren a soldar con TIG, aca en
Mex ese tipo de trabajo es bastante accesible de
precio, lo puedes dejar punteado y luego lo llevas a
soldar. La ventaja que yo tengo es que mi hermano
Larry es experto en soldadura, el me realiza todos
estos trabajos.
Saludos
Gary Gower
Guadalajara, Jal.
--- javier cruz wrote:
>
>
> Hello friends
> I don't know if i have been making something wrong,
> but look this: for test the landing gear tubing i
> made a "V" 4 feets long with .095 tubing, it was
> welding with oxi-ace an cms32 welding rod, looks
> fine,
> but with 150 lbs apx. of pressure for try to open
> the
> "V" it brake easy, so i try to weld with electrical
> arc 1/8 6013 electrode , and i was much better.
> Maybe
> my skills on oxi-ace welding not be good, but i took
> the way for the electrical welding.
> thanks for your comments.
> Saludos desde Mexico
> Javier Cruz
>
>
> Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
>
>
>
> through
>
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
> Matronics!
>
>
>
>
>
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator cable connections |
Well, the photo did not attached (?)
Saludos
Gary Gower
--- Gary Gower wrote:
>
>
> What I have used for years conecting my cables is
> the
> locks in the chain from the Honda 250 offroad
> motorcycle, got the first one from a spare my
> brother
> Larry takes with him in the Enduro trips.
>
> If it can stand that driving, can stand the pull
> from
> the control stick :-)
>
> I make a aluminum spacer each side of the cable.
> When everything is perfectly fitted, I also make a
> little "v" notch in the middle of the aluminum
> spacer
> and use a safety wire, just in case.
>
> To pull the "C" locking piece, I need plyers and a
> screwdriver, to pull it out, so is practically
> impossible for it to come apart, even without the
> safety wire.
>
> Hope this helps, They cost here about US$ 0.40 a
> piece. Can be found in any Motorcycle dealer.
> Not in Harley Davidson place, they use a band :-)
>
> I attach a photo, not a good one but hope it helps.
>
> Saludos
> Gary Gower
>
>
> --- John or Jean Dilatush
> wrote:
> Jean
> > Dilatush"
> >
> > In response to the conversations about
> connections,
> > shackles etc., here
> > is what I have used.
> >
> > Find a source for number 50 chain such as used in
> > the drive chain on
> > motorcyles. Break it apart by grinding the ends
> of
> > the pins holding it
> > together. Save the two sides of each connecting
> > link (one on each side
> > of the connecting link.). Now using two 3/16"
> > clevis pins put them in
> > place of the original connecting pins that you
> > ground out and removed.
> > Secure the clevis pins with cotter keys. Presto,
> > you now have a
> > connector that can be used in place of those
> > expensive shackles. I
> > believe that I figured the cost at less than a
> buck
> > each. I read this
> > in one of the old magazines and the author stated
> > that using 1/8 " cable
> > with cable thimbles and nicopress sleeves that the
> > test fixture broke at
> > about 2500 lbs pull and the test cable and
> fastening
> > remained intact.
> >
> >
> >
> > through
> >
> > http://www.matronics.com/archives
> > http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
> >
> > Matronics!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
>
>
>
> through
>
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
> Matronics!
>
>
>
>
>
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Greg Cardinal" <gcardinal(at)startribune.com> |
| Subject: | Wire, ferrules, etc... |
Check out:
http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/
Go to summaries for the year 1917. Find report #3:"Report on
Investigations of Aviation Wires and Cables, Their Fastenings and
Terminal Connections" by John A. Roeblings Sons Co., Trenton, New
Jersey.
This a 30 page report in downloadable in PDF form.
A sidenote about this website for anyone who hasn't seen it. It is a
goldmine on information. There are thousands of technical memos, notes
and reports authored by people such as Fred Weick, Max Munk, George
Trayer and many other pioneers.
Back to report number 3-
The wire-
The report refers to "tinned aviator wire" that should be "tough and
ductile as well as strong. All bends should be made without danger of
fracture." Also listed are torsion and bend requirements that would be
useful for testing todays wires. For example, a 6 inch sample of .102
(10 ga.) wire should withstand 18 torsional revolutions without
breaking. It should also withstand 11 bends of 90 deg. over a 3/16
radius without breaking.
Back to ferrules-
The early American standard wasn't a spiral wound wire but a flat
sheet wrapped around the wires with the free end of the wire bent over
the flat ferrule and then the whole thing dipped in solder. This was
difficult to make in the field for repairs, acid flux solder caused
corrosion and field mechanics using torches to melt the solder damaged
the temper of the wire. Average strength was only 80% of the wire.
The Europeans were using the oval shaped, spring wire ferrules. 9
left hand convolutions of spring wire and no solder. These averaged
just 65% of the strength of the wire before the free end of the wire
slipped out of the ferrule.
Other methods tried such as different shaped loops and creative ways
to secure the free end of the wire were tried with varying success.
The best method they came up with was to use a tapered ferrule with a
wedge shaped thimble that would increase the contact friction between
the wire and the ferrule as a load was applied. This was not soldered
and averaged 94% of the full strength of the wire.
Based on this NACA report I would not use Gary Prices round ferrules
without pull testing them.
Greg Cardinal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Greg Cardinal" <gcardinal(at)startribune.com> |
Hi Ian,
I don't think we're trying to over-engineer it at all. All of the design and testing
of these sorts of items has been done many years ago. It's simply an excersize
in education.
Has anyone pull tested a round ferrule to failure?
Greg
>>> "Ian Holland" 02/28 9:50 AM >>>
The concern on the "roundness" or "squashed" ferules is starting to
get to me a bit.
1. The round ones "via Gary Price method" gives a ferule that is
extremely tight to place over the two strands. I.e. there is no slop.
I went out and looked at them and see that any loads in the wires are
in tension only, that is, the ferule is a keeper only. The bent back
end tends to compress the ferule on one side only and prevents the
wire from pulling loose. I would suspect that bend back is the weak
point. The ferule after being formed is very solid , tight and
unmoving. I am not an engineer and don't see the concern on having the
oval, absolutely tight ferule. Can someone explain what I am missing?
2. If any one has access to the "Original Piet" can they look and see
what Bernie used? Round or oval?
The next step will be to take the round unit and test tension to
failure. The manual from Don explains that the brace wires should only
be tensioned enough to allow the tail to be lifted off the ground by
lifting on the outer tip. As this load (about 30 pounds) is divided by
2, it indicates to me that the wires are only loaded in tension by
about 15 pounds each. The turnbuckles are rated at 2000 pounds. The
wire will be much less than that. The coiled ferule will be much
stronger than the wire.
Is this the case of us trying to "over-engineer" the working design?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Uncertified fabric |
Thanks Mike and everybody for the fabric input.
walt
-----------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael D Cuy" <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Uncertified fabric
>
> Walt- In talking with all the fabric/finishing vendors at Oshkosh I found
> out that dacron is dacron. It all comes from the same mill !!!!! The
> Superflight
> fabric is the same as the Polyfiber fabric is the same as Ceconite fabric.
> Hah ! Funny, isn't it ? Now the way they finish the fabric all varies
> from mfg.
> to mfg.
>
> Anyway, yes- I used the 1.7 oz fabric. Worked well. Fills easier too
> since the
> weave is finer. Also- I bought my fabric from Superflight since they
sold the
> widest rolls. 71" I think ? They called it uncertified fabric, but
> told me it is
> exactly the same as the certified stuff, but sells for much less. Go
figure.
>
> Mike
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | I posted some pics |
I posted some pics of my almost complete wing tank installation, and
finished spoked wheels with brake drums attached.
All on newsgroup...
alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
walt
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ian Holland" <iholland(at)telusplanet.net> |
----- Original Message -----
From: Greg Cardinal <gcardinal(at)startribune.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Ferruls
>
Greg, I haven't done a pull test yet, but I belkieve somewhere about 4
years ago I made up a couple of extra ferrules. If so, I'll give the
pull a try.
> Hi Ian,
> I don't think we're trying to over-engineer it at all. All of the
design and testing of these sorts of items has been done many years
ago. It's simply an excersize in education.
> Has anyone pull tested a round ferrule to failure?
>
> Greg
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | more about Brodhead |
Just wrote to Walt S. in CA about Brodhead......thought I'd share with
those who might be flying in commercially, or otherwise.
Your best bet (in my opinion) would be to fly into Chicago O'Hare I think.
Madison Wisconsin would be a bit closer, but I'll bet the connections will
be messier, or less likely to be non-stop.
I would say you are looking at maybe a 2.5 hour drive from O'Hare to Brodhead.
I just did a MapQuest route and it's 119 miles and they estimate 2 hours,
22 minutes
drive time. Your mileage may vary:)
Madison to Brodhead is 40 miles. They call out for 1 hour 4 minutes.
Then there is Milwaukee....that would be 97 miles and about 2
hours. Milwaukee wouldn't
be bad. Less traffic than Chicago, for sure too.....and the airport is
more easy to get around
since it's not so huge like O'Hare.
Is there a particular event at Brodhead that I don't wanna
miss? What would I miss flying in on the 20th and leaving on the 29th?
The only thing you don't want to miss at Brodhead would be SATURDAY.
Friday planes are coming in and that's a good day too. Saturday is the
most busy, and usually on Sunday they split early. With the change of
schedule
it's hard to say what will happen, but Saturday is usually the best day at
Brodhead.
They don't have any specific events either....just the pancake breakfasts
and lunch
and dinner that the EAA chapter and volunteers put on.
For motels, Brodhead has zip. Zero. Nada. Camping is easy on the
airport but there
is only one shower for men, one for women so that can be a drag.
We camped a few years, but the last time enjoyed a nice room in Monroe, a
town not
too far from Brodhead. Small town, but at least motels and a few decent
eat places.
Brodhead is a small, small, small town. Up until what, 3 years ago they
did not have
a McDonalds even !
Do I need to stay at Oshkosh 4 days to see everything? Could I
leave on the 27th or 28th and still have my fix?
I've found that I could easily spend the week at Oshkosh, but I'm usually
burned-out
and saturated after 3 days of it. It depends on the weather too. In 1999
it was so
hot we couldn't wait to get out of there....then other years its totally
pleasant.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mboynton(at)excite.com |
| Subject: | Re: I posted some pics |
Walt,
I tried that site as: alt.binaries.pictures.aviation, but didn't get
anything. Where did I go wrong? I'd like to take a look at your wing tank
installation.
Thanks,
Mark Boynton
>
> I posted some pics of my almost complete wing tank installation, and
> finished spoked wheels with brake drums attached.
> All on newsgroup...
> alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
> walt
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John or Jean Dilatush" <Dilatush(at)amigo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator connections & shackles |
----- Original Message -----
From: "del magsam" <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Elevator connections & shackles
>
> I seem to be missing the point on these shackles.
> where are you using them? is it to connect the cable
> loop to the fittings on the spar?
>
Del,
you can use this "shackle" set up anyplace that you need to connect a cable
to the attach point on the elevator, rudder, bell crank, brace point or etc,
etc, etc.
regards,
John
--- John or Jean Dilatush wrote:
> > Dilatush"
> >
> > As an addendum to my message about using number 50
> > chain for shackles, I
> > checked my invoices today and found that I was able
> > to purchase the
> > chain at a farm implement dealer for $2.99 per foot.
> > This was in Feb of
> > 1998. I think that about 2 feet will provide more
> > that enough material
> > for all the shackles you need for a Pietenpol.
> > Cheap, huh?
> >
> >
> >
> > through
> >
> > http://www.matronics.com/archives
> > http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
> >
> > Matronics!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John or Jean Dilatush" <Dilatush(at)amigo.net> |
| Subject: | Cable connections & Shackles |
Del,
Since this computer is smarter than I am, I will reply to your inquiry
this way.
You can use this "Shackle" setup any place that you need to connect a
cable to an attach point--such as the elevators, rudder, ailerons, drag
and antidrag wires in the wings, bracing cables etc, etc, etc. "Try it,
you'll like it"
John
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: I posted some pics |
Mark,
It's not a web site, it's one of the newsgroups usually hooked with your
email, on program like "outlook express". Go to whatever you would to read
the news. Maybe one of the more computer literate people can answer.
walt
-----------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: <mboynton(at)excite.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: I posted some pics
>
> Walt,
>
> I tried that site as: alt.binaries.pictures.aviation, but didn't get
> anything. Where did I go wrong? I'd like to take a look at your wing
tank
> installation.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mark Boynton
>
>
>
>
> >
> > I posted some pics of my almost complete wing tank installation, and
> > finished spoked wheels with brake drums attached.
> > All on newsgroup...
> > alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
> > walt
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Part I of my new article for the NL |
In a message dated 2/27/01 9:36:07 PM Pacific Standard Time,
BOBKA(at)compuserve.com writes:
> I have the Curtiss drawing if you want I can mail it to you. SAE aviation
>
Yes ,
Doug Bryant
720 N Sandpiper
Wichita Ks 67230
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Part I of my new article for the NL |
In a message dated 2/27/01 9:38:57 PM Pacific Standard Time,
BOBKA(at)compuserve.com writes:
>
Ok! Give me your address. Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
Concerning the suggestion for the turtledeck stringers posted by...
"Michael Brusilow"
> A suggestion;
>
> Two methods to attach the stringers to the formers:
> 1) notch the formers or:
> 2) no sweat method, lay the stringers on the formers, line them up,then
> notch individual pieces of ply, notch them, set them on the stringers, &
> glue them to the formers.
>
> Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )
After taking 3 months @ 1 nite a week to finish the turtledeck using
suggestion #1, NOW he tells me about suggestion #2! (sigh). =;)
Thanks,
Rodger
Piet in progress
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | more about Brodhead |
FYI,
Just east of Belvidere, IL, on the way from O'Hare to Brodhead, is a little
town called Union, IL. It has a fantastic railroad museum, called the
Illinois Railroad Museum with lots of old stuff and you can ride the
trolleys and the trains as many times as you wish. I went last year during
Brodhead as an excursion and was the best eight bucks per person of
vacation enjoyment I have had in a long time.
Imagine a steam locamotive and tender 120 feet long, used to haul the
frieght from Omaha to Salt Lake City because the diesels were not powerful
enough to get over the mountains until the sixties!!1
I am not necessarily a railroad guy except that I am glad we have them so I
can navigate.
Chris Bobka
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
If you read the NACA report form about 1922, it will tell you that the
failure mode of the ferrule type wire end treatment is that the bent over
end, which literally holds the whole thing together, will, under load,
straighten itself out and pull through the ferrule. One of the the fixes
that satisfied these scientists was to use the oval ferrule and solder the
entire connection without using a flame which will ruin the temper of the
wire. The preferred method was to dip the fitting into a ladle of melted
solder after the fitting was doused in nonacid flux. The solder joint
depends on the surface areas of all the parts being a large number of units
and the parts in very close proximity to each other so the load can be
taken very effectively in shear by the solder. If you use the round
ferrules and even if you solder, the contact areas are very small and the
benefit of soldering will not be achieved since the pulling force will
overcome the minimal shearing strength of the small contact area soldered.
The loads on the horizontal tail when maneuvering are quite a bit more than
just holding up the tail by the end of the horizontal stabilizer. We are
looking at hundred of lbs of air load plus abrupt loads from turbulence
that will cause a g meter in any airplane to bump up to 4 or 5 g's. Loads
imposed on the structure during a rough field takeoff can even exceed these
air loads. Also the rudder and vertical stabilizer pass their loads
through these wires. Do a full rudder slip and calculate the load on the
two wires (on one side as the other two will be slack since it is taking a
compressive load), then add in the effects of the horizontal stab load..
Chris Bobka
TC
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Elevator connections & shackles |
In a message dated 2/28/01 4:28:21 PM Pacific Standard Time,
Dilatush(at)amigo.net writes:
> > I seem to be missing the point on these shackles.
> > where are you using them? is it to connect the cable
> > loop to the fittings on the spar?
> >
> Del,
> you can use this "shackle" set up anyplace that you need to connect a cable
> to the attach point on the elevator, rudder, bell crank, brace point or etc,
> etc, etc.
> regards,
> John
>
>
>
Del,
Maybe you are unclear on what constitutes a shackle. lt is actually an
assembly made from 2 chain pieces, 2 clevis bolts, 2 castle nuts, 2 cotter
pins put together. I also went to the Kansas Av museum today and got a
shackle from a 1923 Laird Swallow. This shackle is easy to make so I will
put a picture of it on here somehow. The museum also has a punch press die
for the blankings. I am getting a price quote now. Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Brusilow" <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
"I tried that site as: alt.binaries.pictures.aviation, but didn't get
anything. Where did I go wrong? I'd like to take a look at your wing
tank
installation."
Type "Aviation" in the header. The alt binaries will be in the displayed
list.
Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeffery Lorimor <jlorimor(at)willinet.net> |
| From: | "Carl Loar" <skycarl(at)megsinet.net> |
| Subject: | I posted some pics |
Walt,,, those came out really nice. The tank and wheels are sharp. I'm
thinking of doing my tank in fiberglass.
Carl
Please visit my website at
www.megsinet.net/skycarl
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of walter evans
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: I posted some pics
Mark,
It's not a web site, it's one of the newsgroups usually hooked with your
email, on program like "outlook express". Go to whatever you would to read
the news. Maybe one of the more computer literate people can answer.
walt
-----------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: <mboynton(at)excite.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: I posted some pics
>
> Walt,
>
> I tried that site as: alt.binaries.pictures.aviation, but didn't get
> anything. Where did I go wrong? I'd like to take a look at your wing
tank
> installation.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mark Boynton
>
>
>
>
> >
> > I posted some pics of my almost complete wing tank installation, and
> > finished spoked wheels with brake drums attached.
> > All on newsgroup...
> > alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
> > walt
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "oil can" <oilcanbob(at)hotmail.com> |
Just an FYI here.
I've been reading up on aircraft finishes. It seems that the standard
aircraft finish is nitrate dope with buterate dope over the top of the
nitrate.
This done, because buterate wont stick to polester fabric...WRONG !
From what I have read, just about nothing will stick to polyester fabric.
Not nitrate dope, not stits vinyl, not buterate, not house paint.. They all
attach to fabric by mechanical lock.
Mechanical lock :
The dope...seeps thru the weve of the fabric, and attaches to it like the
plaster and lath in an old fachioned house.
The natural question then is, why must we use some special dope/paint if
they all lock the same way, and if none of the finishes which I have
mentioned will naturally block UV ?
The nitrate/Buterate nitrate process....Nitrate dope does not shrink. It is
painted into the fabric to fill the weave. Next a thin layer of buterate is
sprayed on. Buterate shrinks.. a lot! If buterate were applied directly to
the polyester fabric, in time,it would shrink excessively, distorting the
airframe, and/or pulling itself out of the weave of polester fabric. IE:
Peeling.
So...nitrate is sprayed on first, then a thin layer of buterate dope.
A thin layer of buterate, not a thick layer, for the same reason that a thin
kid can hang on to the monkey bars better than a fat kid. There is more lock
per mass.
Thick layers then have less lock per mass.
Ok, what does this have to do with house paint ? Well it seems to me, that
if there is a problem with house paint on fabric, there would be two reasons
why.
1. House paint will not block UV. This problem easily fixted with silvar,
....or black paint. (My own choice would be silvar)
2. Since all paints, aircraft type, and otherwise, which are used on
polyester fabric, mechanically lock into the fabric...the problem with house
paint, may be the same as the problem with buterate dope,,,that it may
shrink, and pull itself away from the fabric, causing peeling.
Some of the guys on this list seem to have used house paints successfully,
so it seems natural to me that they will work, assiming that they won't
shrink over time, peeling themselves away from the fabric,,,. And assuming
that they can be made to block UV. And lastly that they will withstand
fabric drumming.
MY 2 cents, it doesn't make me right.
Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Brusilow" <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
As difficult it is to fuel the center section tank, it be made somewhat
easier by locating the filler neck at the fwd corner of the tank rather
than at the center of the tank.
Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William C. Beerman" <wcb(at)pliantsystems.com> |
| Subject: | Fairlead material |
Worked last night to install elevator and rudder cables,
and to route control cables to the tail.
Does anyone have any good ideas for fairlead material to
guide cables through the side of the fuse, and to guide
rudder cables under the rear seat? I've thought about
using pulleys under the rear seat.
Also, it looks like I'll need to raise the elevator bellcrank
some to prevent interference between the upper elevator cable
and the front of the horizontal stab. I thought I had used all
the tricks I've seen others use to prevent this, but I must
have missed something. I've also seen the nyon rub strips some
have used at the front of the stab, but I'd really like to
eliminate the problem altogether if possible.
Lastly, I used a larger pulley than plans at the front of the
torque tube to maximize bend radius of that cable (as suggested
by others on this list). Unfortunately, this screwed up the
control geometry such that there's a change in cable tension as
the stick is moved fore and aft. I think I can fix this by
moving the front pulley back on the torque tube a little. Anyone
have any experience here?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Meadows" <gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fairlead material |
William,
I was looking at mine the other night, and I think I'm going to use
pulleys under the seat for the rudder cables too, that's a pretty big change
of direction for a fairlead seems to me like. I think most fairlead material
is a phenolic material. But I don't know why some sort of plastic wouldn't
work and even be better. Wicks or ACS has it.
Is your elevator cable still hitting the leading edge of the horizontal
stabilizer with the stick centered? There's no way to prevent this on the
ground, but with the elevator in the flying position, it should be plenty
clear. Those rub pads are just for when the plane is sitting on the ground.
You might engineer some sort of control lock to hold the stick more or less
centered while the plane is parked.
No torque tube knowledge yet. But soon!
Gary Meadows
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Greg Cardinal" <gcardinal(at)startribune.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fairlead material |
Dale and I used nylon tubing as a fairlead. We have small storage compartments
under the rear seat and didn't want anything interfering with the rudder cables
so they have been encased in the tubing.
Using a larger pulley shouldn't have changed the control geometry. It sounds more
like a parallelogram issue. Picture an imaginary line running from the upper
cable attachment hole in the elevator horn to the lower attachment hole. This
line should pass through the center of the hinge pin.
likewise on the bellcrank.
A lot of people just live with varying cable tension.
Greg Cardinal
>>> "William C. Beerman" 03/01 9:15 AM >>>
Worked last night to install elevator and rudder cables,
and to route control cables to the tail.
Does anyone have any good ideas for fairlead material to
guide cables through the side of the fuse, and to guide
rudder cables under the rear seat? I've thought about
using pulleys under the rear seat.
Also, it looks like I'll need to raise the elevator bellcrank
some to prevent interference between the upper elevator cable
and the front of the horizontal stab. I thought I had used all
the tricks I've seen others use to prevent this, but I must
have missed something. I've also seen the nyon rub strips some
have used at the front of the stab, but I'd really like to
eliminate the problem altogether if possible.
Lastly, I used a larger pulley than plans at the front of the
torque tube to maximize bend radius of that cable (as suggested
by others on this list). Unfortunately, this screwed up the
control geometry such that there's a change in cable tension as
the stick is moved fore and aft. I think I can fix this by
moving the front pulley back on the torque tube a little. Anyone
have any experience here?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John or Jean Dilatush" <Dilatush(at)amigo.net> |
| Subject: | Covering finishes |
I have noticed a great deal of correspondence regarding the finishing of
fabrics for Piets on this website, and thought that I might be allowed
to put in my two cents worth.
First, I used the non-certified 2.7oz fabric as sold by Super
Flite,(much less expensive) Then used a ceconite adhesive to apply it
along with the tapes.
Second, there was an article in the September 1996 issue of the
"Experimenter" (probably still available from EAA) where a homebuilder
used a combination of black latex house paint applied with a foam brush,
probably so that the bristles would not push the latex through the
fabric which might create runs on the inside. Then the final color coat
was an automotive enamel.
Before starting this job, I phoned Ed Fisher who originated this process
and he assured me that the finish has stood up
over 10 years on his various aircraft.
You might want to get a copy of this article, or give me you mailing
address and I'll make copies for you and send them.
Mine turned out beautifully!
Regards, John
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike" <mikec(at)microlandusa.com> |
| Subject: | Re: covering fabric |
----- Original Message -----
From: <nle97(at)juno.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: covering fabric
>
> Walt,
> I attended a dope and fabric seminar put on by Alexander Airplane
Supply
> a few years ago. The differnce between the certified fabric and the
> non-certified is that a big roll of fabric is placed on a spool and
> rolled out in preset lengths. Each of the lengths on the first part of
> the roll is checked for strength and certified. when Alexander had
> enough of this, they would sell the rest of the smae roll as uncertified.
> All came from the same roll.
> We are way behind where we wanted to be on our project because of
the
> weather, but at this time we are planning on using unbleached musslin
> which is the same as Grade A cotton. Naturally, this will not be
> certified nor even purchased at a aircraft supply house. We plan on
> making a pull tester out of a clamp and a fish acale to test it before we
> use it or even buy a large quantity. This is really easy to do and it
> wouldn't hurt to chaeck any fabric before using it. New cotton shuold
> exceed 8o lbs pull in both directions whereas dacron should exceed 200
> lbs if it is really new. One year old dacron will loose about half its
> strength, so be sure to get new fabric if you want to use dacron.
>
> John Langston
> Pipe Creek, TX
> nle97(at)juno.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com> |
Something that helps me when I fill my wing tank is
that I use 10 liter (about 3 galons) red plastic
containers, instead of the "normal" 20 liter (about
5.5 galons)ones.
Also is easyer to the back, to carry two 10 liter
containers (one in each hand) that one 20 liter in one
hand...
Saludos
Gary Gower
--- Michael Brusilow
wrote:
> Brusilow"
>
> As difficult it is to fuel the center section tank,
> it be made somewhat
> easier by locating the filler neck at the fwd corner
> of the tank rather
> than at the center of the tank.
>
> Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )
>
>
>
> through
>
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
> Matronics!
>
>
>
>
>
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fairlead material |
In a message dated 3/1/01 7:35:20 AM Pacific Standard Time,
gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com writes:
> ,
>
> I was looking at mine the other night, and I think I'm going to use
> pulleys under the seat for the rudder cables too, that's a pretty big
> change
> of direction for a fairlead seems to me like. I think most fairlead
> material
> is a phenolic material. But I don't know why some sort of plastic wouldn't
> work and even be better. Wicks or ACS has it.
>
> Is your elevator cable still hitting the leading edge of the horizontal
> stabilizer with the stick centered? There's no way to prevent this on the
> ground, but with the elevator in the flying position, it should be plenty
> clear. Those rub pads are just for when the plane is sitting on the ground.
> You might engineer some sort of control lock to hold the stick more or less
> centered while the plane is parked.
>
> No torque tube knowledge yet. But soon!
>
>
I use hard wood blocks left over from the ash beams for the ones under the
pilot seat and nothing but a leather doubler on the ones which pass thru the
fabric. If you use pulleys, make sure they have cable jump protection.
Pulleys are not needed, but OK. Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Letting someone fly your Piet |
As an aside......there is no greater joy you'll ever have than letting
a little boy or girl....or better yet a fellow Pietenpol builder do a few
turns while up for a ride in your Piet or GN-1. Put the front stick and
rudders in and share them. I made my stick removable by making the
"stub" from the torque tube the next size up as the "stick" part.
Kind of a socket deal/slip fit. I can
lay the stick next to me while flying and if I want someone to enjoy some
flying I can simply hand them the stick by where your legs go thru to the
front.
One word of caution is that using plans-built rudder pedals in front makes
the tailwheel handing more sensitive than from the rudder bar in the
pilot's seat.
I found this out by letting my experienced hangar owner/buddy Brian fly
from the
back seat, backing me up so I could do a few takeoffs and landings from the
front. The handling is easier (I think) from the back seat.....so even if
you have
Chuck Yeager up front, do the landings yourself or be prepared to possibly
become
an instant flight instructor. I learned this the hard way by letting a
guy do a landing
in mine from the front seat and we gently ground looped on roll out. He
supposedly
had tons of tailwheel time, including Pitts Special time. Yeah,
right. Never again.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fairlead material |
William,
We are using pulleys under our aft seat bulhead to guide the rudder
cables. The best fairlead materials are phenolic, micarta, or teflon --
anything that is hard but non-abrasive. Fairleads should not deflect
cables more than about three degrees per Part 23, really shouldn't
deflect them for common sense. The cables are designed to go through
fabric on the fuselage side and the holes are usually reinforced with a
piece of leather that should be glued on, then covered with another piece
of fabric to keep the leather from eventually peeling off. I've saved a
pair of my old work boots to use for this purpose. It is better to use
actual leather than some of these man-made materials shoes are sometimes
made of today. I have used vinyl in the past and it did seem to work OK
-- haven't heard any complaints anyway.
John Langston
Pipe Creek, TX
nle97(at)juno.com
________________________________________________________________________________
Ian,
You are absolutely correct in your analysis on the tensions and loads of
the empennage. Tail brace wires do not need to be very tight, only snug
enough not to give when the horizontal stabilixer is lifted. The
ferrules designed by Gary Price are quite good enough for this purpose
and are quite tight when wrapped around the two wires. There is a Curtis
Jenny being restored at the airport where we are building our plane and
it has these same type ferrule throughout, and there are a bunch of them.
It certainly would not hurt to make them oval shaped, in fact, it
wouldn't even be a problem. He gave a drawing for a fixture to bend the
wire around -- just make the fixture oval shaped to fit the wires you're
going to use.
Gary Price used baling wire for his brace wires and ferrules, which I
would not want to use. This is too soft. Someone also said that it was
good to solder these ferrules after assembly, without using a flame.
This certainly makes sense. Any cable you make anywhere in the airplane
for any purpose should be pull tested to check for security of the
swedging.
Someone also said that the drag/anti-drag wires in the wings do not need
to be tightly tensioned. This is wrong. I do not have any particular
tension figure at the tip of my tongue, but these wires should be
tightened enough that the wires will hum when plunked like a guitar
string. They don't need to be a "high C", but there needs to be some
tension. These wires keep the wing squared during all the manuevers done
in flight.
Incidently, I was also a technical counselor for our local EAA chapter
a number of years ago.
John Langston
Pipe Creek, TX
nle97(at)juno.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | John Dilatush & Jack Phillips |
Dear Group- Wish we could share photos on this forum more often, but
just wanted to say that we've got some beautiful planes being produced out
there and these guys above have mailed some photos over the past few years
to prove it. If you have any images, Richard DeCosta has a great site for
posting them....not sure if Richard is out there right now, but he's got a heck
of a Piet photo collection.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Greg Cardinal" <gcardinal(at)startribune.com> |
Have any of you guys installed a foothold to facilitate getting into
the the rear cockpit?
If so, where did you place it and how has it worked out?
Greg Cardinal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | cable slack/tension |
>William B. wrote:
> Unfortunately, this screwed up the
>control geometry such that there's a change in cable tension as
>the stick is moved fore and aft.
William- not to worry. This is typical of the Piet control system design.
It drove me nuts because the one cable would go taught, the other would droop.
Guess what ? That's normal. I tried every combination of upper and lower
cable lengths to the elevator bellcrank and there is just no perfect setup.
It's going to do that by nature of the geometry. For this reason make sure you
use pulley guards as shown in the Bingelis books. For sure do this on EVERY
pulley. They are easy and will keep you alive and the cable in the groove
of the
pulley. Plus a good FAA inspector will demand these.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Eldredge <steve(at)byu.edu> |
| Subject: | Covering finishes |
John,
Good to here from you, Glad to be joined by another house paint piet. With
regard to oil can's comments, I had some concerns about peeling, grip to the
fabric, UV protection, and elasticity. I am satisfied after 3.5 years that
I did the right thing by using latex. I haven't been disappointed with its
performance. Other than not having the requirement to reach speeds of 100
mph, houses are subject to nearly all the same demands as airplanes, as far
as finishes go. I have painted cedar shakes on my home painted with latex.
The high quality house paints must be flexible, UV protected, and virtually
all are garanteed against cracking, fading, peeling, etc. At least twice a
day the wood expands and contracts and the paint keeps up.
My paint is obviously an experiment in progress, but I'm happily building
flight time and memories, (not to mention my bank account) waiting for the
first crack!
Steve E.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of John or
Jean Dilatush
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Covering finishes
I have noticed a great deal of correspondence regarding the finishing of
fabrics for Piets on this website, and thought that I might be allowed
to put in my two cents worth.
First, I used the non-certified 2.7oz fabric as sold by Super
Flite,(much less expensive) Then used a ceconite adhesive to apply it
along with the tapes.
Second, there was an article in the September 1996 issue of the
"Experimenter" (probably still available from EAA) where a homebuilder
used a combination of black latex house paint applied with a foam brush,
probably so that the bristles would not push the latex through the
fabric which might create runs on the inside. Then the final color coat
was an automotive enamel.
Before starting this job, I phoned Ed Fisher who originated this process
and he assured me that the finish has stood up
over 10 years on his various aircraft.
You might want to get a copy of this article, or give me you mailing
address and I'll make copies for you and send them.
Mine turned out beautifully!
Regards, John
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
I made a filler for my taylorcraft that would work
good on a piet also. A horizontal pipe section about
2-3 ft long with a downturn into the tank and an
upturn at the other end for the funnel to fit in. A
long leg onthe outboard end to support it on the
ground. So you are filling it over the ground instead
of the airplane. I also added a water trap filter in
it and put a float on the inboard end to tell me when
it is full. works absolutely perfect no more spilled
gas on the airplane and no overfills.
--- Gary Gower wrote:
>
>
> Something that helps me when I fill my wing tank is
> that I use 10 liter (about 3 galons) red plastic
> containers, instead of the "normal" 20 liter (about
> 5.5 galons)ones.
>
> Also is easyer to the back, to carry two 10 liter
> containers (one in each hand) that one 20 liter in
> one
> hand...
>
> Saludos
>
> Gary Gower
>
>
> --- Michael Brusilow
> wrote:
> > Brusilow"
> >
> > As difficult it is to fuel the center section
> tank,
> > it be made somewhat
> > easier by locating the filler neck at the fwd
> corner
> > of the tank rather
> > than at the center of the tank.
> >
> > Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )
> >
> >
> >
> > through
> >
> > http://www.matronics.com/archives
> > http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
> >
> > Matronics!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
>
>
>
> through
>
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
> Matronics!
>
>
>
>
>
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fairlead material |
It wasn't the bigger pulley that did it. the arm
behind the seat (what is it called) is the culprit.
instead of all the holes being in line. the outboard
holes need to be moved back from center .625 of an
inch. use a piece of conduit or wood and experiment.
does the trick.
del
> Lastly, I used a larger pulley than plans at the
> front of the
> torque tube to maximize bend radius of that cable
> (as suggested
> by others on this list). Unfortunately, this screwed
> up the
> control geometry such that there's a change in cable
> tension as
> the stick is moved fore and aft. I think I can fix
> this by
> moving the front pulley back on the torque tube a
> little. Anyone
> have any experience here?
>
>
>
> through
>
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
> Matronics!
>
>
>
>
>
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: I posted some pics |
Carl,
Thanks for the good words.
walt
-----------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl Loar" <skycarl(at)megsinet.net>
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: I posted some pics
>
> Walt,,, those came out really nice. The tank and wheels are sharp. I'm
> thinking of doing my tank in fiberglass.
> Carl
>
> Please visit my website at
> www.megsinet.net/skycarl
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of walter
evans
> Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 8:02 PM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: I posted some pics
>
>
>
> Mark,
> It's not a web site, it's one of the newsgroups usually hooked with your
> email, on program like "outlook express". Go to whatever you would to
read
> the news. Maybe one of the more computer literate people can answer.
> walt
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <mboynton(at)excite.com>
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 6:12 PM
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: I posted some pics
>
>
> >
> > Walt,
> >
> > I tried that site as: alt.binaries.pictures.aviation, but didn't get
> > anything. Where did I go wrong? I'd like to take a look at your wing
> tank
> > installation.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Mark Boynton
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > I posted some pics of my almost complete wing tank installation, and
> > > finished spoked wheels with brake drums attached.
> > > All on newsgroup...
> > > alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
> > > walt
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | how to get to Walt's photos..... |
It took me a while too...but here might be an easier way
to see Walt Evan's pretty wheels and fuel tank.
Nice.
Mike C.
http://www.nailnews.com/w/alt.binaries.pictures.aviation/a/53179/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Meadows" <gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: how to get to Walt's photos..... |
Thanks Mike, I'd wondered how to get to those!
Gary
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Meadows" <gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Avweb Article about building a Piet |
Gang,
I just saw on Avweb that one of their writers is setting about building a
Pietenpol. The guy's name is Matt Paxton. The article is called "Wooden It
Be Lovely? -- Taking The Homebuilt Plunge" It might be worth reading!
Of course Avweb is at: http://www.avweb.com/
Gary Meadows
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: how to get to Walt's photos, ferrules? |
| From: | kgardner(at)odu.edu |
03/01/2001 04:41:31 PM
Mike,
Thanks for posting the web address to view Walt's photos. I always find
accessing newsgroups problimatic for some reason. Walt - great photos &
beautiful work! Thanks!
I am going to confess some general ignorance and ask, just what are the
ferrules being discussed supposed to do? I gather they are an alternative
to nicopress fittings? If so, why the interest in them? More aerodynamic? ,
better looking?, more 'historic'? Can someone enlighten me?
Thanks all!
Kip Gardner
Laboratory Manager, ODU
Dept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmospheric Sciences
4600 Elkhorn Avenue
Norfolk, VA 23529
(757)683-5654
Bumper Sticker of the Week:
"Don't Drink and Park - 'Accidents' Cause People"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | flyboy_120(at)webtv.net (Ed G.) |
| Subject: | Re: how to get to Walt's photos..... |
Nice pictures Walt, your tank and center section look great, wheels too!
Thanks
Mike C. for making them available to us
semi computer illiterates!!!!! I tried bringing them up without any
luck the other day .
Ed G.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | flyboy_120(at)webtv.net (Ed G.) |
| Subject: | Brodhead Questions |
Can non-piet planes fly into Brodhead on the weekend of the fly-in? If
so could a
Bonanza land there?? I have a friend in Illinois that I bet I could
talk into flying me over from the Chicgo area.
Ed G. Florida
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fairlead material |
| From: | "D.Dale Johnson" <dd5john(at)juno.com> |
I used 1/4 " id nylon tubing to guide the rudder cables from the front of
the back seat to where the cable will exit the plane. I flared the nylon
tubing with heat where it goes through the plywood under the seat. Then I
used nylon straps to hold the tubing to uprights aft of the rear seat. I
have storage compartments under the seat so I didn't want bare cable
running under the sear. Dale Johnson
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: John Dilatush & Jack Phillips |
In a message dated 3/1/01 2:22:45 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov writes:
<< Dear Group- Wish we could share photos on this forum more often, but
just wanted to say that we've got some beautiful planes being produced out
there and these guys above have mailed some photos over the past few years
to prove it. If you have any images, Richard DeCosta has a great site for
posting them....not sure if Richard is out there right now, but he's got a
heck
of a Piet photo collection.
>>
There is a very good FREE photo site. It would be an ideal place to send your
Piet pictures. They offer 25meg of free photo space, only require an email
address to register, and you can have multiple photo albums that can be
shared with all or password protected. This site is www.photopoint.com
I have used it to store pictures of the 1/4 scale Pietenpol that I am
building.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mac Zirges" <macz(at)netbridge.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Brodhead Questions |
Hello. You will have no problem getting a Bonanza into Brodhead. It is
really a very nice strip.
Just bring your camping gear and set up under the trees and enjoy all the
great airplane camaraderie! You will see a few other modern factory jobs, a
number of antiques, and of course lots of Piets.
Mac in Oregon
-----Original Message-----
From: Ed G. <flyboy_120(at)webtv.net>
Date: Thursday, March 01, 2001 3:32 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Brodhead Questions
>
> Can non-piet planes fly into Brodhead on the weekend of the fly-in? If
>so could a
>Bonanza land there?? I have a friend in Illinois that I bet I could
>talk into flying me over from the Chicgo area.
> Ed G. Florida
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: how to get to Walt's photos..... |
Mike,
WOW,,, how'd you do that? There you go, theres always a Piet guy that can
figure anything out.
thanks,
walt
-----------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael D Cuy" <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: how to get to Walt's photos.....
>
> It took me a while too...but here might be an easier way
> to see Walt Evan's pretty wheels and fuel tank.
> Nice.
>
> Mike C.
>
> http://www.nailnews.com/w/alt.binaries.pictures.aviation/a/53179/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack Phillips <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fairlead material |
William C. Beerman wrote:
>
>
> Worked last night to install elevator and rudder cables,
> and to route control cables to the tail.
>
> Does anyone have any good ideas for fairlead material to
> guide cables through the side of the fuse, and to guide
> rudder cables under the rear seat? I've thought about
> using pulleys under the rear seat.
>
> Also, it looks like I'll need to raise the elevator bellcrank
> some to prevent interference between the upper elevator cable
> and the front of the horizontal stab. I thought I had used all
> the tricks I've seen others use to prevent this, but I must
> have missed something. I've also seen the nyon rub strips some
> have used at the front of the stab, but I'd really like to
> eliminate the problem altogether if possible.
>
> Lastly, I used a larger pulley than plans at the front of the
> torque tube to maximize bend radius of that cable (as suggested
> by others on this list). Unfortunately, this screwed up the
> control geometry such that there's a change in cable tension as
> the stick is moved fore and aft. I think I can fix this by
> moving the front pulley back on the torque tube a little. Anyone
> have any experience here?
>
Hi Bill,
I'm at about the same stage on mine - working on the control system.
I'm definitely going to add some pulleys under the rear seat, rather
than just drilling a hole through the wood and letting the up-elevator
cable saw it's way through the seat.
I haven't started making fairleads for the fuselage yet. I made the
fairleads for the aileron cables out of a very dense, hard wood called
"Purpleheart" that I happened to have on hand. I sawed a small block in
two lengthwise, then drilled a couple of holes and bolted the two halves
back together. Then I drilled the hole for the cable and used a cove
bit for a router in my drill press to put a nice large radius all around
on both sides of the hole. It works pretty well.
Is your Piet project up at Lake Ridge airport? If so I might fly my old
Cessna 140 up one weekend and look at it.
Good luck,
Jack Phillips
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: how to get to Walt's photos, ferrules? |
In a message dated 3/1/01 1:42:51 PM Pacific Standard Time, kgardner(at)odu.edu
writes:
> I am going to confess some general ignorance and ask, just what are the
> ferrules being discussed supposed to do? I gather they are an alternative
> to nicopress fittings? If so, why the interest in them? More aerodynamic? ,
> better looking?, more 'historic'? Can someone enlighten me?
>
>
Kip,
The ferrules are used with hard wire bracing which is called out on the F&GM
and improved aircamper plans in certain places. The wire and the ferrules
are high carbon steel (music wire). The wire is easy to find, but the
ferrules are not manufactured any more so builders today substitute aircraft
cable. The discussion started as I recall by making some look alike hard
wire bracing from low carbon steel wire. That opened a can of worms, but
this stuff is really interesting. I was able to visit the Kansas AV museum
yesterday and see a 1926 Laird Swallow wing just completed and it has hard
wire in it. It looked really nice. They gave me some sample ferrules which
they had made at Kansas Spring Co. to spec. Not sure where this will end.
Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Brodhead Questions |
I took my Seneca in there last year with no problem. I used the approach for
Janesville and then direct in. The field is in good shape.
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ed G." <flyboy_120(at)webtv.net>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Brodhead Questions
>
> Can non-piet planes fly into Brodhead on the weekend of the fly-in? If
> so could a
> Bonanza land there?? I have a friend in Illinois that I bet I could
> talk into flying me over from the Chicgo area.
> Ed G. Florida
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mckellars" <mckellar(at)bluebonnet.net> |
Has anyone used the Azusa wheels and brakes ? Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Bell" <mbell(at)sctcorp.com> |
03/02/2001 10:22:40 AM
Check the archives. There are some comments on some of these not to
use and some that you may want to try.
Mike
"Mckellars"
To:
Sent by: cc:
owner-pietenpol-list-server@mat Subject: Pietenpol-List:
wheels
ronics.com
03/02/2001 10:07 AM
Please respond to
pietenpol-list
Has anyone used the Azusa wheels and brakes ? Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Warren D. Shoun" <wbnb(at)earthlink.net> |
Have the Azusa wheels on my Sonerai. Work just fine. Had the
brakes....were almost worthless.
Warren
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fairlead material |
I found a wealth of mat'l at SEARS HARDWARE STORES. They are a Sears store,
but only stuff like Home Depot or 84 Lumber stuff. They have the biggest
display of the most unusual gadgetry I've ever seen. Found nylon
"bushings" I guess you'd call them. 1/2" OD about 1" lg with various size
ID's If you have a lathe , you can cut a shoulder on them,, ,,,or what I
did was to cut or file ( put a screw through them and spin them in the drill
press) circular grooves near the center. Since T-88 won't stick to nylon (I
think) , when glued in ,the glue will grab the rings and can't slide out.
Think cost was about $.50 ea.
walt
-----------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: "William C. Beerman" <wcb(at)pliantsystems.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fairlead material
>
> Worked last night to install elevator and rudder cables,
> and to route control cables to the tail.
>
> Does anyone have any good ideas for fairlead material to
> guide cables through the side of the fuse, and to guide
> rudder cables under the rear seat? I've thought about
> using pulleys under the rear seat.
>
> Also, it looks like I'll need to raise the elevator bellcrank
> some to prevent interference between the upper elevator cable
> and the front of the horizontal stab. I thought I had used all
> the tricks I've seen others use to prevent this, but I must
> have missed something. I've also seen the nyon rub strips some
> have used at the front of the stab, but I'd really like to
> eliminate the problem altogether if possible.
>
> Lastly, I used a larger pulley than plans at the front of the
> torque tube to maximize bend radius of that cable (as suggested
> by others on this list). Unfortunately, this screwed up the
> control geometry such that there's a change in cable tension as
> the stick is moved fore and aft. I think I can fix this by
> moving the front pulley back on the torque tube a little. Anyone
> have any experience here?
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John or Jean Dilatush" <Dilatush(at)amigo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fairlead material |
----- Original Message -----
From: "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fairlead material
>
> I found a wealth of mat'l at SEARS HARDWARE STORES. They are a Sears
store,
> but only stuff like Home Depot or 84 Lumber stuff. They have the biggest
> display of the most unusual gadgetry I've ever seen. Found nylon
> "bushings" I guess you'd call them. 1/2" OD about 1" lg with various size
> ID's If you have a lathe , you can cut a shoulder on them,, ,,,or what
I
> did was to cut or file ( put a screw through them and spin them in the
drill
> press) circular grooves near the center. Since T-88 won't stick to nylon
(I
> think) , when glued in ,the glue will grab the rings and can't slide out.
> Think cost was about $.50 ea.
> walt
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "William C. Beerman" <wcb(at)pliantsystems.com>
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 10:15 AM
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fairlead material
>
>
>
> >
> > Worked last night to install elevator and rudder cables,
> > and to route control cables to the tail.
> >
> > Does anyone have any good ideas for fairlead material to
> > guide cables through the side of the fuse, and to guide
> > rudder cables under the rear seat? I've thought about
> > using pulleys under the rear seat.
> >
> > Also, it looks like I'll need to raise the elevator bellcrank
> > some to prevent interference between the upper elevator cable
> > and the front of the horizontal stab. I thought I had used all
> > the tricks I've seen others use to prevent this, but I must
> > have missed something. I've also seen the nyon rub strips some
> > have used at the front of the stab, but I'd really like to
> > eliminate the problem altogether if possible.
> >
> > Lastly, I used a larger pulley than plans at the front of the
> > torque tube to maximize bend radius of that cable (as suggested
> > by others on this list). Unfortunately, this screwed up the
> > control geometry such that there's a change in cable tension as
> > the stick is moved fore and aft. I think I can fix this by
> > moving the front pulley back on the torque tube a little. Anyone
> > have any experience here?
> >
> >Walt,
re: your fairleads, I think you might want to have the inside diameter large
enough to not only thread your cables through now, but also the cable ends
in the future if needed.
Regards,
John, NX114D
dilatush(at)amigo.net Salida, Colorado
Just finishing up, working on cowlings now.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Sippola" <sippola(at)escape.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Foothold / Shackles |
Greg
I am putting in a rear step over the lower longeron. I initially cut out
a small rectangle under the seat bottom right beside the brace the seat
back fastens to. Worked fine until I fastened on the wing center section
at which point it became useless. I figure about 12 inches behind the seat
back should work well.
On the shackle discussion, I have modified most of the attachment points
with an extra tab so that the cable eye goes between two tabs and is held
in place with a bolt. Works great on the rudder bar, fine on the rudder
pedals, not quite so neat on the control pivot thing behind the seat (Can't
remember the term at this moment) with 3 tabs used for bolting the two
cable eyes between. As I have forks on one end of most of my turnbuckles
that also removes the requirements for several shackles. And I have found
about 8 or so surplus shackles.
Wayne Sippola, Winnipeg
----------
> From: Greg Cardinal <gcardinal(at)startribune.com>
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Foothold
> Date: Thursday, March 01, 2001 1:23 PM
>
>
> Have any of you guys installed a foothold to facilitate getting into
> the the rear cockpit?
> If so, where did you place it and how has it worked out?
>
> Greg Cardinal
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "SAM & JAN MARINUCCI" <srmjem(at)ezol.com> |
| Subject: | Welding or Brazing |
Hi Guys,
I'm working on the control system this weekend and after studing the plans
again for the umpteenth time I can't figure out why it calls for welding on
some components and brazing on others. I realize brazing doesn't have the
strength of a weld so why not weld everything instead of brazing the few
items indicated on the plans? Am I missing something here?
My progress after two years of on again, off again work on the Piet
consists of the fuselage, tail, landing gear, and 30 wing ribs completed. I
have an A-65 to install but it needs to be majored since it's been in
storage for the past 20 years.
My wife and I are planning to attend Brodhead this year and if I'm lucky
maybe get a ride in an Air Camper. I've never flown in one but have seen
quite a few of them. The two that really impressed me for the quality of
workmanship displayed were Mike Cuys' and Jim Malleys' planes. They really
set the standard with their attention to detail and craftsmanship.
Sam
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Welding or Brazing |
| From: | "D.Dale Johnson" <dd5john(at)juno.com> |
You can braze mild steel . 4130 steel has to be welded. Brazing 4130
will cause it crystallize and crack. Not nice at 5000 '. Dale Johnson.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Welding or Brazing |
Sam,
All the experts that I bounce this off of tell me that brazing and 4130
chrome moly don't mix. They say that if you're using 4130...weld only don't
braze.
walt
-----------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: "SAM & JAN MARINUCCI" <srmjem(at)ezol.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Welding or Brazing
>
> Hi Guys,
>
> I'm working on the control system this weekend and after studing the
plans
> again for the umpteenth time I can't figure out why it calls for welding
on
> some components and brazing on others. I realize brazing doesn't have the
> strength of a weld so why not weld everything instead of brazing the few
> items indicated on the plans? Am I missing something here?
> My progress after two years of on again, off again work on the Piet
> consists of the fuselage, tail, landing gear, and 30 wing ribs completed.
I
> have an A-65 to install but it needs to be majored since it's been in
> storage for the past 20 years.
> My wife and I are planning to attend Brodhead this year and if I'm
lucky
> maybe get a ride in an Air Camper. I've never flown in one but have seen
> quite a few of them. The two that really impressed me for the quality of
> workmanship displayed were Mike Cuys' and Jim Malleys' planes. They
really
> set the standard with their attention to detail and craftsmanship.
>
> Sam
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack Phillips <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Welding or Brazing |
SAM & JAN MARINUCCI wrote:
>
> why not weld everything instead of brazing the few
> items indicated on the plans? Am I missing something here?
>
Hi Sam,
The main reason to braze some of the components would be to avoid
warpage. For example, the walking beam that the elevator cables attach
to is pretty thin material, and welding it to the 3/4" tube would
probably cause a lot of warpage. That joint sees almost no stress, and
in fact, if it broke, the walking beam would still function, spinning
around the shaft, so that joint would be a good candidate for brazing.
However, for high stress joints like the rudder bar pivot bolt, I welded
mine. I haven't made the walking beam yet (that's for this weekend) and
haven't decided whether to weld it or braze it. I've never done any
brazing, but my neighbor across the road says he can teach me in about
30 seconds.
Good luck,
Jack
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | leonstefanhutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan) |
I went the Hegar rout . Simular to Azusa but stronger. I used the
Hager axel, hub and brakes, but used aluminum atv. wheels and skined
tires. I took one complete side, and one shock strut (no bungee cord)
to work last night and weighed it on a postal scale. It camein at 24
lbs. Leon S.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Welding or Brazing |
Guys,
Any book on welding/brazing will tell you not to braze 4130. It has
something to do with embrittlement. The carbon steels that Bernard used
had no limitation in this respect. I suggest you do your own research and
come to your own conclusions.
Chris Bobka
EAA Tech Counselor
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Part I of my new article for the NL |
Doug,
Greg Cardinal and I are putting together a package of stuff relating to the
aircraft wire and ferrules. You should have it by next friday.
Chris Bobka
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Williams" <lnawms(at)msn.com> |
High-end bicycle frames are chrome moly tubes brazed together (usually but not
always into forged terminals) and they see a lot more stress than our fittings.
I doubt that brazing is more prone to alter the make-up of the metal than welding
which requires a much higher temperature.
f"http://explorer.msn.com">http://explorer.msn.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | if you need fuel for those Piet pictures |
I always chocked when I had to buy ink cartridges for my printer ( about
$30.00 a pop). A friend told me about the refill kits for the cartridges,
but I never used one. Picked up one and filled mine today, and its a cinch
to do. The black kit has three ink bottles, and I only used maybe 1/4 of
one bottle to fill it. They say its about $2.50 a fill. You can probably
get it at any Walmart. Made by Ontel Products. Can get either the black
kit, or the three color kit. Or get it on line.
http://www.ontelproducts.com/
walt
-----------------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Part I of my new article for the NL |
In a message dated 3/3/01 7:41:33 AM Pacific Standard Time,
BOBKA(at)compuserve.com writes:
> Greg Cardinal and I are putting together a package of stuff relating to the
> aircraft wire and ferrules. You should have it by next friday.
>
>
Excellent! Thanks Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
Guys,
I will quote from Performance Welding by Richard Finch who is an expert in
welding, is in the aerospace industry, and wrote the parts of AC 43-1B
relating to welding. He says, and I quote without permission:
"Brazing Steel
Always avoid brazing 4130 steel. The reason to not braze chromemoly is
that the steel has a definite grain structure that actually opens up at
medium red brazing temperatures. When brazing alloy is melted onto the
steel surface, it flows easily into the many small cracks and crevices in
the chromemoly steeel. Then as the braze joint cools, the brass will not
compress and it forces MAJOR cracks to form in the 4130 steel. Often, a
brazed 4130 steel part will crack completely in two before your eyes as it
cools.
Mild steel (1020, 1025, and so on) is ready made for
brazing..........Brazing, when done correctly, can last as long as any
other metal-joining method. And it can be as strong as fusion welding when
it is done correctly."
Chris Bobka
EAA Tech Counselor
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net> |
I'm a little confused here. Is brazing defined as all gas welding? Should
4130 all be arc welded?
Dick N.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: welding/brazing |
brazing is using a gas torch with a brazing rod.
welding is also using a gas torch, but using a rod
that is of the same material that you're welding (4130
in this case) in brazing you only heat the metal
enough for the brazing to flow. when you weld you heat
the material to a melting point, pool it together and
add material to it from your rod. I took my pieces to
the local tractor dealership and they welded it with
an electric torch and filler rod. arc welding is a
no-no on 4130.
are you flying your seneca to sun n fun this year?
--- Richard Navratil wrote:
> Navratil"
>
> I'm a little confused here. Is brazing defined as
> all gas welding? Should
> 4130 all be arc welded?
> Dick N.
>
>
>
> through
>
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
> Matronics!
>
>
>
>
>
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
A calrification of someone ele's comment:
4130 takes to TIG welding like ducks to water. Tig is a form of arc
welding as heat is generated by an arc of electricity. Just about any
factory produced 4130 steel component for an aircraft made in the last 40
years is TIG welded.
The arc welding style where you use a stick of steel as the electrode is
usually reserved for very large thicknesses and is not seen often in
aircraft use because we just don't use materials of that size.
MIG welding can be used but homebuilders have generally not had the same
degreee of success as aircraft manufacturers in this process. Best to stay
away from it.
That leaves oxy acetylene for the poor folks and TIG for the high rollers.
Chris Bobka
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Owen Davies" <owen(at)davies.mv.com> |
| Subject: | Re: welding/brazing |
Among other useful comments, del magsam said:
> arc welding is a no-no on 4130.
Does anyone know whether the wartime Stinson
production used 4130 or 1025? I spent a couple
of hours one evening chatting with Emmett Griffen,
who ran their welding shop, and he told of converting
to arc welding during WWII. It wasn't easy. At first,
they had two guys running from station to station
grinding out bad welds, but after about six months
they had it down. My impression was that they had
been using 4130, but at this point I'm not sure.
Anyway, grossly impractical for us, but maybe
not impossible.
OwenDavies
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "SAM & JAN MARINUCCI" <srmjem(at)ezol.com> |
Guys,
I'm the one that started this discussion about welding vs
brazing. It seems welding is the way to go where the plans call for
brazing, at least that's what I'm going to do now.
Thanks to all who responded to my question. Thats the neat thing
about this discussion group. A builder can get an almost immediate answer to
any problem that comes up, and the problems or questions do arise during the
building process.
Sam
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Welding 4130 |
That is true: TIG welding is for experts, I have the
fortune to have five TIG welding machines in our
factory, but my brother Larry is the expert.
I dont practice that much, I am in charge of the
Fiberglass section, so when I needed to weld the
fuselage of the Ramsey BTub, one of the welders did it
for me and Larry was checking the work... I built the
fiberglass parts that Larry needs for his projets...
Works fine.
I bought a Oxi-Acet welder last year, but have not the
time to learn right now until I finish my projects.
Saludos
Gary Gower
--- Christian Bobka wrote:
> Bobka
>
> A calrification of someone ele's comment:
>
> 4130 takes to TIG welding like ducks to water. Tig
> is a form of arc
> welding as heat is generated by an arc of
> electricity. Just about any
> factory produced 4130 steel component for an
> aircraft made in the last 40
> years is TIG welded.
>
> The arc welding style where you use a stick of steel
> as the electrode is
> usually reserved for very large thicknesses and is
> not seen often in
> aircraft use because we just don't use materials of
> that size.
>
> MIG welding can be used but homebuilders have
> generally not had the same
> degreee of success as aircraft manufacturers in this
> process. Best to stay
> away from it.
>
> That leaves oxy acetylene for the poor folks and TIG
> for the high rollers.
>
> Chris Bobka
>
>
>
> through
>
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
> Matronics!
>
>
>
>
>
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeffrey Wilcox" <CraigWilcox(at)peoplepc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: WELDING/BRAZING |
Chris is right on this one - although there is a method of brazing 4130 that
provides sufficient strength. You use a silicon bronze with a liquid flux
in the acetylene line. This has been used on (mainly) British racing cars
like Lola and McLaren instead of actual welding. This provides tube joins
that are just as tough and flexible as the parent 4130, but is much faster
than welding. It also provides a bit of build up at the joins. DO NOT
BRAZE 4130 without using the proper techniques!
>
> Guys,
>
> I will quote from Performance Welding by Richard Finch who is an expert in
> welding, is in the aerospace industry, and wrote the parts of AC 43-1B
> relating to welding. He says, and I quote without permission:
>
> "Brazing Steel
>
> Always avoid brazing 4130 steel. The reason to not braze chromemoly is
> that the steel has a definite grain structure that actually opens up at
> medium red brazing temperatures. When brazing alloy is melted onto the
> steel surface, it flows easily into the many small cracks and crevices in
> the chromemoly steeel. Then as the braze joint cools, the brass will not
> compress and it forces MAJOR cracks to form in the 4130 steel. Often, a
> brazed 4130 steel part will crack completely in two before your eyes as it
> cools.
>
> Mild steel (1020, 1025, and so on) is ready made for
> brazing..........Brazing, when done correctly, can last as long as any
> other metal-joining method. And it can be as strong as fusion welding
when
> it is done correctly."
>
> Chris Bobka
> EAA Tech Counselor
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Barry Davis" <bed(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Piet List: welding |
In our EAA chapter, we have seen three failures of 4130 tubing on
airplanes that were tig welded. one was a landing gear, motor mount, and
a couple of main structure pieces. All on different aircraft, all
different manufactures, all tig welded. All welds failed or cracked very
close to the weld. It seems that the weld caused a great amount of
stress ajdacent to the weld. The welds were not post weld heat treated
(some call normalizing). At least when gas welding, it is a very simple
process to do the post heat treating.
I own a tig rig, but I bought a Harris aviation torch ( around $110) and
rented tanks. After a class with George Baing and about 20 hours of
practice, welds are looking better that old Cub welds. ( have a welder
look over your shoulder from time to time and cut the welds to look at
your progress)
I decided that investing the 20 hours was worth the piece of mind I get
while flying.
Barry Davis
GN-1
Jr. Ace
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack Phillips <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Welding or Brazing |
Christian Bobka wrote:
>
>
> Guys,
>
> Any book on welding/brazing will tell you not to braze 4130. It has
> something to do with embrittlement. The carbon steels that Bernard used
> had no limitation in this respect. I suggest you do your own research and
> come to your own conclusions.
>
> Chris Bobka
> EAA Tech Counselor
>
Thanks for the tip. I was considering brazing the elevator walking
beam, but since all my steel is 4130, I will stick to welding. I welded
it this afternoon with no problems.
Jack
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Borodent(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Piet List: welding |
In a message dated 3/4/01 5:27:34 PM Eastern Standard Time,
bed(at)mindspring.com writes:
<< I bought a Harris aviation torch ( around $110) >>
is this for oxy acetylene welding or for normallizing tig welds or what??
Henry Williams--- gluing up some ribs tonight
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | javier cruz <javcr(at)yahoo.com> |
Hello listers
About the welding comments here, i have made two
fittings for the landing gear welded with oxi-acet,
just for try the other two were welded with electrical
arc ( i have more confeidence with electrical arc) but
when i been checking the fittings they have some
crakings next to the welding area, now i have to make
two fittings more, maybe the electrical arc is more
strong but with my poor experience like welder,i think
that electrical arc is not for 4130.
Saludos
Javier Cruz
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net> |
| Subject: | Re: welding/brazing |
Thanks for the info Del,
Yes, I'm really hoping to fly down again - if the plane is ready. Right now
it is having both engines and props overhauled and annual inspection. It
should be ready by the end of the month. If not I'll be flying the truck
camper.
Dick N.
----- Original Message -----
From: "del magsam" <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: welding/brazing
>
> brazing is using a gas torch with a brazing rod.
> welding is also using a gas torch, but using a rod
> that is of the same material that you're welding (4130
> in this case) in brazing you only heat the metal
> enough for the brazing to flow. when you weld you heat
> the material to a melting point, pool it together and
> add material to it from your rod. I took my pieces to
> the local tractor dealership and they welded it with
> an electric torch and filler rod. arc welding is a
> no-no on 4130.
> are you flying your seneca to sun n fun this year?
>
> --- Richard Navratil wrote:
> > Navratil"
> >
> > I'm a little confused here. Is brazing defined as
> > all gas welding? Should
> > 4130 all be arc welded?
> > Dick N.
> >
> >
> >
> > through
> >
> > http://www.matronics.com/archives
> > http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
> >
> > Matronics!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Piet List: welding |
Indeed there is great controversy over the noramlizing after welding with
TIG procedure. Richard Finch adamantly says no need to do it. Yet, it is
relatively cheap insurance so I suggest TIG and then normalize.
Chris Bobka
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
Brakes on a Pietenpol? HOW. The original had a rudder bar as no brakes were
required. The Last Original had a tail wheel. Did it have brakes, toe or heel?
These are questions I've tried all these rainy days to answer without final
resolvement. Almost gave up on the whole project yesterday.
I have narrowed it down to two options:
1. Build rudder pedals with hinged toe devices to exert pressure on the Matco
cyl mounted vertically behind with attached resevoir.
2. Weld an extention on the rudder bar and from it have a pivoting toe action
to activate the cyl.
I don't know. Any of you who have solved this one please don't keep it to
yourself. I have Cessna wheel and brakes (Cleveland).
Corky
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Haines" <robertsjunk(at)hotmail.com> |
I have a MIG welder that I plan to use but now I'm a bit concerned. Why
hasn't MIG welding seen as much success as TIG or OxyA?
Robert Haines
Murphysboro, Illinois
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Stress-relieving TIG welds on 4130 |
Barry Davis makes the same point that Tony Bingelis
does in reference to 'normalizing' any TIG welds after the
fact with a torch to a dull cherry red, then allowed to cool
in still air. I found this out after I build and painted my motor
mount for a 65 Cont. I had to strip the paint off, and take a
torch to each weld cluster to eliminate these high stress points
generated during the tig process. Tig was really not hard to
learn, surprisingly. Still can't gas weld worth a hoot.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William C. Beerman" <wcb(at)pliantsystems.com> |
Don't fret, Russ! I happen to have both a MIG setup and an oxy-acetylene
rig, both of which I use for various purposes. MIG's main advantage over
TIG and oxy-acetylene is speed, although that can also be its
disadvantage
as well. I use the different processes for different jobs. For instance,
while
it's perfectly legitimate to MIG weld 4130 tubing, I find that when
setting
up the welder with the proper parameters, the weld needs to travel
a little faster than I'm comfortable with while changing gun angles
around
the tube radius. Therefore I always gas weld small tubing. MIG is great
for welding .090 plate, making jigs, etc. I know an A&P who's a whiz
with MIG
and welds all his fuselages that way. If you're real good with MIG and
your
machine will maintain a good stable arc when set as low as is needed to
weld
20ga. tubing, (or whatever it is you need to weld) then I don't see why
you'd
change.
There's nothing wrong with MIG welding 4130. I've been told that
a certain aircraft manuufacturer MIG welds all its fuselages with no
post-
weld stress relieving whatsoever. I've also found that there are a lot
of
opinions (and old wives tales) about normalizing. Personally, I don't
worry about it for most things, but if I decide to MIG weld my motor
mount,
I'll probably break out the torch afterwards and normalize that critical
part. I like having MIG AND a torch.
One other note- something that was very helpful to me was to take a
welding
course at the local community college. It only cost me about $40 for an
entire
semester- I'm sure I burned up more metal than that!
Have fun!
-Bill
Robert Haines wrote:
>
>
> I have a MIG welder that I plan to use but now I'm a bit concerned. Why
> hasn't MIG welding seen as much success as TIG or OxyA?
>
> Robert Haines
> Murphysboro, Illinois
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
I don't know if anybody has did it on a piet. but
others have put a hand brake actuator on the stick.
I'm going to mt a hydraulic unit off from a atv on the
stick. I don't like the idea of doing a ground loop
while trying to get my heels or toes on the brakes. I
fly a taylorcraft with heel brakes so I know what its
like to do the foot dance trying to run both at the
same time. I know you don't need them except to try
for the next cutoff so you don't have to go all the
way to end.
del
--- Isablcorky(at)aol.com wrote:
> Isablcorky(at)aol.com
>
> Brakes on a Pietenpol? HOW. The original had a
> rudder bar as no brakes were
> required. The Last Original had a tail wheel. Did it
> have brakes, toe or heel?
> These are questions I've tried all these rainy days
> to answer without final
> resolvement. Almost gave up on the whole project
> yesterday.
> I have narrowed it down to two options:
> 1. Build rudder pedals with hinged toe devices to
> exert pressure on the Matco
> cyl mounted vertically behind with attached
> resevoir.
> 2. Weld an extention on the rudder bar and from it
> have a pivoting toe action
> to activate the cyl.
> I don't know. Any of you who have solved this one
> please don't keep it to
> yourself. I have Cessna wheel and brakes
> (Cleveland).
> Corky
>
>
>
> through
>
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
> Matronics!
>
>
>
>
>
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William C. Beerman" <wcb(at)pliantsystems.com> |
Corky,
I tried a third option based on something I saw at Brodhead two years
ago:
made separate toe pedals which mounted on the fuselage sides about a
foot
above the rudder bar. I could take some pix and send a drawing if you
need,
but it would probably take me about a week. I made up mine based on the
pix
I took at Brodhead and my own dimensions. (I have Clevelands also).
-Bill
Isablcorky(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> Brakes on a Pietenpol? HOW. The original had a rudder bar as no brakes were
> required. The Last Original had a tail wheel. Did it have brakes, toe or heel?
> These are questions I've tried all these rainy days to answer without final
> resolvement. Almost gave up on the whole project yesterday.
> I have narrowed it down to two options:
> 1. Build rudder pedals with hinged toe devices to exert pressure on the Matco
> cyl mounted vertically behind with attached resevoir.
> 2. Weld an extention on the rudder bar and from it have a pivoting toe action
> to activate the cyl.
> I don't know. Any of you who have solved this one please don't keep it to
> yourself. I have Cessna wheel and brakes (Cleveland).
> Corky
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
Bill,
Your suggestion is what I'm looking for. I'd appreciate some pics if it would
not be too much trouble;
C M Corbett
625 Pierremont Rd
Shreveport, La 71106
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "STOCKBERGER,RANDY (HP-Corvallis,ex1)" <randy_stockberger(at)hp.com> |
| Subject: | WELDING/BRAZING (and soldering) |
Larry:
Good steel bicycle frames are soldered with a silver/lead
solder that has a melting point much lower than the brass
used in brazing. This would avoid the crystallization
problem.
High end bicycle frames aren't made out of cromoly steel
anymore, they are either titanium or carbon fiber - at
least for the road bikes I'm familiar with, I don't know
what the BMX people are doing.
At least one local custom bike builder with a good reputation
still welds his cromoly custom frames. These are almost
always touring bikes because the racers don't buy steel
frames.
You can buy kits to build your own bike, these offer pre-fab
steel tubes that vary in diameter, thickness and cross section
along their length to accommodate the forces present in that
specific location. This is much more sophisticated than what
we are doing with our engine mounts, landing gear, etc.
Also, the racing bicyclists are so fanatical about weight that
they demand the frame set be as light as possible. This means
that the tortional stress from pedaling causes stress fractures
in the frame after just one or two seasons of use. These guys
expect their frame to break, we expect ours not to.
Randy Stockberger
> From: "Larry Williams" <lnawms(at)msn.com>
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: WELDING/BRAZING
>
>
>
> High-end bicycle frames are chrome moly tubes brazed together
> (usually but not always into forged terminals) and they see a lot more
> stress than our fittings. I doubt that brazing is more prone to alter the
> make-up of the metal than welding which requires a much higher
temperature.
>
> f"http://explorer.msn.com">http://explorer.msn.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Tailwind-List: Tailwind logo |
Guys on the tailwind list and the pietenpol listers FYI,
Don't read any more into the regs than you need to:
Part 45 Identification and Registration Marking
Subpart C - Nationality and Registration Marks
Section 45.22 Exhibition, antique, and other aircraft: Special Rules
(b) A small US registered aircraft built at least 30 years ago or a US
registered aircraft for which an experimental certificate has been issued
under 21.191(d) or 21.191(g) for operation as an exhibition aircraft or as an amateur-built aircraft
and which has the same external configuration as an aircraft built at least
30 years ago may be operated WITHOUT displaying marks in accordance
with 45.21 and 45.23 through 45.33 if :
(1) It displays in accordance with 45.21 (C) marks at
least 2 inches high on each side of the fuselage or vertical tail surface
consisting of the Roman capital letter "N" followed by:
(i) The US registration number of the aircraft; or
(ii) The symbol appropriate to the airworthiness certificate of the
aircraft ("C", standard: "R", restricted; "L", limited: or "X",
experimental) followed by the US registration number of the aircraft: and
(2)
Section 45.23 Display of Marks; General
(b) When marks that include only the Roman capital letter "N" and the
registration nuare displayed on limited or restricted category aircraft or
experimental or provisionally certificated aircraft, the operator shall
also display on that aircraft near each entrance to the cabin or cockpit,
in letters not less than 2 inches nor more than 6 inches in height, the
words "limited," "restricted." "experimental," or "provisional
airworthiness," as the case may be.
I see this all the time, people going way out of their way to make life as
hard as they can for themselves. Do not rely on the FAA to know the regs
for they often do not have a copy!!
Knowing the regs gives you a position of strength when dealing with the
feds.
Christian Bobka
EAA Technical Counselor
Chapter 25, Minneapolis
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
Corky,
Talk to Andrew Pietenpol about the last Piet as he owns it. I am sure the
Doc Mosher site links to Andrew's "Pietenpol Family Website" adn there
should be an email address there.
Do you have any .100 " piano wire that is not to rusty to run some tests
on?
Chris Bobka
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
Sorry Chris,
The largest Piano Wire Gauge is #25 , Dia .059 and the smallest I had is.029.
If you can use any of what I have you are welcome to it.
Corky
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Bell" <mbell(at)sctcorp.com> |
03/05/2001 02:05:35 PM
I was thinking about hand brakes on the joystick. I know that I want
brakes. Heel and toe have also been mentioned often.. I believe that
you can find all three if you look at enough Piets.
Mike
Isablcorky(at)aol.com
Sent by: To: pietenpol-list-digest(at)matronics.com
owner-pietenpol-list-server@mat cc:
ronics.com Subject: Pietenpol-List:
Brakes
03/05/2001 08:31 AM
Please respond to
pietenpol-list
Brakes on a Pietenpol? HOW. The original had a rudder bar as no brakes
were
required. The Last Original had a tail wheel. Did it have brakes, toe
or heel?
These are questions I've tried all these rainy days to answer without
final
resolvement. Almost gave up on the whole project yesterday.
I have narrowed it down to two options:
1. Build rudder pedals with hinged toe devices to exert pressure on
the Matco
cyl mounted vertically behind with attached resevoir.
2. Weld an extention on the rudder bar and from it have a pivoting toe
action
to activate the cyl.
I don't know. Any of you who have solved this one please don't keep it
to
yourself. I have Cessna wheel and brakes (Cleveland).
Corky
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: welding/brazing |
Owen,
WW II Stinsons used 1025 steel. The only real reason arc welding isn't
done on 4130 in aircraft construction is because the steel is too thin.
Arc welding is meant for heavier gauge steel, but other than that, 4130
can be arc welded OK. I wouldn't even attempt it on an airplane part,
just too thin.
John Langston
Pipe Creek, TX
nle97(at)juno.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Barry Davis" <bed(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Piet List: welding |
Sorry, it is for oxy acetylene welding and can post weld heat treat by a
rapid change of the tip. Just to normalize tig welds, any old cheap torch
will do.
----- Original Message -----
From: <Borodent(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Piet List: welding
>
> In a message dated 3/4/01 5:27:34 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> bed(at)mindspring.com writes:
>
> << I bought a Harris aviation torch ( around $110) >>
> is this for oxy acetylene welding or for normallizing tig welds or what??
> Henry Williams--- gluing up some ribs tonight
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Welding or Brazing |
Sam,
Brazing doesn't use as much heat and therfore doesn't warp the steel as
much as welding. We inherited our project and the bearing surface for
the elevator control bellcrank behind the pilot's seat had been welded
and was all warped out of shape. I worked on it with a file one
afternoon and got it to work OK, but it would have been better to have
brazed it.
We are using 4130 throughout and when welding it will act like 1025.
I've brazed the rudder bar pivot bolt to the bracket without any problems
and have no intention of doing anything different. We are going to
install bushings in the control horns and these will be brazed also
because of the thin control horn steel and the thickness of the bushings.
It will be much easier and the possibilities of it cracking are
negligible. I've been brazing on 4130 steel for over thirty years, but
never on anything structural or that depends on the strength of the weld
to hold things together. The rudder bar pivot bolts are brazed in place
only to hold them in postion to make it easier to install the rudder bar
and its castle nut. The only thing you don't want it to do is pivot. If
it were to break loose, there would be no loss of control as the bolt
would just pivot within the frame. Welding this bolt, which is
nickle/steel, is more likely to cause the bolt to crystalize and fail,
and that would cause a big problem. Likewise, the only thing the control
horn bushings have to do is not pivot. If they were to break loose it
would again cause no loss of control problem, only a repair problem.
John Langston
Pipe Creek, TX
nle97(at)juno.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Owen Davies" <owen(at)davies.mv.com> |
| Subject: | Re: welding/brazing |
> WW II Stinsons used 1025 steel. (etc.)
Many thanks. No chance I'd try to stick weld
a plane myself. I enjoy playing with a torch too much for that. It was
stictly of theoretical interest.
Owen
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Brusilow" <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Brakes on a Pietenpol? HOW"
I have heel brakes. Goodyear mech brakes off a Luscomb.
Mike B Piet N 687MB ( Mr Sam )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Welding or Brazing |
-----------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: <nle97(at)juno.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Welding or Brazing
> the elevator control bellcrank behind the pilot's seat had been welded
> and was all warped out of shape.
I welded all my stuff with O/A, but just wanted to add a comment about
warpage. In my years of stick welding, warpage was always a common and
expected thing. Something you planned ahead for. But that was one of the
amazing things about Oxy/A welding. There is virtually no warpage. I
think that it was that I learned from a book that stressed that you preheat
the piece to weld. They said that this was one of the most important parts
of a good weld. Stands to reason that if the whole piece is approx. the
same temp. it won't warp. Put a flame on the center of a piece of sheet
metal, and it will balloon before your eyes. But throw the whole sheet in a
500 f oven and it comes out as flat as a pancake.
If you stick weld a piece, here there is a cold surface and you hit it in
one little spot with a arc thats hotter than the sun, and that spot only
expands and has no where to go...boing!
Larger pieces like a fuselage still warp because it's not practical to heat
the whole thing .
Getting back to the bellcrank thing, I didn't have a speck of warpage.
And I'm no pro welder.
Anyone in the weld mode now with O/A Give it a try,,,you'll be amazed.
walt
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Owen Davies" <owen(at)davies.mv.com> |
Robert Haines asked:
> I have a MIG welder that I plan to use but now I'm a bit concerned. Why
> hasn't MIG welding seen as much success as TIG or OxyA?
Short answer: Because it's easy to make a MIG weld that
looks good but has little or no penetration, and therefore
no strength, and because the narrow heat-affected zone
encourages crack formation. Companies like Skystar,
which MIG their airframes and omit a post-weld heating,
have a lot of practice at getting it right. They also tend to
have a lot of reports of cracking. On the other hand, the
Pitts has been MIG welded for years, and I've never heard
that it has has a problem. No idea what they do different,
and finding out is high on my list of things to do -- but
strictly as a matter of curiosity. Personally, I wouldn't
even think about MIG for anything but fast tacking of an
airframe that would later be final-welded with gas or TIG.
Maybe attaching tabs for mounting stringers and the like.
To find the long answer, check Deja News for welding thread
in rec.aviation.homebuilt and sci.engr.joining.welding. This
discussion has been had frequently in both places.
For the official word, see the latest revision of AC43.13a,
"Acceptable Methods, Techniques, and Practices, Aircraft
Inspection and Repair," which gives the FAA's position on
this sort of thing. It's available here on the Net, though I don't
have the URL handy.
Finally, go to the Biplane Hangar mailing list archives at
http://gf24.de/biplane/ . There are a number of doc files
containing list messages on a variety of topics. One of
them gives what's probably the best practical discussion
I've seen of aircraft welding.
As for post-weld heating, you'll find that very large can of
worms is alive and wriggling. I don't know anywhere
enough to resolve i myself, but my casual observation
has been that the more people know about metallurgy,
the less likely they are to recommend it. For a good
summary of the "don't do it" argument, see a book called
"Performance Welding," by Richard Finch, one of the
guys who helped rewrite the FAA's welding standards.
Owen Davies
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
I haven't heard this idea discussed before, think about it , maybe it will
work. I ruled out the "bicycle " brake thing on the stick because with all
the cables dropping down the stick interfering with the elevator pulleys
worry me.
How about this....bicycle handlebar type actuators laying flat under the
inst. panel. with the pivot point away from each other and the tips comming
together within about 1/2" under the panel, pull toward you to activate.
Could pull both tips for even braking or separately by working the
fingertips. Seems to work out sequence wise, cause as soon as you set
down, your throttle hand becomes free. Run up is good, Hold the brakes with
right, throttle up with left, left to carb heat then on to mags, and back.
Only thing would be hairy would be holding one to turn, holding the stick
back and the throttle.
Think about it.
walt
-----------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: <Isablcorky(at)aol.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Brakes
>
> Brakes on a Pietenpol? HOW. The original had a rudder bar as no brakes
were
> required. The Last Original had a tail wheel. Did it have brakes, toe or
heel?
> These are questions I've tried all these rainy days to answer without
final
> resolvement. Almost gave up on the whole project yesterday.
> I have narrowed it down to two options:
> 1. Build rudder pedals with hinged toe devices to exert pressure on the
Matco
> cyl mounted vertically behind with attached resevoir.
> 2. Weld an extention on the rudder bar and from it have a pivoting toe
action
> to activate the cyl.
> I don't know. Any of you who have solved this one please don't keep it to
> yourself. I have Cessna wheel and brakes (Cleveland).
> Corky
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Owen Davies" <owen(at)davies.mv.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Piet List: welding |
Chris Bobka observed:
> Indeed there is great controversy over the noramlizing after welding with
> TIG procedure. Richard Finch adamantly says no need to do it. Yet, it is
> relatively cheap insurance so I suggest TIG and then normalize.
Actually, that's minimizing Finch's position. He doesn't merely
say that there is no need to do a post-weld heat. He says that
doing so will actively mess up your joint and seriously increase
your chances of trouble. Very expensive insurance indeed!
According to Finch, stress relieving 4130 requires subjecting
the entire structure to a temperature between 1125 and 1265
degrees F, held for several minutes and then cooled over a
period of hours. There is no way it can be done in a home shop,
and anything less precise than that introduces uncertainties,
at best, and can actually promote failure of the airframe.
That said, Kevin Kimball, of the airplane restoration family,
reports that in rebuilding many planes, they have found cracks
only in structures they knew had not been stress-relieved. My
best guess is that the old planes had some really dubious
welds, so that almost anything would help. It may be worth
noting that nearly all of the planes the Kimballs have restored
must have been built with 1025 steel, rather than 4130, and
1025 is not ever supposed to need post-weld heating!
I've watched this argument with great interest for a long time,
without ever learning enough to resolve it myself. At this point,
I have come to feel that the conservative position is to believe
Finch and the other metallurgically sophisticated types who
agree with him. But it's still a tough call.
Owen Davies
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Piet List: welding |
A tough call indeed.
Chris Bobka
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
I promise this will be my last dumb question for the day. In order to compute
space for a possible heel brake with cyl lieing horizontal under the rudder
bar, I must know how much travel there will be on this bar. Soooooo , What is
the travel of the rudder in degrees on either side of neutral. And while you
are looking that up also tell me the elevator travel up and down AND the
aileron travels. Thanks
Corky in beautiful spring like La
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | leonstefanhutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan) |
| Subject: | Brakes on the Piet. |
A good source of break cyls. are the Hegar brakes. They have several
master cyl styles. Motorcycle handle bar type for the control stick, 2
sizes of lever operated, and heal operated. ACS has them, but Leaf or
CPS shows pictures in there catalog. I suppose they would be compatible
with Cleveland etc. Leon S... Frustrated in Kansas,about to
throw away a bunch of brazed parts-- built to the plans. If I hear
"stick to the plans" one more time I'm going to throw a match to the
whole damn thing!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack Phillips <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
Isablcorky(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> Brakes on a Pietenpol? HOW. The original had a rudder bar as no brakes were required.
> Corky
>
Hi Corky,
I'm going through this right now. I also have Cleveland brakes, with
the non-reservoir type of master cylinders. I just finished
installation of my rudder bar and the rest of the control system this
weekend and am now faced with how to make the brakes actuate. I prefer
heel brakes - to me it just makes more sense to dig your heels in to
stop rather than point your toes. I learned to fly taildraggers in a
J-3 Cub with heel brakes. Now I own a Cessna 140 with toe brakes and I
still don't find them intuitive. Just personal opinion.
However, while heel brakes will be difficult to mount with a rudder
bar, I have no idea at all how you'd do toe brakes. My plan is to make
a lever for each side, mounted under the rudder bar, with a vertical
pivot axis near the centerline of the airplane. The master cylinders
will attach somewhere around the middle of the lever, so I can get a
"proper" amount of travel in the pedal, which will be on the end of the
lever. The pedals must be mounted so that both pedals can be fully
actuated with the rudder neutral, so I can stop in a straight line. But
they also need to be far enough forward so my heel can still actuate the
brake whiel the rudder is fully deflected, so I can maneuver in tight
places on the ramp (otherwise why have brakes at all?). I should have
my first attempt at this done by next weekend, so I'll keep you posted
on how it goes.
Good luck,
Jack
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Eldredge <steve(at)byu.edu> |
"Pietenpol List (E-mail)"
| Subject: | NX designation: was: Tailwind logo |
Chris is exactly right
I had to justify my case with the Faa examiner on the NX issue and for some
strange reason about having built my own seat belts. I was prepared for the
NX designation at inpection time by having the regs copied and also photo
examples of others airplanes. Still gave me hassle until he verified with
Oklahoma city. Turns out the seat belt weirdness came due to his previous
life in the private sector as a faa certified shop that built... Certified
Seat Belts. Know your stuff and it will help you later.
Steve E.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Christian
Bobka
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Tailwind-List: Tailwind logo
Guys on the tailwind list and the pietenpol listers FYI,
Don't read any more into the regs than you need to:
Part 45 Identification and Registration Marking
Subpart C - Nationality and Registration Marks
Section 45.22 Exhibition, antique, and other aircraft: Special Rules
(b) A small US registered aircraft built at least 30 years ago or a US
registered aircraft for which an experimental certificate has been issued
under 21.191(d) or 21.191(g) for operation as an exhibition aircraft or as an amateur-built aircraft
and which has the same external configuration as an aircraft built at least
30 years ago may be operated WITHOUT displaying marks in accordance
with 45.21 and 45.23 through 45.33 if :
(1) It displays in accordance with 45.21 (C) marks at
least 2 inches high on each side of the fuselage or vertical tail surface
consisting of the Roman capital letter "N" followed by:
(i) The US registration number of the aircraft; or
(ii) The symbol appropriate to the airworthiness certificate of the
aircraft ("C", standard: "R", restricted; "L", limited: or "X",
experimental) followed by the US registration number of the aircraft: and
(2)
Section 45.23 Display of Marks; General
(b) When marks that include only the Roman capital letter "N" and the
registration nuare displayed on limited or restricted category aircraft or
experimental or provisionally certificated aircraft, the operator shall
also display on that aircraft near each entrance to the cabin or cockpit,
in letters not less than 2 inches nor more than 6 inches in height, the
words "limited," "restricted." "experimental," or "provisional
airworthiness," as the case may be.
I see this all the time, people going way out of their way to make life as
hard as they can for themselves. Do not rely on the FAA to know the regs
for they often do not have a copy!!
Knowing the regs gives you a position of strength when dealing with the
feds.
Christian Bobka
EAA Technical Counselor
Chapter 25, Minneapolis
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack Phillips <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Welding or Brazing |
walter evans wrote:
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <nle97(at)juno.com>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, March 05, 2001 1:42 PM
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Welding or Brazing
>
> > the elevator control bellcrank behind the pilot's seat had been welded
> > and was all warped out of shape.
>
> I welded all my stuff with O/A, but just wanted to add a comment about
> warpage. In my years of stick welding, warpage was always a common and
> expected thing. Something you planned ahead for. But that was one of the
> amazing things about Oxy/A welding. There is virtually no warpage. I
> think that it was that I learned from a book that stressed that you preheat
> the piece to weld. They said that this was one of the most important parts
> of a good weld. Stands to reason that if the whole piece is approx. the
> same temp. it won't warp. Put a flame on the center of a piece of sheet
> metal, and it will balloon before your eyes. But throw the whole sheet in a
> 500 f oven and it comes out as flat as a pancake.
> If you stick weld a piece, here there is a cold surface and you hit it in
> one little spot with a arc thats hotter than the sun, and that spot only
> expands and has no where to go...boing!
> Larger pieces like a fuselage still warp because it's not practical to heat
> the whole thing .
> Getting back to the bellcrank thing, I didn't have a speck of warpage.
> And I'm no pro welder.
> Anyone in the weld mode now with O/A Give it a try,,,you'll be amazed.
> walt
>
I agree with Walt. I welded my bellcrank (or walking beam, or whatever
you call it) last night with oxy-acetylene with no warpage whatever. I
was very careful to weld only about 1/4th of the circumference, then
flip the part over and weld the opposite side, keeping alternating like
that until the whole thing was done. It came out absolutely straight
and true. I'm very pleased with it (particularly because my brother
said he didn't think I could do it!).
Jack
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack Phillips <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Rudder travel |
Isablcorky(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> I promise this will be my last dumb question for the day. In order to compute
> space for a possible heel brake with cyl lieing horizontal under the rudder
> bar, I must know how much travel there will be on this bar. Soooooo , What is
> the travel of the rudder in degrees on either side of neutral. And while you
> are looking that up also tell me the elevator travel up and down AND the
> aileron travels. Thanks
> Corky in beautiful spring like La
>
Not a dumb question at all. It shows you're thinking! I measured the
travel my rudder can make before it hits the elevator. The cable
travels +/- 3.25". So I figured the rudder bar needs to be capable of
traveling 3.50" each way to make up for cable stretch (and rudder
deflection in the slipstream), even though you wouldn't often need full
deflection in flight (recovering from a spin would need it, though).
The hard part is figuring out how much travel the brake cylinder piston
needs to apply full brakes. As I said in my earlier e-mail, I'll let
you know how mine turns out.
Jack
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Brakes on the Piet. |
By the time I throw my stuff on your fire it;s going to be one heck of a
blaze. Too many unanswered questions.
Corky
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Rudder travel |
A Spin!!!!!!!!
in a Piet?
with all that brazed stuff and home bound welding?
Not on my life.
Corky
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Haines" <robertsjunk(at)hotmail.com> |
I have been following the messages about wire shackles and how you all
have been using #40 or #50 chain links. I assume you take two links
and two bolts and bolt the fitting on one end and the cable on the
other. Or do you fold the link over and make it resemble the actual
shackle? Would either method work?
Why don't you simply not use the shackle? I understand that they're
there so you can remove or replace the wire but how ofter does that
happen? The method my Kolb SlingShot uses is that the wire and
thimble are attached directly to the fitting, no shackle at all.
What's the downside to this method?
Robert Haines
Murphysboro, Illinois
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 3/5/01 4:40:46 PM Pacific Standard Time,
robertsjunk(at)hotmail.com writes:
> I have been following the messages about wire shackles and how you all
> have been using #40 or #50 chain links. I assume you take two links
> and two bolts and bolt the fitting on one end and the cable on the
> other. Or do you fold the link over and make it resemble the actual
> shackle? Would either method work?
>
> Why don't you simply not use the shackle? I understand that they're
> there so you can remove or replace the wire but how ofter does that
> happen? The method my Kolb SlingShot uses is that the wire and
> thimble are attached directly to the fitting, no shackle at all.
> What's the downside to this method?
>
> Robert Haines
> Murphysboro, Illinois
>
>
>
Robert,
The only reason to consider using a shackle made of 2 links, 2 clevis bolts,
2 castle nuts is because aircraft shackles are kind of expensive so this
represents a suitable substitute. Use where needed. I use these on my
aircraft and they work well for me. I now have obtained a formed
sheetmetal shackle from a 1923 -1927 Laird Swallow. The Kansas Av Museum has
a punch press die for them which I can borrow. I received an estimate from a
local fabricator who will run them for about $.40 each. The blankings then
have to be formed. I may use some of these on my Scout. Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Meadows" <gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Piet List: welding |
Gang,
This is two cents from an innocent bystander. It would seem like
normalizing would be a perfectly safe and non-detrimental practice after TIG
welding. Otherwise, it seems like all of us guys out here Oxy/acetylene
welding (which I also understand is self-normalizing), would be having all
these cracking problems. I haven't heard of any of this type of problem that
much, Has anyone else?
I have the feeling there is a large enough body of anecdotal evidence out
here in Piet land that we would have heard about these normalization
problems.
They also taught us in A&P school to normalize welds like Chris mentioned.
Gary Meadows
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Hardaway <mike(at)hardaway.com> |
| Subject: | Re: WELDING/BRAZING (and soldering) |
"STOCKBERGER,RANDY (HP-Corvallis,ex1)" wrote:
> Good steel bicycle frames are soldered with a silver/lead
> solder that has a melting point much lower than the brass
> used in brazing. This would avoid the crystallization
> problem.
>
> High end bicycle frames aren't made out of cromoly steel
> anymore, they are either titanium or carbon fiber - at
> least for the road bikes I'm familiar with, I don't know
> what the BMX people are doing.
> At least one local custom bike builder with a good reputation
> still welds his cromoly custom frames. These are almost
> always touring bikes because the racers don't buy steel
> frames.
> Also, the racing bicyclists are so fanatical about weight that they demand the
frame set be as light as
> possible. This means that the tortional stress from pedaling causes stress fractures
in the frame after
> just one or two seasons of use. These guys expect their frame to break, we expect
ours not to.
Randy, et al:
I am a Piet builder, a semi-competent torch-slinger, an aeronautical engineer and
a 225# racing cyclist,
having been on the podium at more than one masters' national championship. I ONLY
ride steel alloy frames,
BRAZED, not silver-soldered. Lightweight road climbers need the lightness of Titanium
or carbon fiber.
Track and criterium sprinters like myself stress frames far too much to use anything
but steel alloys.
Silver soldering is only used in situations where the temperature must be kept
low yet achieve a reasonably
strong bond. A good frame builder can safely reach the temperatures required for
brazing without damaging
the base material.
The reason your friend in Corvallis sells only touring frames may be because racers
are not so foolish as
to ride frames that are welded in the interest of saving time.
Incidentally, I get more than "just one or two seasons" out of my frames.
Mike Hardaway
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John McNarry" <jmcnarry(at)techplus.com> |
Hi Corky
I have an idea I have only mocked up but it should work like this. I
have the straight axle with 21" motorcycle wheel alloy rims and widened
hubs. The brakes are drum, lever operated. The brake lever is mounted on the
stick and is longer than a standard motorcycle lever. The standard
motorcycle cable splits into two after it runs parallel to the hinge line of
the sticks aileron axis. Stick position doesn't change its tension.
Each cable then passes through the floor behind the rudder bar, about where
the rear gear V attaches, and on to each brake. Two slotted straps with a
pulley at the rear end are attached to the rudder bar and the cables travel
through the slots. If the brake lever is squeezed with the rudder bar in the
straight position the slots in the straps do not contact the cable. The
cable is adjusted so that the lever almost touches the stick when squeezed
hard. When the bar is pushed in either direction the slotted strap on that
side pulls that cable and makes it tighter. The brake lever won't travel as
far now but only the brake on the applied rudder side works. I mocked this
up in my trial cockpit and I am pretty sure it will work. I haven't figured
out how far from the rudder bar hinge to attach the straps.This would
position lever at full rudder and one brake on. The brake cables are exposed
and run in guarded pulleys. There is a pulley mounted at the floor for each
cable to guide the cable to the wheel.
I really want the tall wheel look and most of the setups like that I have
seen have no brakes or two brake levers. I like the idea of being able to
have one hand on the stick, and brake, the other on the throttle.
Six more pulleys. Some motorcycle brake lever adjusters, cable and a bit of
steel strap. Not too much more weight for the peace of mind of stopping on a
hard surface. Sure would hate to roll into somebody's aluminum beauty!
I suppose your hydraulic system might work out if you mounted the pedals and
cylinders on the bar. Cylinders near the hinge and bell cranks to operate
them. Perhaps you could mount the cylinders remotely and use cable from
rudder bar mounted toe pedals. Keep experimenting.
Never give up, just work on something else while you think about it.
John Mc
----- Original Message -----
From: <Isablcorky(at)aol.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Brakes
>
> Brakes on a Pietenpol? HOW. The original had a rudder bar as no brakes
were
> required. The Last Original had a tail wheel. Did it have brakes, toe or
heel?
> These are questions I've tried all these rainy days to answer without
final
> resolvement. Almost gave up on the whole project yesterday.
> I have narrowed it down to two options:
> 1. Build rudder pedals with hinged toe devices to exert pressure on the
Matco
> cyl mounted vertically behind with attached resevoir.
> 2. Weld an extention on the rudder bar and from it have a pivoting toe
action
> to activate the cyl.
> I don't know. Any of you who have solved this one please don't keep it to
> yourself. I have Cessna wheel and brakes (Cleveland).
> Corky
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John McNarry" <jmcnarry(at)techplus.com> |
I use all three types of welders. the MIG is good for production type work
on sheet stock. The TIG is okay, but on clusters I find I can get into the
tight corners better with Oxy/Actylene. The self annealing factor of the
Oxy/Ac gives me peace of mind. Wood smells better.
John Mc
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Haines <robertsjunk(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: welding
>
> I have a MIG welder that I plan to use but now I'm a bit concerned. Why
> hasn't MIG welding seen as much success as TIG or OxyA?
>
> Robert Haines
> Murphysboro, Illinois
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David Scott <scott(at)haulpak.com> |
| Subject: | Piet Toe Brakes - See Bill Rewey's Piet 06 Mar 01 |
Jack -
I saw your note. You should try to get a look
at Bill Rewey's Piet for the toe brake idea. He
mounted them on the fuselage sides on the diagonal
cross braces. When he wanted brake, he just moves
his toe over the fuselage side and pivots his
ankle on the rudder bar. His heel stays on the
rudder bar and he is able to have brake (either
or both) action. Really cool setup, I thought.
David Scott 06 Mar 01 07:30
--------- original message ----------
From: Jack Phillips <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2001 18:52:05 -0500
..... I have no idea at all how you'd do toe brakes. ....
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
Thanks John, This is a problem with nearly all Piets and most builders will
be confronted sooner or later. It has just about brought my project to a
halt. Bill Rewey's set up has been recommended by several so I called him
this am. He is sending me some sketches of his arrangement. Due to "on hand"
items I have to stick with Cleveland brakes. Only for parking and run-up.
NEVER for the runway. That I learned well many, many years ago.
Corky
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Eldredge <steve(at)byu.edu> |
I put toe brakes in my rudder bar airplane. I mounted the non-reservoir
master cylinders parrallel to the first diagonal from the firewall and made
an upsidown L pedal for each side. Works great and I only need about
1/2-3/4" travel to activate the brake. I looked for a picture but it
appears that I'll have to go take one. I'll post soon.
Steve E.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
Isablcorky(at)aol.com
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Brakes
Brakes on a Pietenpol? HOW. The original had a rudder bar as no brakes were
required. The Last Original had a tail wheel. Did it have brakes, toe or
heel?
These are questions I've tried all these rainy days to answer without final
resolvement. Almost gave up on the whole project yesterday.
I have narrowed it down to two options:
1. Build rudder pedals with hinged toe devices to exert pressure on the
Matco
cyl mounted vertically behind with attached resevoir.
2. Weld an extention on the rudder bar and from it have a pivoting toe
action
to activate the cyl.
I don't know. Any of you who have solved this one please don't keep it to
yourself. I have Cessna wheel and brakes (Cleveland).
Corky
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
Thanks Steve,
I toyed with that idea but didn't know if I had enough room. How about the
possible drag on rudder operation from those 2 hyd lines?
Corky
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
Like Steve E., I had to show the FAA Manager in Cleveland who
inspected my Pietenpol the regulation which allows for NX instead of
the big billboard sign EXPERIMENTAL. He looked over my copy of the
reg. and said "hmm....you learn something new everyday." He was real
nice about it...and I had no problems in that area.
Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Haines" <robertsjunk(at)hotmail.com> |
I am about to step into the line of fire here...
Most MIG welders are designed to weld fast and put lots of wire out there to
fill in a fillet weld or generate a thick bead. That's OK by me, it comes
in handy most of the time.
My method for ensuring a good, low stress weld in small parts is to use the
.023 wire (the small diameter wire) and turn the speed almost all the way
down. There is a speed that is too slow and the wire will melt and pull off
of the weld, my speed is just faster than that. I leave the power level
high to what the welder recommends for that thickness. The result is a
large area of heated material.
This goes against the effecient nature of normal MIG welding as you waste
considerable heat. For these purposes, it seems to be appropriate.
My friends MIG weld body panels and to keep from warping, they stitch weld
using 1/4" beads (about 1 to 2 seconds). Either wait 5 to 10 seconds
between welds or move down about 4 inches and start another stitch coming
back after two or three stitches to fill in sections.
This is a different philosophy from OxyA (or I guess TIG) where you generate
a pool and keep it molten for the whole weld. I guess is stems from the
fact that generating a pool with a MIG welder is simply point and shoot, its
real easy to start and stop.
Robert Haines
Murphysboro, Illinois
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Eldredge <steve(at)byu.edu> |
No drag because they are not connected in any way to the rudder bar.
steve E. Stay tuned for a pic.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
Isablcorky(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Brakes
Thanks Steve,
I toyed with that idea but didn't know if I had enough room. How about the
possible drag on rudder operation from those 2 hyd lines?
Corky
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Owen Davies" <owen(at)davies.mv.com> |
Robert Haines said:
> My method for ensuring a good, low stress weld in small parts is to use
the
> .023 wire (the small diameter wire) and turn the speed almost all the way
> down. There is a speed that is too slow and the wire will melt and pull
off
> of the weld, my speed is just faster than that. I leave the power level
> high to what the welder recommends for that thickness. The result is a
> large area of heated material.
It sounds like you are recommending this
for something like those control-system parts
discussed in recent messages, rather than
for the airframe itself. Did I get this right?
Owen Davies
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | test samples to Doug |
Doug,
A box of test samples and really good wire info is on its way to you FEDEX.
Should be there tomarrow. The SAE multi-step test is the best I have come
up with for aircraft wire suitablity.
chris bobka
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack Phillips <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Piet Toe Brakes - See Bill Rewey's Piet 06 Mar 01 |
David Scott wrote:
>
>
> Jack -
>
> I saw your note. You should try to get a look
> at Bill Rewey's Piet for the toe brake idea. He
> mounted them on the fuselage sides on the diagonal
> cross braces. When he wanted brake, he just moves
> his toe over the fuselage side and pivots his
> ankle on the rudder bar. His heel stays on the
> rudder bar and he is able to have brake (either
> or both) action. Really cool setup, I thought.
>
> David Scott 06 Mar 01 07:30
>
> --------- original message ----------
>
> From: Jack Phillips <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net>
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2001 18:52:05 -0500
>
> ..... I have no idea at all how you'd do toe brakes. ....
>
Hi David,
I appreciate your note. I still prefer heel brakes, at least on a tail
dragger, so will continue with the path I'm on. At least I will until
I've convinced myself it can't be done.
I've seen Bill Rewey's Pietenpol - saw it at Oshkosh in '97 and at
Brodhead last summer, but I don't remember his brake setup. That's the
problem with looking at other airplanes for ideas, I never know the
areas that I'm going to need ideas on. He's got a nice plane, and
seeing it in '97 convinced me to put a circular cutout in my
centersection (Mike Cuy did the same thing).
Thanks,
Jack
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: test samples to Doug |
In a message dated 3/6/01 2:35:04 PM Pacific Standard Time,
BOBKA(at)compuserve.com writes:
> A box of test samples and really good wire info is on its way to you FEDEX.
> Should be there tomarrow. The SAE multi-step test is the best I have come
> up with for aircraft wire suitablity.
>
>
Chris,
That's great! I'll be looking for it. Thanks Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeane Tomblin <tombling(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Cut out verses flopp in center cection |
Group,
I really like the look of the piet's with the cut out in the center cection
but BHP's warning in the flying and Gliding(1933 page 40) about using the
flop to preserve goog climb performance bothers me. Is there really a need
for the flop and does it improve performance over a cut out found on
biblanes of the period?Can you get in and out of the aft cockpit without
it?
Gene Tomblin
St. Louis MO.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Wives Tales about Wing Cut-outs |
Group- We've discussed the pro's and con's of the center
section flop vs. a curved wing cutout a few times and here is
my take on it. Either one is perfectly fine. In flying both types
I can detect no difference in performance. Think about it.....you've
got possibly a Ford A engine and a slab radiator right in front of
the center section, plus two windshields and your shoulders
and head. What more drag and disturbance of air flow
could you create with a cutout ? I have absolutely no adverse
performance or handling issues flying with the curved cutout.
For those who say you "loose lift" with a cutout is also a bit
of a stretch: In flying a Piet with a flop at Brodhead, I noticed
that with it "unlatched" in flight, it has no tendency to lift or move.
I moved it with my hand and there was very little force on it one
way or the other. I say either one is just fine. It is nice to get in
and out with the cutout with a hand-hold though. The ultimate I suppose
would be a foot-hole in the fuse and hand hold on the center section.
Visibility in turns is a bit better with a cutout, but that wing blocks
a ton of sky above you no matter what you do.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Haines" <robertsjunk(at)hotmail.com> |
Owen,
Actually, I was hoping for some comment on this method. I haven't started
on a tube airframe but have used this method on small metal parts. Would it
be unacceptable? I don't mind getting an OxyA setup (another tool for my
collection) and learning but if I already have something that works...
Just looking for insight from those who have more experience than me.
Robert Haines
Murphysboro, Illinois
******
It sounds like you are recommending this
for something like those control-system parts
discussed in recent messages, rather than
for the airframe itself. Did I get this right?
Owen Davies
******
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Cutout vs. Flaps |
| From: | kgardner(at)odu.edu |
03/07/2001 10:09:36 AM
Good Morning List!
I read with interest the couple of postings on this subject & Mike Cuy's
comments about his experiences flying both types (flap v. cutout) pricked a
thought in my brain (a dangerous thing). Namely, does anyone know whether
or not any Piet has ever been tested in a wind tunnel? This occured to me
because my university operates a full-scale one at NASA-Langley. Recently
they tested the props that are going into the EAA's 1903 Wright Flyer
reproduction that is going to fly, hopefully, at Kitty Hawk on Dec. 17.
2003. I was curious, anyone think that someone with some pull could
persuade the EAA to have ODU to run a couple of Piets through their
facility? I bet any number of folks would 'volunteer' to get their planes
down here if it could be set up. Maybe as a tie-in with the Air-Venture
2001 theme of 'Aviation Firsts'?
What do ya'll think?
Kip Gardner
Laboratory Manager, ODU
Dept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmospheric Sciences
4600 Elkhorn Avenue
Norfolk, VA 23529
(757)683-5654
Bumper Sticker of the Week:
"Don't Drink and Park - 'Accidents' Cause People"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Brusilow" <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Wives Tales about Wing Cut-outs |
Pietenpol-List: Tales about Wing Cut-outs
>
> Group- We've discussed the pro's and con's of the center
> section flop vs. a curved wing cutout a few times and here is
> my take on it. Either one is perfectly fine. In flying both types
> I can detect no difference in performance I have absolutely no adverse
> performance or handling issues flying with the curved cutout.
>
In flying a Piet with a flop at Brodhead, I noticed
> that with it "unlatched" in flight, it has no tendency to lift or move.
> Mike C.
Mike C is absolutely correct. Flight proformance with either is the same. As
Mike, I have flown both types. Many times I have flown with the flop
unlached. It stays right there, no difference, but if you taxi ( slow )
with a bit of a tailwind, the flop will come up.
If you ever see an inflight photo of a cutout Piet with the pilot wearing a
long scarf, the scarf is pointing foward.
Mike B Piet N687 MB ( Mr Sam )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Cutout vs. Flaps |
Greg Cardinal and I were pushing for some info a few years ago. It seems
we were in the throes of trying to properly design a plywood web, built up
spar and one of the first pieces of info you need to plug into the formulas
was the pitching moment ranges of the airfoil at various angles of attack
and aircraft loadings. This is normally easily obtained from "the curves"
of the various airfoils. Unfortunately, since the Piet's airfoil is home
grown, no such data exists. We could make an assumption but we were
unwilling to make such an important assumption so early in the analysis.
So we gave up.
If we can't get a full scale pietenpol into a wind tunnel, maybe someone
out there can take a full or scale airfoil section and run the tests? We
could supply the model of the airfoil. Any one studying aerodynamics at a
university?
Chris Bobka
TC
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Wing center section cutouts. |
As Mike C. points out, there is a lot of mythology out there
about this.
I have flown four different Piets over the years (including my
own) with the "flop" in place and with it removed. I flew my
Piet for two years with a cutout extending to about six or se-
ven inches aft of the rear spar. Then I modified the center sec-
tion to incorporate the "flop" and it has been in this configura-
tion ever since.
Frankly, I have been unable to detect any real difference in
performance between configurations. But I think the airflow
over the tail is less turbulent with the "flop" in place. As Mike
said, there is little resistance felt when moving it upward by
hand while in flight. Moving it up, however, causes the nose to
pitch down quite dramatically (at least, on my a/c). Testing a
Piet in a wind tunnel, as suggested by a member of the group,
should give some clues regarding the cause.
I guess the whole thing will remain vague until wind tunnel test-
ing is done. In the meantime, I like the "flop". It accentuates the
"Hershey Bar" image of the wing and provides some shade
from the sun!
Graham Hansen (Pietenpol CF-AUN)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: Pietenpol Pitching moment |
| From: | "Mike Bell" <mbell(at)sctcorp.com> |
03/07/2001 01:25:33 PM
I ran some models of the Pietenpol air foil a year or so ago. I can
still find them somewhere. These were mathematical models but they
supported what you see when you look at the wing. It is slightly
reflexed and has very little pitching moment. I ran this on a web
site that supports airfoils for model aircraft. I ran it with
Reynolds numbers appropriate to full size flying at about 80 mph. I
won't dig for them now, but I know that I will run into them.. If you
do a search on airfoils you'll find the site without too much effort.
The name just eludes me right now.
Mike
Christian Bobka
To: "INTERNET:pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com"
Sent by:
owner-pietenpol-list-server@mat cc:
ronics.com Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List:
Cutout vs. Flaps
03/07/2001 12:32 PM
Please respond to
pietenpol-list
Greg Cardinal and I were pushing for some info a few years ago. It
seems
we were in the throes of trying to properly design a plywood web,
built up
spar and one of the first pieces of info you need to plug into the
formulas
was the pitching moment ranges of the airfoil at various angles of
attack
and aircraft loadings. This is normally easily obtained from "the
curves"
of the various airfoils. Unfortunately, since the Piet's airfoil is
home
grown, no such data exists. We could make an assumption but we were
unwilling to make such an important assumption so early in the
analysis.
So we gave up.
If we can't get a full scale pietenpol into a wind tunnel, maybe
someone
out there can take a full or scale airfoil section and run the tests?
We
could supply the model of the airfoil. Any one studying aerodynamics
at a
university?
Chris Bobka
TC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wizzard187(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Wing center section cutouts. |
Hi Gang, I am building a piet and am 200 # about 5'8 and 65 years old and
am worring about getting in and out and have built a step. I am wondering
about making the flop from the rear spar back and slant the flop out to get
more head room. I haven't climb in one any suggestion would be helpful
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "ED GRENTZER" <flyboy_120(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Cut out verses flopp in center cection |
Hey everyone
I've always had some questions on the flap vs cutout issue too. I've
never even flown in a Piet but I understand that they're notoriously tail
heavy when light engines are used and BHP said that the flap adds
considerable lift. So it seems that a cutout would remove lift from the aft
edge of the wing reducing lift and agravating the tail heavy situation. Is
this true or am I barking at the moon????
my other question is: with the wing canted back to compensate for
lighter engines does the cutout increase visability forward over the wing to
any extent or just staight up.
If someone could please answer these two questions it would help me
decide which way to go. If it dosen't increase visabbility to any great
extent I think I'll go with the flap.
Thanks Ed G.
>From: Jeane Tomblin <tombling(at)compuserve.com>
>Reply-To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>To: "INTERNET:pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com"
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Cut out verses flopp in center cection
>Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 21:51:24 -0500
>
>
>
>Group,
>I really like the look of the piet's with the cut out in the center cection
> but BHP's warning in the flying and Gliding(1933 page 40) about using
>the
>flop to preserve goog climb performance bothers me. Is there really a need
>for the flop and does it improve performance over a cut out found on
>biblanes of the period?Can you get in and out of the aft cockpit without
>it?
>
>Gene Tomblin
>St. Louis MO.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Cutout vs. Flaps |
| From: | kgardner(at)odu.edu |
03/07/2001 03:08:06 PM
Chris,
Well, I'm not a student, but I work here on campus & am somewhat known to
the people who did the Wright Flyer prop tests. As I've mentioned before,
I'm moving up to Mike Cuy's turf in a couple of months, but if you have
some specific idea, maybe I can get someone here to bite. Since these guys
already have a relationship with EAA, my thought was working a project
through them, which might make covering costs a little easier. It's also
possible that the guys here have a grad student who might be interested in
doing some analysis of 'vintage aeronautics', but I don't know offhand.
I'm willing to help as much as my schedule & plans allow, but I need to
know what you actually want done. I still think getting a whole plane (or a
couple of different ones) would be really cool & would pay big dividends to
the whole vintage aircraft community.
BOBKA(at)compuserve.com@matronics.com on 03/07/2001 12:32:19 PM
Please respond to pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent by: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
cc:
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Cutout vs. Flaps
If we can't get a full scale pietenpol into a wind tunnel, maybe someone
out there can take a full or scale airfoil section and run the tests? We
could supply the model of the airfoil. Any one studying aerodynamics at a
university?
Chris Bobka
TC
Regards,
Kip Gardner
Laboratory Manager, ODU
Dept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmospheric Sciences
4600 Elkhorn Avenue
Norfolk, VA 23529
(757)683-5654
Bumper Sticker of the Week:
"Don't Drink and Park - 'Accidents' Cause People"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Wing center section cutouts. |
Mr Wizzard,
I am 192# 68 in and near 78 years young. I have designed and welded a step
to be bolted on fuse build-up to help get into the plane. Now, on the cutout,
my plan is not only a curved cutout of the center section but to let the
cutout extend to either side taking in about 5 or 6 inches of the wings
measured at the trailing edge. This was done in many of the early biplanes
and they seemed to fly OK. It will sure facilitate the awkward entrance and
exit of the Pietenpol performance. I just can't conceive climbing aboard
with my big a--. unless there be a paid audience.
Corky in La on a crash diet.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Williams" <lnawms(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | welding/brazing(and soldering) |
Mike
Thanks for backing me up on the brazing vs soldering of racing bike frames. I've
built and raced a few and REALLY have a hard time with the theorists that haven't
a clue in practical terms. You were much kinder than I would have been (that's
why I didn't respond!!).
f"http://explorer.msn.com">http://explorer.msn.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | 'Cut out' verses 'flopp' in center cection |
Gene Tomblin wrote about: Cut out verses flopp in center cection
Gene, if you like the looks of the cut out in the center section then that's
good enough reason for going that way. There is really no "need" for a
'flopp' or a 'cut out' in the center section, you can get into and out of
the
cockpit without it. But it does make getting in and out a little easier if
you
have any problem "folding" in the middle.
Also, raising the wing 2" higher by using longer cabanes and lift struts
makes it easier too and you probably wouldn't even miss a cut out.
Rodger Childs
Piet in progress
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mckellars" <mckellar(at)bluebonnet.net> |
Has anyone built a 2 piece wing? I was thinking of building the left
wing and the center section together and making the right wing per the
improved Aircamper plans. Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: 'Cut out' verses 'flopp' in center cection |
If, I had tried to climb aboard a Piet BEFORE I began this project, I would
have looked for an old Waco UPF to rebuild. After the discussions earlier I
went out and put some chairs close and tried to board my Piet fuse. I had
tried and entered successfully without the centersection attached last
August. Today the C S was attached and I TRIED to board the Piet. I thought I
would look awkward but nothing like that turned out. It was an awful site. I
WISH SOMEONE WOULD GIVE A GOOD AND THOROUGH EXPLANATION ON THE PROPER MANNER
TO BOARD A PIET. I'VE RAISED THE CABANES 2 INCHES, MIGHT HAVE TO GO TO 6. I
WAS SHOCKED. There just isn't enough room (for me )
I'm going to have to find some more cut-aways.
Corky, the La contortionist.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack Phillips <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Cut out verses flopp in center cection |
Jeane Tomblin wrote:
>
>
> Group,
> I really like the look of the piet's with the cut out in the center cection
> but BHP's warning in the flying and Gliding(1933 page 40) about using the
> flop to preserve goog climb performance bothers me. Is there really a need
> for the flop and does it improve performance over a cut out found on
> biblanes of the period?Can you get in and out of the aft cockpit without
> it?
>
> Gene Tomblin
> St. Louis MO.
>
Hi Gene,
Bill Rewey and Mike Cuy both have good performance from their Piets with
circular cutouts. I talked with Bill before doing mine. I actually
ended up making my centersection 6" wider than standard in order to gain
more fuel capacity, and it just happened that the 6" I added (which
added 2.5 sq. ft. in wing area) exactly balanced the 2.5 sq. ft. in area
that my cutout subtracted.
I can't believe that the addition of a cutout causes such a drastic
change in airflow - certainly not as much as standing a radiator up in
front of the leading edge! It may be worth noting that Bill Rewey and
Mike Cuy both use A-65 Continental engines, as I do.
Since most Pietenpols require shifting the wing aft to acheive proper
balance, I think it is very beneficial for easy entrance and egress to
have the cutout, or a flop. I like the extra visibility of the cutout,
and I think it looks better - just my opinion.
Jack
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Brusilow" <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Wing center section cutouts. |
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wing center section cutouts.
>
> Hi Gang, I am building a piet and am 200 # about 5'8 and 65 years old
and
> am worring about getting in and out and have built a step. I am wondering
> about making the flop from the rear spar back and slant the flop out to
get
> more head room. I haven't climb in one any suggestion would be helpful
>. There is really no "need" for a
>'flopp' or a 'cut out' in the center section, you can get into and out of
>the
>cockpit without it.
I made my flop from the rear spar & extended it out to the first bay of the
left wing so that I can stand straight alongside the cockpit. Very easy to
mount & dismount.
Sure you can get in & out of the cockpit without either a cutout of flop,
but it aint easy.
Mike B Piet N687MB (Mr Sam )
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 'Cut out' verses 'flopp' in center cection |
Corky,
My cabanes are 2" longer than plans length, no cutout, no flop, no step. I
am 6' tall, 200lbs., 46 yrs. young,...now, here's the way I do it: Standing
on the left side, I grasp the left rear cabane strut, about half way up. I
then grab my right pants cuff, with my right hand, and lift my foot up over
the side of the plane, and place my right foot on the seat, with my toe
pointing to the right side. I then grasp the right cabane strut with my
right hand, and hoist my head & shoulders all the way over the right side of
the cockpit, extending my left arm till my elbow is straight, with my back
lightly touching the bottom of the wing. I then bend my left knee all the
way, and am able to bring my left foot inside, and place it on the floor.
Shifting all my weight to my left foot, and two good handholds, I then place
my right foot on the floor, have a seat, and extend my two feet to the rudder
bar. To get out, simply reverse the procedure. For me, it is very easy,
and has become second nature.
I've shown this method to lots of people, and so far, nobody has much of a
problem getting in and out. I can even get in & out of the front pit,
without too much trouble, except for placing my head & neck above the cross
cables, on the right side of the front pit.
First flight planned for early summer.
Chuck Gantzer
Wichita KS
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Meadows" <gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com> |
Gang,
Anybody had trouble getting to Aircamper.org? I've tried it several times
today and never could get it to work.
Richard, you out there? I tried to visit for a Piet picture fix, and
couldn't get in. Maybe the problem is on my end.
Gary Meadows
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mckellars" <mckellar(at)bluebonnet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aircamper.org |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Meadows" <gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Aircamper.org
>
> Gang,
>
> Anybody had trouble getting to Aircamper.org? I've tried it several
times
> today and never could get it to work.
>
> Richard, you out there? I tried to visit for a Piet picture fix, and
> couldn't get in. Maybe the problem is on my end.
>
> Gary Meadows
>
>
> _-Gary, I've had the same problem. It's not on your end
Mark============================================================
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Loar" <skycarl(at)megsinet.net> |
I've had problems getting into Richard's site also, I believe it is his
server. Same problem the other day.
Carl
Please visit my website at
www.megsinet.net/skycarl
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Gary Meadows
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Aircamper.org
Gang,
Anybody had trouble getting to Aircamper.org? I've tried it several times
today and never could get it to work.
Richard, you out there? I tried to visit for a Piet picture fix, and
couldn't get in. Maybe the problem is on my end.
Gary Meadows
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ignitor" <ignitor(at)uswest.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aircamper.org |
Gary;
I've tried too and can't get there. Must be on their end.
Chris House
> Anybody had trouble getting to Aircamper.org? I've tried it several
times
> today and never could get it to work.
>
> Richard, you out there? I tried to visit for a Piet picture fix, and
> couldn't get in. Maybe the problem is on my end.
>
> Gary Meadows
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: 'Cut out' verses 'flopp' in center cection |
Chuck,
How much will it cost me to get a video of that mounting and dismounting?
Corky
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 'Cut out' verses 'flopp' in center cection |
In a message dated 3/7/01 11:21:08 PM Central Standard Time,
Isablcorky(at)aol.com writes:
<< Chuck,
How much will it cost me to get a video of that mounting and dismounting?
Corky
>>
Just bring me a tube of Ben Gay !! lol Seriously, it's not difficult at
all, once ya figure out the moves.
Chuck
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: 'Cut out' verses 'flopp' in center cection |
Seriously, I wish I could raise my leg that high. No way anymore.
Corky
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 'Cut out' verses 'flopp' in center cection |
| From: | "Mike Bell" <mbell(at)sctcorp.com> |
03/08/2001 07:39:35 AM
Please send pictures.
Mike
If, I had tried to climb aboard a Piet BEFORE I began this project, I
would
have looked for an old Waco UPF to rebuild. After the discussions
earlier I
went out and put some chairs close and tried to board my Piet fuse. I
had
tried and entered successfully without the centersection attached last
August. Today the C S was attached and I TRIED to board the Piet. I
thought I
would look awkward but nothing like that turned out. It was an awful
site. I
WISH SOMEONE WOULD GIVE A GOOD AND THOROUGH EXPLANATION ON THE PROPER
MANNER
TO BOARD A PIET. I'VE RAISED THE CABANES 2 INCHES, MIGHT HAVE TO GO TO
6. I
WAS SHOCKED. There just isn't enough room (for me )
I'm going to have to find some more cut-aways.
Corky, the La contortionist.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Greg Yotz" <gyachts(at)kans.com> |
| Subject: | Re: covering fabric |
Can anyone give me input on where they bought there covering material and
the prices. I'm probably going to go with 1.7oz non-certified but am trying
to find the best 'deal', which might take into account customer service and
not just price.
I looked in the archives but couldn't find a definite answer.
Greg
Gridley, KS
----- Original Message -----
From: Mike <mikec(at)microlandusa.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: covering fabric
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <nle97(at)juno.com>
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2001 12:59 PM
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: covering fabric
>
>
> >
> > Walt,
> > I attended a dope and fabric seminar put on by Alexander
Airplane
> Supply
> > a few years ago. The differnce between the certified fabric and the
> > non-certified is that a big roll of fabric is placed on a spool and
> > rolled out in preset lengths. Each of the lengths on the first part of
> > the roll is checked for strength and certified. when Alexander had
> > enough of this, they would sell the rest of the smae roll as
uncertified.
> > All came from the same roll.
> > We are way behind where we wanted to be on our project because
of
> the
> > weather, but at this time we are planning on using unbleached musslin
> > which is the same as Grade A cotton. Naturally, this will not be
> > certified nor even purchased at a aircraft supply house. We plan on
> > making a pull tester out of a clamp and a fish acale to test it before
we
> > use it or even buy a large quantity. This is really easy to do and it
> > wouldn't hurt to chaeck any fabric before using it. New cotton shuold
> > exceed 8o lbs pull in both directions whereas dacron should exceed 200
> > lbs if it is really new. One year old dacron will loose about half its
> > strength, so be sure to get new fabric if you want to use dacron.
> >
> > John Langston
> > Pipe Creek, TX
> > nle97(at)juno.com
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 'Cut out' verses 'flopp' in center |
cection
If you can't raise your leg that high, what do you do when you see a fire
hydrant?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: 'Cut out' verses 'flopp' in center cection |
As we say down south, I'm S O L .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: covering fabric |
In a message dated 3/8/01 6:16:21 AM Pacific Standard Time, gyachts(at)kans.com
writes:
> Can anyone give me input on where they bought there covering material and
> the prices. I'm probably going to go with 1.7oz non-certified but am trying
> to find the best 'deal', which might take into account customer service and
> not just price.
> I looked in the archives but couldn't find a definite answer.
>
> Greg
> Gridley, KS
>
>
>
Greg,
I buy mine from Aircraft Spruce and use 2.7 oz because it is the equivalent
to grade A cotton as mentioned in Spruce Catalog. The current price in
Spruce is $3.65 /yd, and it is 66 inches wide. This fabric is manufactured
by Dupont. Doug Bryant Wichita Ks
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Craig Lawler <clawler(at)ptd.net> |
| Subject: | Re: covering fabric |
Greg,
I used AirTech and it worked well. Good customer service. Used 1.7
covering too. No cheep.
Craig
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Merrill <lagom(at)earthlink.net> |
"INTERNET:pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com"
I dont want to open a can or worms and get everyone upset, but I would like to
know if there is anyone out there who can tell me the different flying characteristics
between the piet and GN-1 airfoil. Has anyone flown both and can they
comment on how they differ.. if any? I'm not talking about construction, just
how they fly and handle. I just would like to know.
Merrill
Mt. Dora, Fl
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | 1.7 oz. covering fabric |
> > Can anyone give me input on where they bought there covering material and
> > the prices. I'm probably going to go with 1.7oz non-certified but am
> trying
> > to find the best 'deal', which might take into account customer service and
> > not just price
> > Greg
> > Gridley, KS
Greg- Superflite was pretty good to
deal with in sending me their 1.7 oz non-cert. fabric. They have a web
site too which is: http://www.superflite.com/cov.html#fabric They are
located in IL.
PS- the only thing I had to hunt around for was matching 1.7 oz. finishing
tapes....the pinked edged stuff you put over ribs, leading edges, trailing
edges etc. that comes in all kinds of various widths depending on your
need. I had to order those hit and miss from whomever had them in the
1.7 oz weight. Wicks, ACS, some independent Polyfiber dealers.
If you use the 1.7 oz. try to use 1.7 oz tapes too. The reason for this is
that the 1.7 oz has a fine weave that will fill nicely. (read less coats, less
sanding, less weight, nicer finished appearance) If you use heavier grades
of fabric for your finishing tapes you'll find number one, they are more
stiff and
don't lay down or curve around as easy as the lighter tapes, and number two,
they have a more coarse weave to them and will take more schtuff to fill the
weave to match the rest of your finish. It is fine to do though......just
some
observations.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christian Bobka <BOBKA(at)compuserve.com> |
Everybody, get your can openers!!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rich <houndsfour(at)mediaone.net> |
Hi Merrill,
Yes I have flown both an ORG PIET and I own a GN-1.
This is were I'll most likely get flamed but the only difference is in the first
4" of the leading edge. Mr. Grega increased the radius of leading edge slightly.
I found no difference in the flying (cruising) of either wing. I did notice a
cleaner or
sharper break in the stall. Very comfortable to stall, no bad habits. To be very
honest, you will be very happy with either wing.
Rich
GN-1 81ET
Merrill wrote:
>
> I dont want to open a can or worms and get everyone upset, but I would like to
know if there is anyone out there who can tell me the different flying characteristics
between the piet and GN-1 airfoil. Has anyone flown both and can they
comment on how they differ.. if any? I'm not talking about construction, just
how they fly and handle. I just would like to know.
>
> Merrill
> Mt. Dora, Fl
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Boarding Flap and Cutout |
Guys,
Concerning the Flap or lack thereof, did I forget to mention that our
Piet has the Flap. It goes from the first rib to the right of center line to
the second rib left of center line. It is in place on a piano hinge and
works real slick, a work of art with all the bracing to keep the fabric
from deforming it when the time of covering comes.
I was out voted on whether to have it or not, I voted against it at
first. The other member of the group, who had got into a Piet cockpit
without the flap, and is 6ft tall, out-voted me.
Rodger Childs
85% complete, 75% left to go
(details, details)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
Amidst all my belly-aching, crying, complaining, blaming and just down right
cussedness about getting in and out of my Piet, fashioning a set of hydrau
brakes and all the other little pesty things that come up because of
ignorance, a real nice thing happened to me today. I received an email direct
from a stranger on the net. He was very cordial in his approach mainly, as
would be expected, he was from Louisiana. Yes, believe it or not, there are
Piet builders below the line. He recently bought a project and will need a
lot of encouragement. Its great to have a neighbor building even though it's
200 miles away. Lets give him a good Pietenpol welcome at
blugoos1(at)bellsouth.net (James Cooper)
Corky, sharing the great stet with Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Merrill" <lagom(at)earthlink.net> |
Thanks Rich for the informative response about the GN-1 and the Pietenpol
airfoil. I'm building the piet, but I almost started the GN-1. I think
they are both good airplanes. In fact I think that anything built properly
and that fly's well by an individual is a great airplane. With all the
talk here about putting the piet wing in the wind tunnel, and no real stats
about its performance, I was just wondering about the GN-1 airfoil as well
Happy building
Merrill
Mt Dora, Fl.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Boyd" <pietenpol41(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 piece wing/ wing flop |
Yes there was one guy who was doing a two piece wing. I found a piece from
him on the issue in the archives. Sorry I don't remember his name. He said
it elilminated some 6-8lbs and made construction easier. It also enabled
him to build it in limited work space in his garage. I elected to go with
the 3-piece after all was said and done. I will install a wing flop which
will extend from the left wing panel to the right wing panel while being
attached to the center section via piano hinge. This should allow more of an
opening for entry/exit. This has NOT saved me a lot of time and work but I
am interested in being able to get in and out without too much difficulty.
Dave Boyd, Champaign, IL
>From: "Mckellars" <mckellar(at)bluebonnet.net>
>Reply-To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: 2 piece wing
>Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2001 19:31:56 -0600
>
>
>Has anyone built a 2 piece wing? I was thinking of building the left
>wing and the center section together and making the right wing per the
>improved Aircamper plans. Mark
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mckellars" <mckellar(at)bluebonnet.net> |
I've been trying to get in touch with William Wynne for about a month
with no success. I wanted to use a Corvair engine and ordered one of his
conversion manuals about 3 weeks ago. I even sent a money order so he
would'nt have to wait for a check to clear. I have'nt recieved it as of
today. I'm trying to make a decision about what engine to use. Any
advice would be welcomed. Has anyone had dealings with W. Wynne? Mark
McKellar Mt. Pleasant, Tx
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: William Wynne |
| From: | kgardner(at)odu.edu |
03/09/2001 01:44:24 PM
Hi Mark,
I have a copy of William's conversion manual, and based on it, I have
decided to use a Corvaire in my Piet (whenever I get started on it :-).
I also visited him this past Dec. at his shop/hangar, where I picked his
brain for the better part of a day. He is a very personable & easy guy to
communicate with. That said, it took him about 2 months to get my copy of
the manual to me & he has not been responding to e-mails lately. I suspect
that right now he is busy getting ready for Sun N' Fun.
His e-mail is WilliamTCA(at)aol.com
You can also try calling him at (904) 451-3676
The manual is great, lots of detail & easy to read. You would also need a
copy of the Chevrolet Corvair shop manual & I recommend also getting a
copy of Richard Finch's "How to Keep Your Corvair Alive" (available from
Amazon.com)
Hope this helps!
mckellar(at)bluebonnet.net@matronics.com on 03/09/2001 12:53:51 PM
Please respond to pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent by: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
cc:
Subject: Pietenpol-List: William Wynne
I've been trying to get in touch with William Wynne for about a month
with no success. I wanted to use a Corvair engine and ordered one of his
conversion manuals about 3 weeks ago. I even sent a money order so he
would'nt have to wait for a check to clear. I have'nt recieved it as of
today. I'm trying to make a decision about what engine to use. Any
advice would be welcomed. Has anyone had dealings with W. Wynne? Mark
McKellar Mt. Pleasant, Tx
Regards,
Kip Gardner
Laboratory Manager, ODU
Dept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmospheric Sciences
4600 Elkhorn Avenue
Norfolk, VA 23529
(757)683-5654
Bumper Sticker of the Week:
"Don't Drink and Park - 'Accidents' Cause People"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Loar" <skycarl(at)megsinet.net> |
Mark, I got the package from Wm Wynne about a year ago. Took a couple of
weeks to get it but it is worth it.
He has a lot of good advice in there. If you are planning to use a corvair
engine, then I would suggest going to clarks corvairs online and ordering
their catalog. Also, JC Whitneys has some good stuff you can use such as
bearing and rings. They have a great gasket set also for the corvair. First
rate stuff really reasonable.
www.corvair.com
here is their link
Carl
Please visit my website at
www.megsinet.net/skycarl
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Mckellars
Subject: Pietenpol-List: William Wynne
I've been trying to get in touch with William Wynne for about a month
with no success. I wanted to use a Corvair engine and ordered one of his
conversion manuals about 3 weeks ago. I even sent a money order so he
would'nt have to wait for a check to clear. I have'nt recieved it as of
today. I'm trying to make a decision about what engine to use. Any
advice would be welcomed. Has anyone had dealings with W. Wynne? Mark
McKellar Mt. Pleasant, Tx
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: William Wynne |
| From: | "Mike Bell" <mbell(at)sctcorp.com> |
03/09/2001 01:54:39 PM
William is honest, knowledgeable and slow. What he provides is
certainly worth waiting for and at times you will.
Clarks or Corvair Underground now handles his manual and "magic
studs". No one else provides his depth of knowledge and experience
with the Corvair as an aircraft engine.
Mike
kgardner(at)odu.edu
Sent by: To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
owner-pietenpol-list-server@mat cc:
ronics.com Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List:
William Wynne
03/09/2001 01:44 PM
Please respond to
pietenpol-list
Hi Mark,
I have a copy of William's conversion manual, and based on it, I have
decided to use a Corvaire in my Piet (whenever I get started on it :
-).
I also visited him this past Dec. at his shop/hangar, where I picked
his
brain for the better part of a day. He is a very personable & easy guy
to
communicate with. That said, it took him about 2 months to get my copy
of
the manual to me & he has not been responding to e-mails lately. I
suspect
that right now he is busy getting ready for Sun N' Fun.
His e-mail is WilliamTCA(at)aol.com
You can also try calling him at (904) 451-3676
The manual is great, lots of detail & easy to read. You would also
need a
copy of the Chevrolet Corvair shop manual & I recommend also getting
a
copy of Richard Finch's "How to Keep Your Corvair Alive" (available
from
Amazon.com)
Hope this helps!
mckellar(at)bluebonnet.net@matronics.com on 03/09/2001 12:53:51 PM
Please respond to pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent by: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
cc:
Subject: Pietenpol-List: William Wynne
I've been trying to get in touch with William Wynne for about a month
with no success. I wanted to use a Corvair engine and ordered one of
his
conversion manuals about 3 weeks ago. I even sent a money order so he
would'nt have to wait for a check to clear. I have'nt recieved it as
of
today. I'm trying to make a decision about what engine to use. Any
advice would be welcomed. Has anyone had dealings with W. Wynne? Mark
McKellar Mt. Pleasant, Tx
Regards,
Kip Gardner
Laboratory Manager, ODU
Dept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmospheric Sciences
4600 Elkhorn Avenue
Norfolk, VA 23529
(757)683-5654
Bumper Sticker of the Week:
"Don't Drink and Park - 'Accidents' Cause People"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: William Wynne |
I havn't been able to contact him either. I ordered a
motor mt from him a year ago and havn't received it
yet. some of the time was spent because he was
developing a new design. but that wasdone awhile back.
I am also concerned that I have lost my money. If you
don't get a book from him. I have two, one that I
ordered and one that came with the engine that I
bought. hopefully he is just busy with getting ready
for sun n fun.Also I two copies of "Keeping your
corvair alive"by Finch
del
--- Mckellars wrote:
>
>
> I've been trying to get in touch with William Wynne
> for about a month
> with no success. I wanted to use a Corvair engine
> and ordered one of his
> conversion manuals about 3 weeks ago. I even sent a
> money order so he
> would'nt have to wait for a check to clear. I
> have'nt recieved it as of
> today. I'm trying to make a decision about what
February 24, 2001 - March 09, 2001
Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-bw