Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-cc
September 20, 2001 - October 21, 2001
engine. The first info I found was in BPA #60
Michael, thanks for the quick turn around on the copy of your video -- only
about 1/2 way thru it (after it arrived yesterday!) -- haven't had 2 1/2 hrs
to watch it at one sitting! ;-)
Otherwise, I'm having fun soaking upper rib capstrips in the bathtub &
cleaning off a work bench for making tail feathers.
Mike
Pretty Prairie, KS
----- Original Message -----
| From: | "Michael D Cuy" <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | 65 Cont. vs. others ? |
>
> Group---I happened to stumble onto an A-65 with everything
> but the log books. Fortunately it was re-buildable--but still ended
> up costing nearly $4,500. I would go with an auto engine only if
> you did it by the guru's knowledge. For Fords I would pick the brains
> of Lowell Frank or Wil Graff who have flown countless hours behind
> those engines because they knew there stuff. (I'm sure there are
> others, but those I know.) Pick a Corvair authority
> like Virl Deal or W. W....when he's back up to speed. Unless you are
> an avid engine head, I'd closely follow those who've rebuilt and
> successfully flown
> behind auto engines to the tee. A 65 Cont. can be rebuilt wrong
too......or
> the carb or mags done improperly.....but they still are the most
reasonable
> engine for the money out there as far as A/C engines go. I could not
imagine
> paying the money for a 150 hp engine for an RV when compared to our little
> Pietenpols.
>
> Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Warren D. Shoun" <wbnb(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Support America, Go Flying |
Thanks Steve! Really enjoyed that.
Cheers,
~Warren
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Support America, Go Flying |
In a message dated 9/20/01 6:18:46 PM Eastern Daylight Time, steve(at)byu.edu
writes:
<< After hearing that the VFR restrictions were somewhat lifted, I split work
and went flying. I tied a flag to the piet to savor the renewed freedom.
May it never need to be revolked again.
>>
Amen to that Steve. Great to see the "E" flying again !
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fred Weaver" <Mytyweav(at)flash.net> |
| Subject: | Re:Support America, Go Flying |
Yo Steve!! The pics looked great! Looks like a couple were taken fairly
close to home... :)
Glad to see the Piet in the air with the flag(including the pole) flying
also...
Weav
----- Original Message -----
From: Steve Eldredge <steve(at)byu.edu>
Subject: Tailwind-List: Support America, Go Flying
> --> Tailwind-List message posted by: Steve Eldredge
>
>
> After hearing that the VFR restrictions were somewhat lifted, I split work
> and went flying. I tied a flag to the piet to savor the renewed freedom.
> May it never need to be revolked again.
>
> Steve E.
>
> pictures from this afternoon over Provo, Utah.
>
> http://home.byu.net/~sdeldred/FREEDOM/
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Michael
> Conkling
> Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 3:36 PM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: 65 Cont. vs. others ?
>
>
>
>
> Any one run across recent info on Larry Harrison & his Iron Duke powered
> Piets (I think he built both the "Poplar Piet" & a Sky Scout) ??
> Same engine as the S-10 pickup, etc. -- 151 cu. in. L-4 G.M./ Pontiac
> engine. The first info I found was in BPA #60
>
> Michael, thanks for the quick turn around on the copy of your video --
only
> about 1/2 way thru it (after it arrived yesterday!) -- haven't had 2 1/2
hrs
> to watch it at one sitting! ;-)
>
> Otherwise, I'm having fun soaking upper rib capstrips in the bathtub &
> cleaning off a work bench for making tail feathers.
>
> Mike
> Pretty Prairie, KS
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael D Cuy" <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov>
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 10:11 AM
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: 65 Cont. vs. others ?
>
>
>
> >
> > Group---I happened to stumble onto an A-65 with everything
> > but the log books. Fortunately it was re-buildable--but still ended
> > up costing nearly $4,500. I would go with an auto engine only if
> > you did it by the guru's knowledge. For Fords I would pick the brains
> > of Lowell Frank or Wil Graff who have flown countless hours behind
> > those engines because they knew there stuff. (I'm sure there are
> > others, but those I know.) Pick a Corvair authority
> > like Virl Deal or W. W....when he's back up to speed. Unless you are
> > an avid engine head, I'd closely follow those who've rebuilt and
> > successfully flown
> > behind auto engines to the tee. A 65 Cont. can be rebuilt wrong
> too......or
> > the carb or mags done improperly.....but they still are the most
> reasonable
> > engine for the money out there as far as A/C engines go. I could not
> imagine
> > paying the money for a 150 hp engine for an RV when compared to our
little
> > Pietenpols.
> >
> > Mike C.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Joe Krzes" <jkrzes(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Support America, Go Flying |
Great pictures Steve. I feel like I went on the flight with you. Now
excuse me while I go comb my hair... :)
Joe
>In a message dated 9/20/01 6:18:46 PM Eastern Daylight Time, steve(at)byu.edu
>writes:
>
>After hearing that the VFR restrictions were somewhat lifted, I split work
> and went flying. I tied a flag to the piet to savor the renewed freedom.
> May it never need to be revolked again.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: Support America, Go Flying |
Steve-----Now that's what I call FLYING the flag !
Way to go,
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Textor" <pincjt(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Piet builder web sites? |
Is there a listing of Piet builder sites?
Thanks,
Jack
DSM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | NormDecou(at)aol.com |
Mike,
I understand that you made a video of your project. I was told you make
copies for about $20. If you are still willing to do this please let me know
where to send the check. I will need to send you some extra money to cover
shipping to Canada. I am currently doing my cockpit mockup, so I guess I am
in the very late planning stages now.
Thanks Norm
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Cuy-Piet Video |
Mike,
As a long time admirer of your interpretation of Bernie's Classic, I
would also like to obtain a copy. Please post the particulars if the vid is
still available. Thanx! :>) Don Cooley
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Eng mount more stuff |
Am building new engine mount (A-65) and altering it 2 inches forward for
W &
B considerations. Questions: Top mount arms are, according to plans,
9/16
forward of lower arms. What degree of down incidence does this provide?
Also,
there are no dimensions of the plans that provide for any right
deflection of
centerline thrust. What should I do in this case?
Corky,
I do not have the plans in front of me but I do know that the mounts on
the crankcase are exactly perpendicular to the crankshaft both
vertically and horizontally. If what you say above is true, then it
would give quite a bit of downthrust. If we knew the coefficient of
lift of the airfoil and the airspeed we could figure the angle of attack
at cruise and then adjust the downthrust so that the crankshaft is
parallel to the direction of flight. But I have never seen any numbers
for C sub L for Bernard's home brewed airfoil although one of these days
we will make a full scale section and have Kip Gardner get some students
to work up the numbers where he works.
Side thrust is determined by the degree of sidelip of the aircraft in
level flight. The P-factor is such that the right side of the disc is
pulling more than the left, assuming not enough downthrust or with
enough downthrust but with the spiral of the propwash impinging on the
left side of the fuselage and vertical stab aft of the CG (point of
rotation). This would be just like being in a climb where you have to
hold right rudder to keep the ball in the middle except that you would
not be climbing but still having to hold the ball centered with right
rudder. Add some right thrust and you take your right foot off of the
rudder. Of course, this is for cruising speed in straight and level
flight only. All other regimes would theoretically require some rudder
input either left or right to keep the ball centered. Another fix for
this, usually in combination with the right thrust would be to offset
the vertical stabilizer's leading edge to the left. Old Travelair
biplanes have an adjustment on the stab for just such a purpose.
I believe Mike Cuy said that if you set the ship so that the fuselage is
level fore and aft (firewall at right angles to the floor) and
laterally, and prop up the motor in position so that the crank is
exactly in line with the fuselage when looking at it from the top and
the side, then hang a nail from the cieling with the point right in
front of the center of the prop hub, then move the motor so that the
center of the prop hub is one inch to the right of the nail tip and one
inch below it. That is the downthrust and right thrust needed.
anyone else?
chris bobka
Minneapolisl
----- Original Message -----
From: Isablcorky(at)aol.com
To: bobka(at)charter.net
Sent: Friday, September 21, 2001 12:53 PM
Subject: Eng mount
Chris,
I'm building this new engine mount and would like some help on the
offset to the right. How much shorter should the right hangers be from
the lefters. OR can this be taken care of with those large 1/16 th
washers after engine installation?
Corky in La
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mac Zirges" <macz(at)netbridge.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 65 Cont. vs. others ? |
I just wanted to put in another comment about some folks having the
impression that the model A engine is an "insane" choice for our
Piets--anyone that goes to Brodhead each year would know that the model A
powered Piets not only fly well, but quite a number of them are there
regularly. That is, they haven't fallen out of the sky during the previous
year, or during their trip to Brodhead, etc. Bernie figured out a very
simple system that still works today.
Cordially, Mac in Oregon
-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Swanson <swans071(at)tc.umn.edu>
Date: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 9:35 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: 65 Cont. vs. others ?
>
>
>>From some of the comments that have been posted, it might sound like
putting
>a Model A on a Piet is insane. My Dad has questioned my sanity. But I
>would second Mike's comments below about using experts to rebuild the
>engine. I am using an old guy here in Minnesota who has been rebuilding
>Model A's for 60 years, along with other engines of the era. I got his name
>from Vi Kapler, who also has an engine in this guy's shop. He has picked
out
>others who specialize in some of the work, such as pouring new babbit
>bearings, who he has confidence in. What has given me some confidence in
>him is he has made several recommendations. For example, he insists on new
>pistons, slightly undersize so if there is an oiling failure there will be
>extra time before the engine seizes. And we will be putting a temporary
>Plexiglas cover over the valves to watch the oiling system during the
ground
>break-in period to be sure the bearings are getting sufficient oil. He had
>the engine magnafluxed and determined there were no cracks in the water
>jacket. And he also swapped the crank that came with my engine with
another
>that was a heavier casting.
>
>I guess what I am saying is that flying behind any engine is a risk, and a
>poor rebuild job on an aircraft engine is always a problem. But if you do
>careful research, and farm out the parts of the project that you are not
>competent to do (in my case the engine), the risks can be minimized. The
>Model A is an inherently strong engine, and is simple. Many are still in
>daily use in out of the way places for irrigation pumps.
>
>I have this strange burning desire to build this as original as I can
>consistent with modern building practices, and fly it to Brodhead.
>
>Call me crazy, but don't call me late for dinner.
>
>Al Swanson
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Michael D
>Cuy
>Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 10:11 AM
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: 65 Cont. vs. others ?
>
>
>
>
>Group---I happened to stumble onto an A-65 with everything
>but the log books. Fortunately it was re-buildable--but still ended
>up costing nearly $4,500. I would go with an auto engine only if
>you did it by the guru's knowledge. For Fords I would pick the brains
>of Lowell Frank or Wil Graff who have flown countless hours behind
>those engines because they knew there stuff. (I'm sure there are
>others, but those I know.) Pick a Corvair authority
>like Virl Deal or W. W....when he's back up to speed. Unless you are
>an avid engine head, I'd closely follow those who've rebuilt and
>successfully flown
>behind auto engines to the tee. A 65 Cont. can be rebuilt wrong
>too......or
>the carb or mags done improperly.....but they still are the most reasonable
>engine for the money out there as far as A/C engines go. I could not
>imagine
>paying the money for a 150 hp engine for an RV when compared to our little
>Pietenpols.
>
>Mike C.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ignitor" <ignitor(at)uswest.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Cuy-Piet Video |
Mike;
Count me in on that video, too
Chris
Who's now a causality of the airline losses and has plenty of time to
build........
(But still smiling)
----- Original Message -----
From: <ADonJr(at)aol.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Cuy-Piet Video
>
> Mike,
> As a long time admirer of your interpretation of Bernie's Classic,
I
> would also like to obtain a copy. Please post the particulars if the vid
is
> still available. Thanx! :>) Don Cooley
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John McNarry" <jmcnarry(at)escape.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: 65 Cont. vs. others ? |
Mac, Al and others
I am still impressed with what Bernard Pietenpol, Henry and Edsel Ford
accomplished so many years ago! The Fords for building the remarkable A and
Bernard for using its engine to give us so much fun.
The technologies available to us today allow one to do the research and make
the changes to the A or B engine and have a VERY reliable fun powerplant.
None of us, I hope, would take an aviation engine of what is becoming an
elderly design itself and just bolt it onto the airframe and go flying. We
wouldn't do that with a Continental or Lycoming. Don't do it with any
alternative engine either.
If using the Ford engines, be sure to use the best pistons available. Make
the changes to the oiling and cooling systems.
Add carb heat. Have you ever looked at the condensation on the intake of a
flying Ford A? If it is that cold on the outside, what is happening inside?
Be sure your cam lift and timing is right too. The old cams tend to suffer
from poor lube and age.
Aside from being very slightly heavier 20 to 40 pounds depending on the
mods. The 200 cubic inch Ford fours can be a very dependable engine. Just
build it right! Go back and look at Grant Maclaren's website. lots of good
solid information on the Ford engines.
Don't forget to use your local antique car guys for a resource too.
John
> I just wanted to put in another comment about some folks having the
> impression that the model A engine is an "insane" choice for our
> Piets--anyone that goes to Brodhead each year would know that the model A
> powered Piets not only fly well, but quite a number of them are there
> regularly. That is, they haven't fallen out of the sky during the
previous
> year, or during their trip to Brodhead, etc. Bernie figured out a very
> simple system that still works today.
>
> Cordially, Mac in Oregon
> >
> >>From some of the comments that have been posted, it might sound like
> putting
> >a Model A on a Piet is insane. My Dad has questioned my sanity. But I
> >would second Mike's comments below about using experts to rebuild the
> >engine. I am using an old guy here in Minnesota who has been rebuilding
> >Model A's for 60 years, along with other engines of the era. I got his
name
> >from Vi Kapler, who also has an engine in this guy's shop. He has picked
> out
> >others who specialize in some of the work, such as pouring new babbit
> >bearings, who he has confidence in. What has given me some confidence in
> >him is he has made several recommendations. For example, he insists on
new
> >pistons, slightly undersize so if there is an oiling failure there will
be
> >extra time before the engine seizes. And we will be putting a temporary
> >Plexiglas cover over the valves to watch the oiling system during the
> ground
> >break-in period to be sure the bearings are getting sufficient oil. He
had
> >the engine magnafluxed and determined there were no cracks in the water
> >jacket. And he also swapped the crank that came with my engine with
> another
> >that was a heavier casting.
> >
> >I guess what I am saying is that flying behind any engine is a risk, and
a
> >poor rebuild job on an aircraft engine is always a problem. But if you
do
> >careful research, and farm out the parts of the project that you are not
> >competent to do (in my case the engine), the risks can be minimized. The
> >Model A is an inherently strong engine, and is simple. Many are still in
> >daily use in out of the way places for irrigation pumps.
> >
> >I have this strange burning desire to build this as original as I can
> >consistent with modern building practices, and fly it to Brodhead.
> >
> >Call me crazy, but don't call me late for dinner.
> >
> >Al Swanson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alan Swanson" <swans071(at)tc.umn.edu> |
| Subject: | Horizontal Stabilizer |
I just finished all the parts of my tail section, and am putting them
together for the first time. When I built them, I made sure that all of the
main parts of the horizontal stabilizer were on the same center line- the
leading edge, center beam, and rear main beam. I used 3/16 plywood in the
center on the leading edge and center beam where the fin attaches, and 1/8
ply on the main beam as shown on the plans. I also have 1/8 ply gusset on
the fuselage over the tailpost.
Using this combination, as the plans show, I need to put a 1/8 ply spacer
under the front edge of the horizontal stab to make it level. And I need to
shim up the front 3/16 ply piece on the H-stab and on the rear with a 1/8
ply spacer to make the fin sit flush and level with the tailpost.
Did I do something wrong? As it stands now, the fin sits high on the 3/16
ply piece on the center beam of the H-stab if I don't use spacers.
Thanks for the help,
Al Swanson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | flyboy_120(at)webtv.net (Ed G.) |
| Subject: | Re: Horizontal Stabilizer |
Al my horizontal stab came out the same way. If you look at the
thicknesses of the members and the spacers called for in the plans it
doesn't add up, I put the 3/16 spacer under the center beam so that the
stab. sits parallel to the longerons and then filled in te space under
the leading edge . It took a hair over 1/4" spacer.
Ed G.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | flyboy_120(at)webtv.net (Ed G.) |
| Subject: | Re: Horizontal Stabilizer |
Al actually a 1/8" spacer under the center beam would give zero degrees
of incedence. I may change mine before it's all over, When I did mine I
figured a little positive incedence wouldn't hurt, Any comments from the
group on this Ed G.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
Group----here is a site you can go to for info on my Piet video.
It's a mish-mash of everything. 2.5 hours---all Piet stuff. Enough
to bore any wife to tears. No extra charge for Canadian shipping.
Thanks,
Mike C.
http://users.aol.com/bpabpabpa/cuyvideo.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 2 Msgs - 09/23/01 |
In a message dated 09/24/2001 1:54:27 AM Central Daylight Time,
pietenpol-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes:
<< Al actually a 1/8" spacer under the center beam would give zero degrees
of incedence. I may change mine before it's all over, When I did mine I
figured a little positive incedence wouldn't hurt, Any comments from the
group on this Ed G. >>
Have you flown your airplane yet? How does it fly? The reason I ask is that
you are setting yourself up for severe 'pitch-down' forces If you look at
most (not all) airplanes, you will note that there is a slight nose UP, or
sometimes even an inverted airfoil to the horizontal stab. Zero degrees
would have been better, I think.
Ed
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
Steamed my left lower longeron over the weekend. It took a real nice
set, though I wish I could have gotten a more gentle curve at the first
station.
Next I tried soaking the right one for three days before bending -
CRACK!
That's an expensive mistake I won't make again. Back to the steamer for
all wood bending from now on.
Larry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mboynton(at)excite.com |
Wow,
I hadn't planned on steaming my longerons at all - and I'm using Douglas
fir. Anybody else had experience with this?
Mark Boynton
>
>
> Steamed my left lower longeron over the weekend. It took a real nice
> set, though I wish I could have gotten a more gentle curve at the first
> station.
>
> Next I tried soaking the right one for three days before bending -
> CRACK!
>
> That's an expensive mistake I won't make again. Back to the steamer for
> all wood bending from now on.
>
> Larry
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | flyboy_120(at)webtv.net (Ed G.) |
| Subject: | Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 2 Msgs - 09/23/01 |
Ed I'm just now working on fastenening in the tail feathers . I made
the spacers as per the plans and like Al, realized when trying to fit
up the horizontal stab that something is is not quite right. The plans
call for 3/16" spacers at both the center beam and the leading edge
which can't work because there is a 1/4" difference in the thicknesses
as I'm sure you know.
Thanks for your input I will plane the center beam spacer down to 1/8"
which should put it at zero incidence. I haven't made the front spacer
yet . Ed G.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alan Swanson" <swans071(at)tc.umn.edu> |
Over the past few years there have been several discussions about rib
steaming, but never about longeron steaming. I think Larry is the first one
I have heard who is steaming Longerons.
Larry- I did not steam the longerons, just used retaining blocks around the
bend. I wonder if the reason you didn't get a gentle curve at the first
station was because the steaming made the wood too "rubbery" and soft?
Also, you might want to place the longerons so that the grain direction is
vertical to get the most strength.
Al Swanson
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
mboynton(at)excite.com
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: longerons
Wow,
I hadn't planned on steaming my longerons at all - and I'm using Douglas
fir. Anybody else had experience with this?
Mark Boynton
>
>
> Steamed my left lower longeron over the weekend. It took a real nice
> set, though I wish I could have gotten a more gentle curve at the first
> station.
>
> Next I tried soaking the right one for three days before bending -
> CRACK!
>
> That's an expensive mistake I won't make again. Back to the steamer for
> all wood bending from now on.
>
> Larry
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
If your longeron broke while bending, inspect your wood very carefully. It
might have been defective to start. Does the grain have the proper slope?
Was there a pitch pocket at the break? Was it the right size and shape? All
bends should be gentle not abrupt.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
http://www.eaa.org for latest flying rules
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alan Swanson" <swans071(at)tc.umn.edu>
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: longerons
Over the past few years there have been several discussions about rib
steaming, but never about longeron steaming. I think Larry is the first one
I have heard who is steaming Longerons.
Larry- I did not steam the longerons, just used retaining blocks around the
bend. I wonder if the reason you didn't get a gentle curve at the first
station was because the steaming made the wood too "rubbery" and soft?
Also, you might want to place the longerons so that the grain direction is
vertical to get the most strength.
Al Swanson
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
mboynton(at)excite.com
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: longerons
Wow,
I hadn't planned on steaming my longerons at all - and I'm using Douglas
fir. Anybody else had experience with this?
Mark Boynton
>
>
> Steamed my left lower longeron over the weekend. It took a real nice
> set, though I wish I could have gotten a more gentle curve at the first
> station.
>
> Next I tried soaking the right one for three days before bending -
> CRACK!
>
> That's an expensive mistake I won't make again. Back to the steamer for
> all wood bending from now on.
>
> Larry
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Pietenpol longerons... |
I have never heard of anyone having to steam or soak the
Pietenpol lower longerons, particularly with the "Improved
Air Camper" plans which have a gentle curvature compared
to the earlier version in the 1932 Flying and Glider Manual.
It wasn't necessary to steam my, or my friend's, longerons
in order to fit them into the jig (both were built from the later
blueprints drawn by Orrin Hoopman).
Possibly, as Cy Galley suggests, the wood is flawed. If both
longerons came from the same piece of timber, I'd take a
very close look at the one that didn't break.
Cheers,
Graham Hansen (Pietenpol CF-AUN)
________________________________________________________________________________-
| From: | javier cruz <javcr(at)yahoo.com> |
Hi group
Hi Larry
I think that you should be carefully with the
longerons, they some the main structure parts,
remember that next to the little bend are the landing
gear fittings, i don't be a wood expert, and this is
not a comercial advisory, but the wood that Wicks
sended to me was very good. I made a fuselage drawing
on the table, put a little pieces of wood on the
drawing and with a little pressure the longerons take
the curve, after apply a little water spray on the
blend , two days, for tension relieve and all looks
good. I have tested the fuselage (for shock absorbers
springs) with 600 lbs on and all was OK, (i don't have
the lateral's ply on).
About the H stabilizer, i think that it should be at 0
degrees, All friends here that are now flying sad that
the Pietenpols are tail heavy, and with positive
angle, the tail will be more heavy.
I expect that it can help you a little.
ood luck
Saludos desde Mexico
Javier Cruz
working on the Corvair engine.
________________________________________________________________________________-
| Subject: | Re: Horizontal Stabilizer |
In a message dated 9/22/01 10:06:56 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
swans071(at)tc.umn.edu writes:
> I just finished all the parts of my tail section, and am putting them
> together for the first time. When I built them, I made sure that all of the
> main parts of the horizontal stabilizer were on the same center line- the
> leading edge, center beam, and rear main beam. I used 3/16 plywood in the
> center on the leading edge and center beam where the fin attaches, and 1/8
> ply on the main beam as shown on the plans. I also have 1/8 ply gusset on
> the fuselage over the tailpost.
>
> Using this combination, as the plans show, I need to put a 1/8 ply spacer
> under the front edge of the horizontal stab to make it level. And I need to
> shim up the front 3/16 ply piece on the H-stab and on the rear with a 1/8
> ply spacer to make the fin sit flush and level with the tailpost.
>
> Did I do something wrong? As it stands now, the fin sits high on the 3/16
> ply piece on the center beam of the H-stab if I don't use spacers.
>
> Thanks for the help,
>
> Al Swanson
>
>
>
Al,
Shimming is fine and is probably considered normal construction technique as
any plans can only contain so much detail information. Doug Bryant
Wichita Ks
________________________________________________________________________________-
| From: | Larry Neal <llneal(at)earthlink.net> |
Alan, Cy and Javier,
Thanks for the response.
Yes the grain was vertical. Yes the bend was curved around multiple blocks,
which were sanded in radius.
The bend was done gradually, but also "over" by some 20%, working over
successive blocks to create the bend and then relax to the final curve. There
was no beating the wood up, but obviously it surrendered.
This was a very nice piece of spruce. It was thoroughly inspected and did not
have any defects, by the book aircraft grade and yes I have the book...
I can only think that in soaking much more time was needed. Apparently, I
overstressed a good, stiff piece of wood.
I steamed the replacement yesterday and formed it. Looks dandy and has the same
curve as the first. A bit more bend at the second upright than subsequent, just
like the first, but smooth as butter and no complaints from the wood. This was
by putting the first six feet of the longeron put the steamer for three hours
with a gallon of water.
To be honest, I'm as surprised as anyone. I've been on this and previous Piet
groups for about ten years and never heard of a problem.
Where the hell is DeCosta when you need him? He's the bent wood expert, if I
remember correctly he does it for a living. I'll email the rascal and see what
he says.
Obviously I'm now a bit concerned about dry bending and happy with steaming, so
that's my two cents worth and I'm moving on to putting the sides together.
Larry
knee deep in wing ribs too ;-)
Alan Swanson wrote:
>
> Over the past few years there have been several discussions about rib
> steaming, but never about longeron steaming. I think Larry is the first one
> I have heard who is steaming Longerons.
>
> Larry- I did not steam the longerons, just used retaining blocks around the
> bend. I wonder if the reason you didn't get a gentle curve at the first
> station was because the steaming made the wood too "rubbery" and soft?
> Also, you might want to place the longerons so that the grain direction is
> vertical to get the most strength.
>
> Al Swanson
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
> mboynton(at)excite.com
> Sent: Monday, September 24, 2001 12:04 PM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: longerons
>
>
> Wow,
>
> I hadn't planned on steaming my longerons at all - and I'm using Douglas
> fir. Anybody else had experience with this?
>
> Mark Boynton
>
>
> >
> >
> > Steamed my left lower longeron over the weekend. It took a real nice
> > set, though I wish I could have gotten a more gentle curve at the first
> > station.
> >
> > Next I tried soaking the right one for three days before bending -
> > CRACK!
> >
> > That's an expensive mistake I won't make again. Back to the steamer for
> > all wood bending from now on.
> >
> > Larry
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________-
| From: | "Tommy & Carolyn" <TommyandCarolyn(at)centurytel.net> |
| Subject: | 3rd Annual Cajun Fly-in & Camp-out |
It's still on and the weather's gonna be great ! ! !
Allen Parish Fall Camp-0ut / Fly-in
September 28 - 30, 2001
Supported by EAA Chapter 614
Cenla Escadrille
There will be plenty of good food, camping, with bathroom and shower
facilities. Friday the 28th, an evening pig roast for the overnight campers.
The
rand Casino Caushatta in Oberlin will be providing transportation to
and from the casino and its hotel. For hotel accommodations and area
interest contact the Allen Parish Tourist Commission at 1-888-639-4868 or on
line at www.allenparish.com.
This Fly-in will be held at the Allen Parish Airport located approximately 4
miles south of Oakdale, LA on Hwy. 165. The identifier is L42. The airport
coordinates: N30-45, W92-41.3. Field elevation is 107' MSL. Pattern altitude
is standard. Runway 18-36 has a new overlay and is 5010' X 75' asphalt.
There will be a 600' X 50' turf strip marked by cones on the northwest side
of the runway for ultralight aircraft, powered parachutes and any other
aircraft desiring to land on grass. The airspace will be controlled by the
Air National
uard air traffic control tower located on the east side of the
runway, operating on 122.8. Non radio aircraft are reminded to use extreme
caution when approaching the airport.
Upon arrivial, watch for the "FOLLOW ME" vehicle for parking. There are no
parking, tie-down, overnight, registration or camping fees. Please sign in
at the registration booth as we would like to know who attends.
FMI: Joel FMI: Tommy
318-335-9721 318-748-6308
318-215-0090 cen23370(at)centurytel.net
1-800-466-3161
airport(at)beci.net
flyallen(at)bellsouth.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mboynton(at)excite.com |
Group,
Sorry if this seems to be too much attention to detail, but the grain
orientation thing has puzzled me for some time.
In which grain orientation is wood most resistant to compression forces -
when the grain is vertical to the force, that is, the grain lines are in
line with (parallel to) the force when viewed from the end of the piece (not
from the face of it), or when the grain lines are horizontal
(perpendicular)to the force; and to help my feeble brain understand, why is
it so?
Thanks,
Mark Boynton
>
> Alan, Cy and Javier,
>
> Thanks for the response.
>
> Yes the grain was vertical. Yes the bend was curved around multiple
blocks,
> which were sanded in radius.
> The bend was done gradually, but also "over" by some 20%, working over
> successive blocks to create the bend and then relax to the final curve.
There
> was no beating the wood up, but obviously it surrendered.
> This was a very nice piece of spruce. It was thoroughly inspected and
did not
> have any defects, by the book aircraft grade and yes I have the book...
> I can only think that in soaking much more time was needed. Apparently,
I
> overstressed a good, stiff piece of wood.
> I steamed the replacement yesterday and formed it. Looks dandy and has
the same
> curve as the first. A bit more bend at the second upright than
subsequent, just
> like the first, but smooth as butter and no complaints from the wood.
This was
> by putting the first six feet of the longeron put the steamer for three
hours
> with a gallon of water.
> To be honest, I'm as surprised as anyone. I've been on this and previous
Piet
> groups for about ten years and never heard of a problem.
> Where the hell is DeCosta when you need him? He's the bent wood expert,
if I
> remember correctly he does it for a living. I'll email the rascal and
see what
> he says.
> Obviously I'm now a bit concerned about dry bending and happy with
steaming, so
> that's my two cents worth and I'm moving on to putting the sides
together.
>
> Larry
> knee deep in wing ribs too ;-)
>
> Alan Swanson wrote:
>
> >
> > Over the past few years there have been several discussions about rib
> > steaming, but never about longeron steaming. I think Larry is the
first one
> > I have heard who is steaming Longerons.
> >
> > Larry- I did not steam the longerons, just used retaining blocks around
the
> > bend. I wonder if the reason you didn't get a gentle curve at the
first
> > station was because the steaming made the wood too "rubbery" and soft?
> > Also, you might want to place the longerons so that the grain direction
is
> > vertical to get the most strength.
> >
> > Al Swanson
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
> > mboynton(at)excite.com
> > Sent: Monday, September 24, 2001 12:04 PM
> > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: longerons
> >
> >
> > Wow,
> >
> > I hadn't planned on steaming my longerons at all - and I'm using
Douglas
> > fir. Anybody else had experience with this?
> >
> > Mark Boynton
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Steamed my left lower longeron over the weekend. It took a real
nice
> > > set, though I wish I could have gotten a more gentle curve at the
first
> > > station.
> > >
> > > Next I tried soaking the right one for three days before bending -
> > > CRACK!
> > >
> > > That's an expensive mistake I won't make again. Back to the steamer
for
> > > all wood bending from now on.
> > >
> > > Larry
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Warren D. Shoun" <wbnb(at)earthlink.net> |
Mark,
handful of straws, place the open ends on a table and place a weight on the top
open ends. They will hold it. If you place them side ways and place any weight
in the middle, they will flex. Wood is essentially the original composite
material formed in cellular columns.
Cheers,
Warren
mboynton(at)excite.com wrote:
>
> Group,
>
> Sorry if this seems to be too much attention to detail, but the grain
> orientation thing has puzzled me for some time.
>
> In which grain orientation is wood most resistant to compression forces -
> when the grain is vertical to the force, that is, the grain lines are in
> line with (parallel to) the force when viewed from the end of the piece (not
> from the face of it), or when the grain lines are horizontal
> (perpendicular)to the force; and to help my feeble brain understand, why is
> it so?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mark Boynton
>
>
> >
> > Alan, Cy and Javier,
> >
> > Thanks for the response.
> >
> > Yes the grain was vertical. Yes the bend was curved around multiple
> blocks,
> > which were sanded in radius.
> > The bend was done gradually, but also "over" by some 20%, working over
> > successive blocks to create the bend and then relax to the final curve.
> There
> > was no beating the wood up, but obviously it surrendered.
> > This was a very nice piece of spruce. It was thoroughly inspected and
> did not
> > have any defects, by the book aircraft grade and yes I have the book...
> > I can only think that in soaking much more time was needed. Apparently,
> I
> > overstressed a good, stiff piece of wood.
> > I steamed the replacement yesterday and formed it. Looks dandy and has
> the same
> > curve as the first. A bit more bend at the second upright than
> subsequent, just
> > like the first, but smooth as butter and no complaints from the wood.
> This was
> > by putting the first six feet of the longeron put the steamer for three
> hours
> > with a gallon of water.
> > To be honest, I'm as surprised as anyone. I've been on this and previous
> Piet
> > groups for about ten years and never heard of a problem.
> > Where the hell is DeCosta when you need him? He's the bent wood expert,
> if I
> > remember correctly he does it for a living. I'll email the rascal and
> see what
> > he says.
> > Obviously I'm now a bit concerned about dry bending and happy with
> steaming, so
> > that's my two cents worth and I'm moving on to putting the sides
> together.
> >
> > Larry
> > knee deep in wing ribs too ;-)
> >
> > Alan Swanson wrote:
> >
>
> > >
> > > Over the past few years there have been several discussions about rib
> > > steaming, but never about longeron steaming. I think Larry is the
> first one
> > > I have heard who is steaming Longerons.
> > >
> > > Larry- I did not steam the longerons, just used retaining blocks around
> the
> > > bend. I wonder if the reason you didn't get a gentle curve at the
> first
> > > station was because the steaming made the wood too "rubbery" and soft?
> > > Also, you might want to place the longerons so that the grain direction
> is
> > > vertical to get the most strength.
> > >
> > > Al Swanson
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
> > > mboynton(at)excite.com
> > > Sent: Monday, September 24, 2001 12:04 PM
> > > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> > > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: longerons
> > >
> > >
> > > Wow,
> > >
> > > I hadn't planned on steaming my longerons at all - and I'm using
> Douglas
> > > fir. Anybody else had experience with this?
> > >
> > > Mark Boynton
> > >
> > >
>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Steamed my left lower longeron over the weekend. It took a real
> nice
> > > > set, though I wish I could have gotten a more gentle curve at the
> first
> > > > station.
> > > >
> > > > Next I tried soaking the right one for three days before bending -
> > > > CRACK!
> > > >
> > > > That's an expensive mistake I won't make again. Back to the steamer
> for
> > > > all wood bending from now on.
> > > >
> > > > Larry
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Greg Cardinal" <gcardinal(at)startribune.com> |
Mark,
Both of your descriptions below are considered "perpendicular" to the grain. The
compressive strength perpendicular to the grain is 840 psi for spruce.
If Wayne Meier is listening to this group he could probably explain why. Wayne
is a wood expert and supplies marine and aircraft plywood in the Minneapolis/St.
Paul area.
Greg Cardinal in Minneapolis
>>> 09/25 9:56 AM >>>
Group,
Sorry if this seems to be too much attention to detail, but the grain
orientation thing has puzzled me for some time.
In which grain orientation is wood most resistant to compression forces -
when the grain is vertical to the force, that is, the grain lines are in
line with (parallel to) the force when viewed from the end of the piece (not
from the face of it), or when the grain lines are horizontal
(perpendicular)to the force; and to help my feeble brain understand, why is
it so?
Thanks,
Mark Boynton
>
> Alan, Cy and Javier,
>
> Thanks for the response.
>
> Yes the grain was vertical. Yes the bend was curved around multiple
blocks,
> which were sanded in radius.
> The bend was done gradually, but also "over" by some 20%, working over
> successive blocks to create the bend and then relax to the final curve.
There
> was no beating the wood up, but obviously it surrendered.
> This was a very nice piece of spruce. It was thoroughly inspected and
did not
> have any defects, by the book aircraft grade and yes I have the book...
> I can only think that in soaking much more time was needed. Apparently,
I
> overstressed a good, stiff piece of wood.
> I steamed the replacement yesterday and formed it. Looks dandy and has
the same
> curve as the first. A bit more bend at the second upright than
subsequent, just
> like the first, but smooth as butter and no complaints from the wood.
This was
> by putting the first six feet of the longeron put the steamer for three
hours
> with a gallon of water.
> To be honest, I'm as surprised as anyone. I've been on this and previous
Piet
> groups for about ten years and never heard of a problem.
> Where the hell is DeCosta when you need him? He's the bent wood expert,
if I
> remember correctly he does it for a living. I'll email the rascal and
see what
> he says.
> Obviously I'm now a bit concerned about dry bending and happy with
steaming, so
> that's my two cents worth and I'm moving on to putting the sides
together.
>
> Larry
> knee deep in wing ribs too ;-)
>
> Alan Swanson wrote:
>
> >
> > Over the past few years there have been several discussions about rib
> > steaming, but never about longeron steaming. I think Larry is the
first one
> > I have heard who is steaming Longerons.
> >
> > Larry- I did not steam the longerons, just used retaining blocks around
the
> > bend. I wonder if the reason you didn't get a gentle curve at the
first
> > station was because the steaming made the wood too "rubbery" and soft?
> > Also, you might want to place the longerons so that the grain direction
is
> > vertical to get the most strength.
> >
> > Al Swanson
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
> > mboynton(at)excite.com
> > Sent: Monday, September 24, 2001 12:04 PM
> > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: longerons
> >
> >
> > Wow,
> >
> > I hadn't planned on steaming my longerons at all - and I'm using
Douglas
> > fir. Anybody else had experience with this?
> >
> > Mark Boynton
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Steamed my left lower longeron over the weekend. It took a real
nice
> > > set, though I wish I could have gotten a more gentle curve at the
first
> > > station.
> > >
> > > Next I tried soaking the right one for three days before bending -
> > > CRACK!
> > >
> > > That's an expensive mistake I won't make again. Back to the steamer
for
> > > all wood bending from now on.
> > >
> > > Larry
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Haines" <robertsjunk(at)hotmail.com> |
I think I have a handle on grain orientation so I'll give it a try. If I
don't, someone please correct me so I'll be right in the future.
The analogy about a stack of straws is correct. A piece of wood resists
compression the most from the End Grain. If you imagine how the wood was in
the tree, it's strongest in it's resistance to gravity. So if you wanted to
fabricate spacer blocks, it would be best to orient them so that the grain
lines are parallel to the compression force.
When determining what orientation is strongest for a long stick when it's
bent, it's the growth rings which are critical. A stick of wood with a
square cross-section can be viewed as a laminiated member using really bad
glue. The growth ring is the really bad glue. It's somewhat like a leaf
spring. It's very springy (or weak) when bent up or down but near
impossible to bend it from the sides (in this illustration, the leafs are
oriented horizontal as they are on a car). When working with wood, it is up
to the design or designer on what is more important: the ability to easily
bend around a curve or the ability to resist a bending force and this will
determine the orientation of the growth rings.
Robert Haines
Murphysboro, Illinois
*******
Group,
Sorry if this seems to be too much attention to detail, but the grain
orientation thing has puzzled me for some time.
In which grain orientation is wood most resistant to compression forces -
when the grain is vertical to the force, that is, the grain lines are in
line with (parallel to) the force when viewed from the end of the piece (not
from the face of it), or when the grain lines are horizontal
(perpendicular)to the force; and to help my feeble brain understand, why is
it so?
Thanks,
Mark Boynton
********
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mboynton(at)excite.com |
| Subject: | Re: wood grain (growth ring) orientation |
Robert,
I think you hit the nail on the head for me. When I mentioned "grain"
orientation, what I was actually referring to was the orientation of the
growth rings (live and learn?). Your analogy of the car leaf spring is very
helpful. I'll orient the longerons in my fuselage so the growth rings are
horizontal - just as they are in wing spars.
Thanks to all,
Mark Boynton
>
> I think I have a handle on grain orientation so I'll give it a try. If I
> don't, someone please correct me so I'll be right in the future.
>
> The analogy about a stack of straws is correct. A piece of wood resists
> compression the most from the End Grain. If you imagine how the wood was
in
> the tree, it's strongest in it's resistance to gravity. So if you wanted
to
> fabricate spacer blocks, it would be best to orient them so that the
grain
> lines are parallel to the compression force.
>
> When determining what orientation is strongest for a long stick when it's
> bent, it's the growth rings which are critical. A stick of wood with a
> square cross-section can be viewed as a laminiated member using really
bad
> glue. The growth ring is the really bad glue. It's somewhat like a leaf
> spring. It's very springy (or weak) when bent up or down but near
> impossible to bend it from the sides (in this illustration, the leafs are
> oriented horizontal as they are on a car). When working with wood, it is
up
> to the design or designer on what is more important: the ability to
easily
> bend around a curve or the ability to resist a bending force and this
will
> determine the orientation of the growth rings.
>
> Robert Haines
> Murphysboro, Illinois
>
>
> *******
>
> Group,
>
> Sorry if this seems to be too much attention to detail, but the grain
> orientation thing has puzzled me for some time.
>
> In which grain orientation is wood most resistant to compression forces -
> when the grain is vertical to the force, that is, the grain lines are in
> line with (parallel to) the force when viewed from the end of the piece
(not
> from the face of it), or when the grain lines are horizontal
> (perpendicular)to the force; and to help my feeble brain understand, why
is
> it so?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mark Boynton
> ********
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mboynton(at)excite.com |
Larry Neal,
From what I have just learned about growth ring orientation,is it possible
your longeron that failed when bent had the growth ring orientation vertical
instead of horizontal, and your longeron that didn't fail was oriented
horizontal.
Just curious,
Mark Boynton
>
> Mark,
> Both of your descriptions below are considered "perpendicular" to the
grain. The compressive strength perpendicular to the grain is 840 psi for
spruce.
> If Wayne Meier is listening to this group he could probably explain why.
Wayne is a wood expert and supplies marine and aircraft plywood in the
Minneapolis/St. Paul area.
>
> Greg Cardinal in Minneapolis
>
> >>> 09/25 9:56 AM >>>
>
> Group,
>
> Sorry if this seems to be too much attention to detail, but the grain
> orientation thing has puzzled me for some time.
>
> In which grain orientation is wood most resistant to compression forces -
> when the grain is vertical to the force, that is, the grain lines are in
> line with (parallel to) the force when viewed from the end of the piece
(not
> from the face of it), or when the grain lines are horizontal
> (perpendicular)to the force; and to help my feeble brain understand, why
is
> it so?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mark Boynton
>
>
>
> >
> > Alan, Cy and Javier,
> >
> > Thanks for the response.
> >
> > Yes the grain was vertical. Yes the bend was curved around multiple
> blocks,
> > which were sanded in radius.
> > The bend was done gradually, but also "over" by some 20%, working over
> > successive blocks to create the bend and then relax to the final
curve.
> There
> > was no beating the wood up, but obviously it surrendered.
> > This was a very nice piece of spruce. It was thoroughly inspected and
> did not
> > have any defects, by the book aircraft grade and yes I have the
book...
> > I can only think that in soaking much more time was needed.
Apparently,
> I
> > overstressed a good, stiff piece of wood.
> > I steamed the replacement yesterday and formed it. Looks dandy and
has
> the same
> > curve as the first. A bit more bend at the second upright than
> subsequent, just
> > like the first, but smooth as butter and no complaints from the wood.
> This was
> > by putting the first six feet of the longeron put the steamer for
three
> hours
> > with a gallon of water.
> > To be honest, I'm as surprised as anyone. I've been on this and
previous
> Piet
> > groups for about ten years and never heard of a problem.
> > Where the hell is DeCosta when you need him? He's the bent wood
expert,
> if I
> > remember correctly he does it for a living. I'll email the rascal and
> see what
> > he says.
> > Obviously I'm now a bit concerned about dry bending and happy with
> steaming, so
> > that's my two cents worth and I'm moving on to putting the sides
> together.
> >
> > Larry
> > knee deep in wing ribs too ;-)
> >
> > Alan Swanson wrote:
> >
>
> > >
> > > Over the past few years there have been several discussions about
rib
> > > steaming, but never about longeron steaming. I think Larry is the
> first one
> > > I have heard who is steaming Longerons.
> > >
> > > Larry- I did not steam the longerons, just used retaining blocks
around
> the
> > > bend. I wonder if the reason you didn't get a gentle curve at the
> first
> > > station was because the steaming made the wood too "rubbery" and
soft?
> > > Also, you might want to place the longerons so that the grain
direction
> is
> > > vertical to get the most strength.
> > >
> > > Al Swanson
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
> > > mboynton(at)excite.com
> > > Sent: Monday, September 24, 2001 12:04 PM
> > > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> > > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: longerons
> > >
> > >
> > > Wow,
> > >
> > > I hadn't planned on steaming my longerons at all - and I'm using
> Douglas
> > > fir. Anybody else had experience with this?
> > >
> > > Mark Boynton
> > >
wrote:
> > >
>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Steamed my left lower longeron over the weekend. It took a real
> nice
> > > > set, though I wish I could have gotten a more gentle curve at
the
> first
> > > > station.
> > > >
> > > > Next I tried soaking the right one for three days before bending
> > > > CRACK!
> > > >
> > > > That's an expensive mistake I won't make again. Back to the
steamer
> for
> > > > all wood bending from now on.
> > > >
> > > > Larry
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Neal <llneal(at)earthlink.net> |
Mark,
At this point we've determined that time was my problem. I expected too much
from soaking and bent too quickly. Tests have determined that bending more
slowly, to the curve and allowing it to set a few days would have been
successful.
Bending beyond the required curve, as in bending a spring, does not work and
damages the wood.
A cold bend apparently works for a lot of folks, but I'll still bet that some
time is required before it takes a set and the possibility exists for distortion
unless the gussets are adequate to preserve the shape.
An easy clarification for everyone:
The wood is bent in the same way you bend a stack of playing cards.
Larry
mboynton(at)excite.com wrote:
>
> Larry Neal,
>
> >From what I have just learned about growth ring orientation,is it possible
> your longeron that failed when bent had the growth ring orientation vertical
> instead of horizontal, and your longeron that didn't fail was oriented
> horizontal.
>
> Just curious,
>
> Mark Boynton
>
>
>
> >
> > Mark,
> > Both of your descriptions below are considered "perpendicular" to the
> grain. The compressive strength perpendicular to the grain is 840 psi for
> spruce.
> > If Wayne Meier is listening to this group he could probably explain why.
> Wayne is a wood expert and supplies marine and aircraft plywood in the
> Minneapolis/St. Paul area.
> >
> > Greg Cardinal in Minneapolis
> >
> > >>> 09/25 9:56 AM >>>
> >
> > Group,
> >
> > Sorry if this seems to be too much attention to detail, but the grain
> > orientation thing has puzzled me for some time.
> >
> > In which grain orientation is wood most resistant to compression forces -
> > when the grain is vertical to the force, that is, the grain lines are in
> > line with (parallel to) the force when viewed from the end of the piece
> (not
> > from the face of it), or when the grain lines are horizontal
> > (perpendicular)to the force; and to help my feeble brain understand, why
> is
> > it so?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Mark Boynton
> >
> >
> >
>
> > >
> > > Alan, Cy and Javier,
> > >
> > > Thanks for the response.
> > >
> > > Yes the grain was vertical. Yes the bend was curved around multiple
> > blocks,
> > > which were sanded in radius.
> > > The bend was done gradually, but also "over" by some 20%, working over
> > > successive blocks to create the bend and then relax to the final
> curve.
> > There
> > > was no beating the wood up, but obviously it surrendered.
> > > This was a very nice piece of spruce. It was thoroughly inspected and
> > did not
> > > have any defects, by the book aircraft grade and yes I have the
> book...
> > > I can only think that in soaking much more time was needed.
> Apparently,
> > I
> > > overstressed a good, stiff piece of wood.
> > > I steamed the replacement yesterday and formed it. Looks dandy and
> has
> > the same
> > > curve as the first. A bit more bend at the second upright than
> > subsequent, just
> > > like the first, but smooth as butter and no complaints from the wood.
> > This was
> > > by putting the first six feet of the longeron put the steamer for
> three
> > hours
> > > with a gallon of water.
> > > To be honest, I'm as surprised as anyone. I've been on this and
> previous
> > Piet
> > > groups for about ten years and never heard of a problem.
> > > Where the hell is DeCosta when you need him? He's the bent wood
> expert,
> > if I
> > > remember correctly he does it for a living. I'll email the rascal and
> > see what
> > > he says.
> > > Obviously I'm now a bit concerned about dry bending and happy with
> > steaming, so
> > > that's my two cents worth and I'm moving on to putting the sides
> > together.
> > >
> > > Larry
> > > knee deep in wing ribs too ;-)
> > >
> > > Alan Swanson wrote:
> > >
> >
> > > >
> > > > Over the past few years there have been several discussions about
> rib
> > > > steaming, but never about longeron steaming. I think Larry is the
> > first one
> > > > I have heard who is steaming Longerons.
> > > >
> > > > Larry- I did not steam the longerons, just used retaining blocks
> around
> > the
> > > > bend. I wonder if the reason you didn't get a gentle curve at the
> > first
> > > > station was because the steaming made the wood too "rubbery" and
> soft?
> > > > Also, you might want to place the longerons so that the grain
> direction
> > is
> > > > vertical to get the most strength.
> > > >
> > > > Al Swanson
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > > > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
> > > > mboynton(at)excite.com
> > > > Sent: Monday, September 24, 2001 12:04 PM
> > > > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> > > > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: longerons
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Wow,
> > > >
> > > > I hadn't planned on steaming my longerons at all - and I'm using
> > Douglas
> > > > fir. Anybody else had experience with this?
> > > >
> > > > Mark Boynton
> > > >
> wrote:
> > > >
> >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Steamed my left lower longeron over the weekend. It took a real
> > nice
> > > > > set, though I wish I could have gotten a more gentle curve at
> the
> > first
> > > > > station.
> > > > >
> > > > > Next I tried soaking the right one for three days before bending
> -
> > > > > CRACK!
> > > > >
> > > > > That's an expensive mistake I won't make again. Back to the
> steamer
> > for
> > > > > all wood bending from now on.
> > > > >
> > > > > Larry
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net> |
According to everything that I have read, the lines of grain should run in
the same plane as the bend e.g. for rib capstrips the grain is vertical. I
believe the best source for this info is Bingelis.
When you put the longeron in the jig, the lines of grain should be parallel
to the table top.
Chris Bobka
Tech Counselor
----- Original Message -----
From: <mboynton(at)excite.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: longerons
>
> Larry Neal,
>
> >From what I have just learned about growth ring orientation,is it
possible
> your longeron that failed when bent had the growth ring orientation
vertical
> instead of horizontal, and your longeron that didn't fail was oriented
> horizontal.
>
> Just curious,
>
> Mark Boynton
>
>
>
> >
> > Mark,
> > Both of your descriptions below are considered "perpendicular" to the
> grain. The compressive strength perpendicular to the grain is 840 psi for
> spruce.
> > If Wayne Meier is listening to this group he could probably explain
why.
> Wayne is a wood expert and supplies marine and aircraft plywood in the
> Minneapolis/St. Paul area.
> >
> > Greg Cardinal in Minneapolis
> >
> > >>> 09/25 9:56 AM >>>
> >
> > Group,
> >
> > Sorry if this seems to be too much attention to detail, but the grain
> > orientation thing has puzzled me for some time.
> >
> > In which grain orientation is wood most resistant to compression
forces -
> > when the grain is vertical to the force, that is, the grain lines are
in
> > line with (parallel to) the force when viewed from the end of the piece
> (not
> > from the face of it), or when the grain lines are horizontal
> > (perpendicular)to the force; and to help my feeble brain understand,
why
> is
> > it so?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Mark Boynton
> >
> >
> >
>
> > >
> > > Alan, Cy and Javier,
> > >
> > > Thanks for the response.
> > >
> > > Yes the grain was vertical. Yes the bend was curved around multiple
> > blocks,
> > > which were sanded in radius.
> > > The bend was done gradually, but also "over" by some 20%, working
over
> > > successive blocks to create the bend and then relax to the final
> curve.
> > There
> > > was no beating the wood up, but obviously it surrendered.
> > > This was a very nice piece of spruce. It was thoroughly inspected
and
> > did not
> > > have any defects, by the book aircraft grade and yes I have the
> book...
> > > I can only think that in soaking much more time was needed.
> Apparently,
> > I
> > > overstressed a good, stiff piece of wood.
> > > I steamed the replacement yesterday and formed it. Looks dandy and
> has
> > the same
> > > curve as the first. A bit more bend at the second upright than
> > subsequent, just
> > > like the first, but smooth as butter and no complaints from the
wood.
> > This was
> > > by putting the first six feet of the longeron put the steamer for
> three
> > hours
> > > with a gallon of water.
> > > To be honest, I'm as surprised as anyone. I've been on this and
> previous
> > Piet
> > > groups for about ten years and never heard of a problem.
> > > Where the hell is DeCosta when you need him? He's the bent wood
> expert,
> > if I
> > > remember correctly he does it for a living. I'll email the rascal
and
> > see what
> > > he says.
> > > Obviously I'm now a bit concerned about dry bending and happy with
> > steaming, so
> > > that's my two cents worth and I'm moving on to putting the sides
> > together.
> > >
> > > Larry
> > > knee deep in wing ribs too ;-)
> > >
> > > Alan Swanson wrote:
> > >
> >
> > > >
> > > > Over the past few years there have been several discussions about
> rib
> > > > steaming, but never about longeron steaming. I think Larry is the
> > first one
> > > > I have heard who is steaming Longerons.
> > > >
> > > > Larry- I did not steam the longerons, just used retaining blocks
> around
> > the
> > > > bend. I wonder if the reason you didn't get a gentle curve at the
> > first
> > > > station was because the steaming made the wood too "rubbery" and
> soft?
> > > > Also, you might want to place the longerons so that the grain
> direction
> > is
> > > > vertical to get the most strength.
> > > >
> > > > Al Swanson
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > > > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
> > > > mboynton(at)excite.com
> > > > Sent: Monday, September 24, 2001 12:04 PM
> > > > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> > > > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: longerons
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Wow,
> > > >
> > > > I hadn't planned on steaming my longerons at all - and I'm using
> > Douglas
> > > > fir. Anybody else had experience with this?
> > > >
> > > > Mark Boynton
> > > >
> wrote:
> > > >
> >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Steamed my left lower longeron over the weekend. It took a
real
> > nice
> > > > > set, though I wish I could have gotten a more gentle curve at
> the
> > first
> > > > > station.
> > > > >
> > > > > Next I tried soaking the right one for three days before
bending
> -
> > > > > CRACK!
> > > > >
> > > > > That's an expensive mistake I won't make again. Back to the
> steamer
> > for
> > > > > all wood bending from now on.
> > > > >
> > > > > Larry
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
Hello, everyone;
I'm new to this list so I don't know if there is a particular protocol for
buying and selling stuff here... so forgive me if I'm breaking any rules
(and let me know the rules, please!).
I just bought a set of genuine Air Camper plans, manual, and supplement from
the Pietenpol family but would also like to have the Grega plans to see what
they look like. If anyone has a set of GN-1 plans that they would like to
sell, please email me off-net. Thanks!
Oscar Zuniga
Medford, Oregon
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.geocities.com/taildrags/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Barry Davis" <bed(at)mindspring.com> |
Hey, they are only $25 and you get a serial number to build by.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: GN-1 plans
>
> Hello, everyone;
>
> I'm new to this list so I don't know if there is a particular protocol for
> buying and selling stuff here... so forgive me if I'm breaking any rules
> (and let me know the rules, please!).
>
> I just bought a set of genuine Air Camper plans, manual, and supplement
from
> the Pietenpol family but would also like to have the Grega plans to see
what
> they look like. If anyone has a set of GN-1 plans that they would like to
> sell, please email me off-net. Thanks!
>
> Oscar Zuniga
> Medford, Oregon
> mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
> website at http://www.geocities.com/taildrags/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Warren D. Shoun" <wbnb(at)earthlink.net> |
I agree with Barry: They are inexpensive, and have a ton of additional
information that is in fact useable in conjunction with the Hoopman plans.
Cheers,
Warren
Barry Davis wrote:
>
> Hey, they are only $25 and you get a serial number to build by.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
> To:
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: GN-1 plans
>
>
> >
> > Hello, everyone;
> >
> > I'm new to this list so I don't know if there is a particular protocol for
> > buying and selling stuff here... so forgive me if I'm breaking any rules
> > (and let me know the rules, please!).
> >
> > I just bought a set of genuine Air Camper plans, manual, and supplement
> from
> > the Pietenpol family but would also like to have the Grega plans to see
> what
> > they look like. If anyone has a set of GN-1 plans that they would like to
> > sell, please email me off-net. Thanks!
> >
> > Oscar Zuniga
> > Medford, Oregon
> > mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
> > website at http://www.geocities.com/taildrags/
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | KGardner(at)odu.edu |
09/27/2001 05:46:49 PM
Oscar,
To add to Barry's comment, they are directly available from John Grega. He
advertises regularly in the classified section of Sport Aviatioon &
Experimenter & I'd bet in the back of KitPlanes too. If you don't have a
copy handy, send me a message & I'll get the address to you.
Kip Gardner (2 weeks left to go at work, and moving ETD less than a month
away)
Laboratory Manager
Old Dominion University
Dept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmos. Sciences, Rm. 441
4600 Elkhorn Ave.
Norfolk, VA 23529
Ph: 757-683-5654
Bumper Sticker of the Week:
"Warning - I Brake For Red Lights"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | KGardner(at)odu.edu |
09/28/2001 10:44:19 AM
List,
For anyone who is interested, Aircamper GN-1 plans:
John W. Grega
355 Grand Blvd.
Bedford, OH 44146
$25.00 incl. S&H
Happy Hangar Flyin'!
Kip Gardner
Laboratory Manager
Old Dominion University
Dept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmos. Sciences, Rm. 441
4600 Elkhorn Ave.
Norfolk, VA 23529
Ph: 757-683-5654
Bumper Sticker of the Week:
"Don't Drive Faster Than Your Guardian Angel Can Fly"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
"Fishnet"
| Subject: | terrorism and weight and balance |
group,
Something that I haven't heard discussed before. That plane that went
down in Pa, if there were 50 some odd people on board, and let's assume
they were all heros. If they all rushed foward at the same time,
wouldn't that alone, make the plane unflyable???
walt
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Sippola" <sippola(at)escape.ca> |
See I always understood the grain should be horizontal. It is called
vertical grain lumber, but when you look at the end of your spars, the
grain will be horizontal. I did the same with the rib capstrips and the
longerons. I don't think there is much of a strength issue either way.
Vertical grain lumber is used as it warps less.
Wayne Sippola, Winnipeg
----------
> From: Christian Bobka <bobka(at)charter.net>
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: longerons
> Date: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 7:28 PM
>
>
> According to everything that I have read, the lines of grain should run
in
> the same plane as the bend e.g. for rib capstrips the grain is vertical.
I
> believe the best source for this info is Bingelis.
>
> When you put the longeron in the jig, the lines of grain should be
parallel
> to the table top.
>
> Chris Bobka
> Tech Counselor
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <mboynton(at)excite.com>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: longerons
>
>
> >
> > Larry Neal,
> >
> > >From what I have just learned about growth ring orientation,is it
> possible
> > your longeron that failed when bent had the growth ring orientation
> vertical
> > instead of horizontal, and your longeron that didn't fail was oriented
> > horizontal.
> >
> > Just curious,
> >
> > Mark Boynton
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Mark,
> > > Both of your descriptions below are considered "perpendicular" to
the
> > grain. The compressive strength perpendicular to the grain is 840 psi
for
> > spruce.
> > > If Wayne Meier is listening to this group he could probably explain
> why.
> > Wayne is a wood expert and supplies marine and aircraft plywood in the
> > Minneapolis/St. Paul area.
> > >
> > > Greg Cardinal in Minneapolis
> > >
> > > >>> 09/25 9:56 AM >>>
> > >
> > > Group,
> > >
> > > Sorry if this seems to be too much attention to detail, but the
grain
> > > orientation thing has puzzled me for some time.
> > >
> > > In which grain orientation is wood most resistant to compression
> forces -
> > > when the grain is vertical to the force, that is, the grain lines
are
> in
> > > line with (parallel to) the force when viewed from the end of the
piece
> > (not
> > > from the face of it), or when the grain lines are horizontal
> > > (perpendicular)to the force; and to help my feeble brain understand,
> why
> > is
> > > it so?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Mark Boynton
> > >
> > >
wrote:
> > >
> >
> > > >
> > > > Alan, Cy and Javier,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the response.
> > > >
> > > > Yes the grain was vertical. Yes the bend was curved around
multiple
> > > blocks,
> > > > which were sanded in radius.
> > > > The bend was done gradually, but also "over" by some 20%, working
> over
> > > > successive blocks to create the bend and then relax to the final
> > curve.
> > > There
> > > > was no beating the wood up, but obviously it surrendered.
> > > > This was a very nice piece of spruce. It was thoroughly
inspected
> and
> > > did not
> > > > have any defects, by the book aircraft grade and yes I have the
> > book...
> > > > I can only think that in soaking much more time was needed.
> > Apparently,
> > > I
> > > > overstressed a good, stiff piece of wood.
> > > > I steamed the replacement yesterday and formed it. Looks dandy
and
> > has
> > > the same
> > > > curve as the first. A bit more bend at the second upright than
> > > subsequent, just
> > > > like the first, but smooth as butter and no complaints from the
> wood.
> > > This was
> > > > by putting the first six feet of the longeron put the steamer for
> > three
> > > hours
> > > > with a gallon of water.
> > > > To be honest, I'm as surprised as anyone. I've been on this and
> > previous
> > > Piet
> > > > groups for about ten years and never heard of a problem.
> > > > Where the hell is DeCosta when you need him? He's the bent wood
> > expert,
> > > if I
> > > > remember correctly he does it for a living. I'll email the
rascal
> and
> > > see what
> > > > he says.
> > > > Obviously I'm now a bit concerned about dry bending and happy
with
> > > steaming, so
> > > > that's my two cents worth and I'm moving on to putting the sides
> > > together.
> > > >
> > > > Larry
> > > > knee deep in wing ribs too ;-)
> > > >
> > > > Alan Swanson wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Over the past few years there have been several discussions
about
> > rib
> > > > > steaming, but never about longeron steaming. I think Larry is
the
> > > first one
> > > > > I have heard who is steaming Longerons.
> > > > >
> > > > > Larry- I did not steam the longerons, just used retaining
blocks
> > around
> > > the
> > > > > bend. I wonder if the reason you didn't get a gentle curve at
the
> > > first
> > > > > station was because the steaming made the wood too "rubbery"
and
> > soft?
> > > > > Also, you might want to place the longerons so that the grain
> > direction
> > > is
> > > > > vertical to get the most strength.
> > > > >
> > > > > Al Swanson
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > > > > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
> > > > > mboynton(at)excite.com
> > > > > Sent: Monday, September 24, 2001 12:04 PM
> > > > > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> > > > > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: longerons
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Wow,
> > > > >
> > > > > I hadn't planned on steaming my longerons at all - and I'm
using
> > > Douglas
> > > > > fir. Anybody else had experience with this?
> > > > >
> > > > > Mark Boynton
> > > > >
pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Steamed my left lower longeron over the weekend. It took a
> real
> > > nice
> > > > > > set, though I wish I could have gotten a more gentle curve
at
> > the
> > > first
> > > > > > station.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Next I tried soaking the right one for three days before
> bending
> > -
> > > > > > CRACK!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That's an expensive mistake I won't make again. Back to the
> > steamer
> > > for
> > > > > > all wood bending from now on.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Larry
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | terrorism and weight and balance |
-- Original Message --
>
>group,
>Something that I haven't heard discussed before. That plane that went
>down in Pa, if there were 50 some odd people on board, and let's assume
>they were all heros. If they all rushed foward at the same time,
>wouldn't that alone, make the plane unflyable???
> No a 767 grosses at about 305,000 pounds so 50 175 pound people wold change
the CG some but not enough to take the aircraft out of the envalope. The
pilots tell me you can feel the people walking up and down the isle in the
smaller jets mostly the meal serive carts pluss two stews and then it's
not anything you'd trim for. Keep in mind that 99% of the time on a comercial
jet these days the auto pilot is flying the plane and it's more than capable
of handeling a suden engine failure with a margin of saifty left over. Airline
policy dictates that in order to save fuel the pilots only hand fly when
they absolutly have to . which on a 767 is almost never. This is somthing
I watched with interest in this whole afair. The aircraft used for both
the WTC and the pentagon could have been guided to their targets by a non
pilot with a little traing because the 767 and 757 both have auto pilots
which can be ingaged below 500 feet unlike the DC9/ MD80 serise or the DC10/MD11
serise aircraft which must be above 500 feet except on an ILS autoland approch.
I'm a simulator technician for TWA Now TWA LLC an American Airlines company.
In a few minutes i go in to work to see if I still have a job.
Gene in St. Louis
Big iron Silulator jockey
>
>
Visit iWon.com - the Internet's largest guaranteed cash giveaway! Click
here now for your "Thank You" gift:
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
All,
I don't want to stir up a fuss or bore anyone either, but I find the
longeron discussion interesting. I've had my plans for years and been
on the list a long time, but not heard this discussion before.
To simplify my question, imagine the fuselage sitting on the gear. Look
at the firewall, with the tailpost in the distance. Which way should
the end grain in the longerons be oriented, horizontally or vertically?
The plans on pages 4 and 6 show an end view of a longeron with end grain
of about 45 degrees, but I suspect that this is artistic licensee.
There is no textual discussion of grain orientation in the plans that
I've found.
From my totally ignorant perspective on this point I theorize that if it
is horizontal, this fits the same scheme used in the spars, which of
course attach directly to the fuselage longerons and bolt up in the same
fashion both places. I think that there might be a better glue joint
with the plywood gussets as well.
On the other hand, I gather from discussion that bending is easier in
the plane of the grain and that would be of benefit when forming the
lower longerons.
I've looked in the approved procedures book and can't find anything
there. I just went over all the stuff I've collected, plans, tips,
discussions, nothing there.
I wonder how many piets have been built each way, anyone willing to let
us know?
If it's not specified on the plans or the FAA repair manual is it
important enough to worry about? (If it is, I will have to rip up two
fuselague sides and will be suggesting some immediate changes to those
selling plans.)
Or is it possible that I've just been sniffing too much T-88?
Larry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: terrorism and weight and balance |
Actually, the autopilot on all airplanes will remain engaged until the
disengage button is pressed. This includes al the boeings (discounting a
side feature called "control wheel steering" used on some boeings) and the
DC-9/ MD-80/DC-10. The altitude does not matter. The autopilot really does
not know or care how high or low you are. In the MD-80 at 145,000 lbs., if
you are hand flying and someone walks from front to back or back to front,
you will notice it right away. Holding an exact altitude plus or minus a
few feet at 500 mph makes every wieght shift felt.
On the other hand, if everyone stays seated and you find the right trim
setting, in smooth air you can let go of all the controls for more than a
minute without any altitude deviation. But in that interim you burn off
some fuel (about 120 lbs per minute) so you have to retrim due to the CG
shift forward (in a swept wing) as fuel is burned off.
Chris Bobka
NWA DC-9 driver
----- Original Message -----
From: <GeneT(at)iwon.com>
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: terrorism and weight and balance
>
>
> -- Original Message --
>
> >
> >group,
> >Something that I haven't heard discussed before. That plane that went
> >down in Pa, if there were 50 some odd people on board, and let's assume
> >they were all heros. If they all rushed foward at the same time,
> >wouldn't that alone, make the plane unflyable???
> > No a 767 grosses at about 305,000 pounds so 50 175 pound people wold
change
> the CG some but not enough to take the aircraft out of the envalope. The
> pilots tell me you can feel the people walking up and down the isle in the
> smaller jets mostly the meal serive carts pluss two stews and then it's
> not anything you'd trim for. Keep in mind that 99% of the time on a
comercial
> jet these days the auto pilot is flying the plane and it's more than
capable
> of handeling a suden engine failure with a margin of saifty left over.
Airline
> policy dictates that in order to save fuel the pilots only hand fly when
> they absolutly have to . which on a 767 is almost never. This is somthing
> I watched with interest in this whole afair. The aircraft used for both
> the WTC and the pentagon could have been guided to their targets by a non
> pilot with a little traing because the 767 and 757 both have auto pilots
> which can be ingaged below 500 feet unlike the DC9/ MD80 serise or the
DC10/MD11
> serise aircraft which must be above 500 feet except on an ILS autoland
approch.
> I'm a simulator technician for TWA Now TWA LLC an American Airlines
company.
> In a few minutes i go in to work to see if I still have a job.
>
> Gene in St. Louis
> Big iron Silulator jockey
> >
> >
>
>
> Visit iWon.com - the Internet's largest guaranteed cash giveaway! Click
> here now for your "Thank You" gift:
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 9/29/01 8:33:45 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
llneal2(at)earthlink.net writes:
> All,
>
> I don't want to stir up a fuss or bore anyone either, but I find the
> longeron discussion interesting. I've had my plans for years and been
> on the list a long time, but not heard this discussion before.
>
> To simplify my question, imagine the fuselage sitting on the gear. Look
> at the firewall, with the tailpost in the distance. Which way should
> the end grain in the longerons be oriented, horizontally or vertically?
>
> The plans on pages 4 and 6 show an end view of a longeron with end grain
> of about 45 degrees, but I suspect that this is artistic licensee.
> There is no textual discussion of grain orientation in the plans that
> I've found.
>
> From my totally ignorant perspective on this point I theorize that if it
> is horizontal, this fits the same scheme used in the spars, which of
> course attach directly to the fuselage longerons and bolt up in the same
> fashion both places. I think that there might be a better glue joint
> with the plywood gussets as well.
>
> On the other hand, I gather from discussion that bending is easier in
> the plane of the grain and that would be of benefit when forming the
> lower longerons.
>
> I've looked in the approved procedures book and can't find anything
> there. I just went over all the stuff I've collected, plans, tips,
> discussions, nothing there.
>
> I wonder how many piets have been built each way, anyone willing to let
> us know?
>
> If it's not specified on the plans or the FAA repair manual is it
> important enough to worry about? (If it is, I will have to rip up two
> fuselague sides and will be suggesting some immediate changes to those
> selling plans.)
>
> Or is it possible that I've just been sniffing too much T-88?
>
> Larry
>
>
>
Larry,
The grain direction does not matter for any wood except for the spars and
that is because the wood expands the least across the grain. Doug Bryant
Wichita Ks
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Owen Davies" <owen(at)davies.mv.com> |
Doug Bryant observed:
> The grain direction does not matter for any wood except for the spars and
> that is because the wood expands the least across the grain. Doug Bryant
I'd add one exception, which no doubt everyone knows already,
but it seems worth mentioning now, because some of the same
reasoning may apply to the longerons.
Grain direction also matters for the long pieces of capstrip that
form the upper curve of the wing ribs. The wood layers that
make up the grain go vertically, in part because doing it the
other way would increase the risk of separating the "laminations"
that make up the grain and splitting the stick as it bends over
the tightest part of the curve.
I'd think that same reasoning applied to the lower longerons.
Their curve is not as tight, but the splitting forces must be higher
in the thicker cross-section.
Also, isn't the strength significantly different with or across the
grain? Either is probably strong enough, but for the strongest
possible airframe...
Owen Davies
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | grain orientation |
Hello, folks;
I won't jump in on the 'grain orientation' discussion except to add a little
side-note to those using Douglas fir rather than spruce. In my experience
(3 yrs. building a single-place wood-frame/foam/fiberglass experimental, and
probably one more year to go!)- Doug fir tends to splinter and split a lot
easier than spruce. Where fasteners (nails, screws, whatever) are going to
go through the wood, it sure is easier to prevent problems when you are
going across the grain (looking at the end of your piece, the "layers" are
like a stack of pancakes, and you're drilling or nailing straight down
through it). One other little thing is that the growth ring stuff will tend
to deflect your screw/nail/drill bit to one side if you are not working
perpendicular to the grain... it seems to be much harder than the wood
between the rings. If your grain is angled (not either parallel or
perpendicular) I can almost guarantee you that your nail/screw/drill bit
will wander off on the angle that the grain/growth rings go... even out the
side of your piece. Don't ask me how I know ;o)
And, yes- I believe that the grain shown in the drawings is simply "artistic
license" to show that it's wood. Technically inaccurate, but just fine for
folks who understand proper use and selection of aircraft wood (like farmers
in the 1930's in the Midwest, eh?)
Oscar Zuniga
Medford, Oregon
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.geocities.com/taildrags/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Sippola" <sippola(at)escape.ca> |
I still think the capstips are supposed to have the grain horizontal,
although it is NOT a strength issue as the capstrips and longerons are all
used in a truss framework and virtually all stresses on the individual
components are in compression or tension. The main stick of wood used as a
beam are the spars (and the tail feather beams) and these are used with the
grain horizontal. But again as mentioned it is not for strength but for
greater wood stability.
I would suggest someone check the grain orientation of some bentwood
furniture that is not made up of laminations. I suspect it would be in the
same orientation as a leaf spring or deck of cards.
Wayne Sippola, Winnipeg
----------
> From: Owen Davies <owen(at)davies.mv.com>
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Longerons
> Date: Sunday, September 30, 2001 10:48 AM
>
>
> Doug Bryant observed:
>
> > The grain direction does not matter for any wood except for the spars
and
> > that is because the wood expands the least across the grain. Doug
Bryant
>
> I'd add one exception, which no doubt everyone knows already,
> but it seems worth mentioning now, because some of the same
> reasoning may apply to the longerons.
>
> Grain direction also matters for the long pieces of capstrip that
> form the upper curve of the wing ribs. The wood layers that
> make up the grain go vertically, in part because doing it the
> other way would increase the risk of separating the "laminations"
> that make up the grain and splitting the stick as it bends over
> the tightest part of the curve.
>
> I'd think that same reasoning applied to the lower longerons.
> Their curve is not as tight, but the splitting forces must be higher
> in the thicker cross-section.
>
> Also, isn't the strength significantly different with or across the
> grain? Either is probably strong enough, but for the strongest
> possible airframe...
>
> Owen Davies
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John McNarry" <jmcnarry(at)escape.ca> |
----- Original Message -----
From: Wayne Sippola <sippola(at)escape.ca>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Longerons
> I would suggest someone check the grain orientation of some
bentwood
> furniture that is not made up of laminations. I suspect it would be in
the
> same orientation as a leaf spring or deck of cards.
> Wayne Sippola, Winnipeg
>
Just happen to be sitting on a bent wood chair. The rear legs and back are
all one piece. There is a curve out to the rear and then the back from the
seat up curves right around and down to form the other leg. The tightest
bends are in the grain orientation Wayne suggests.
John
Wayne were you touch and go in the Herc at YBR yesterday?
Had a ride in a Harmon Rocket there. Wow fast! But Low and Slow in the Piet
is still more appealing.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net> |
I remember reading from a reliable source that the grain is to vertical in
capstrips so that when you have to nail the leading edge sheeting on, the
cap strips will not bounce with each hammer blow.
Chris Bobka
Tech Counselor
Minneapolis
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wayne Sippola" <sippola(at)escape.ca>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Longerons
>
> I still think the capstips are supposed to have the grain horizontal,
> although it is NOT a strength issue as the capstrips and longerons are all
> used in a truss framework and virtually all stresses on the individual
> components are in compression or tension. The main stick of wood used as
a
> beam are the spars (and the tail feather beams) and these are used with
the
> grain horizontal. But again as mentioned it is not for strength but for
> greater wood stability.
> I would suggest someone check the grain orientation of some
bentwood
> furniture that is not made up of laminations. I suspect it would be in
the
> same orientation as a leaf spring or deck of cards.
> Wayne Sippola, Winnipeg
>
> ----------
> > From: Owen Davies <owen(at)davies.mv.com>
> > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Longerons
> > Date: Sunday, September 30, 2001 10:48 AM
> >
> >
> > Doug Bryant observed:
> >
> > > The grain direction does not matter for any wood except for the spars
> and
> > > that is because the wood expands the least across the grain. Doug
> Bryant
> >
> > I'd add one exception, which no doubt everyone knows already,
> > but it seems worth mentioning now, because some of the same
> > reasoning may apply to the longerons.
> >
> > Grain direction also matters for the long pieces of capstrip that
> > form the upper curve of the wing ribs. The wood layers that
> > make up the grain go vertically, in part because doing it the
> > other way would increase the risk of separating the "laminations"
> > that make up the grain and splitting the stick as it bends over
> > the tightest part of the curve.
> >
> > I'd think that same reasoning applied to the lower longerons.
> > Their curve is not as tight, but the splitting forces must be higher
> > in the thicker cross-section.
> >
> > Also, isn't the strength significantly different with or across the
> > grain? Either is probably strong enough, but for the strongest
> > possible airframe...
> >
> > Owen Davies
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | TomTravis(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: terrorism and weight and balance |
In a message dated 9/28/2001 10:02:07 PM Central Daylight Time,
GeneT(at)iwon.com writes:
> Airline
> policy dictates that in order to save fuel the pilots only hand fly when
> they absolutly have to . which on a 767 is almost never.
Having just retired after almost 36 years as an airline pilot I find that
interesting. Nobody ever told me that and I was a check airman (instructor
pilot) for 18 of those years.
Autopilots can be engaged on any Boeing or McDonnell Douglas/Boeing jet at
any altitude. Company policy dictates the minium altitude for engagement.
Tom Travis
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: terrorism and weight and balance |
Tom,
I think the non airline pilots are making this stuff up.
Chris bobka
----- Original Message -----
From: <TomTravis(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: terrorism and weight and balance
>
> In a message dated 9/28/2001 10:02:07 PM Central Daylight Time,
> GeneT(at)iwon.com writes:
>
>
> > Airline
> > policy dictates that in order to save fuel the pilots only hand fly when
> > they absolutly have to . which on a 767 is almost never.
>
> Having just retired after almost 36 years as an airline pilot I find that
> interesting. Nobody ever told me that and I was a check airman
(instructor
> pilot) for 18 of those years.
>
> Autopilots can be engaged on any Boeing or McDonnell Douglas/Boeing jet at
> any altitude. Company policy dictates the minium altitude for engagement.
>
>
> Tom Travis
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | TomTravis(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: terrorism and weight and balance |
Chris,
I think you're right. The same type people who come up with stuff like,
"Airliners fly themselves, all pilots have to do is push a couple of
buttons". I even heard some idiot call in to one of the TV shows a couple
of weeks ago and suggest that airliners autopilots could be pre-programmed to
fly to an Air Force base and land in case of a hijacking.
Tom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Owen Davies" <owen(at)davies.mv.com> |
| Subject: | Re: terrorism and weight and balance |
Tom Travis observed:
> I think you're right. The same type people who come up with stuff like,
> "Airliners fly themselves, all pilots have to do is push a couple of
> buttons". I even heard some idiot call in to one of the TV shows a
couple
> of weeks ago and suggest that airliners autopilots could be pre-programmed
to
> fly to an Air Force base and land in case of a hijacking.
Fifteen years or so ago, a pilot friend--17,000 hours in everything from
Korean-War fighters to airliners to DC-3s dumping napalm on little
villages in Africa--told me, "In a few years, the crew of an airliner will
consist of the pilot and a dog. The pilot will be there to feed and nurture
the dog. The dog will be there to bite him if he goes near the controls!"
FWIW.
Owen Davies
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Sippola" <sippola(at)escape.ca> |
Hi John,
No, I have not been to Brandon since they started repaving. I
was out
all night searching for a sailboat near Cambridge Bay. After nearly a 5
hour transit we searched for about 4 hours in the dark with the spotters
using NVG's but it is very difficult to find anything unless they have a
light on. We found them shortly after sunrise. Called out at 7pm and back
home noon the next day with 13.7 hours of flying. We did stop for gas
once. Slept real well last night.
Thanks for the reply on the bentwood rocker. A friend of mine built a
Harmon Rocket and does airshows with it. He's based at Rocky Mtn and is
the airport manager their.
Wayne Sippola, Winnipeg
----------
> From: John McNarry <jmcnarry(at)escape.ca>
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Just happen to be sitting on a bent wood chair. The rear legs and back
are
> all one piece. There is a curve out to the rear and then the back from
the
> seat up curves right around and down to form the other leg. The tightest
> bends are in the grain orientation Wayne suggests.
>
> John
>
> Wayne were you touch and go in the Herc at YBR yesterday?
> Had a ride in a Harmon Rocket there. Wow fast! But Low and Slow in the
Piet
> is still more appealing.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: terrorism and weight and balance |
Tom,
Not to be one of those people, but two friends who fly/flew 747's (one
retired) said they CAN fly themselves. They trottle up (hands off) rotate,
climb to altitude , at their destination,power back and land.
There was a show on TV awhile back where they showed it on tape. The two
pilots had their hands behind their head, and you saw the throttles ease
back to decend, line up with the runway, touch down,and even watched the
throttles go to reverse thrusters. It was amazing.
any 747 pilots out there that can confirm this?
walt
----- Original Message -----
From: <TomTravis(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: terrorism and weight and balance
>
> Chris,
>
> I think you're right. The same type people who come up with stuff like,
> "Airliners fly themselves, all pilots have to do is push a couple of
> buttons". I even heard some idiot call in to one of the TV shows a
couple
> of weeks ago and suggest that airliners autopilots could be pre-programmed
to
> fly to an Air Force base and land in case of a hijacking.
>
>
> Tom
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | no smoking, I think |
Steve E......I know this is trival in light of more serious
concerns this nation has right now, but since this attack
have you done any Piet smoke runs ? We are grounded
being under the Cleveland Class B airspace (for now only, I hope)
and once, if ever, allowed back in the air I'm worried about
someone calling in my smoke jobs. (of which I do many and has
become my main reason for taking the plane out anymore :))))
I think I should have been an Ag pilot really:)
And to the rest of you KEEP BUILDING !!!! Every day you work
on your plane is THAT much closer to the day YOU get to fly it !
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: no smoking, I think |
What do you think are the odds of flying my Piet with a driver's lic?
Corky in La living in the most beautiful weather in my memory
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Eldredge <steve(at)byu.edu> |
| Subject: | no smoking, I think |
I haven't done many smoke runs lately. My smoke is still connected, but I
have gone through so many bottles it is frustrating. The insect sprayer
rubber o-rings and such don't last very long against the oil, and I havn't
come up with a good replacement. Result is I have to keep pumping up the
tank during flight and half the time I end up disconnecting the tube and get
oil everywhere. Sorry that your under Class B. What a crock. They should
at least let you move your plane. I'd have probably pulled the wings and
trucked mine by now, If I weren't a few miles south of SLC. Best of luck
getting airborn soon!
BTW, Who knows what the locals would think about a smoke run. You do recall
the one time it attracted the Price, Utah media, county sherrif and an
elementary school kids.....
Steve E.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Michael D
Cuy
Subject: Pietenpol-List: no smoking, I think
Steve E......I know this is trival in light of more serious
concerns this nation has right now, but since this attack
have you done any Piet smoke runs ? We are grounded
being under the Cleveland Class B airspace (for now only, I hope)
and once, if ever, allowed back in the air I'm worried about
someone calling in my smoke jobs. (of which I do many and has
become my main reason for taking the plane out anymore :))))
I think I should have been an Ag pilot really:)
And to the rest of you KEEP BUILDING !!!! Every day you work
on your plane is THAT much closer to the day YOU get to fly it !
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net> |
THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE SURVEY
***************************************************************
On September 19th a SPECIAL - EAA Chapter E-Gram was sent out
regarding the VFR flight restrictions that were currently under effect
and a
survey with three questions was included. The feedback on the survey
was
OUTSTANDING and we thank all those who participated. The survey was
very
important in gathering information that reflects some of the concerns of
the
EAA Chapter community. The comments that were received were very good
and
constructive and enable EAA to provide additional guidance to the FAA
and
DOT as they worked with the DOD.
The following questions were asked:
With the current VFR flight restrictions, what areas have you noticed
that
have experienced the most significant negative economic impact?
* Flight School Closed * Fuel Sales Reduced * Cancelled Personal
Flying
Activities * Cancelled Flying Events
If VFR flight were brought back on line with some limitations, which of
the
following is least acceptable?
* Transponder Required * VFR Flight Plan Required * 50 Mile Flight
From
Home Airport Restriction * No Night Operations
What is your level of confidence we will return to all flight operations
as
they were before September 11th?
* High Level * Medium Level * Low Level * No Confidence
Here's a highlight of the results from the survey: The most significant
negative economic impact that survey responders experienced was the
canceling of personal flying activities (40%). Close behind was
experiencing Flight School Closures (34%). The least acceptable
limitation
was a 50 mile Flight from Home Airport Restriction (62%). The overall
level
of confidence that flight operations will return as they were before
September 11th was Low Level of Confidence (34%).
Subsequent SPECIAL - EAA Chapter E-Grams were also sent in an effort to
keep
EAA Members as up to date as possible on the current flight situation.
We
continue to work to return flight operations to full status. To keep
informed as to the latest updates, go to the EAA web site at
www.eaa.org.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dick and Marge Gillespie" <dickmarg(at)peganet.com> |
| Subject: | Drag Wires for GN-1 |
Does anybody out there know where I can find some 9/64 1050 steel rod?
My local steel source says they can't find anything less than a quarter
inch diameter.
DickG.
Ft . Myers, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alan Swanson" <swans071(at)tc.umn.edu> |
| Subject: | Stress Relieve Fittings? |
When bending 90 degree fittings out of .090, is it a good idea to play a
torch over the bend to relieve the bending stress?
Al Swanson
swans071(at)tc.umn.edu
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JEFFREY WILCOX <craigwilcox(at)peoplepc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Stress Relieve Fittings? |
Allan -
Not if you use the proper bend radius - allow about one thickness - in this case,
.090" . No need to heat at all. Be sure to bend ACROSS the grain of the metal.
Craig
On Mon, 01 October 2001, "Alan Swanson" wrote:
>
>
> When bending 90 degree fittings out of .090, is it a good idea to play a
> torch over the bend to relieve the bending stress?
>
> Al Swanson
> swans071(at)tc.umn.edu
>
>
>
PeoplePC: It's for people. And it's just smart.
http://www.peoplepc.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Beating the longeron question to death |
| From: | KGardner(at)odu.edu |
10/02/2001 07:40:42 AM
List,
I know we've been over this longeron stuff ad infinitum, but one last
question about the whole grain thing came to mind. It makes sense to me to
have the end grain of the lower longerons horizontally oriented (as in the
bentwood rocker example) because the lower longeron bending (compression)
forces are most easily dealt with in that direction. However, what about
the TOP longerons? They are subjected to the greatest bending forces
(compression) when the the 2 sides are brought together at the tail post.
So, my question is, does anyone see any compelling reason NOT to have the
lower longerons oriented with the grain horizontal & the top ones with the
grain vertical?
BTW, whoever mentioned the effect of grain on drilling straight holes is
absolutely right. I learned a trick from an old wooden boat builder around
here for dealing with that. Grind the point of your drill bit off so it's
flat (i.e. like a drift), and it won't have as great a tendency to be
pulled to one side or the other by the grain. Use a normal bit for starting
your hole, then use the ground-off one.
Hoping everyone will be back in the air soon,
Kip Gardner
Laboratory Manager
Old Dominion University
Dept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmos. Sciences, Rm. 441
4600 Elkhorn Ave.
Norfolk, VA 23529
Ph: 757-683-5654
Bumper Sticker of the Week:
"Don't Drive Faster Than Your Guardian Angel Can Fly"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Stress Relieve Fittings? |
Allan,
On top of what Craig said, be sure to smooth all the saw cuts on the edges
before bending (I use a belt sander and it makes a nice smooth surface). If
you leave the rough saw cuts on the edges, the part can crack when you bend
it (if you're lucky) or can crack a few years later under load.
Check out Tony Bingelis' book "Sportplane Construction Techniques". It
tells all about making fittings.
Good Luck,
Jack Phillips
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of JEFFREY
WILCOX
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Stress Relieve Fittings?
Allan -
Not if you use the proper bend radius - allow about one thickness - in this
case, .090" . No need to heat at all. Be sure to bend ACROSS the grain of
the metal.
Craig
On Mon, 01 October 2001, "Alan Swanson" wrote:
>
>
> When bending 90 degree fittings out of .090, is it a good idea to play a
> torch over the bend to relieve the bending stress?
>
> Al Swanson
> swans071(at)tc.umn.edu
>
>
PeoplePC: It's for people. And it's just smart.
http://www.peoplepc.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
Hello, folks;
Dumb question here from a newbie to this list. What is a "smoke run", and
how do you guys generate smoke? My assumption is that it's something
similar to aerobatic smoke, but I would think that in a Piet it wouldn't be
too exciting to watch a smoke trail unfurl at 80 MPH in a straight line ;o)
My further assumption is that you are talking about a backyard type
fertilizer/sprayer that you pump up and that has a hand-held wand for
spraying the posies... which you guys are rigging up to shoot smoke oil or
something into your exhaust pipe?
I guess I owe the list a short intro- I'm a mechanical/electrical engineer,
just turned 50 this year, 5 kids (youngest just started college 2 wks. ago-
yippee!), PPSEL/VFR, 480 hrs. (about half in taildraggers of various types).
I have an RH Corvair engine project in rebuild.
Thanks!
Oscar Zuniga
Medford, Oregon
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
HI Oscar,
The smoke runs allude to the smoke systems that Mike Cuy and a few others
have installed in their Pietenpols (I'm adding one as well). As you
surmise, it consists of a pressure type bug sprayer which when pumped up can
inject oil into the exhaust system. It actually lays out a good stream of
smoke and can be a lot of fun. I suggest you buy Mike Cuy's video of
building and flying NX48MC, his Lindy award winning Pietenpol Air Camper.
It shows the system in operation. His video is well worth the $20 cost just
if it helps you avoid one mistake in building your project.
Check out the December 1999 issue of Sport Aviation to see Mike's plane.
Jack Phillips
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | KGardner(at)odu.edu |
10/02/2001 10:24:04 AM
Oscar,
There is also a cool picture of Mike laying down smoke on his way to
Brodhead a few years ago. It's somewhere on Grant MacClaren's old BPA web
site.
Kip
Laboratory Manager
Old Dominion University
Dept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmos. Sciences, Rm. 441
4600 Elkhorn Ave.
Norfolk, VA 23529
Ph: 757-683-5654
Bumper Sticker of the Week:
"Don't Drive Faster Than Your Guardian Angel Can Fly"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Stress Relieve Fittings? |
Smoothing the edges of the fittings is important but you must hold the legth
wise part of the piece in the same direction as the movement of the belt.
This puts the sanding marks legthwise rather than across the metal, creating
stress points. And 4130 will crack at these points.
Chris Bobka
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Stress Relieve Fittings?
>
> Allan,
>
> On top of what Craig said, be sure to smooth all the saw cuts on the edges
> before bending (I use a belt sander and it makes a nice smooth surface).
If
> you leave the rough saw cuts on the edges, the part can crack when you
bend
> it (if you're lucky) or can crack a few years later under load.
>
> Check out Tony Bingelis' book "Sportplane Construction Techniques". It
> tells all about making fittings.
>
> Good Luck,
>
> Jack Phillips
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of JEFFREY
> WILCOX
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Stress Relieve Fittings?
>
>
>
> Allan -
> Not if you use the proper bend radius - allow about one thickness - in
this
> case, .090" . No need to heat at all. Be sure to bend ACROSS the grain
of
> the metal.
>
> Craig
>
> On Mon, 01 October 2001, "Alan Swanson" wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > When bending 90 degree fittings out of .090, is it a good idea to play a
> > torch over the bend to relieve the bending stress?
> >
> > Al Swanson
> > swans071(at)tc.umn.edu
> >
> >
>
>
> PeoplePC: It's for people. And it's just smart.
> http://www.peoplepc.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 10 Msgs - 10/01/01 |
In a message dated 10/02/2001 1:54:08 AM Central Daylight Time,
pietenpol-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes:
<<
Tom,
Not to be one of those people, but two friends who fly/flew 747's (one
retired) said they CAN fly themselves. They trottle up (hands off) rotate,
climb to altitude , at their destination,power back and land.
There was a show on TV awhile back where they showed it on tape. The two
pilots had their hands behind their head, and you saw the throttles ease
back to decend, line up with the runway, touch down,and even watched the
throttles go to reverse thrusters. It was amazing.
any 747 pilots out there that can confirm this?
walt
----- Original Message -----
From: <TomTravis(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: terrorism and weight and balance
>>
"The state of the art today is that, with one push of a button, a modern
airliner can start its' engines, taxi to the runway, take off, climb to
cruise altitude, cruise, descend, land and taxi to the gate without once
again being touched by human hand. The only thing they haven't figured out
yet is how to get the damned things to fix themselves!"
By the way, I'm a pilot as well as a mechanic.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Neal <llneal(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Stress Relieve Fittings? |
(Oh, no! He's gonna ask it.....)
Just to be sure, when we say bend across the metal's grain...
As I remember, the grain is indicated by the stenciled lettering on the metal.
So is the correct bend with the lettering getting closer to itself, or is the
lettering in the trough of the bend?
It sounds as though a dremel sanding drum might be handy to get into the corners
on some parts and still keep the sanding orientation correct.
Larry
...ain't nothin wrong with that horse a good whipping wouldn't cure ;-)
Christian Bobka wrote:
>
> Smoothing the edges of the fittings is important but you must hold the legth
> wise part of the piece in the same direction as the movement of the belt.
>
> This puts the sanding marks legthwise rather than across the metal, creating
> stress points. And 4130 will crack at these points.
>
> Chris Bobka
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net>
> To:
> Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Stress Relieve Fittings?
>
>
> >
> > Allan,
> >
> > On top of what Craig said, be sure to smooth all the saw cuts on the edges
> > before bending (I use a belt sander and it makes a nice smooth surface).
> If
> > you leave the rough saw cuts on the edges, the part can crack when you
> bend
> > it (if you're lucky) or can crack a few years later under load.
> >
> > Check out Tony Bingelis' book "Sportplane Construction Techniques". It
> > tells all about making fittings.
> >
> > Good Luck,
> >
> > Jack Phillips
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of JEFFREY
> > WILCOX
> > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Stress Relieve Fittings?
> >
> >
> >
> > Allan -
> > Not if you use the proper bend radius - allow about one thickness - in
> this
> > case, .090" . No need to heat at all. Be sure to bend ACROSS the grain
> of
> > the metal.
> >
> > Craig
> >
> > On Mon, 01 October 2001, "Alan Swanson" wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > When bending 90 degree fittings out of .090, is it a good idea to play a
> > > torch over the bend to relieve the bending stress?
> > >
> > > Al Swanson
> > > swans071(at)tc.umn.edu
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > PeoplePC: It's for people. And it's just smart.
> > http://www.peoplepc.com
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mboynton(at)excite.com |
| Subject: | Re: Stress Relieve Fittings? |
I can't resist:
Doesn't it depend on the orientation of the growth rings?
There, I feel better now.
Mark Boynton
>
> (Oh, no! He's gonna ask it.....)
>
> Just to be sure, when we say bend across the metal's grain...
>
> As I remember, the grain is indicated by the stenciled lettering on the
metal.
> So is the correct bend with the lettering getting closer to itself, or is
the
> lettering in the trough of the bend?
>
> It sounds as though a dremel sanding drum might be handy to get into the
corners
> on some parts and still keep the sanding orientation correct.
>
> Larry
> ...ain't nothin wrong with that horse a good whipping wouldn't cure ;-)
>
> Christian Bobka wrote:
>
> >
> > Smoothing the edges of the fittings is important but you must hold the
legth
> > wise part of the piece in the same direction as the movement of the
belt.
> >
> > This puts the sanding marks legthwise rather than across the metal,
creating
> > stress points. And 4130 will crack at these points.
> >
> > Chris Bobka
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net>
> > To:
> > Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Stress Relieve Fittings?
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Allan,
> > >
> > > On top of what Craig said, be sure to smooth all the saw cuts on the
edges
> > > before bending (I use a belt sander and it makes a nice smooth
surface).
> > If
> > > you leave the rough saw cuts on the edges, the part can crack when
you
> > bend
> > > it (if you're lucky) or can crack a few years later under load.
> > >
> > > Check out Tony Bingelis' book "Sportplane Construction Techniques".
It
> > > tells all about making fittings.
> > >
> > > Good Luck,
> > >
> > > Jack Phillips
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
JEFFREY
> > > WILCOX
> > > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> > > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Stress Relieve Fittings?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Allan -
> > > Not if you use the proper bend radius - allow about one thickness -
in
> > this
> > > case, .090" . No need to heat at all. Be sure to bend ACROSS the
grain
> > of
> > > the metal.
> > >
> > > Craig
> > >
> > > On Mon, 01 October 2001, "Alan Swanson" wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > When bending 90 degree fittings out of .090, is it a good idea to
play a
> > > > torch over the bend to relieve the bending stress?
> > > >
> > > > Al Swanson
> > > > swans071(at)tc.umn.edu
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > PeoplePC: It's for people. And it's just smart.
> > > http://www.peoplepc.com
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Neal <llneal(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Beating the longeron question to death |
Kip,
I got some new insight into this the other day from a couple of good
authorities.
The opinion was that vertical or horizontal does not matter, but to do both top
and bottom the same to keep the fuselage bend symmetrical.
Unless I missed a post, I think we've all come to the conclusion that it's not
of much consequence either way.
Larry
...here's the whip, your turn ;-)
---------------------------------
KGardner(at)odu.edu wrote:
>
> List,
>
> I know we've been over this longeron stuff ad infinitum, but one last
> question about the whole grain thing came to mind. It makes sense to me to
> have the end grain of the lower longerons horizontally oriented (as in the
> bentwood rocker example) because the lower longeron bending (compression)
> forces are most easily dealt with in that direction. However, what about
> the TOP longerons? They are subjected to the greatest bending forces
> (compression) when the the 2 sides are brought together at the tail post.
> So, my question is, does anyone see any compelling reason NOT to have the
> lower longerons oriented with the grain horizontal & the top ones with the
> grain vertical?
>
> BTW, whoever mentioned the effect of grain on drilling straight holes is
> absolutely right. I learned a trick from an old wooden boat builder around
> here for dealing with that. Grind the point of your drill bit off so it's
> flat (i.e. like a drift), and it won't have as great a tendency to be
> pulled to one side or the other by the grain. Use a normal bit for starting
> your hole, then use the ground-off one.
>
> Hoping everyone will be back in the air soon,
>
> Kip Gardner
> Laboratory Manager
> Old Dominion University
> Dept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmos. Sciences, Rm. 441
> 4600 Elkhorn Ave.
> Norfolk, VA 23529
>
> Ph: 757-683-5654
>
> Bumper Sticker of the Week:
>
> "Don't Drive Faster Than Your Guardian Angel Can Fly"
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Stress Relieve Fittings? |
Your right, Larry. The lettering on the steel should be perpendicular to
the bend line. And a small sanding drum on a Dremel tool is a must for
smoothing out any inside radius curves before bending.
Jack
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Larry Neal
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Stress Relieve Fittings?
(Oh, no! He's gonna ask it.....)
Just to be sure, when we say bend across the metal's grain...
As I remember, the grain is indicated by the stenciled lettering on the
metal.
So is the correct bend with the lettering getting closer to itself, or is
the
lettering in the trough of the bend?
It sounds as though a dremel sanding drum might be handy to get into the
corners
on some parts and still keep the sanding orientation correct.
Larry
...ain't nothin wrong with that horse a good whipping wouldn't cure ;-)
Christian Bobka wrote:
>
> Smoothing the edges of the fittings is important but you must hold the
legth
> wise part of the piece in the same direction as the movement of the belt.
>
> This puts the sanding marks legthwise rather than across the metal,
creating
> stress points. And 4130 will crack at these points.
>
> Chris Bobka
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net>
> To:
> Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Stress Relieve Fittings?
>
>
> >
> > Allan,
> >
> > On top of what Craig said, be sure to smooth all the saw cuts on the
edges
> > before bending (I use a belt sander and it makes a nice smooth surface).
> If
> > you leave the rough saw cuts on the edges, the part can crack when you
> bend
> > it (if you're lucky) or can crack a few years later under load.
> >
> > Check out Tony Bingelis' book "Sportplane Construction Techniques". It
> > tells all about making fittings.
> >
> > Good Luck,
> >
> > Jack Phillips
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of JEFFREY
> > WILCOX
> > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Stress Relieve Fittings?
> >
> >
> >
> > Allan -
> > Not if you use the proper bend radius - allow about one thickness - in
> this
> > case, .090" . No need to heat at all. Be sure to bend ACROSS the grain
> of
> > the metal.
> >
> > Craig
> >
> > On Mon, 01 October 2001, "Alan Swanson" wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > When bending 90 degree fittings out of .090, is it a good idea to play
a
> > > torch over the bend to relieve the bending stress?
> > >
> > > Al Swanson
> > > swans071(at)tc.umn.edu
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > PeoplePC: It's for people. And it's just smart.
> > http://www.peoplepc.com
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Don Emch" <emchair(at)cros.net> |
Mike,
For what it's worth a couple of guys put Mather's field in IFR on Sunday at the
Mather's Chili Fly-in. I was kind of wondering the same thing you were at the
time. It sure didn't seem to concern anybody though! Hope you can get out
soon, maybe in time for Fall colors!
Don E.
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov>
Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2001 11:22:46 -0400
>
>Steve E......I know this is trival in light of more serious
>concerns this nation has right now, but since this attack
>have you done any Piet smoke runs ? We are grounded
>being under the Cleveland Class B airspace (for now only, I hope)
>and once, if ever, allowed back in the air I'm worried about
>someone calling in my smoke jobs. (of which I do many and has
>become my main reason for taking the plane out anymore :))))
>I think I should have been an Ag pilot really:)
>
>And to the rest of you KEEP BUILDING !!!! Every day you work
>on your plane is THAT much closer to the day YOU get to fly it !
>
>Mike C.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeffrey Wilcox" <craigwilcox(at)peoplepc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Stress Relieve Fittings? |
Bending the piece WITH the grain would put the letters in the "trough"WRONG!!!
Bending ACROSS the grain would be bring the letters closer to each
other, as you put it. If you put the piece in a bending press, have the
letters stick out like a tongue!.
Be sure to POLISH the edges before bending, No nicks, scrapes, files marks,
whatever. I use a dremel tool with a medium rubber wheel to remove all tool
marks, etc., before bending. Of course, since I'm too cheap (poor?) to buy
a metal cutting bandsaw, I also cut all my pieces with a jewelers saw, 2/0
blades. Built four airplanes this way, working on #5 and #6.
Craig
----- Original Message -----
From: Larry Neal <llneal(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Stress Relieve Fittings?
>
> (Oh, no! He's gonna ask it.....)
>
> Just to be sure, when we say bend across the metal's grain...
>
> As I remember, the grain is indicated by the stenciled lettering on the
metal.
> So is the correct bend with the lettering getting closer to itself, or is
the
> lettering in the trough of the bend?
>
> It sounds as though a dremel sanding drum might be handy to get into the
corners
> on some parts and still keep the sanding orientation correct.
>
> Larry
> ...ain't nothin wrong with that horse a good whipping wouldn't cure ;-)
>
> Christian Bobka wrote:
>
> >
> > Smoothing the edges of the fittings is important but you must hold the
legth
> > wise part of the piece in the same direction as the movement of the
belt.
> >
> > This puts the sanding marks legthwise rather than across the metal,
creating
> > stress points. And 4130 will crack at these points.
> >
> > Chris Bobka
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net>
> > To:
> > Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Stress Relieve Fittings?
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Allan,
> > >
> > > On top of what Craig said, be sure to smooth all the saw cuts on the
edges
> > > before bending (I use a belt sander and it makes a nice smooth
surface).
> > If
> > > you leave the rough saw cuts on the edges, the part can crack when you
> > bend
> > > it (if you're lucky) or can crack a few years later under load.
> > >
> > > Check out Tony Bingelis' book "Sportplane Construction Techniques".
It
> > > tells all about making fittings.
> > >
> > > Good Luck,
> > >
> > > Jack Phillips
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of JEFFREY
> > > WILCOX
> > > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> > > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Stress Relieve Fittings?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Allan -
> > > Not if you use the proper bend radius - allow about one thickness - in
> > this
> > > case, .090" . No need to heat at all. Be sure to bend ACROSS the
grain
> > of
> > > the metal.
> > >
> > > Craig
> > >
> > > On Mon, 01 October 2001, "Alan Swanson" wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > When bending 90 degree fittings out of .090, is it a good idea to
play a
> > > > torch over the bend to relieve the bending stress?
> > > >
> > > > Al Swanson
> > > > swans071(at)tc.umn.edu
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > PeoplePC: It's for people. And it's just smart.
> > > http://www.peoplepc.com
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeffrey Wilcox" <craigwilcox(at)peoplepc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Stress Relieve Fittings? |
>
> I can't resist:
>
> Doesn't it depend on the orientation of the growth rings?
>
> There, I feel better now.
>
> Mark Boynton
>
Yes, Mark, but you need my special Xe-Kr-Cd deluxe viewing instrument to see
them. Please send $8,500 in small bills, and wait until you receive the
viewer.
Craig
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Greg Cardinal" <gcardinal(at)startribune.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Stress Relieve Fittings? |
I would recommend a 3M Scotchbrite polishing wheel for your bench grinder. They
run about $40.00 and will put a mirror finish on the edges of your steel.
Use a light feed pressure on the metal for two reasons; the Scotchbrite wheel can
cut aggressively and heavy feeds wear down the wheel prematurely when polishing
the edges of this sheets.
One more thing, they are very effective at removing skin from your fingertips.
Greg Cardinal in Minneapolis
Christian Bobka wrote:
>
> Smoothing the edges of the fittings is important but you must hold the legth
> wise part of the piece in the same direction as the movement of the belt.
>
> This puts the sanding marks legthwise rather than across the metal, creating
> stress points. And 4130 will crack at these points.
>
> Chris Bobka
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net>
> To:
> Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Stress Relieve Fittings?
>
>
> >
> > Allan,
> >
> > On top of what Craig said, be sure to smooth all the saw cuts on the edges
> > before bending (I use a belt sander and it makes a nice smooth surface).
> If
> > you leave the rough saw cuts on the edges, the part can crack when you
> bend
> > it (if you're lucky) or can crack a few years later under load.
> >
> > Check out Tony Bingelis' book "Sportplane Construction Techniques". It
> > tells all about making fittings.
> >
> > Good Luck,
> >
> > Jack Phillips
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of JEFFREY
> > WILCOX
> > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Stress Relieve Fittings?
> >
> >
> >
> > Allan -
> > Not if you use the proper bend radius - allow about one thickness - in
> this
> > case, .090" . No need to heat at all. Be sure to bend ACROSS the grain
> of
> > the metal.
> >
> > Craig
> >
> > On Mon, 01 October 2001, "Alan Swanson" wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > When bending 90 degree fittings out of .090, is it a good idea to play a
> > > torch over the bend to relieve the bending stress?
> > >
> > > Al Swanson
> > > swans071(at)tc.umn.edu
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > PeoplePC: It's for people. And it's just smart.
> > http://www.peoplepc.com
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
I have a question....
The plans show using wooden trailing edges, but I have also heard of some
using aluminum trailing edges. I assume this would be a weight saver. I was
wondering if anyone out there might have input on the use of wood vs aluminum
on this portion of the project. Strength, rigidity?? Obviously I do not want
to divert from the plans, however I am interested in saving some weight for
the model a. Thanks in advance.
Walt
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mboynton(at)excite.com |
| Subject: | Re: Stress Relieve Fittings? |
Craig,
OK, but next time let me know before I put away my Monopoly game!
Mark Boynton
>
>
> >
> > I can't resist:
> >
> > Doesn't it depend on the orientation of the growth rings?
> >
> > There, I feel better now.
> >
> > Mark Boynton
> >
> Yes, Mark, but you need my special Xe-Kr-Cd deluxe viewing instrument to
see
> them. Please send $8,500 in small bills, and wait until you receive the
> viewer.
>
> Craig
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
Hi Walt,
I used aluminum trailing edges on mine. They not only save weight, they are
straighter than most wooden trailing edges. Another concern with wood is
rot, since the trailing edge is at the low point of the wing and will
collect moisture, drain grommets or no.
They may not be suitable for "purists", but I'm sure BHP would have used
them if they were readily available in his day.
Jack Phillips
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
Wcbowe(at)aol.com
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Trailing edges
I have a question....
The plans show using wooden trailing edges, but I have also heard of some
using aluminum trailing edges. I assume this would be a weight saver. I was
wondering if anyone out there might have input on the use of wood vs
aluminum
on this portion of the project. Strength, rigidity?? Obviously I do not
want
to divert from the plans, however I am interested in saving some weight for
the model a. Thanks in advance.
Walt
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Piet project on e-bay |
This looks pretty clean.
Mike C.
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1644144930
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Seibert" <r18643(at)email.sps.mot.com> |
| Subject: | Some thoughts before flying |
SOME THOUGHTS BEFORE FLYING
Keep the aeroplane in such an attitude that the air pressure is directly
in the pilot's face. - Horatio C. Barber, 1916
When a flight is proceeding incredibly well, something was forgotten. -
Robert Livingston, 'Flying The Aeronca'
The only time an aircraft has too much fuel on board is when it is on
fire. - Sir Charles Kingsford Smith
Flexible is much too rigid, in aviation you have to be fluid. - Verne
Jobst
If you can't afford to do something right, then be darn sure you can
afford to do it wrong. - Charlie Nelson
Just remember, if you crash because of weather, your funeral will be
held on a sunny day. - Layton A. Bennett
I hope you either take up parachute jumping or stay out of single
motored airplanes at night. - Charles A. Lindbergh, to Wiley Post,1931
Never fly the 'A' model of anything. - Ed Thompson
Never fly anything that doesn't have the paint worn off the rudder
Pedals. - Harry Bill
Keep thy airspeed up, less the earth come from below and smite thee. -
William Kershner
When a prang seems inevitable, endeavor to strike the softest, cheapest
object in the vicinity, as slowly and gently as possible. - advice given
to RAF pilots during W.W.II.
Instrument flying is when your mind gets a grip on the fact that there
is vision beyond sight. - U.S. Navy 'Approach' magazine circa W.W.II.
Always keep an 'out' in your hip pocket. - Bevo Howard
The Cub is the safest airplane in the world; it can just barely kill
you. - attributed to Max Stanley, Northrop test pilot
A pilot who doesn't have any fear probably isn't flying his plane to its
maximum. - Jon McBride, astronaut
If you're faced with a forced landing, fly the thing as far into the
crash as possible. - Bob Hoover
It occurred to me that if I did not handle the crash correctly, there
would be no survivors. - Richard Leakey, after engine failure in a
single engine airplane, Nairobi, Africa, 1993.
If an airplane is still in one piece, don't cheat on it. Ride the
bastard down. - Ernest K. Gann, advice from the 'old pelican'
Though I Fly Through the Valley of Death I Shall Fear No Evil For I am
80,000 feet and Climbing. - sign over the entrance to the SR-71 squadron
on Kadena AB Okinawa
You've never been lost until you've been lost at Mach 3. - Paul F.
Crickmore
The emergencies you train for almost never happen. It's the one you
can't train for that kills you. - Ernest K. Gann, advice from the 'old
pelican'
If you want to grow old as a pilot, you've got to know when to push it,
and when to back off. - Chuck Yeager
Never fly in the same cockpit with someone braver than you. - Richard
Herman Jr, 'Firebreak'
There is no reason to fly through a thunderstorm in peacetime. - Sign
over squadron ops desk at Davis-Monthan AFB, AZ, 1970.
An airplane might disappoint any pilot but it'll never surprise a good
one. - Len Morgan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LAWRENCE WILLIAMS" <lnawms(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Head-mount mags for "A" |
Does anyone have info or know where I can get info about the suitability
of using a WICO XVD 2311 magneto on a "A"? I am presently using a WICO XVD 2339
and it works very well but it's a loaner and I have located a 2311 but don't
want to buy it if it doesn't fit.
HELP!
Larry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
Pieters,
Has there ever been established an avarage price which a Piet should bring?
Maybe some of you owners of completed birds might offer for our guidance such
figures as to what you would let it go for or what offers you may have had in
the past. I know approx what I'll have in mine by the time it's covered.
Could this be the asking price? Sure would like some help and discussion on
this subject as it is close to our hearts and pocketbooks.
Corky in La where he needs some shrimp money
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Meadows" <gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com> |
Corky,
Don't give up the fight yet! It'd sure be a shame to put all the work
that you have into a project, and then let someone else enjoy your efforts!!
I'm sure you've thought it over and have good reasons for selling, though.
I'll bet that it'd be easier to sell a project if it had been flown some
first - for obvious reasons. If you don't want to take it that far, I bet
you might sell it easier if you threw in the covering, and left it in it's
skeletal form. Then the prospective buyer could take a good look-see at your
handiwork and determine that the structure is safe and strong. I know I'd
rather buy pre-cover than to have to inspect the structure through the
inspection holes.
As for price, I defer to the "been-there, done-thats" on the list, there
seems to be a wide range there.
Good luck, Corky, I hope whatever you decide works out, but I sure would
hate to see you go! I've enjoyed your unique perspective on things!
Gary Meadows
Spring, TX
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Philip Humphrey" <philip.humphrey(at)belgacom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Trailing edges |
Jack, Hi,
I'm an 'almost' Piet builder living in Belgium. I've just bought a set of
drawings and am getting ideas together. What kind of aluminum did you use -
tubular section, or a V section, and how was it attached? Anything to save
weight must be good! Grateful for your advice.
Phil H.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Trailing edges
>
> Hi Walt,
>
> I used aluminum trailing edges on mine. They not only save weight, they
are
> straighter than most wooden trailing edges. Another concern with wood is
> rot, since the trailing edge is at the low point of the wing and will
> collect moisture, drain grommets or no.
>
> They may not be suitable for "purists", but I'm sure BHP would have used
> them if they were readily available in his day.
>
> Jack Phillips
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
> Wcbowe(at)aol.com
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Trailing edges
>
>
> I have a question....
>
> The plans show using wooden trailing edges, but I have also heard of some
> using aluminum trailing edges. I assume this would be a weight saver. I
was
> wondering if anyone out there might have input on the use of wood vs
> aluminum
> on this portion of the project. Strength, rigidity?? Obviously I do not
> want
> to divert from the plans, however I am interested in saving some weight
for
> the model a. Thanks in advance.
>
> Walt
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Eldredge <steve(at)byu.edu> |
in 1999 I saw my friends go at oshkosh for 12,500. It was a nice example
with a subaru engine and a custom prop. I know there was one for 19,500 in
florida, not sure how much it went for or if it sold, but even as nice as it
was, I'm not sure it was worth that much. Myself, I think a piet with an
aircraft engine, with the hours flown off in good condition is in the 12-16K
value. Famous Mike Cuy's would be an exception of course.
Just my thoughts....
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: A value
Pieters,
Has there ever been established an avarage price which a Piet should bring?
Maybe some of you owners of completed birds might offer for our guidance
such
figures as to what you would let it go for or what offers you may have had
in
the past. I know approx what I'll have in mine by the time it's covered.
Could this be the asking price? Sure would like some help and discussion on
this subject as it is close to our hearts and pocketbooks.
Corky in La where he needs some shrimp money
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
A finished, flying Piet might go for anywhere from $6 to 16 K
I'd think depending on condition, problems, previous accident
history, hours, fabric condition and engine type and hours.
Empty weight too should be a factor.
Course the way Cubs and Champs have skyrocketed in price maybe
Steve E. and I are low in our estimates. Some Piets are just beautiful
while others are pretty shabby. Don't buy one sight unseen if at all
possible. Corky---don't sell that thing. Finish it, fly it with or without
your license and look for the F-16 escorts. (but don't let them fly it
without getting some dual first:))
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
Hello, folks;
Not sure how things are handled on this list, but on several others, Fridays
are sort of "open line Friday". This keeps most days free of hangar talk
and sidebar issues, but still allows a day for people to toss out wild ideas
or "there I was, flat on my back" stories.
So, I'll take the liberty to mention floats, since I've seen it discussed in
the archives and maybe there's some interest here. I got a set of plans
from MukTuk Floats
(http://www.ultralightfloats.com/) for my little M-19 "Flying Squirrel", and
have installed appropriate mounting points to allow dismounting the mains
and installing floats on some of the same mounting points. To that, you
have to add water rudder steering cables and etc., but it isn't a major
trick to do straight floats interchangeable with land gear (amphibs are a
whole 'nother story). This is coming from somebody who hasn't actually done
it yet, but is headed that way... so take what I say with a grain of salt or
two! One other slight problem is that I'm still only land rated, but we can
fix that too.
Anyway, the MukTuk floats are homebuilt wooden/composite floats, easy to
build if you've already built a Piet, and can be sized for planes up to 1200
lbs. gross. The Piet fits in there. With a Corvair, dragging a set of
floats around shouldn't be an issue at all. Cress Walker, the
owner/designer at MukTuk, takes your info on particulars of your airplane
and generates a set of plans tailored to your airplane. They include all
dimensions sized for your set of floats. You get a construction manual and
a set of drawings. He does a good job.
More food for thought there. I just don't think I've every seen a Piet on
floats of any type...
Oscar Zuniga
Medford, Oregon
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Pietenpol value.... |
Corky,
It would be a great shame if you don't finish that little air-
plane. From the photo you sent me, it looks like a good
job. I'm sure it will be one of the better Pietenpols when
finished.
Regarding the value of homebuilt airplanes, I don't know
what the situation is in the USA. In Canada, a person is
apt to recover approximately the cost of materials and
parts without any consideration for the labor invested---
and this applies to a completed and flying aircraft. There
are exceptions of course, but inflation tends to blurr the
picture and it is difficult to see whether you have broken
even or lost some money.
The most significant return on your time and money is in
flying and enjoying your creation. No value can be assigned
to something as precious as this. I've been flying my Piet
for 31 years as of next month (November 15) and consider
it to be one of the most worthwhile investments I ever made.
When I retire it, I hope to donate it to a museum because
it owes me nothing. With this in mind, I do hope you will be
able to keep your project, finish it, and fly and enjoy it as
much as I have enjoyed mine.
As I write this, it is a nice day out there. I think I'll go fly my
Pietenpol and change its oil.
Cheers,
Graham
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
Hi Phil,
I used the V section aluminum Trailing Edge material that Aircraft Spruce &
Specialty sells. It costs $10.85 (USD) for a 10 foot (approx. 3 meter)
section. It will take a total of 4 sections to do a Pietenpol, so $43.40.
The savings come in the installation time. It took me about an hour to do
the entire wing. I hate to think how long it would take to do it in wood.
If you don't have their catalog, it's free and can be ordered at
www.aircraftspruce.com . It is a valuable source of information, and their
prices are not too bad (by aircraft standards). I have bought a lot of
hardware and about half my wood from them. I believe they ship worldwide.
Good luck,
Jack Phillips
Wings finished, Tail finished, Fuselage nearly finished, Landing Gear under
construction and nearly finished. Engine awaiting rebuild.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Philip
Humphrey
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Trailing edges
Jack, Hi,
I'm an 'almost' Piet builder living in Belgium. I've just bought a set of
drawings and am getting ideas together. What kind of aluminum did you use -
tubular section, or a V section, and how was it attached? Anything to save
weight must be good! Grateful for your advice.
Phil H.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Lou Larsen" <pietlars(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Head-mount mags for "A" |
Larry:
You could try Bill Lopoulos, he has a magnetos site on the net . I asked
him some questions and he was most helpful. You can E-Mail him :
blopoulos(at)aol.com
If you ask a search engine foe "magnetos" his site will come up. He has
parts and service for antique engines, tractors, etc. magnetos, NOT
aircraft mags.
Finally got my old type handle mag switch and a tach, mechanical type; non
sensitive altimeter and airspeed are on the way. Working on the instrument
panel now. Still need a compass and inclinometer.
Regards,
Lou
----- Original Message -----
From: "LAWRENCE WILLIAMS" <lnawms(at)msn.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Head-mount mags for "A"
>
> Does anyone have info or know where I can get info about the suitability
> of using a WICO XVD 2311 magneto on a "A"? I am presently using a WICO XV> D
2339 and it works very well but it's a loaner and I have located a 2311> but
don't want to buy it if it doesn't fit.
> HELP!
>
> Larry
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cinda + Skip Gadd" <csfog(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | GN-1 Landing Gear |
A question for the Grega gang,
I am using a combination of elements from the GN 1, Wag-Aero Cubby, and
Piet for the L/G on my Piet.
The L/G-Lift strut brackets at the lower longerons are mainly GN 1, with
the exception that the aft bracket is used for both L/G and Lift strut like the
Piet.
I have a set of Grega plans but have not been able to tell what size, wall
thickness the channel spreader is. This channel is used in the place most Piet
builders use a metal strap, it goes from left to right side below the floor
board at both front and aft L/G brackets.
In addition the the thickness of the metal, also would like to know where
to get this or is this something that has to be made up?
Thanks in advance, Skip in Atlanta
--- Cinda + Skip Gadd
--- csfog(at)earthlink.net
--- EarthLink: It's your Internet.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alan Swanson" <swans071(at)tc.umn.edu> |
| Subject: | Tail Section Fittings |
I have just finished making the metal fittings for my tail section, and I
have a couple of questions, particularly for you guys who have finished your
plane:
-For the wire brace fittings, did you bolt the fittings directly to the main
and center beams so that the fitting, except for the connection tab, will be
under the fabric covering? Or did you put a spacer under the fitting to
build it up flush, and bolt the fitting on top of the fabric so it is
exposed?
-Same question for the elevator and rudder control horns. The plans for the
horns show a 1 inch opening, but do not show a spacer to build the main beam
up to that thickness.
It seems that putting all of these fittings flush on top of the fabric will
have a lot of bolts and nuts showing and produce more drag. Does it matter
aerodynamically or aesthetically?
Thanks as always for the help.
Al Swanson
swans071(at)tc.umn.edu
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Tail Section Fittings |
>:
>
>-For the wire brace fittings, did you bolt the fittings directly to the main
>and center beams so that the fitting, except for the connection tab, will be
>under the fabric covering? Or did you put a spacer under the fitting to
>build it up flush, and bolt the fitting on top of the fabric so it is
>exposed?
I've seen both ways. I think for the fittings it is easier and
cleaner (not aerodynamically) to make it flush and have them on the
outside of the fabric.
>-Same question for the elevator and rudder control horns. The plans for the
>horns show a 1 inch opening, but do not show a spacer to build the main beam
>up to that thickness.
Again, I've seen both. My horns were tight around the main beam, but
I am going to rebuild them to be flush. 1/16" or 1/8" plywood is the
plan for spacers
>
>
>It seems that putting all of these fittings flush on top of the fabric will
>have a lot of bolts and nuts showing and produce more drag. Does it matter
>aerodynamically or aesthetically?
I'd say that those bolts are the least of drag concerns for a Piet
:-) Aesthetically --- that's up to you. I kind of like the look of
off color, external fittings on some piets and the smooth covered
fittings on others.
Check out the pictures below of Dale Johnson and Greg Cardinal's
fittings. They are creating an award winning aircraft IMHO.
http://homepage.mac.com/khuizenga (you can ignore the navigation
and tailwheel file)
Kirk
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
All,
Whats normally done about seatbelts and attachments? I sorta guessed
I'm on my own with shoulder straps...
Similarly, I'm not content with that 1/8" plywood bulkhead for a
firewall.
I remember some of the discussions about these during the "wish I was
building" phase. I'll search in the archives of course, but are there
any new opinions available?
Larry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Boyd" <pietenpol41(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Some thoughts before flying |
Thanks for the THOUGHTS BEFORE FLYING. I teach flying at the Univ. of Illinois.
I'll use some of the quotes in my CFI groundschool class to help put things in
perspecive. Dave Boyd
From: "Bob Seibert" <R18643(at)EMAIL.SPS.MOT.COM>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Some thoughts before flying
Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2001 12:17:34 -0500
-- Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Bob Seibert"
SOME THOUGHTS BEFORE FLYING
Keep the aeroplane in such an attitude that the air pressure is directly
in the pilot's face. - Horatio C. Barber, 1916
When a flight is proceeding incredibly well, something was forgotten. -
Robert Livingston, 'Flying The Aeronca'
The only time an aircraft has too much fuel on board is when it is on
fire. - Sir Charles Kingsford Smith
Flexible is much too rigid, in aviation you have to be fluid. - Verne
Jobst
If you can't afford to do something right, then be darn sure you can
afford to do it wrong. - Charlie Nelson
Just remember, if you crash because of weather, your funeral will be
held on a sunny day. - Layton A. Bennett
I hope you either take up parachute jumping or stay out of single
motored airplanes at night. - Charles A. Lindbergh, to Wiley Post,1931
Never fly the 'A' model of anything. - Ed Thompson
Never fly anything that doesn't have the paint worn off the rudder
Pedals. - Harry Bill
Keep thy airspeed up, less the earth come from below and smite thee. -
William Kershner
When a prang seems inevitable, endeavor to strike the softest, cheapest
object in the vicinity, as slowly and gently as possible. - advice given
to RAF pilots during W.W.II.
Instrument flying is when your mind gets a grip on the fact that there
is vision beyond sight. - U.S. Navy 'Approach' magazine circa W.W.II.
Always keep an 'out' in your hip pocket. - Bevo Howard
The Cub is the safest airplane in the world; it can just barely kill
you. - attributed to Max Stanley, Northrop test pilot
A pilot who doesn't have any fear probably isn't flying his plane to its
maximum. - Jon McBride, astronaut
If you're faced with a forced landing, fly the thing as far into the
crash as possible. - Bob Hoover
It occurred to me that if I did not handle the crash correctly, there
would be no survivors. - Richard Leakey, after engine failure in a
single engine airplane, Nairobi, Africa, 1993.
If an airplane is still in one piece, don't cheat on it. Ride the
bastard down. - Ernest K. Gann, advice from the 'old pelican'
Though I Fly Through the Valley of Death I Shall Fear No Evil For I am
80,000 feet and Climbing. - sign over the entrance to the SR-71 squadron
on Kadena AB Okinawa
You've never been lost until you've been lost at Mach 3. - Paul F.
Crickmore
The emergencies you train for almost never happen. It's the one you
can't train for that kills you. - Ernest K. Gann, advice from the 'old
pelican'
If you want to grow old as a pilot, you've got to know when to push it,
and when to back off. - Chuck Yeager
Never fly in the same cockpit with someone braver than you. - Richard
Herman Jr, 'Firebreak'
There is no reason to fly through a thunderstorm in peacetime. - Sign
over squadron ops desk at Davis-Monthan AFB, AZ, 1970.
An airplane might disappoint any pilot but it'll never surprise a good
one. - Len Morgan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Doc Mosher <docshop(at)tds.net> |
| Subject: | Corvair article in November Kitplanes magazine |
The November issue of Kitplanes magazine has a great article by Howard Levy
(excellent author and photographer and all-around nice guy) all about
"Convening Corvair College." Four and a half pages of article and photos
about the Daytona campus (actually Spruce Creek). Photos of Pat Panzera's
great looking Corvair, photos of Kevin, William, Grace, and many
more. Kitplanes gave Howard enough space to spread out and do an in-depth
article about the engine, the get-together, and the people. Great engine,
but the people make the difference.
Doc Mosher
Oshkosh USA
________________________________________________________________________________
Larry,
I'm sure of the preffered way for the waist belt. Mine has a swaged
loop of cable around the struts by the seat rear currently, but may
very well change it.
As far as shoulder straps I will be modifying my current set-up to be
similar to what Dale Johnson and Greg Cardinal have. Cables are
attached to a fitting inside the fuselage where the Vertical and
Horizontal Stabilizer attach.
There is a movie of the set-up at my web site.
http://homepage.mac.com/khuizenga/ (shoulderstrap.mov)
At Brodhead this year I took some video of of front seat shoulder
straps and may do the following.
http://homepage.mac.com/khuizenga/ (frontseat.jpg and frontseatrestraint.jpg)
Maybe this will give you some ideas
Kirk
>
>Whats normally done about seatbelts and attachments? I sorta guessed
>I'm on my own with shoulder straps...
>
>Similarly, I'm not content with that 1/8" plywood bulkhead for a
>firewall.
>
>I remember some of the discussions about these during the "wish I was
>building" phase. I'll search in the archives of course, but are there
>any new opinions available?
>
>Larry
________________________________________________________________________________
><kirkh@unique-software.com>
>
>Larry,
>
>I'm sure of the preffered way for the waist belt. Mine has a swaged
>loop of cable around the struts by the seat rear currently, but may
>very well change it.
>
This should read NOT sure of the preffered way
Kirk
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ted Brousseau" <nfn00979(at)naples.net> |
| Subject: | Rudder control horns |
What are you guys doing about rudder control horns? The original Piet
didn't have a steerable tail wheel so it simply had a rudder control horn.
With a steerable tail wheel things get complex. Do the control cables still
go to the rudder horn and then the rudder transfers torque to the tail
wheel? Or, do the control cables now go directly to the tail wheel and then
allow the tail wheel to control the rudder? This would seem the logical
setup. Otherwise a lot of torque would be carried by that little wooden
rudder.
Thanks,
Ted Brousseau
Who is finally starting to finish his Piet. See ya in 2003!!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | flyboy_120(at)webtv.net (Ed G.) |
| Subject: | Re: Rudder control horns |
Most have seperate cables for the rudder and the tail wheel from the
rudder bar back
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rudder control horns |
>
>Most have seperate cables for the rudder and the tail wheel from the
>rudder bar back
>
My Piet has twin cables from the rear pedals back - one for the
rudder and one for the tailwheel. The GN-1 plans show an additional
horn on the lower rudder to control the tailwheel.
I think there would be a lot of torque on the rudder also if you
position the rudder horn half way up the rudder and have a tailwheel
control horn at the bottom of the rudder. What I may do to make the
system a bit simpler and cut down a little bit of weight is to have
the rudder cables run to a lower horn that is a combination of rudder
and tailwheel horn. A system like this would also put the cable more
in line with the pedal connection and limit redirecting the rudder
cable through fairleads.
Does that make any sense?
Kirk
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Rudder control horns.... |
Ted,
The Piet rudder with its horn located about halfway up is not
designed to accomodate a tailwheel steering horn at the bot-
tom. As you correctly say, that's too much torque between the
two horns for the slender front rudder spar to withstand.
As many do, I employed a pair of 3/32" cables running from
the rear rudder bar (pedals on my a/c) to the tailwheel steer-
ing arms. It has worked very well and places no stress on the
very light rudder structure which is designed to take air loads
only. I made no changes to the rudder; it is built strictly accor-
ding to the plans and is plenty strong as designed. It is about
as lightweight as it could be, once again demonstrating the
genius of BHP.
Glad to hear you are back working on your project.
Cheers,
Graham
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Tail Section Fittings |
Alan,
I used maple pieces (shims) to come flush with the fabric
on my Pietenpol. The fittings were then installed on the out-
side of the fabric surface. It is important to use a marine
quality sealing or bedding compound between the fitting
and the fabric to prevent water intrusion past the bolts. Try-
ing to get a good covering job around previously-installed
fittings with projecting lugs is difficult, but not impossible. I
prefer to have the fittings exposed where I can keep an eye
on them. The added drag won't be noticeable.
On the subject of these fittings, I did depart from the plans
by using a single AN3 bolt to mount the horizontal stabilizer
fittings to the main and rear spars. This allows the fittings to
line up with the tail bracing wires (I used 3/32" SS cable on
my a/c), thus avoiding eccentric loading. To do this, it is ne-
cessary to have the fittings outside the fabric. The single
AN3 bolt is ample for this purpose.
Cheers,
Graham
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tommy & Carolyn" <TommyandCarolyn(at)centurytel.net> |
| Subject: | Ultralight Fly-in |
Hello Group,
WHAT: Ultralight Aircraft Fly-in
WHEN: October 13, 2001
WHERE: SLUA Club airstrip (1600') Iowa, LA located on
the NE corner of Hwy 165 & I-10 intersection
N30-14-56, W92-58-18
WHO: Southwest Louisiana Ultralight Aircraft Club
FEATURES: Good food, flea market, flying games (bomb drop,
balloon chase, spot landing) with a "Top Gun"
award & more.
FEES: FREE
FMI: Ed Stephens 337-436-0423 337-475-5509
estephen(at)mail.ncneese.edu
Tommy Dubroc 318-748-6308
cen23370(at)centurytel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Loar" <skycarl(at)megsinet.net> |
| Subject: | Rudder control horns |
Ted, The manual that Don Pietenpol puts out states that the front rudder
spar will not be strong enough to take a steerable tail wheel. I ran two
sets of cables back and it works fine. Also, the same manual mentions that
if you use petals instead of the rudder bar, you should beef up the rudder
spar as the torque from the petals puts more strain on it.
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 Ted Brousseau
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Rudder control horns
What are you guys doing about rudder control horns? The original Piet
didn't have a steerable tail wheel so it simply had a rudder control horn.
With a steerable tail wheel things get complex. Do the control cables still
go to the rudder horn and then the rudder transfers torque to the tail
wheel? Or, do the control cables now go directly to the tail wheel and then
allow the tail wheel to control the rudder? This would seem the logical
setup. Otherwise a lot of torque would be carried by that little wooden
rudder.
Thanks,
Ted Brousseau
Who is finally starting to finish his Piet. See ya in 2003!!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "oil can" <oilcanbob(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Corvair article in November Kitplanes magazine |
I'm curious, how well does the corvair perform in a Piet ?
If one were to put a "vair" powered Piet up aginst an A/C engine powered
Piet, which A/C engine would the corvair compaire to ?
What is the cruise RPM of the corvair engine ?
Fuel consumption?
Thanks,
bob
>From: Doc Mosher <docshop(at)tds.net>
>Reply-To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: Corvair article in November Kitplanes magazine
>Date: Sun, 07 Oct 2001 12:07:24 -0500
>
>
>The November issue of Kitplanes magazine has a great article by Howard Levy
>(excellent author and photographer and all-around nice guy) all about
>"Convening Corvair College." Four and a half pages of article and photos
>about the Daytona campus (actually Spruce Creek). Photos of Pat Panzera's
>great looking Corvair, photos of Kevin, William, Grace, and many
>more. Kitplanes gave Howard enough space to spread out and do an in-depth
>article about the engine, the get-together, and the people. Great engine,
>but the people make the difference.
>
>Doc Mosher
>Oshkosh USA
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Rudder control horns |
Hi Ted,
I didn't want to trust the rudder spar to carry all the torque of steering
loads from the horn down to the tailwheel. It was never designed to do
that, and I felt that it would add an awful lot of weight to beef it up
enough to do so. I started to do as many others had done and crimp a set of
tailwheel steering cables onto the rudder cables so I would get tailwheel
steering directly from the rudder bar. However, the steering arms on my
tailwheel were only a couple of inches long, which means that the tailwheel
would be extremely sensitive and quite touchy, particularly on pavement.
Discussions with Mike Cuy who uses this arrangement confirmed the problem.
I decided to add a couple of fittings on my rudder bar about 6" from the
pviot point and attach the tailwheel steering cables there. The only
problem was routing them, because if they went straight back, they would
interfere with the aileron horns in the rear cockpit. My solution was to
rout them through pulleys and run them under the floorboard (I had already
decided to add a couple of stringers on the belly, which allows room to run
the cables). It makes for a neat arrangement and now the tailwheel reaches
its swivel break-over point just before the rudder reaches its stop. I'll
let you know how it works in actual landings in a couple of years.
Jack Phillips
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ted Brousseau
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Rudder control horns
What are you guys doing about rudder control horns? The original Piet
didn't have a steerable tail wheel so it simply had a rudder control horn.
With a steerable tail wheel things get complex. Do the control cables still
go to the rudder horn and then the rudder transfers torque to the tail
wheel? Or, do the control cables now go directly to the tail wheel and then
allow the tail wheel to control the rudder? This would seem the logical
setup. Otherwise a lot of torque would be carried by that little wooden
rudder.
Thanks,
Ted Brousseau
Who is finally starting to finish his Piet. See ya in 2003!!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
Hi Larry,
This is another of the many areas left to builder's discretion. This kind
of thing makes the Pietenpol more fun to me, trying to come up with the best
possible design given the constrints you're working within.
The FAR's say the seatbelts must be attached to the primary structure. They
should be capable of resisting a 20 G impact (beyond that, even if the human
stays in the cockpit, his internal organs will be rearranged), which
translates to 20 X the heaviest person you ever expect to put in that seat.
Figure on maybe 5,000 lbs of load. Note that the structure doesn't have to
sustain this load without deformation - it just can't break completely and
let the occupant go free. I would assume that if you put a 20 G load on the
plane, the elongation of the bolt holes holding the seatbelts on will be the
least of your problems.
I attached my rear seatblets directly to the lower longerons at the junction
with the rear seatback, with an AN 5 bolt. This location gives about the
right angle for the belt across the lap as shown in Tony Bingelis' books,
and this point is as strong as anything on the longeron, since there are two
plywood gussets for the bolt to go through as well as the longeron.
For the front seat, I made a couple of fittings of .063" chomoly steel that
attach directly to the ash cross member that spans the rear landing gear
struts. The right fitting mounts on the same bolt as the rudder bar pivot
support strut with a 5/16" bolt. The left one mounts symmetrically on the
ash cross member with another AN5 bolt. Both of these bolts pass through
the ash cross member, the plywood floorboard and the steel strap that runs
beneath the belly.
I can send you some pictures if you wish.
Good luck,
Jack Phillips
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Kirk & Laura
Huizenga
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Seatbelts
<kirkh@unique-software.com>
><kirkh@unique-software.com>
>
>Larry,
>
>I'm sure of the preffered way for the waist belt. Mine has a swaged
>loop of cable around the struts by the seat rear currently, but may
>very well change it.
>
This should read NOT sure of the preffered way
Kirk
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Corvair article in November Kitplanes magazine |
| From: | KGardner(at)odu.edu |
10/08/2001 10:25:55 AM
Bob,
Based on the research I've done & the people I've visited, including Wm.
Wynne and Andrew Pietenpol, Corvair performance is really dependent on how
involved you want to get in the conversion. As I understand it, a straight
Bernie-P. conversion will not generate the hp or torque of Wm. Wynne's
conversion, largely because Wm. uses a non-sock cam and makes some other
changes that improve performance. I don't know how much fuel a B-P
convesrsion burns, but Wm. claims 5.6gph at 70% cruise. He told me directly
that his now-destroyed Piet had a 1000fpm climb rate and cruised at 100mph
ais.
I imagine some real-life Corvair flyers could give you some real-life
numbers that might confirm or refute all this.
Cheers!
Kip Gardner (starting my last week on the job.)
Laboratory Manager
Old Dominion University
Dept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmos. Sciences, Rm. 441
4600 Elkhorn Ave.
Norfolk, VA 23529
Ph: 757-683-5654
Bumper Sticker of the Week:
"Don't Drive Faster Than Your Guardian Angel Can Fly"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Corvair article in November Kitplanes magazine |
>
> I'm curious, how well does the corvair perform in a
> Piet ?
like a hot rod
>
> If one were to put a "vair" powered Piet up aginst
> an A/C engine powered
> Piet, which A/C engine would the corvair compaire to
it would compare to the O-200, about a 100 hp. a
little lighter, and a whole lot smoother.
>
> What is the cruise RPM of the corvair engine ?
2800 rpm
> Fuel consumption?
about 6 gph
check out the web pages, I think its flycorvair.com
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
Jack,
Excellent description, thanks!
With this and the discussion on "A frame & cable", I think I've got what I need.
It's also coming up in the archives, so the next person won't need to ask.
I highly recommend going there, though it's unfortunate that we don't have all
that
stuff pre- '99.
I'm going to ask Richard if there is any way we could merge the old stuff in, but
we'll have to see. It would be nice if we could get aircamper.org back, but many
of
you may remember that he ran that site for a long time. It was a lot of work and
tough to find support.
Larry
Jack Phillips wrote:
>
> Hi Larry,
>
> This is another of the many areas left to builder's discretion. This kind
> of thing makes the Pietenpol more fun to me, trying to come up with the best
> possible design given the constrints you're working within.
>
> The FAR's say the seatbelts must be attached to the primary structure. They
> should be capable of resisting a 20 G impact (beyond that, even if the human
> stays in the cockpit, his internal organs will be rearranged), which
> translates to 20 X the heaviest person you ever expect to put in that seat.
> Figure on maybe 5,000 lbs of load. Note that the structure doesn't have to
> sustain this load without deformation - it just can't break completely and
> let the occupant go free. I would assume that if you put a 20 G load on the
> plane, the elongation of the bolt holes holding the seatbelts on will be the
> least of your problems.
>
> I attached my rear seatblets directly to the lower longerons at the junction
> with the rear seatback, with an AN 5 bolt. This location gives about the
> right angle for the belt across the lap as shown in Tony Bingelis' books,
> and this point is as strong as anything on the longeron, since there are two
> plywood gussets for the bolt to go through as well as the longeron.
>
> For the front seat, I made a couple of fittings of .063" chomoly steel that
> attach directly to the ash cross member that spans the rear landing gear
> struts. The right fitting mounts on the same bolt as the rudder bar pivot
> support strut with a 5/16" bolt. The left one mounts symmetrically on the
> ash cross member with another AN5 bolt. Both of these bolts pass through
> the ash cross member, the plywood floorboard and the steel strap that runs
> beneath the belly.
>
> I can send you some pictures if you wish.
>
> Good luck,
>
> Jack Phillips
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Kirk & Laura
> Huizenga
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Seatbelts
>
> <kirkh@unique-software.com>
>
> ><kirkh@unique-software.com>
> >
> >Larry,
> >
> >I'm sure of the preffered way for the waist belt. Mine has a swaged
> >loop of cable around the struts by the seat rear currently, but may
> >very well change it.
> >
>
> This should read NOT sure of the preffered way
>
> Kirk
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | KGardner(at)odu.edu |
10/08/2001 01:53:37 PM
Hi List,
Well, I'm down to 2 weeks and counting. I'll be off the list for an
indefinite period starting late Friday, my last day at work. We move to OH
on Oct. 24. The only issue left to resolve is finding a job. Mike C. -
I'll be in touch sometime after I arrive.
A couple quick questions:
I've been in touch with the guy who had the Piet project for sale on eBay
last week (the one that Mike Cuy posted). He had a reserve price on it,
which the bidding never reached, so it's off auction & still up for sale.
Since he is located in southern OH, I am very interested in possibly
purchasing this project.
My question for the list - He says that he used aerolite glue as the
adhesive and spar varnish as the wood finish (I presume polyurethane).
First, can anyone tell me about the properties of aerolite? How does it
compare to T-88? Second, I have heard that using anything but epoxy varnish
can complicate the use of some fabric-covering adhesives? Any insights on
that?
The pictures of this project look good & aside from an urge to be able to
say, I did everything myself, I think this would be a good project to take
over & would certainly save me some significant time.
Thanks!
Kip Gardner
Laboratory Manager
Old Dominion University
Dept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmos. Sciences, Rm. 441
4600 Elkhorn Ave.
Norfolk, VA 23529
Ph: 757-683-5654
Bumper Sticker of the Week:
"Don't Drive Faster Than Your Guardian Angel Can Fly"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
Hi Kip,
All I know about Aerolite is what was published in the EAA's Wood book. It
sounds like it would be OK. As for the epoxy varnish question, accepted
practice is to put epoxy varnish over the Polyurethane in areas that might
be exposed to fabric, such as the edges of the spars and the rib capstrips.
I think this is mostly a problem if using the PolyFiber process. You could
try putting a little PolyBrush on the varnished surfaces and see if it lifts
the varnish.
Good Luck,
Jack
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
KGardner(at)odu.edu
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Aerolite glue?
Hi List,
Well, I'm down to 2 weeks and counting. I'll be off the list for an
indefinite period starting late Friday, my last day at work. We move to OH
on Oct. 24. The only issue left to resolve is finding a job. Mike C. -
I'll be in touch sometime after I arrive.
A couple quick questions:
I've been in touch with the guy who had the Piet project for sale on eBay
last week (the one that Mike Cuy posted). He had a reserve price on it,
which the bidding never reached, so it's off auction & still up for sale.
Since he is located in southern OH, I am very interested in possibly
purchasing this project.
My question for the list - He says that he used aerolite glue as the
adhesive and spar varnish as the wood finish (I presume polyurethane).
First, can anyone tell me about the properties of aerolite? How does it
compare to T-88? Second, I have heard that using anything but epoxy varnish
can complicate the use of some fabric-covering adhesives? Any insights on
that?
The pictures of this project look good & aside from an urge to be able to
say, I did everything myself, I think this would be a good project to take
over & would certainly save me some significant time.
Thanks!
Kip Gardner
Laboratory Manager
Old Dominion University
Dept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmos. Sciences, Rm. 441
4600 Elkhorn Ave.
Norfolk, VA 23529
Ph: 757-683-5654
Bumper Sticker of the Week:
"Don't Drive Faster Than Your Guardian Angel Can Fly"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Greg Cardinal" <gcardinal(at)startribune.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aerolite glue? |
I used Aerolite on the ribs. I was very happy with it. Easy to use and samples
have tested satisfactory. When glueing up small pieces, like rib gussets, Aerolite
takes a "set" and holds the gussets while the nails are pounded in. T-88
is very slippery making it difficult nail small pieces. On larger pieces T-88
works well.
Greg Cardinal
>>> 10/08 11:55 AM >>>
Hi List,
Well, I'm down to 2 weeks and counting. I'll be off the list for an
indefinite period starting late Friday, my last day at work. We move to OH
on Oct. 24. The only issue left to resolve is finding a job. Mike C. -
I'll be in touch sometime after I arrive.
A couple quick questions:
I've been in touch with the guy who had the Piet project for sale on eBay
last week (the one that Mike Cuy posted). He had a reserve price on it,
which the bidding never reached, so it's off auction & still up for sale.
Since he is located in southern OH, I am very interested in possibly
purchasing this project.
My question for the list - He says that he used aerolite glue as the
adhesive and spar varnish as the wood finish (I presume polyurethane).
First, can anyone tell me about the properties of aerolite? How does it
compare to T-88? Second, I have heard that using anything but epoxy varnish
can complicate the use of some fabric-covering adhesives? Any insights on
that?
The pictures of this project look good & aside from an urge to be able to
say, I did everything myself, I think this would be a good project to take
over & would certainly save me some significant time.
Thanks!
Kip Gardner
Laboratory Manager
Old Dominion University
Dept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmos. Sciences, Rm. 441
4600 Elkhorn Ave.
Norfolk, VA 23529
Ph: 757-683-5654
Bumper Sticker of the Week:
"Don't Drive Faster Than Your Guardian Angel Can Fly"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Owen Davies" <owen(at)davies.mv.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aerolite glue? |
Kip Gardner asked about Aerolite glue...
Aerolite is a two-part urea-formaldehyde glue
developed during WWII and used to hold together
the all-wood Mosquito bomber. In use, the only
problem with it is remembering to paint one side of
the joint with the formaldehyde. It's colorless, so
if you aren't exceedingly methodical, it is easy to
forget. Some folks have put a drop or two of food
coloring in it, so wood treated with it can be easily
recognized.
In the long run, there is some question about its
durability, especially in hot climates. When rebuilding
planes that have baked for years in the desert sun,
some people have reported that rib gussets glued
with Aerolite can be picked off with the fingers. It
is not clear how much of a problem this is in less
extreme climates. However, the most recent edition
of FAA's "Acceptable Standards and Practices"
has dropped Aerolite from the list of approved glues.
(Well, aside from resorcinol, they don't really
approve any glues, just kick the issue to other
authorities.) Epoxies are now approved, within
the limits of the usual weasel-wording.
Owen Davies
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com> |
I bought a project a couple years ago in which
aero-lite glue was used as the adheasive and found
quite a few joints that had come loose. I am not sure
if it was because of the glue or glue-ee. the project
was aproximitly 25-30 years old when i bought it. It
is a Jungster I biplane of all wood construction. it
seems like only the areas that had not been varnished
yet were the bad glue joints. The fusealage was pretty
much complete with the gear and engine mounted. The
truss work and gussets seem to be very solid in the
fuse. which had been varnished, only a few stringers
in the turtle deck and some other minor things had
been pulled loose. I am going through the project with
extreme caution to make sure no other joints are loose
or may come loose, and scraping the varnish away and
using T-88 to re-glue. The only other joints that are
giving me trouble are in the wing gussets which are
not varnished yet. I am not sure if this has to do
with the wood shrinking over the years and pulling
apart or the guy who glued them messed up. Any way
hopefully you may find some of this info usefull.
Sincerly
Shad
God bless the good ole U.S.A.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | GN-1 Landing Gear |
Skip wrote:
>I have a set of Grega plans but have not been able to tell
>what size, wall thickness the channel spreader is.
>In addition the the thickness of the metal, also would like to
>know where to get this or is this something that has to be made up?
Well, Skip, I'm emailing you (off-net) a shot of the channels used on the
M-19, which has a gross of about 800 or 850 and a fuselage width of 24", but
these channels are way stout and should be fine on a GN. Email me direct
and I'll give you particulars on mine since I don't have GN-1 plans yet so I
can't comment on what is called for there. For another shot or two of the
channels I'm using, go to http://www.flysquirrel.net/gear/gear.html and
scroll down to the shot where I'm holding a landing gear shock strut spring
in my hand, and the photo right below it. These are 4130, and were bent on
a brake... and given the rather narrow dimension of the channel, it was a
trick.
Oscar Zuniga
Medford, Oregon
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aerolite glue? |
Kip,
I am a fan of the Aerolite glue. As others have said, if you put it in the
desert for a while, you might have problems but it is nice to work with as
long as the tolerances are tight. No gap filling properties.
Chris Bobka - tech counselor
----- Original Message -----
From: <KGardner(at)odu.edu>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Aerolite glue?
>
>
> Hi List,
>
> Well, I'm down to 2 weeks and counting. I'll be off the list for an
> indefinite period starting late Friday, my last day at work. We move to OH
> on Oct. 24. The only issue left to resolve is finding a job. Mike C. -
> I'll be in touch sometime after I arrive.
>
> A couple quick questions:
>
> I've been in touch with the guy who had the Piet project for sale on eBay
> last week (the one that Mike Cuy posted). He had a reserve price on it,
> which the bidding never reached, so it's off auction & still up for sale.
> Since he is located in southern OH, I am very interested in possibly
> purchasing this project.
>
> My question for the list - He says that he used aerolite glue as the
> adhesive and spar varnish as the wood finish (I presume polyurethane).
> First, can anyone tell me about the properties of aerolite? How does it
> compare to T-88? Second, I have heard that using anything but epoxy
varnish
> can complicate the use of some fabric-covering adhesives? Any insights on
> that?
>
> The pictures of this project look good & aside from an urge to be able to
> say, I did everything myself, I think this would be a good project to take
> over & would certainly save me some significant time.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Kip Gardner
> Laboratory Manager
> Old Dominion University
> Dept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmos. Sciences, Rm. 441
> 4600 Elkhorn Ave.
> Norfolk, VA 23529
>
> Ph: 757-683-5654
>
> Bumper Sticker of the Week:
>
> "Don't Drive Faster Than Your Guardian Angel Can Fly"
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Aerolite glue? |
| From: | KGardner(at)odu.edu |
10/09/2001 10:36:34 AM
List,
Thanks for the feedback on Aerolite glue. All of my aircraft books are
packed awaiting the move, so I wasn't able to look this up on my own. As
usual, sounds like there are some definite opinions about this stuff, but
basically, it seems that there are several basic considerations:
It's 'old' technology.
It has some definable positives & negatives.
It works when used properly.
It degrades if used improperly, or is not protected from adverse
environmental conditions.
Sounds like working with wood to me....
Just one concern, someone said that the catalyzer is dilute Sulfuric Acid?
Is this really true? I haven't worked in labs for 20 years & not discovered
that Sulfuric is hell on cellulose - I have more cotton clothes with holes
in them than I care to think about. Any comments?
Guess I'll go look at this project & make up my mind
Any further comments or opinions would be appreciated, especially the kinds
of stuff to look for when buying someone else's project.
BTW, for anyone who cares, here is my new contact info. in OH:
e-mail:
Address: 426 Schneider Ave. NE, N.Canton, OH 44720
phone: 330-494-1775
Cheers!
Kip Gardner
Laboratory Manager
Old Dominion University
Dept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmos. Sciences, Rm. 441
4600 Elkhorn Ave.
Norfolk, VA 23529
Ph: 757-683-5654
Bumper Sticker of the Week:
"Don't Drive Faster Than Your Guardian Angel Can Fly"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com> |
The Aerolite is a good adhesive, was the best option
maybe since WW II and still is a good option, not as
good as the newer epoxy glues (with both glues the
wood will fail first than the joint... so what is the
case).
But same happens with covering materiales. Looks like
for now only the Polyfiber system is the way to go,
with the modern publicity impact, you may get the idea
that all other methods of covering are no good
anymore, but a correct applied "good 'ol dope" will
make a great aircraft with a more classic look.
Saludos
Gary Gower
--- shad bell wrote:
>
>
> I bought a project a couple years ago in which
> aero-lite glue was used as the adheasive and found
> quite a few joints that had come loose. I am not
> sure
> if it was because of the glue or glue-ee. the
> project
> was aproximitly 25-30 years old when i bought it. It
> is a Jungster I biplane of all wood construction. it
> seems like only the areas that had not been
> varnished
> yet were the bad glue joints. The fusealage was
> pretty
> much complete with the gear and engine mounted. The
> truss work and gussets seem to be very solid in the
> fuse. which had been varnished, only a few stringers
> in the turtle deck and some other minor things had
> been pulled loose. I am going through the project
> with
> extreme caution to make sure no other joints are
> loose
> or may come loose, and scraping the varnish away and
> using T-88 to re-glue. The only other joints that
> are
> giving me trouble are in the wing gussets which are
> not varnished yet. I am not sure if this has to do
> with the wood shrinking over the years and pulling
> apart or the guy who glued them messed up. Any way
> hopefully you may find some of this info usefull.
> Sincerly
> Shad
> God bless the good ole U.S.A.
>
> http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1
>
>
>
> pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> http://www.matronics.com/unsubscribe
>
>
>
> through
>
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
> Matronics!
>
>
>
>
>
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ian Holland" <iholland(at)telusplanet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aerolite glue? |
Folks, I have got most of my joints very tight and have had no problem
with using the aerolite glue. I researched it pretty heavy, along with
many others and decided to use it as it had the best overall
properties. I know lots of people are using the T-88, but I declined
to do so after doing some oven tests. I definitely did not like the
softening of the glue at the temperatures that can be expected in an
enclosed wing. Recorcinol was the second choice. I also did some gap
tests using the aerolite, and even with almost 1/16 inch gap, the wood
still broke rather than the glue joint. No, I am not recommending 1/16
inch slop in joints. It was just that I heard that it had no gap
filling properties previously, and thought it would be worth a few
sticks, and some time. The method that I used was to ALWAYS put the
glue on the stationary piece and the hardener on the piece in hand. It
worked for me, although it was hard to get aerolite into Canada. I
ended up picking it up on the U.S. side of the border. It appears that
the shippers were worried about the acid or an auto-polymerization
reaction.
Would I use it again? definitely!
Of all the things to sort out on building the Piet, the selection of
which glue to use was probably one of the toughest to resolve. I also
checked with Transport Canada, at the time, and it was OK by them. I
still did the testing, as it wasn't going to be their butts hanging
high.
Good luck and good building.
-=Ian=-
Piet ready for precover inspection in the spring!
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Forward Fuselage support |
| From: | Chris Tracy <catdesigns(at)juno.com> |
I need to know how the forward fuselage metal is held in place and its
substructure. I don't know what you would call it, you know the curved
piece covering the instrument panels and front fuselage area, a front
turtle deck perhaps. All I can see in pictures are screws along the
sides but is it glued to the supports or is it just draped over them. I
need to make the supports and I have heard that some people make
laminated bows and some use ply. Any one have pictures, descriptions,
cryptic late night crayon drawings, any thing at all of how to do this
part of the fuselage . I'm having trouble visualizing what the plans
want me to do here. I see that there are supports running between the
rear instrument panel and the front head rest. Are people installing
these? I thought the Bengalis book told you not to put anything like
this in an area where your head could hit it in a crash or am I just
reading too much into things.
HELP ME..(desperate plea for attention)
Chris
Sacramento, CA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Tracy <catdesigns(at)juno.com> |
I doubt this got any attention out side of Sacramento but the other day,
monday I think, airshow pilot Julie Clark had been working on her plane
and went up for a test flight(she lives around here and we see her flying
every now and then). Well according to the news several people panicked
when they saw a small plane, a nice looking silver T-34, spraying white
stuff over town. Multiple calls came into the sheriff ,FAA and the FBI I
guess. She was checked out by the sheriff (don't know if any F-16s were
involved ) and the HazMat team tested her plane to make sure it wasn't a
Biological weapon. Turns out it was only smoke oil. She said she was
only testing the smoke system to see if it was working like she has done
many times before.
Moral of the Story
Don't Smoke unless lots of people know what you are doing. The news
media has whipped the country into a panic and I think it would be wise
if general aviation played it very conservative for a while. We need
them to let Corky fly his plane so lets not make waves now.
Chris
Sacramento, CA
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Supplemental plans |
| From: | KGardner(at)odu.edu |
10/10/2001 10:06:13 AM
List,
After a long, and at times seemingly fruitless search, I have finally
managed to make contact with Keri-Ann Price.
For those of you who are new to Piets, Keri-Ann sells supplemental plans
for the Piet that, by all accounts, are extremely well-drawn and practical
designs for such things as an improved 3-piece wing that is much easier to
break down than the traditional design, a front cockpit door that is
structurally safe, no-gap ailerons, a low-weight steerable tailwheel, etc.
Her work was featured regularly in the old BPA newsletter.
She also owns what is reportedly a very nicely-built Piet that was also
featured numerous times in the old BPA newsletter, which she noe has up for
sale.
Anyway, she told me to put her contact information out to the list & she
will e-mail a price list for the various plans and/or provide information
about her plane.
Apparently she moved recently & stuff is still packed up, but she said she
would be ready to ship plans again in a few weeks.
Anyway the e-mail address is :
keriannprice(at)hotmail.com
Joel, thanks very much for your help in locating her, I think it will be
well worth the effort.
Cheers!
Kip Gardner (3 days & counting)
Laboratory Manager
Old Dominion University
Dept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmos. Sciences, Rm. 441
4600 Elkhorn Ave.
Norfolk, VA 23529
Ph: 757-683-5654
Bumper Sticker of the Week:
"Don't Drive Faster Than Your Guardian Angel Can Fly"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Warren D. Shoun" <wbnb(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Supplemental plans |
Hi Guys,
I bought most of these plans back when Gary Price was selling them. They
are extraordinarily well done and very much worth the price. You will not be
disappointed.
Cheers,
~Warren
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Forward Fuselage support |
In a message dated 10/10/01 12:09:48 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
catdesigns(at)juno.com writes:
> I need to know how the forward fuselage metal is held in place and its
> substructure. I don't know what you would call it, you know the curved
> piece covering the instrument panels and front fuselage area, a front
> turtle deck perhaps. All I can see in pictures are screws along the
> sides but is it glued to the supports or is it just draped over them. I
> need to make the supports and I have heard that some people make
> laminated bows and some use ply. Any one have pictures, descriptions,
> cryptic late night crayon drawings, any thing at all of how to do this
> part of the fuselage . I'm having trouble visualizing what the plans
> want me to do here. I see that there are supports running between the
> rear instrument panel and the front head rest. Are people installing
> these? I thought the Bengalis book told you not to put anything like
> this in an area where your head could hit it in a crash or am I just
> reading too much into things.
>
> HELP ME..(desperate plea for attention)
>
>
Chris,
What plans are you using? I recommend the improved air camper plans only.
As soon as I am sure, I can pass along some information on how I interpret
the plans here. Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net> |
Chris,
Julie is a friend of mine. I fly with her on occasion at the airline. She
had her T-28 in my hangar all summer here in MN. I will make sure that
everyone at work knows about this. This is more proof that she is a true
blonde and lives up to it.
Chris Bobka
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Tracy" <catdesigns(at)juno.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: No Smoking
>
> I doubt this got any attention out side of Sacramento but the other day,
> monday I think, airshow pilot Julie Clark had been working on her plane
> and went up for a test flight(she lives around here and we see her flying
> every now and then). Well according to the news several people panicked
> when they saw a small plane, a nice looking silver T-34, spraying white
> stuff over town. Multiple calls came into the sheriff ,FAA and the FBI I
> guess. She was checked out by the sheriff (don't know if any F-16s were
> involved ) and the HazMat team tested her plane to make sure it wasn't a
> Biological weapon. Turns out it was only smoke oil. She said she was
> only testing the smoke system to see if it was working like she has done
> many times before.
>
> Moral of the Story
> Don't Smoke unless lots of people know what you are doing. The news
> media has whipped the country into a panic and I think it would be wise
> if general aviation played it very conservative for a while. We need
> them to let Corky fly his plane so lets not make waves now.
>
> Chris
> Sacramento, CA
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re:Forward Fuselage support |
| From: | Chris Tracy <catdesigns(at)juno.com> |
Doug, I'm am using the improved air camper plans. I have looked at Mike
Cuys video and all the pictures that I can find on the web and I still
can't figure it out. Am I the only one who cant figure this out?
Chris
Sacramento, CA
>
> In a message dated 10/10/01 12:09:48 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
> catdesigns(at)juno.com writes:
>
>
> > I need to know how the forward fuselage metal is held in place and
> its
> > substructure. I don't know what you would call it, you know the
> curved
> > piece covering the instrument panels and front fuselage area, a
> front
> > turtle deck perhaps. All I can see in pictures are screws along
> the
> > sides but is it glued to the supports or is it just draped over
> them. I
> > need to make the supports and I have heard that some people make
> > laminated bows and some use ply. Any one have pictures,
> descriptions,
> > cryptic late night crayon drawings, any thing at all of how to do
> this
> > part of the fuselage . I'm having trouble visualizing what the
> plans
> > want me to do here. I see that there are supports running between
> the
> > rear instrument panel and the front head rest. Are people
> installing
> > these? I thought the Bengalis book told you not to put anything
> like
> > this in an area where your head could hit it in a crash or am I
> just
> > reading too much into things.
> >
> > HELP ME..(desperate plea for attention)
> >
> >
>
> Chris,
>
> What plans are you using? I recommend the improved air camper
> plans only.
> As soon as I am sure, I can pass along some information on how I
> interpret
> the plans here. Doug Bryant
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Dilatush" <dilatush(at)amigo.net> |
| Subject: | Re:Forward Fuselage support |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Tracy" <catdesigns(at)juno.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re:Forward Fuselage support
Chris,
I had the same question while building my Piet and phoned Frank Pavliga
about how he did his Sky Gypsy.
He said that he used #8 brass wood inserts placed in the 1/4" x 1/2" filler
strip that runs along the outside of the top longeron. (This is the strip
that holds the fabric away from the fittings etc.) Then he used 1/2" x #8
round or truss head machine screws to hold the aluminum cowlings in place.
I followed his instructions and everything came out just right. I would
only suggest that the top filler strip be made of a fairly hard and fine
grain wood to retain the brass inserts well, otherwise they will have a
tendency to strip out. Be sure to make up the aluminum cowlings first
before drilling any holes: place the cowlings in position and then drill
your pilot holes through the cowling and into the strip so the holes will
line up properly upon final assembly.
Hope that this helps,
John, Just have to make the prop and lift struts now and go flying!
Salida, Colorado.
========================================================
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com> |
Chris,
Hope this is not true, because if so...
The terrorist ARE in fact WINNING the "war", the
Americans are showing them (that is what terrorrist
want) how weak and scary they are.
The worse thing is that is the most cheapest war
against any country, DO NOT LET them win the Guinnes
price for this.
Show them the American PRIDE.
Where is "In God we Trust"?
I bet for America, do not let me (and all the
world)loose...
Saludos
Gary Gower
--- Chris Tracy wrote:
>
>
> I doubt this got any attention out side of
> Sacramento but the other day,
> monday I think, airshow pilot Julie Clark had been
> working on her plane
> and went up for a test flight(she lives around here
> and we see her flying
> every now and then). Well according to the news
> several people panicked
> when they saw a small plane, a nice looking silver
> T-34, spraying white
> stuff over town. Multiple calls came into the
> sheriff ,FAA and the FBI I
> guess. She was checked out by the sheriff (don't
> know if any F-16s were
> involved ) and the HazMat team tested her plane to
> make sure it wasn't a
> Biological weapon. Turns out it was only smoke oil.
> She said she was
> only testing the smoke system to see if it was
> working like she has done
> many times before.
>
> Moral of the Story
> Don't Smoke unless lots of people know what you are
> doing. The news
> media has whipped the country into a panic and I
> think it would be wise
> if general aviation played it very conservative for
> a while. We need
> them to let Corky fly his plane so lets not make
> waves now.
>
> Chris
> Sacramento, CA
>
>
>
> pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> http://www.matronics.com/unsubscribe
>
>
>
> through
>
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
> Matronics!
>
>
>
>
>
http://personals.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Aerolite glue? |
| From: | KGardner(at)odu.edu |
10/11/2001 05:48:14 PM
Hi List,
Tomorrow is my last day at work & my last day on the list until I get
moved. I'm sure looking foreward to getting this over with!
Just curiosity, has anyone heard any news of William Wynne & does anyone
have any info on the status of the crash investigation?
Also, Mike Cuy, are you still grounded? Anyone else? I sure hope they can
get this airspace thing cleared up soon. I checked the EAA web site
yesterday & it sounds like at least they are trying to get everyone's
concerns heard & have been proposing some good ideas for getting the
restrictions lifted.
Ya'll don't start anything unruly on the list while I'm off!
Cheers!
Kip Gardner (who won't be able to say 'Ya'll' much longer - any of you
Yankees know what the plural of Ya'll is? Bet Corky knows!)
Laboratory Manager
Old Dominion University
Dept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmos. Sciences, Rm. 441
4600 Elkhorn Ave.
Norfolk, VA 23529
Ph: 757-683-5654
Bumper Sticker of the Week:
"Don't Drive Faster Than Your Guardian Angel Can Fly"
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re:Forward Fuselage support |
In a message dated 10/10/01 11:07:11 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
catdesigns(at)juno.com writes:
> Doug, I'm am using the improved air camper plans. I have looked at Mike
> Cuys video and all the pictures that I can find on the web and I still
> can't figure it out. Am I the only one who cant figure this out?
> Chris
> Sacramento, CA
>
>
Chris,
I'm not sure I fully understand the queation, but I gather that The cowling
supports and the cowling attachment to these supports was ths the subject.
The plans show 1/8" plywood cowling supports. I attach mine with aluminum
angle clips which have a nut plate. I found these at a local surplus store.
A small hardwood block glued to the plywood support in those attach locations
would also work, or a laminated bow type cowling support with the cowling
screws thru the cowling and directly into the bow or block. BHP did it both
ways (that is little blocks or bow). Stay as close to the general intent of
the plans as you can. Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "George Allen" <GeorgeA(at)PAonline.com> |
Hurry back Kip, we'll miss ya. Thanks for that address for the plans from
Keri-Ann. I was just wondering where to get them. Good timing!
Good luck on your move.
George Allen
GeorgeA(at)PAonline.com
----- Original Message -----
From: <KGardner(at)odu.edu>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Aerolite glue?
>
>
> Hi List,
>
> Tomorrow is my last day at work & my last day on the list until I get
> moved. I'm sure looking foreward to getting this over with!
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom & Michelle Brant" <tmbrant(at)uswest.net> |
| Subject: | piet costs, other than building |
Here's a question I've not heard posed yet... What kind of costs are
involved in owning a Piet? I'm talking here about the costs unrelated
to building the plane. I'm talking insurance, hangar, fuel,
maintenance, annuals, etc... I know hangars around where I live cost
about $130 a month for a real basic one. I'm curious on the financial
committment that can be expected after the Piet is completed and flying.
Any thoughts anyone???
Tom Brant,
Minneapolis
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | piet costs, other than building |
Hi Tom,
I don't know for certain, not having flown mine yet, but I expect it to be
somewhat similar to the J-3 Cub I used to own. (assuming you are flying
behind a Continental A-65). I used to figure on 4 gallons an hour for fuel,
and perhaps a quart of oil every 5 hours. At today's prices, that equates
to about $11 per hour for gas and oil. Insurance is expensive because it is
a homebuilt. I checked with Avemco at Sun'n'Fun and they told me that I
could expect to pay a little over $1,000 per year for liability and hull
insurance (flight and ground). I'll get the liability, but I think I'll
skip the hull insurance - that's more than I'm paying for my Cessna 140,
insured at twice the value of the Piet.
Annual inspections should be pretty cheap since you can do them yourself.
Hangar rent varies all over the place. At the airport where I fly, hangars
cost $75 a month, if you can get one. I've been on the waiting list for
three years and am getting near the top of the list.
I doubt you could find a much cheaper airplane to fly than a Pietenpol.
Jack
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tom &
Michelle Brant
Subject: Pietenpol-List: piet costs, other than building
Here's a question I've not heard posed yet... What kind of costs are
involved in owning a Piet? I'm talking here about the costs unrelated
to building the plane. I'm talking insurance, hangar, fuel,
maintenance, annuals, etc... I know hangars around where I live cost
about $130 a month for a real basic one. I'm curious on the financial
committment that can be expected after the Piet is completed and flying.
Any thoughts anyone???
Tom Brant,
Minneapolis
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
William is leaving, or has left, his parents' place in New Jersey to return
to Florida. He is greatly improving, the burns are expected to heal quite
well but with some scarring, and his voice is returning to normal (had
inhalation damage to his throat). He has repeatedly thanked everyone who
took an interest, sent a card, contributed to the medical costs, and
particularly those of us who share a love of flying- to encourage him to get
back into it and keep going. He plans to do that, and is going to be
looking closely at the engine when he gets fit enough to get back in the
shop.
Pat Panzera has made an interview video in which William talks about the
crash and the investigation (which appears to be related to carb ice)...
coming soon to a theater near you (not really, but will soon be available).
I will post an update to this list. At least one copy of this video will be
a "loaner" or "floater", available for free as long as you mail it to the
next person. The complete series is three- 2 hr. videos on
rebuilding/converting the Corvair for aero applications.
And in answer to the last question- the plural of "y'all" is "y'all".
That's what's so great about the language of the South- it says a lot with
not too many words ;o)
Oscar Zuniga
Medford, Oregon
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Adios, "Ya'll' answer |
| From: | KGardner(at)odu.edu |
10/12/2001 05:29:34 PM
List,
So long everyone, it's been great, I'll be back on in a few weeks as an
Ohioan.
Oscar, it was a trick question, there are 2 answers; the one you gave
(Ya'll) and the other, that all true Southerners know, and that's "All
Ya'll". Depends on where you're from as to whether or not you consider it
beneath you to use it.
Keep 'em Flying,
Kip Gardner
(Former) Laboratory Manager
Old Dominion University
Dept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmos. Sciences, Rm. 441
4600 Elkhorn Ave.
Norfolk, VA 23529
Ph: who cares?
Bumper Sticker of the Week:
"Don't Drive Faster Than Your Guardian Angel Can Fly"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeff Hill" <jeff2dogs(at)hotmail.com> |
Hey guys, on the plans for the extended fuselage that BP drew (the extra 9
1/2") it appears that there is a slight undercamber in the area of the rear
fuselage, not a lot but definitely there if you sight along the lower
longeron looking from he tail. The original shorter fuselage definitely does
not have this. Is this intentional and are there any problems with this?
Jeff in Texas waiting for an
impending storm this evening
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: William Wynne |
Oscar,
Thanks for the report on William. Good news! Doug Bryant Wichita Ks
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: the plural of ya'll |
Actually, Oscar, Ya'll is singular. The plural of ya'll is "all ya'll"
Corky and Gary Meadows, what do you say?
Chris Bobka
formerly a Texan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: William Wynne
>
> William is leaving, or has left, his parents' place in New Jersey to
return
> to Florida. He is greatly improving, the burns are expected to heal quite
> well but with some scarring, and his voice is returning to normal (had
> inhalation damage to his throat). He has repeatedly thanked everyone who
> took an interest, sent a card, contributed to the medical costs, and
> particularly those of us who share a love of flying- to encourage him to
get
> back into it and keep going. He plans to do that, and is going to be
> looking closely at the engine when he gets fit enough to get back in the
> shop.
>
> Pat Panzera has made an interview video in which William talks about the
> crash and the investigation (which appears to be related to carb ice)...
> coming soon to a theater near you (not really, but will soon be
available).
> I will post an update to this list. At least one copy of this video will
be
> a "loaner" or "floater", available for free as long as you mail it to the
> next person. The complete series is three- 2 hr. videos on
> rebuilding/converting the Corvair for aero applications.
>
> And in answer to the last question- the plural of "y'all" is "y'all".
> That's what's so great about the language of the South- it says a lot with
> not too many words ;o)
>
> Oscar Zuniga
> Medford, Oregon
> mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
> website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Meadows" <gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: the plural of ya'll |
Chris,
Well, we've used "y'all" as both singular and plural, in either usage,
"y'all" by itself is pretty informal. As a singular, you'd use "Yew". If you
wanted to pick a fight or proclaim your love, "Yew" would be the word. Y'all
used as a singular just isn't quite as direct.
Said to a group, "Y'all" implies that some, or most of you should take
notice. "All Y'all" is a strong proclamation of importance, meaning that
your attention is expected, and 100% participation is mandatory! Texan moms
and wives use this one a lot. Also used in Southeast Texas is "Y'all all".
It conveys importance, but doesn't have the urgency, of "All Y'all"
I'd certainly like to hear Corky's take on this, I bet he can explain to
"y'all" about "y'all" much better than I can!
Gary Meadows
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jannica Wunge" <jannicaw(at)hotmail.com> |
Hello list.
I would like to tell you all that I am listening in on your conversation. I
have been on the list for a week or two. It has been most educating. I am a
middle-aged lady living in the county of Dalarna in Sweden. During the warm
season I use to fly gliders and a Piper Pawnee for glider towing. For the
long dark winter evenings I am planning to start to build my first
aeroplane. I have not definitely decided what to build yet but I am
contemplating the Aircamper. Two good reasons are that the way of building
seems to reassemble all those RC planes I have built over the years and it
is comparably inexpensive.
I am told that I probably could substitute sitka spruce with Swedish spruce
and some pine. I am planning to use a resorcinal-fenol glue. It is traded by
the name of Aerodux in this country. I have used it earlier for repairing
old wooden gliders in our flight club. As for the engine, I think I will
save that problem for later, but it will not be the model A. My flight club
operates a motorglider with a Rotax 912 engine and that could be an
alternative if I could afford it. Anyway it is a wonderful engine.
There is at least one more Aircamper on its way in this country. A friend of
mine is building it and he has been on it for a year or so. He on the other
hand is going to use the A Ford engine.
If you think that the Aircamper would be a suitable subject for the first
homebuilt aeroplane I will be happy to hear that. Otherwise, dont
tell me.
Happy landings.
Jannica Wunge
Hmta MSN Explorer kostnadsfritt p http://explorer.msn.se
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mac Zirges" <macz(at)netbridge.net> |
Hello. Yes, you should definitely seriously consider the Pietenpol. As you
noted, it is constructed very much like models you are familiar with--but
more important is that it was designed by a fellow who was very down to
earth and practical. Bernie Pietenpol built with what was at hand back in
the 1930's so almost every part of the airplane can be scrounged from
"regular" materials, ie they do not need to be sophisticated and expensive
aircraft or other hard-to-find materials.
The airplane also lends itself to substituting what is at hand--such as
different types of wood, engines, etc. And you can readily customize
various aspects to suit your tastes or materials at hand.
And besides, the Pietenpol flies very nicely on low power, and is slow
enough for farm pasture landings, etc.
Good Luck,
Mac in Oregon USA
-----Original Message-----
From: Jannica Wunge <jannicaw(at)hotmail.com>
Date: Saturday, October 13, 2001 11:35 AM
>
>Hello list.
>I would like to tell you all that I am listening in on your conversation. I
>have been on the list for a week or two. It has been most educating. I am a
>middle-aged lady living in the county of Dalarna in Sweden. During the warm
>season I use to fly gliders and a Piper Pawnee for glider towing. For the
>long dark winter evenings I am planning to start to build my first
>aeroplane. I have not definitely decided what to build yet but I am
>contemplating the Aircamper. Two good reasons are that the way of building
>seems to reassemble all those RC planes I have built over the years and it
>is comparably inexpensive.
>I am told that I probably could substitute sitka spruce with Swedish spruce
>and some pine. I am planning to use a resorcinal-fenol glue. It is traded
by
>the name of Aerodux in this country. I have used it earlier for repairing
>old wooden gliders in our flight club. As for the engine, I think I will
>save that problem for later, but it will not be the model A. My flight
club
>operates a motorglider with a Rotax 912 engine and that could be an
>alternative if I could afford it. Anyway it is a wonderful engine.
>There is at least one more Aircamper on its way in this country. A friend
of
>mine is building it and he has been on it for a year or so. He on the other
>hand is going to use the A Ford engine.
>If you think that the Aircamper would be a suitable subject for the first
>homebuilt aeroplane I will be happy to hear that. Otherwise, dont
>tell me.
>Happy landings.
>
>Jannica Wunge
>
>
>Hmta MSN Explorer kostnadsfritt p http://explorer.msn.se
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
Welcome Jannica!
If there is anyone nicer to talk to than a glider pilot, it must be a tow pilot
;-)
The Piet is a great first project. I'm having a blast myself and the only other
thing I've done is a start on a Woodstock. I have found the woodwork much more
straightforward.
Larry
Jannica Wunge wrote:
>
> Hello list.
> I would like to tell you all that I am listening in on your conversation. I
> have been on the list for a week or two. It has been most educating. I am a
> middle-aged lady living in the county of Dalarna in Sweden. During the warm
> season I use to fly gliders and a Piper Pawnee for glider towing. For the
> long dark winter evenings I am planning to start to build my first
> aeroplane. I have not definitely decided what to build yet but I am
> contemplating the Aircamper. Two good reasons are that the way of building
> seems to reassemble all those RC planes I have built over the years and it
> is comparably inexpensive.
> I am told that I probably could substitute sitka spruce with Swedish spruce
> and some pine. I am planning to use a resorcinal-fenol glue. It is traded by
> the name of Aerodux in this country. I have used it earlier for repairing
> old wooden gliders in our flight club. As for the engine, I think I will
> save that problem for later, but it will not be the model A. My flight club
> operates a motorglider with a Rotax 912 engine and that could be an
> alternative if I could afford it. Anyway it is a wonderful engine.
> There is at least one more Aircamper on its way in this country. A friend of
> mine is building it and he has been on it for a year or so. He on the other
> hand is going to use the A Ford engine.
> If you think that the Aircamper would be a suitable subject for the first
> homebuilt aeroplane I will be happy to hear that. Otherwise, dont
> tell me.
> Happy landings.
>
> Jannica Wunge
>
> Hmta MSN Explorer kostnadsfritt p http://explorer.msn.se
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Piet fuselages |
Jeff,
I've looked at mine and can barely detect maybe a 1/8" undercamber at the next
to last station before the tailpost.
One question that occurs is which plans you are using.
My plans show the last four stations measuring:
19-1/8 "
16 "
13-1/4 "
10-7/8 " (tailpost)
The three before the tailpost are noted on my plans with an asteric and a
notation " Corrected 9-22-94 DP", which I assume means Don Pietenpols.
If you used another set of measurements before this date, that could account for
a lot.
I'm not holding myself out as an advisor or A&P, but I don't think it would
amount to any difference at all unless the undercamber was very large, inches or
so.
Actually, I'd think it would look rather classy, though a smaller cross-section
may upset any plans for the APU and restroom in the tail section ;-)
Larry
Soaked in Texas
Jeff Hill wrote:
>
> Hey guys, on the plans for the extended fuselage that BP drew (the extra 9
> 1/2") it appears that there is a slight undercamber in the area of the rear
> fuselage, not a lot but definitely there if you sight along the lower
> longeron looking from he tail. The original shorter fuselage definitely does
> not have this. Is this intentional and are there any problems with this?
> Jeff in Texas waiting for an
> impending storm this evening
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
Hej Jannica,
Vlkommen til Pietenpols!
I think you've made a good choice for a first airplane. I also approve of
your choice of glues - I've used resorcinol and T-88 epoxy on my Pietenpol.
The only concern with resorcinol is to be certain that your shop and the
pieces you are gluing are at least 70 F (21 C) to get a good reliable joint.
At least one of your countrymen has some experience working on Pietenols.
My friend Leif Brunstrm from just outside Stockholm has helped me quite a
bit on mine, when he's been in the U.S. on business.
Just keep subscribing to this forum and just about any question you have can
be answered.
Good Luck!
Jack Phillips
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jannica Wunge
Subject:
Hello list.
I would like to tell you all that I am listening in on your conversation. I
have been on the list for a week or two. It has been most educating. I am a
middle-aged lady living in the county of Dalarna in Sweden. During the warm
season I use to fly gliders and a Piper Pawnee for glider towing. For the
long dark winter evenings I am planning to start to build my first
aeroplane. I have not definitely decided what to build yet but I am
contemplating the Aircamper. Two good reasons are that the way of building
seems to reassemble all those RC planes I have built over the years and it
is comparably inexpensive.
I am told that I probably could substitute sitka spruce with Swedish spruce
and some pine. I am planning to use a resorcinal-fenol glue. It is traded by
the name of Aerodux in this country. I have used it earlier for repairing
old wooden gliders in our flight club. As for the engine, I think I will
save that problem for later, but it will not be the model A. My flight club
operates a motorglider with a Rotax 912 engine and that could be an
alternative if I could afford it. Anyway it is a wonderful engine.
There is at least one more Aircamper on its way in this country. A friend of
mine is building it and he has been on it for a year or so. He on the other
hand is going to use the A Ford engine.
If you think that the Aircamper would be a suitable subject for the first
homebuilt aeroplane I will be happy to hear that. Otherwise, dont
tell me.
Happy landings.
Jannica Wunge
Hmta MSN Explorer kostnadsfritt p http://explorer.msn.se
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DonanClara(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: the plural of ya'll |
In a message dated 10/13/2001 1:01:58 AM Central Daylight Time,
bobka(at)charter.net writes:
<< Actually, Oscar, Ya'll is singular. The plural of ya'll is "all ya'll"
>>
Hey Chris
I guess it varies depending on what part of the South your in. They wasted no
time here in Alabama telling this transplanted Californian that ya'll is
never used when addressing a single person...only when there's two or more
and it is used collectively, (ie: all of you)so I gathered from that that
it was never singular...go figure !!
Don Hicks in Hartford, Alabama
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "D.Dale Johnson" <dd5john(at)juno.com> |
Welcome Jannica
The pete is a good choice.
It's simple all wood & stales at the same speed as most gliders.
I to am a glider pilot flying a homemade Duster
The pete is just like building a big model.
There is a lot of help on this list. good luck.
Dale Johnson Mpls,Mn.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ted Brousseau" <nfn00979(at)naples.net> |
Jannica,
I am flying an aircamper and building another one. You will absolutely love
building AND flying it. Go for it.
Ted Brousseau
Naples, FL
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jannica Wunge" <jannicaw(at)hotmail.com>
>
> Hello list.
> I would like to tell you all that I am listening in on your conversation.
I
> have been on the list for a week or two. It has been most educating. I am
a
> middle-aged lady living in the county of Dalarna in Sweden. During the
warm
> season I use to fly gliders and a Piper Pawnee for glider towing. For the
> long dark winter evenings I am planning to start to build my first
> aeroplane. I have not definitely decided what to build yet but I am
> contemplating the Aircamper. Two good reasons are that the way of building
> seems to reassemble all those RC planes I have built over the years and it
> is comparably inexpensive.
> I am told that I probably could substitute sitka spruce with Swedish
spruce
> and some pine. I am planning to use a resorcinal-fenol glue. It is traded
by
> the name of Aerodux in this country. I have used it earlier for repairing
> old wooden gliders in our flight club. As for the engine, I think I will
> save that problem for later, but it will not be the model A. My flight
club
> operates a motorglider with a Rotax 912 engine and that could be an
> alternative if I could afford it. Anyway it is a wonderful engine.
> There is at least one more Aircamper on its way in this country. A friend
of
> mine is building it and he has been on it for a year or so. He on the
other
> hand is going to use the A Ford engine.
> If you think that the Aircamper would be a suitable subject for the first
> homebuilt aeroplane I will be happy to hear that. Otherwise, dont
> tell me.
> Happy landings.
>
> Jannica Wunge
>
>
> Hmta MSN Explorer kostnadsfritt p http://explorer.msn.se
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | who owns the green Piet? |
Hello, folks;
I was over on the Matronics Piet page, in the archives, researching the
issue of offsetting the vertical stab. when using the Corvair engine(found
it; thanks). I noticed the _beautiful_ green Piet with silver wing and top
cowlings and large white "E" on the tail. Whose is that bird, and are there
other pix of it on the web somewhere? Gorgeous.
Oscar Zuniga
Medford, Oregon
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Warren D. Shoun" <wbnb(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: who owns the green Piet? |
Oscar,
I think that one belongs to Steve Eldridge in Utah...
~Warren
Oscar Zuniga wrote:
>
> Hello, folks;
>
> I was over on the Matronics Piet page, in the archives, researching the
> issue of offsetting the vertical stab. when using the Corvair engine(found
> it; thanks). I noticed the _beautiful_ green Piet with silver wing and top
> cowlings and large white "E" on the tail. Whose is that bird, and are there
> other pix of it on the web somewhere? Gorgeous.
>
> Oscar Zuniga
> Medford, Oregon
> mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
> website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | rib stitching on a blustery October day |
group,
It was great on this beautiful, blustery, sunny, unflyable day, to be
in my shop covering and rib stitching the center section.
Whew! Finally at a point where I'm 90% done and 90% to go.
Guess it's time to think about getting a number.
walt
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: who owns the green Piet? |
In a message dated 10/14/01 2:21:59 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
taildrags(at)hotmail.com writes:
<<
I was over on the Matronics Piet page, in the archives, researching the
issue of offsetting the vertical stab. when using the Corvair engine(found
it; thanks). I noticed the _beautiful_ green Piet with silver wing and top
cowlings and large white "E" on the tail. Whose is that bird, and are there
other pix of it on the web somewhere? Gorgeous.
>>
I believe that one belongs to Steve Eldgredge of Provo, Utah
I have 13 more pictures of that airplane on my PhotoPoint site at:
PhotoPoint - Pietenpol Project
PhotoPoint - Pietenpol History
Steves Pietenpol
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alan Swanson" <swans071(at)tc.umn.edu> |
| Subject: | Rudder control horns |
What do you guys think of this idea for routing the tail wheel steering
cables?
On the lower cross member of the first bay behind the rear seat (ie just
under the elevator bell crank) put in a "horizontal bell crank", almost like
another rudder bar full length across the fuselage. Connect the cables from
the rudder bar and the rudder to it, so it swings freely with rudder action.
Then about 4 inches from the center point, connect the steering cables.
This piece could be made fairly light since it doesn't carry much load. And
the slight added weight would be offset by less cable from the front. This
would desensitize the steering action, and would avoid the problem of
routing the steering cables past the aileron control horn or under the
floorboards.
I haven't tried it yet, still just a thought. See any problems with this?
Al Swanson
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jack
Phillips
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Rudder control horns
Hi Ted,
I didn't want to trust the rudder spar to carry all the torque of steering
loads from the horn down to the tailwheel. It was never designed to do
that, and I felt that it would add an awful lot of weight to beef it up
enough to do so. I started to do as many others had done and crimp a set of
tailwheel steering cables onto the rudder cables so I would get tailwheel
steering directly from the rudder bar. However, the steering arms on my
tailwheel were only a couple of inches long, which means that the tailwheel
would be extremely sensitive and quite touchy, particularly on pavement.
Discussions with Mike Cuy who uses this arrangement confirmed the problem.
I decided to add a couple of fittings on my rudder bar about 6" from the
pviot point and attach the tailwheel steering cables there. The only
problem was routing them, because if they went straight back, they would
interfere with the aileron horns in the rear cockpit. My solution was to
rout them through pulleys and run them under the floorboard (I had already
decided to add a couple of stringers on the belly, which allows room to run
the cables). It makes for a neat arrangement and now the tailwheel reaches
its swivel break-over point just before the rudder reaches its stop. I'll
let you know how it works in actual landings in a couple of years.
Jack Phillips
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ted Brousseau
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Rudder control horns
What are you guys doing about rudder control horns? The original Piet
didn't have a steerable tail wheel so it simply had a rudder control horn.
With a steerable tail wheel things get complex. Do the control cables still
go to the rudder horn and then the rudder transfers torque to the tail
wheel? Or, do the control cables now go directly to the tail wheel and then
allow the tail wheel to control the rudder? This would seem the logical
setup. Otherwise a lot of torque would be carried by that little wooden
rudder.
Thanks,
Ted Brousseau
Who is finally starting to finish his Piet. See ya in 2003!!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Rudder control horns |
No problem other than extra weight aft of the CG.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Alan Swanson
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Rudder control horns
What do you guys think of this idea for routing the tail wheel steering
cables?
On the lower cross member of the first bay behind the rear seat (ie just
under the elevator bell crank) put in a "horizontal bell crank", almost like
another rudder bar full length across the fuselage. Connect the cables from
the rudder bar and the rudder to it, so it swings freely with rudder action.
Then about 4 inches from the center point, connect the steering cables.
This piece could be made fairly light since it doesn't carry much load. And
the slight added weight would be offset by less cable from the front. This
would desensitize the steering action, and would avoid the problem of
routing the steering cables past the aileron control horn or under the
floorboards.
I haven't tried it yet, still just a thought. See any problems with this?
Al Swanson
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jack
Phillips
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Rudder control horns
Hi Ted,
I didn't want to trust the rudder spar to carry all the torque of steering
loads from the horn down to the tailwheel. It was never designed to do
that, and I felt that it would add an awful lot of weight to beef it up
enough to do so. I started to do as many others had done and crimp a set of
tailwheel steering cables onto the rudder cables so I would get tailwheel
steering directly from the rudder bar. However, the steering arms on my
tailwheel were only a couple of inches long, which means that the tailwheel
would be extremely sensitive and quite touchy, particularly on pavement.
Discussions with Mike Cuy who uses this arrangement confirmed the problem.
I decided to add a couple of fittings on my rudder bar about 6" from the
pviot point and attach the tailwheel steering cables there. The only
problem was routing them, because if they went straight back, they would
interfere with the aileron horns in the rear cockpit. My solution was to
rout them through pulleys and run them under the floorboard (I had already
decided to add a couple of stringers on the belly, which allows room to run
the cables). It makes for a neat arrangement and now the tailwheel reaches
its swivel break-over point just before the rudder reaches its stop. I'll
let you know how it works in actual landings in a couple of years.
Jack Phillips
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ted Brousseau
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Rudder control horns
What are you guys doing about rudder control horns? The original Piet
didn't have a steerable tail wheel so it simply had a rudder control horn.
With a steerable tail wheel things get complex. Do the control cables still
go to the rudder horn and then the rudder transfers torque to the tail
wheel? Or, do the control cables now go directly to the tail wheel and then
allow the tail wheel to control the rudder? This would seem the logical
setup. Otherwise a lot of torque would be carried by that little wooden
rudder.
Thanks,
Ted Brousseau
Who is finally starting to finish his Piet. See ya in 2003!!
________________________________________________________________________________
Mike,
Do you have a straight on picture of your panel - or better yet a
picture of the panel and view out the front from the rear cockpit? I
am trying to build a piet for Xplane simulator and like your simple
panel (and the rest of the plane of course). I can do a
photorealistic panel if I have a picture.
If your able and willing please email me.
Just want to make sure you received my cash via mail for a video also.
Thanks - have a great day
Kirk
St Paul, MN
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Cockpit picture oops |
Sorry, I accidently sent this to the list instead of direct to Mike Cuy.
But --- if anyone has good pictures of Piet panels or views from the
rear cockpit, I'm interested in seeing them.
Thanks and sorry again
Kirk
><kirkh@unique-software.com>
>
>Mike,
>
>Do you have a straight on picture of your panel - or better yet a
>picture of the panel and view out the front from the rear cockpit? I
>am trying to build a piet for Xplane simulator and like your simple
>panel (and the rest of the plane of course). I can do a
>photorealistic panel if I have a picture.
>
>If your able and willing please email me.
>
>Just want to make sure you received my cash via mail for a video also.
>
>Thanks - have a great day
>Kirk
>St Paul, MN
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | javier cruz <javcr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: rib stitching on a blustery October day |
Congratulations Walt
Ever ahead on your project, congratulations...
Javier Cruz
(working on the rudder trim)
Saludos desde Mexico
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tommy & Carolyn" <TommyandCarolyn(at)centurytel.net> |
| Subject: | Ultralight Fly-in |
Hey Group,
Last weekend's storms forced us to cancel and invoke the raindate. It's on
again and this weekend will be glorious.
Come on, lets fly.
Tommy
WHAT: Ultralight Aircraft Fly-in
WHEN: October 20, 2001
WHERE: SLUA Club airstrip (1600') Iowa, LA located on
the NE corner of Hwy 165 & I-10 intersection
N30-14-56, W92-58-18
WHO: Southwest Louisiana Ultralight Aircraft Club
FEATURES: Good food, flea market, flying games (bomb drop,
balloon chase, spot landing) with a "Top Gun"
award & more.
FEES: FREE
FMI: Ed Stephens 337-436-0423 337-475-5509
estephen(at)mail.ncneese.edu
Tommy Dubroc 318-748-6308
cen23370(at)centurytel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Eldredge <steve(at)byu.edu> |
| Subject: | Cockpit picture oops |
I have a couple on my website about my piet. I am ressurecting my
http://Aircamper.byu.edu website after several requests for information and
photos of the Green 'AirCamper' with the 'E' on the tail.
Best Regards,
Steve E.
PS. I like it too!
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Kirk &
Laura Huizenga
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Cockpit picture oops
<kirkh@unique-software.com>
Sorry, I accidently sent this to the list instead of direct to Mike Cuy.
But --- if anyone has good pictures of Piet panels or views from the
rear cockpit, I'm interested in seeing them.
Thanks and sorry again
Kirk
><kirkh@unique-software.com>
>
>Mike,
>
>Do you have a straight on picture of your panel - or better yet a
>picture of the panel and view out the front from the rear cockpit? I
>am trying to build a piet for Xplane simulator and like your simple
>panel (and the rest of the plane of course). I can do a
>photorealistic panel if I have a picture.
>
>If your able and willing please email me.
>
>Just want to make sure you received my cash via mail for a video also.
>
>Thanks - have a great day
>Kirk
>St Paul, MN
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | doing your own "annual" |
After you build your Piet (or whatever you build) you can
sign off your own annual inspections-----although they are
technically called Condition Inspections. If you buy a homebuilt
(ie---you are not the builder or manufacturer) you are not
entitled to a Repairman's Certificate for that airplane.
The EAA hotline had a good write up on more of this topic.
Show the FAA that YOU know the regs-----don't let them make
up the rules as they go along. This goes for DAR's too.
PS---your Repairman's Certificate is only good for the airplane you
built. You can only sign off the planes YOU built and have Repairman
Certificate's for. If you sell your homebuilt you can still sign it off
for the new owner, should you so desire.
Mike C.
Q & A: Question of the Week
Question: Last month I had my airplane inspected by the FAA for an
experimental airworthiness certificate. At the same time I sent in my
application for the airworthiness inspection. I also sent my application
for my repairman certificate. The airplane passed the inspection with no
defects. I was under the impression that I would be illegible for the
repairman certificate at that time. The inspector informed me that after I
had flown off the 40-hour test period I could get it. I was also informed
that I would have to go to the FSDO to give them my app. and take a test
for the repairman certificate. Is this how it works?
I thought that just the fact that I did at least 51% of the work and the
aircraft passed the inspection that I the builder was illegible for the
repairman certificate at the same time the airworthiness certificate was
issued. Any information that you can give me regarding this situation I
would appreciate.
Answer: There is NO requirement in any FAA Regulation or other FAA document
that requires you to complete your 40-hour test flight in order to receive
your Experimental Amateur-Built Repairman's Certificate.
That said, if a DAR inspected your aircraft - he/she does not have the
authority to issue the repairman's certificate - only an FAA FSDO
Airworthiness Inspector does - so a visit to the FSDO is in order. Visit
any time and when you get there ask for the "duty" Airworthiness Inspector.
Each FSDO office is suppose to have at least one inspector in the office at
all times (less lunch and coffee/donut breaks) to take care of the walk-in
business.
You'll need to take:
1. Your repairman's application,
2. Your aircraft registration,
3. Your aircraft airworthiness form,
4. The aircraft operating limitations,
5. Your builders log, and
6. A photo ID (e.g., drivers license, etc.).
Note: if they ask to keep the documents - let them make copies - don't let
them keep the originals. (You can't fly without the originals.)
The Experimental Amateur-Built Aircraft Repairman's Certificate can be
issued on the spot - there is no requirement to take any FAA tests to
receive it. The FAA Inspector will probably talk to you about your
airplane, inspecting your aircraft per FAR 43 Appendix D, etc.
(<http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfrhtml_00/Title_14/14cfr43_00.html>htt
p://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfrhtml_00/Title_14/14cfr43_00.<http://www.a
ccess.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfrhtml_00/Title_14/14cfr43_00.html>html)
Print it out and read it before you go.
As a side note for what it's worth - 99% of all DARs would have taken your
application and forwarded it to the FSDO for their action.
FAA Order 8300.10, chapter 25 covers the FAA FSDOs inspector s
responsibilities for issuing the repairman's certificate - it is very clear
about what is required and your inspector was way off base with his testing
or waiting period information.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
Pieters,
Have been composing this letter in my poor feeble mind for the last 3 weeks.
Couldn't make a sound decision for lack of a good reason(s). Having been laid
up with viral influenza these few weeks has also given time for serious
thought. I want not to bore you with my personal reasons or problems sooooo
I'll pass on this section until in the future IF someone would need to know.
My decision was kicked into action by Mike Cuy's explanation of FAA rules etc
this am 9:38. This raised the curtain on a final act of the FAA Opera. No I'm
not going to jump on that "down with those Yankee Beauros" as they have their
hands full and my full support, BUT I might take this opportunity to act like
the "fat lady and try for that unattainable B#.
My decision to sell my project NOW or complete the machine and then offer it
for sale is the immediate problem. Mike's letter solved this for me. If I
were to complete the project I would be the qualified repairman as it should
be. If I were to sell it now to another he could qualify as the repairman.
This seems the best possibility. I know that's the way I would want it.
The Piet is in the following condition:
Aircrft completed ready for cover. Engine running, instruments and controls
operating, wings, aelirons,struts and juries, controls etc. properly
installed and operating. Since labor day weekend I have begun to give the
entire wood surface another coat of spar varnish, not ureathane.
If anyone is interested in purchasing my project please contact me directly
on E Mail: Isablcorky(at)aol.com
Thank you for you time and interest
Claude M Corbett
625 Pierremont Rd
Shreveport, La 71106
318 868 3385
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
Corky, I hate to bust your bubble, but if you sell it before completion,
NOBODY gets the repairman certificate. The new buyer wouldn't qualify as he
didn't build at least 51% of it, and you wouldn't because you didn't finish
it. At least that's my understanding of the rules. Now you can get on your
soapbox about the bureaucrats.
Sure hate to see you sell it, particularly this close to completion. I'm
sure you have good reason, so I won't try to talk you out of it.
Best wishes,
Jack Phillips
-----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: Decision Time
Pieters,
Have been composing this letter in my poor feeble mind for the last 3 weeks.
Couldn't make a sound decision for lack of a good reason(s). Having been
laid
up with viral influenza these few weeks has also given time for serious
thought. I want not to bore you with my personal reasons or problems sooooo
I'll pass on this section until in the future IF someone would need to know.
My decision was kicked into action by Mike Cuy's explanation of FAA rules
etc
this am 9:38. This raised the curtain on a final act of the FAA Opera. No
I'm
not going to jump on that "down with those Yankee Beauros" as they have
their
hands full and my full support, BUT I might take this opportunity to act
like
the "fat lady and try for that unattainable B#.
My decision to sell my project NOW or complete the machine and then offer it
for sale is the immediate problem. Mike's letter solved this for me. If I
were to complete the project I would be the qualified repairman as it should
be. If I were to sell it now to another he could qualify as the repairman.
This seems the best possibility. I know that's the way I would want it.
The Piet is in the following condition:
Aircrft completed ready for cover. Engine running, instruments and controls
operating, wings, aelirons,struts and juries, controls etc. properly
installed and operating. Since labor day weekend I have begun to give the
entire wood surface another coat of spar varnish, not ureathane.
If anyone is interested in purchasing my project please contact me directly
on E Mail: Isablcorky(at)aol.com
Thank you for you time and interest
Claude M Corbett
625 Pierremont Rd
Shreveport, La 71106
318 868 3385
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Corky--there is one other option |
Corky-----Holy moly, don't give up the ship ! HERE IS
ANOTHER way you can have your cake and eat it too.
Here is what you do------and I've seen it done before.
1) Complete the plane, fly it and have a ball. (PS----and get well soon)
2) Get your repairman certificate
3) If you want to sell the airplane, do this.
4) Write on the back of your registration or airworthiness cert. (I forget
which now) that your plane was destroyed. IE, hangar fire, got caught
in a cotton combine, whatever.
5) They take your N-number off the registry.
6) You take the wings and tail and such apart.
7) you sell the plane as "parts"
8) The new owner takes your photos,, etc. stuff and puts the plane
back together.
9) He or she mails in for a new N-number
10) They put the plane back together
11) They call the FAA or DAR and get it inspected and an airworthiness cert.
issued.
12) I know this is not necessarily ethical, but cripe sakes, for a guy who
served
his country flying in the military, it's a perk I think you should think about.
Hope this helps,
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Decision Time |
Jack,
I can't support your point. As the project becomes more and more disassembled
to apply this last coat(insurance) of varnish it will be very easy for a new
builder to support a 51% log and photo book by reassembly AND covering the
Piet. Believe me that's a good 51% in itself. Just a thought however.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John McNarry" <jmcnarry(at)escape.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Decision Time |
Corky
I respect your decision to sell your project. Heck I've considered
selling mine as I'm so busy with other things it just hangs on the wall of
my shop. I call it the 1" thick stage. I look to the input from y'all on
this list with hope that I'll find the time to get back at it.
Anyway I sure have enjoyed your input to this list. Please hang around and
add your two cents worth now and then.
Hope you get completely well
John Mc
In getting colder Canada
----- Original Message -----
From: <Isablcorky(at)aol.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Decision Time
>
> Pieters,
> Have been composing this letter in my poor feeble mind for the last 3
weeks.
> Couldn't make a sound decision for lack of a good reason(s). Having been
laid
> up with viral influenza these few weeks has also given time for serious
> thought. I want not to bore you with my personal reasons or problems
sooooo
> I'll pass on this section until in the future IF someone would need to
know.
> My decision was kicked into action by Mike Cuy's explanation of FAA rules
etc
> this am 9:38. This raised the curtain on a final act of the FAA Opera. No
I'm
> not going to jump on that "down with those Yankee Beauros" as they have
their
> hands full and my full support, BUT I might take this opportunity to act
like
> the "fat lady and try for that unattainable B#.
> My decision to sell my project NOW or complete the machine and then offer
it
> for sale is the immediate problem. Mike's letter solved this for me. If I
> were to complete the project I would be the qualified repairman as it
should
> be. If I were to sell it now to another he could qualify as the repairman.
> This seems the best possibility. I know that's the way I would want it.
> The Piet is in the following condition:
> Aircrft completed ready for cover. Engine running, instruments and
controls
> operating, wings, aelirons,struts and juries, controls etc. properly
> installed and operating. Since labor day weekend I have begun to give the
> entire wood surface another coat of spar varnish, not ureathane.
> If anyone is interested in purchasing my project please contact me
directly
> on E Mail: Isablcorky(at)aol.com
>
> Thank you for you time and interest
>
> Claude M Corbett
> 625 Pierremont Rd
> Shreveport, La 71106
>
> 318 868 3385
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Corky,
Well here's another idea that combines some previously stated options.
Mike's idea of finishing, registering, and them unregistering is a
viable way to deal with this I think. And it doesn't need to be
unethical either. I think that you can unregister an aircraft with
the FAA without too much problem - it doesn't need to be destroyed
before it can be unregistered. People can and do this with
experimental aircraft to limit their liability when selling.
The example that I know of is my own project. My Piet was built in
'81 and flown for a number of years. In '89 the owner unregistered it
and donated it to a technical college. They had it for a while and
finally gave it to the Minnesota Air National Guard Museum at KMSP.
The guard kept it for a whole and then traded it for some bomber
parts with my EAA Chapter. I bought it from the chapter as parts and
have since disassembled pretty much the whole thing and am beginning
to rebuild now.
I talked with an FAA district manager about problem I might run into
and the line that I got is that it shouldn't be a problem. To the FAA
the plane is not in existance and I will register it under a
different number.
That leads to the other issue of Repairman Certificate. First, the
51% rule is not too difficult to meet if a person buying the project
and is willing to do some extra/repetative work. The 51% rule has
nothing to do with time spent on the project. The checklist I
received from the FAA in regards to the 51% rule gives credit for
manufacturing and equal credit for assembly. So, as in my case,
having stripped the whole plane down, just assembling and recovering
pretty much puts me over the 51%. I am also remaking some fittings
and rebuilding the corvair engine so there shouldn't be any problem.
In your case, Corky, if you are going to sell via the ideas listed
above, I'd pe prepared to be heart-broken when someone tears off all
the covering work you did. I guess you can sell it prior to covering,
but you would probably get less money I would think for an unflown
craft.
Regardless, my second point with the repairman cert is maybe it would
be worth waiting to see if the Sport Pilot thing goes through. If it
does, you could register the plane as a light aircraft and sell it to
someone that could get the repaiman's cert for it.
Finally, while I want the repairman cert for my plane, many people
have downplayed the need for this as it is likely that there is one
or a number of A&P/AI's in any local EAA Chapter that could do the
annual for cheap or free. I'm pretty sure my Technical Advisor would
do it for a ride.
Just more ideas and I hope it becomes clear what your best option is, Corky.
Kirk
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Cockpit picture oops |
In a message dated 10/16/01 10:12:18 AM Eastern Daylight Time, steve(at)byu.edu
writes:
<< I have a couple on my website about my piet. I am ressurecting my
http://Aircamper.byu.edu website after several requests for information and
photos of the Green 'AirCamper' with the 'E' on the tail.
Best Regards,
Steve E. >>
Would there be a chance that any of the pictures I took last year have made
it to that same website ?
-dennis
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Decision Time |
You don't have to build 5!% to get the repair certificate. You just have to
be recognized as the final builder. Many School Flight planes have a person
that gets the "repairman's' and they might not have done 5% of the actual
work.
Check with Earl Lawrence of EAA if you have a question about this.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
http://www.eaa.org for latest flying rules
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Decision Time
Corky, I hate to bust your bubble, but if you sell it before completion,
NOBODY gets the repairman certificate. The new buyer wouldn't qualify as he
didn't build at least 51% of it, and you wouldn't because you didn't finish
it. At least that's my understanding of the rules. Now you can get on your
soapbox about the bureaucrats.
Sure hate to see you sell it, particularly this close to completion. I'm
sure you have good reason, so I won't try to talk you out of it.
Best wishes,
Jack Phillips
-----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: Decision Time
Pieters,
Have been composing this letter in my poor feeble mind for the last 3 weeks.
Couldn't make a sound decision for lack of a good reason(s). Having been
laid
up with viral influenza these few weeks has also given time for serious
thought. I want not to bore you with my personal reasons or problems sooooo
I'll pass on this section until in the future IF someone would need to know.
My decision was kicked into action by Mike Cuy's explanation of FAA rules
etc
this am 9:38. This raised the curtain on a final act of the FAA Opera. No
I'm
not going to jump on that "down with those Yankee Beauros" as they have
their
hands full and my full support, BUT I might take this opportunity to act
like
the "fat lady and try for that unattainable B#.
My decision to sell my project NOW or complete the machine and then offer it
for sale is the immediate problem. Mike's letter solved this for me. If I
were to complete the project I would be the qualified repairman as it should
be. If I were to sell it now to another he could qualify as the repairman.
This seems the best possibility. I know that's the way I would want it.
The Piet is in the following condition:
Aircrft completed ready for cover. Engine running, instruments and controls
operating, wings, aelirons,struts and juries, controls etc. properly
installed and operating. Since labor day weekend I have begun to give the
entire wood surface another coat of spar varnish, not ureathane.
If anyone is interested in purchasing my project please contact me directly
on E Mail: Isablcorky(at)aol.com
Thank you for you time and interest
Claude M Corbett
625 Pierremont Rd
Shreveport, La 71106
318 868 3385
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Decision Time |
In a message dated 10/16/01 2:28:55 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
Isablcorky(at)aol.com writes:
<< The Piet is in the following condition:
Aircrft completed ready for cover. Engine running, instruments and controls
operating, wings, aelirons,struts and juries, controls etc. properly
installed and operating. Since labor day weekend I have begun to give the
entire wood surface another coat of spar varnish, not ureathane.
If anyone is interested in purchasing my project please contact me directly
on E Mail: Isablcorky(at)aol.com
Thank you for you time and interest
>>
So sorry to hear you've decided to sell your Piet. I would dearly love to
buy it from you. I live in Tenn. so not far from you. After all the sweat and
trouble you've been through to get this far, I hate to think of your not
finishing it and taking her up. I hope whoever buys it will be kind enough
to finish it and bring it back "home" for a visit and let you "test fly" it.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Corky--there is one other option |
In a message dated 10/16/01 3:59:41 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov writes:
<< 7) you sell the plane as "parts"
8) The new owner takes your photos,, etc. stuff and puts the plane
back together.
9) He or she mails in for a new N-number
10) They put the plane back together
11) They call the FAA or DAR and get it inspected and an airworthiness cert.
issued.
12) I know this is not necessarily ethical, but cripe sakes, for a guy who
served
his country flying in the military, it's a perk I think you should think
about.
Hope this helps,
Mike C.
>>
Mike, can a airworthiness certificate be obtained from an airplane bought as
parts ? I am guessing as long as its built according to plans and found to
be airworthy, why not ? Whats to keep me from buying the "parts" (fuselage,
wing, gear, engine mount, engine) and doing the assembly and covering myself ?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Cockpit picture |
Folks,
Foundthis pic of instrument panel. Hope it will serve some purpose.
Corky in La
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Cockpit picture |
Sorry,
I sent the wrong #10
Corky
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Prop help for this guy if you can ? |
Grant forwarded this to me and if anyone has any ideas would you
write direct to this fellows sister's computer e-mail ?
beverly.wilson(at)ns.sympatico.ca
THANKS !
Mike C.
<< Hello Grant
I recently bought a wooden propellor with the following inscriptions and
measurements and am wondering if it is from a Pietenpol:
Stamped into the steel hub: "Ford" and "275 R"
Overall prop length: six feet
Diameter at hub: 6 and 1/2 inches
Maximum prop width: seven inches
Maximum prop thickness: 2 and 3/4 inches
Prop thickness six inches in from prop tip: 1 and 3/4 in.
The prop is made from two (only) pieces of (spruce?).
Does the above description seem like a Pietenpol prop?
If not, is there somewhere else I could search for ID?
Thank you for any light you may be able to shed on this.
You may post this message or forward it to others if you
think it would help.
Regards Jerry Munro, New Glasgow, Nova Scotia
Please reply if any to me at ae798(at)ns.sympatico.ca
rather than to the e-dress from which I am sending this message...this note
is coming from my sister's computer.
Thank you in advance. JM >>
Jerry,
I don't know.
I'll BCC your question to a few who might know, or might
be able to direct your question to someone who can
-=Grant=-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | 51% rule... Corky, don't sell |
Hello, folks;
Unless I'm mistaken, the "51% rule" (which really doesn't say 51% anywhere
in the body of the text) simply states that the majority of the aircraft
must be amateur-built. That doesn't mean it has to be 51% built by the same
person (lots of EAA chapters, groups, father-son, husband-wife, etc. build
planes)... it just means 51%+ built by amateurs. Now, the repairman cert is
a whole 'nother thing. It's very easy to read through the paperwork and
regs and get an understanding of what the requirements are. For example
(and this doesn't directly address the issue of your new buyer getting the
repairman cert, but it helps)- from Jim Pratt's site at
http://www.moneypit.net/~pratt/ambuilt/faqhmblt.htm
9. What are the rules for used experimental aircraft? If I buy a used one
that has been certified and has its N number can I still work on it as
though I built it or do I have to have an A&P work on it from then on?
A. The FAA regulates maintenance through FAR part 43. Far 43.1 states that
the rules of that part do (b) "...not apply to any aircraft for which an
experimental airworthiness certificate has been issued, unless a different
kind of airworthiness certificate had been previously issued".
In effect what this means is that any person may perform maintenance,
preventive maintenance, rebuilding, overhauling or alternations to an
experimental aircraft, unless that aircraft had previously held another type
of airworthiness certificate, i.e. standard, utility, acrobatic, transport,
etc. If it is an amateur built aircraft, then anyone can do the maintenance.
However, all experimental operating limitations contain additional limiting
factors. You will nearly always find a statement worded something like "This
aircraft cannot be flown unless it has received, within the preceding 12
calendar months, a condition inspection conducted in accordance with the
scope and detail of appendix A of part 43, and the inspection is recorded in
the aircraft records." Further, the limitations usually also say "Only the
builder, when certificated as the repairman, mechanics holding an A & P
rating, and appropriately rated repair stations may conduct the condition
inspection required by the operating limitations". If the aircraft is
turbine powered, or surplus military, there may be additional limitations
which mandate a licensed mechanic perform the work.
The net effect, and to answer your question, is: 1. The operating
limitations will tell you who can do the work. 2. If amateur-built, you
probably can do the work, except for the annual "condition inspection". and
3. That condition inspection will probably have to be done by an A & P,
since there are no "appropriately rated repair stations" for non-certified
experimental aircraft that I know of.''
But... I still think Mike Cuy's scenario gives you the second-best direction
to follow. The first-best direction to follow is to get some chicken soup
or hot tea going until you get well enough to fly, cover and certify the
airplane, and get behind the stick yourself! That will change your whole
outlook on whether to sell it or not!
Oscar Zuniga
Medford, Oregon
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hofmann <jhofmann(at)netwurx.net> |
Hi Jerry,
It may be off a Pietenpol but I would look elsewhere first. The Ford Model B
engine was actually certified (as was a Ford V8) for production in the Funk
line of aircraft as well as the Arrow Sport. I would tend to look in that
direction. Corben also used the Ford in the Super Ace of l935 or so,
although very few of this really neat plane have been built. In fact, that
use of wood (probably Maple) is similar to what Lewis of Madison, Wisconsin
would have produced. I have a Lewis from my prewar Taylorcraft hanging above
my couch. Maybe this can get you pointed in the right direction...then maybe
again, maybe it won't.
-john hofmann-
"37 year old mind chocked full of 70 year old airplane information not
really even useful for gameshows...."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: 51% rule... Corky, don't sell |
Anyone can do the maintenance on an "Experimental", anyone! You need an
annual "condition" inspection done by either the plane's builder repairman
or an A&P. Don't need an IA but they also can be used.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
http://www.eaa.org for latest flying rules
----- Original Message -----
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: 51% rule... Corky, don't sell
Hello, folks;
Unless I'm mistaken, the "51% rule" (which really doesn't say 51% anywhere
in the body of the text) simply states that the majority of the aircraft
must be amateur-built. That doesn't mean it has to be 51% built by the same
person (lots of EAA chapters, groups, father-son, husband-wife, etc. build
planes)... it just means 51%+ built by amateurs. Now, the repairman cert is
a whole 'nother thing. It's very easy to read through the paperwork and
regs and get an understanding of what the requirements are. For example
(and this doesn't directly address the issue of your new buyer getting the
repairman cert, but it helps)- from Jim Pratt's site at
http://www.moneypit.net/~pratt/ambuilt/faqhmblt.htm
9. What are the rules for used experimental aircraft? If I buy a used one
that has been certified and has its N number can I still work on it as
though I built it or do I have to have an A&P work on it from then on?
A. The FAA regulates maintenance through FAR part 43. Far 43.1 states that
the rules of that part do (b) "...not apply to any aircraft for which an
experimental airworthiness certificate has been issued, unless a different
kind of airworthiness certificate had been previously issued".
In effect what this means is that any person may perform maintenance,
preventive maintenance, rebuilding, overhauling or alternations to an
experimental aircraft, unless that aircraft had previously held another type
of airworthiness certificate, i.e. standard, utility, acrobatic, transport,
etc. If it is an amateur built aircraft, then anyone can do the maintenance.
However, all experimental operating limitations contain additional limiting
factors. You will nearly always find a statement worded something like "This
aircraft cannot be flown unless it has received, within the preceding 12
calendar months, a condition inspection conducted in accordance with the
scope and detail of appendix A of part 43, and the inspection is recorded in
the aircraft records." Further, the limitations usually also say "Only the
builder, when certificated as the repairman, mechanics holding an A & P
rating, and appropriately rated repair stations may conduct the condition
inspection required by the operating limitations". If the aircraft is
turbine powered, or surplus military, there may be additional limitations
which mandate a licensed mechanic perform the work.
The net effect, and to answer your question, is: 1. The operating
limitations will tell you who can do the work. 2. If amateur-built, you
probably can do the work, except for the annual "condition inspection". and
3. That condition inspection will probably have to be done by an A & P,
since there are no "appropriately rated repair stations" for non-certified
experimental aircraft that I know of.''
But... I still think Mike Cuy's scenario gives you the second-best direction
to follow. The first-best direction to follow is to get some chicken soup
or hot tea going until you get well enough to fly, cover and certify the
airplane, and get behind the stick yourself! That will change your whole
outlook on whether to sell it or not!
Oscar Zuniga
Medford, Oregon
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Decision Time |
----- Original Message -----
From: <Isablcorky(at)aol.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Decision Time
>
> Pieters,
> Have been composing this letter in my poor feeble mind for the last 3
weeks.
> Couldn't make a sound decision for lack of a good reason(s). Having been
laid
Corky,
Have seen your letters in the last few weeks, and figured I'd reply. In
my opinion ( up north we have a saying..cleaned up it is something like this
"opinions are like butt holes, everyone has one.)
I've read all the responses about you selling your project, and I went
through the responses to read them all so I wouldn't miss any. Can't seem
to find the reason you're selling, but maybe thats personal business.
I guess my statement is that you seem to be worried about the person who is
buying your project a little too much.
If your project is anything like mine, to go out and work on the Piet, isn't
a chore or a "job". It's alot easier ( and probably cheaper) to buy a
plane than to build it, but that's what people like you and me like to do.
Is the Sport pilot thing still going through? Unless I've missed something,
it's still in the works, and soon we can all fly.
As far as I know , a person who has never even flown can still build
and licence a plane. So if we don't know what the FAA future holds, I
would finish the assembly, cover it, paint it the colors you want,
have it inspected, and finally fly it, or get to see it fly.
I know one thing...When I was standing on a rooftop in Elmwood Park NJ on
Sept 11, and saw the World Trade Center fall, and take thousands of innocent
people to the ground, it made me put things in proper order.
My humble vote is to finish the Piet.
walt
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Decision Time |
Thanks Walt,
I took one step closer today toward your and many other recommendations by
calling FAA and ordering my first(naked) inspection in three weeks. Have been
pretty sick and I must have come out of it with a little depression which
sometimes happens to a person my age. I think I'll put it all to size as time
goes by. Funny thing, I've had many e mails like yours and only one who
inquired as to the price. He has two sons so I advised him not to consider
buying mine as his boys would miss an opportunity of a lifetime in the
building process.
Thanks again
Corky in La
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bruce Watkins <flyer(at)clas.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Decision Time |
Corky, The reason no one asked the price is because......
We ALL want to see YOU finish your airplane!!!!
Hang in there buddy,
Bruce
Cape Girardeau, MO
Isablcorky(at)aol.com wrote:
>
SNIP
>
> Funny thing, I've had many e mails like yours and only one who
> inquired as to the price.
SNIP
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Decision Time |
Corky,
I know people younger than me , in their 40's that spend the weekends
watching the TV, and consider it a good weekend. Then there are people like
my mentor who is in his 80's, actively an A&P, helped me through my first
project, and now through my Piet up till now, and he's amazing. ( They're
will be a little blurb on my fuse that thanks him for his efforts,, he has
an EAA membership of #242[I think]). He isn't some old fossel that I only
put up with, he's a wealth of knowledge. He just bought a Cassut raser,
rebuilt the engine and will fly it. When I fly off my hours, he will be
the first in the front seat.
Don't even think of being that guy in front of the TV.....
We all have to keep going till some higher power pulls the plug.
walt
----- Original Message -----
From: <Isablcorky(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Decision Time
>
> Thanks Walt,
> I took one step closer today toward your and many other recommendations by
> calling FAA and ordering my first(naked) inspection in three weeks. Have
been
> pretty sick and I must have come out of it with a little depression which
> sometimes happens to a person my age. I think I'll put it all to size as
time
> goes by. Funny thing, I've had many e mails like yours and only one who
> inquired as to the price. He has two sons so I advised him not to consider
> buying mine as his boys would miss an opportunity of a lifetime in the
> building process.
> Thanks again
> Corky in La
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John McNarry" <jmcnarry(at)escape.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Decision Time |
Well summed up Walt, I agree.
Corky, Building is definitely part of the object. I have had a lot of fun
enjoyment and just "plane" fun building over the years.
In Canada the reason we are given for being allowed to build are Recreation
and Education. The recreation part you know, the education part is well
summed up by a recent posting:
"37 year old mind chocked full of 70 year old airplane information not
really even useful for gameshows...."
-john hofmann-
Just insert your own age Corky, who the heck should care about that but
you? I work with some gents at the Museum in their late eighties and early
nineties that provide me with inspiration. "As young as you act & as old as
you feel"
In the words of Richard Feynman "What do you care what other people think?"
Get out there building and have fun Corky!
John Mc
> > Pieters,
> > Have been composing this letter in my poor feeble mind for the last 3
> weeks.
> > Couldn't make a sound decision for lack of a good reason(s). Having been
> laid
>
>
> Corky,
> Have seen your letters in the last few weeks, and figured I'd reply. In
> my opinion ( up north we have a saying..cleaned up it is something like
this
> "opinions are like butt holes, everyone has one.)
> I've read all the responses about you selling your project, and I went
> through the responses to read them all so I wouldn't miss any. Can't seem
> to find the reason you're selling, but maybe thats personal business.
> I guess my statement is that you seem to be worried about the person who
is
> buying your project a little too much.
> If your project is anything like mine, to go out and work on the Piet,
isn't
> a chore or a "job". It's alot easier ( and probably cheaper) to buy a
> plane than to build it, but that's what people like you and me like to do.
> Is the Sport pilot thing still going through? Unless I've missed
something,
> it's still in the works, and soon we can all fly.
> As far as I know , a person who has never even flown can still build
> and licence a plane. So if we don't know what the FAA future holds, I
> would finish the assembly, cover it, paint it the colors you want,
> have it inspected, and finally fly it, or get to see it fly.
> I know one thing...When I was standing on a rooftop in Elmwood Park NJ on
> Sept 11, and saw the World Trade Center fall, and take thousands of
innocent
> people to the ground, it made me put things in proper order.
>
> My humble vote is to finish the Piet.
> walt
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Decision Time |
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | skycarl(at)megsinet.net |
| Subject: | Re: Decision Time |
Isablcorky(at)aol.com wrote:
Ok Corky, Time to put my 24 cents in( inflation ya know)
It's evident from your input on this list that you've put a lot of
hard fun in your plane. It sure as hell would be a shame to see you
not finish it. I know sometimes with all that's going on right now and
when a person isn't feeling 100 percent that it can get a little
overwhelming. Kinda like the tunnel in the dream that has the end that
keeps stretching out in front of you. But man, wait untill you at
least feel better before you decide.As you can tell, everyone want's
to see you keep it, but if you decide not to, some lucky person will
get a really fine flying machine.
Hang in there partner,
Carl
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jared wilkinson <jared_wilkinson(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Decision Time |
We have a saying here in Missouri, "Airplanes are like
wild women, those who don't have one, wish they did,
and those who do have one, always have something to
do." Well, maybe all Missourians don't say that, but
I do, and I say if you finish that Piet, I'll road
trip down there to see it fly. Cork, you remind me of
some of the guys who used to come into the hobby shop
I worked at during High School. They always had a
great story to tell, and I really enjoyed that job.
So, get to feeling better, and make us "Show-Me
Staters" proud.
Jared Wilkinson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
Howdy;
Those of you who subscribe/contribute to SAA have gotten (or will soon get)
your Fall 2001 issue of "To Fly", and will find a couple of stories on Piets
and pictures of same. There is one that I really found interesting, on pg.
36, showing BHP's Corvair-powered plane parked with his hangar in the
background. The straight line of the top of the hangar doors stretches
across the photo right above the wing, and boy does it exaggerate the fact
that that wing is flat as a pancake. Since I'm new on this list I'll
probably get instantly excommunicated for this and sorry, Mike- the "replica
police" are right on this one: "Bent wings are for sissies" ;o)
Oscar Zuniga
Medford, Oregon
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "fishin" <fishin(at)wwa.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Decision Time |
Date: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 6:24 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Decision Time
you finish that Piet,
>So, get to feeling better, >!!!!!!!!!
Hey Corky,>We're 2 months into oyster season and I'll wager you haven't gone
through a sack of them yet. Could be that's why you've had the miseries.
Serious now, as soon as you've gotten your second wind, get together with
the rest of your oompaah band for a doseedo, break out a sack of orsters and
a cold suds. I gawrentee you'll be right back and start shrinking fabric.
I understand the not feeling 100% and not wanting to fool with anything but
it WILL PASS. Just getting over the flu myself and lost a month before that
while up in the Grand Rapids area. My birds just now getting some paint on
it. Had it insured since last June and it's still a month away from flying.
Always the optomist I guess.
I'm still planning a flight next spring into your area to see the finished
product. I'm sure you'll continue to do me proud.
Get better---Get busy
JoeC N99621 colder every day in NE IL
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Meadows" <gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Decision Time kinda long |
Corky,
I remember when Joe Krzes and I came up to visit you a little over a year
ago, I was impressed with how nice a plane your Piet was shaping up to be! I
remember all the work you'd done to the spars, and how good it looked with
the wing on it! Now, you've gotten a running engine on it, controls all
rigged up, brakes and gear figured out, you've made impressive progress this
year, and now it's almost ready to cover! I'd hate like the dickens to see
you stop now!
When we came up there, I'd done my fin and rudder and ribs and had an
elevator half in the jig, that was it! I'd been idle for several months.
After I saw your project, I got fired-up!
Since then, I've done all my tailfeathers, my fuselage/turtledeck is mostly
complete, I've started on my straight axle landing gear, I've gotten most
all of my steel parts cut/bent or welded - something I wasn't sure I could
do! I've collected up about 60% of the parts to build my A65, and I built
the two extra ribs that I realized I needed cause I was building a 3 piece,
not 1 piece wing! All that progress was because you invited us up there, and
showed us your project and your wonderful hospitality and got me excited!!
As close as you are to being done, it'd be a shame to let a little bug get
in your way! I know with being sick, it's easy to get despondent. Combine
that with the what we've witnessed in the last few weeks, and I think any of
us would be down. I with Walt, cover it, paint it, and fly it!! You deserve
to be the one who enjoys the first flight, whether you're in it, or
overseeing! Probably all you need to perk you up is to get completely over
your bug and get out and work on your Piet!!
Hang in there!
Gary
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
Hello, folks;
Is it just me, or is the Buckeye Pietenpol Association's website at
http://users.aol.com/BPANews/ inaccessible? I've been trying it for a
couple of weeks, with no joy. I'm interested in back issues of the
newsletter, but can't get there from here.
(Or maybe that it proudly proclaims itself to be created on an Apple, and my
PC refuses to talk to Apples). Anyway, what started this was trying to
track down back issues of the newsletter, so if anybody can help, please
email me off-line; thanks.
Oscar Zuniga
Medford, Oregon
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
Oscar,
I have the complete set of old newsletters as compiled by Mike Bell. I've
read them all and would be very happen to send them to you. Maybe when your
done with them you could pass them on to someone else etc. ( Y'all ) let me
know y'alls thinking on this y'all.
Corky in Louisiana where all y'all is sorta standard talk.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: SAA articles |
In a message dated 10/17/01 7:48:23 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
taildrags(at)hotmail.com writes:
> Those of you who subscribe/contribute to SAA have gotten (or will soon get)
> your Fall 2001 issue of "To Fly", and will find a couple of stories on
> Piets
> and pictures of same. There is one that I really found interesting, on pg.
> 36, showing BHP's Corvair-powered plane parked with his hangar in the
> background. The straight line of the top of the hangar doors stretches
> across the photo right above the wing, and boy does it exaggerate the fact
> that that wing is flat as a pancake. Since I'm new on this list I'll
> probably get instantly excommunicated for this and sorry, Mike- the
> "replica
> police" are right on this one: "Bent wings are for sissies" ;o)
>
>
Oscaar,
That airplane has a very small amount of dihedral which was bent into it
during wing installation (one piece wing) and strut fabrication. I believe
both of the last two Piets had this small amount. My planes are A powered,
have straight wings, and fly fine. The straight wing actually looks drooped
as viewed from the front. I would have a hard time believing that either way
would have any effect on the flying characteristics of this plane. I use the
straight wing because it is easier for me to install and strut. Doug Bryant
Wichuta Ks
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike" <mikec(at)microlandusa.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Decision Time |
Corky,
Unless something has changed recently the FAA only requires one final
inspection after everything is covered and ready to go.
"Pre Cover" or "progressive" inspections are no longer required or
recommended. Are you calling out Uncle Sam a little early??
Mike
(Hatz Builder always lurking and learning from you Piet guys!)
----- Original Message -----
From: <Isablcorky(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Decision Time
>
> Thanks Walt,
> I took one step closer today toward your and many other recommendations by
> calling FAA and ordering my first(naked) inspection in three weeks. Have
been
> pretty sick and I must have come out of it with a little depression which
> sometimes happens to a person my age. I think I'll put it all to size as
time
> goes by. Funny thing, I've had many e mails like yours and only one who
> inquired as to the price. He has two sons so I advised him not to consider
> buying mine as his boys would miss an opportunity of a lifetime in the
> building process.
> Thanks again
> Corky in La
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Decision Time |
Mike,
Last Sept (2000) as I was writing a check to our uncle for the Sep 15th
estimate I asked myself why am I to PAY a DAR for services heretofore
provided by the gov. Soooooo I call the FAA office in Baton Rouge and ask
them the same question. Very warmly, in a nice cordial tone, he said let him
check and he would be back with me. That afternoon he called and said he had
been given my case and I could expect him to be my inspector and that he
desired to give it a precover (naked) inspection as well as a preflight
inspection. Now Mike I'll ask you, " would you have begun arguing regulations
with the man after he had agreed to inspect your plane?"The way I look at is,
the more inspectors the better. None of us or you or him or her knows it all
and I'm appreciative if anyone might point out a little boo boo which could
alter my timetable with the hereafter.
Sooooo, as soon as I get the new engine mount welded I'll call Jim for the
naked show in Shreveport. Who knows, it might even draw a crowd
Corky in La with the torch in hand but standing on shaky legs.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike" <mikec(at)microlandusa.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Decision Time |
Well Corky that all makes pretty good sense and is probably the route I
would take as well.
Just had to chime in though, just in case you were in for a surprise, that
is, the guy would show up and
say "what'd ya call me for?? This thing's not ready for inspection"
Sounds like you have a good thing going there.
Mike
----- Original Message -----
From: <Isablcorky(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Decision Time
>
> Mike,
> Last Sept (2000) as I was writing a check to our uncle for the Sep 15th
> estimate I asked myself why am I to PAY a DAR for services heretofore
> provided by the gov. Soooooo I call the FAA office in Baton Rouge and ask
> them the same question. Very warmly, in a nice cordial tone, he said let
him
> check and he would be back with me. That afternoon he called and said he
had
> been given my case and I could expect him to be my inspector and that he
> desired to give it a precover (naked) inspection as well as a preflight
> inspection. Now Mike I'll ask you, " would you have begun arguing
regulations
> with the man after he had agreed to inspect your plane?"The way I look at
is,
> the more inspectors the better. None of us or you or him or her knows it
all
> and I'm appreciative if anyone might point out a little boo boo which
could
> alter my timetable with the hereafter.
> Sooooo, as soon as I get the new engine mount welded I'll call Jim for the
> naked show in Shreveport. Who knows, it might even draw a crowd
> Corky in La with the torch in hand but standing on shaky legs.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Decision Time |
Mike,
It may not be ready for inspection BUT I need to have the Fed man tell me so.
After talking with him it seems he is most interested in my building log.
Since I'm the world's worst record keeper I am beginning to do a lot of
imaginary and possibly some fictional writings. Thankfully I have taken lots
of construction photographs and have a naked plane to prove it. My tech
advisor seems to think we are ready.
Corky in La getting ready for the nude act.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Brusilow" <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Decision Time |
----- Original Message -----
From: Mike
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2001 4:00 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Decision Time
Corky,
Unless something has changed recently the FAA only requires one final
inspection after everything is covered and ready to go.
"Pre Cover" or "progressive" inspections are no longer required or
recommended. Are you calling out Uncle Sam a little early??
Mike
(Hatz Builder always lurking and learning from you Piet guys
*************************************************************************************************
Right! That's how I did it.
Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Conkling" <hpvs(at)southwind.net> |
| Subject: | Re:Tail Feathers |
Hi there!
Got a good question for you guys that have your tail feathers finished --
which cross-sections are used for the ends of the rudder, elevators & etc.
It looks like BH used the leading edge shape for the ends of the horizontal
stabilizer -- did he use the main beam (hinge attach) shape for the ends of
the rudder & elevators (??) or something else?
Mike
Pretty Prairie, KS
----- Original Message -----
From: <Dmott9(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Cockpit picture oops
>
> In a message dated 10/16/01 10:12:18 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
steve(at)byu.edu
> writes:
>
> << I have a couple on my website about my piet. I am ressurecting my
> http://Aircamper.byu.edu website after several requests for information
and
> photos of the Green 'AirCamper' with the 'E' on the tail.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Steve E. >>
>
> Would there be a chance that any of the pictures I took last year have
made
> it to that same website ?
>
> -dennis
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Grentzer" <flyboy_120(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | tail feather ENDS |
Hey Mike I answered your question on the list when I was half asleep
this morning. I Didn't pick up on what you were really asking. The ENDS
duh. If I'm lucky it won't go through. Anyway the ends need to be freelanced
they are not one of the listed sections that I know of. I cut tapered pieces
of spruce to match up with the thicknesses of the ends of the beams.then put
on the gussets and filled between the gussets with 1/8" filler strips and
then planed the outer edges round and fair after the glue dried. I'm sure
there are other ways to do it but this worked good for me. Hope this helps.
Ed
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | pre-cover inspection |
"Mike" wrote:
>Just had to chime in though, just in case you were in for a
>surprise, that is, the guy would show up and say
>"what'd ya call me for??
The man is from Baton Rouge. He would say "what did all y'all call me for?"
;o)
Boy, it's good to hear you're moving on to the next step Corky. Shaky legs
or not...
Oscar Zuniga
Medford, Oregon
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
Doug wrote:
>I would have a hard time believing that either way would have
>any effect on the flying characteristics of this plane.
Well, history would agree with you, and I think Don Pietenpol's notes say
that BHP tried adding dihedral and didn't find it worthwhile. Hundreds of
builders over the years would agree with you too.
The purpose is to make the plane more stable or "self-righting", with the
mass of the fuselage "hanging" between the two lifting surfaces, or the lift
vectors acting slightly toward the center axis of the airplane and counter
to gravity so that the plane would tend to fly wings-level. But however all
the engineering and vector stuff works, the intent of adding dihedral is to
make the plane more stable. However, the intent of me making the comment is
to get in a little ribbing on Mike ;o)
Oscar Zuniga
Medford, Oregon
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Joe Krzes" <jkrzes(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re:Tail Feathers |
Mike,
I used the leading edge material on the outboard edges of all parts and
trailing edge material on only the trailing edges. Yes, the thicknesses
don't match (especially rear outboard corners of horizontal stabilizer), but
tapering or shimming is pretty easy. I've seen piets that used beam
material (hinge edge) for the outboard edges and that seemed to work too. I
like how mine turned out, but I would entertain the idea of using beam
material for the inboard edges of the elevators.
Tip: Watch the overall height of the rudder, I took 1/2 inch off bottom.
Joe
Spring, TX
>From: "Michael Conkling" <hpvs(at)southwind.net>
>Reply-To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re:Tail Feathers
>Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2001 21:02:29 -0500
>
>
>
>Hi there!
>
>Got a good question for you guys that have your tail feathers finished --
>which cross-sections are used for the ends of the rudder, elevators & etc.
>It looks like BH used the leading edge shape for the ends of the horizontal
>stabilizer -- did he use the main beam (hinge attach) shape for the ends of
>the rudder & elevators (??) or something else?
>
>Mike
>Pretty Prairie, KS
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <Dmott9(at)aol.com>
>To:
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Cockpit picture oops
>
>
> >
> > In a message dated 10/16/01 10:12:18 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
>steve(at)byu.edu
> > writes:
> >
> > << I have a couple on my website about my piet. I am ressurecting my
> > http://Aircamper.byu.edu website after several requests for information
>and
> > photos of the Green 'AirCamper' with the 'E' on the tail.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Steve E. >>
> >
> > Would there be a chance that any of the pictures I took last year have
>made
> > it to that same website ?
> >
> > -dennis
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: wing dihedral |
In kidding with Oscar offline I noted one significant
benefit of the dihedral I put in my Piet wings------it
makes it easier to pee in the bottle while flying with
the rudder bar only :))
Mike C.
(but it is true)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Warren D. Shoun" <wbnb(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: wing dihedral |
You know, I kind'a always suspected that our buddy Oscar needed just a degree
or
two of dihedral for his mental stability, but this crosswind gust from Mike C.
has
almost sent me into a groundloop laughing....
Cheers,
~Warren
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mac Zirges" <macz(at)netbridge.net> |
| Subject: | Re: wing dihedral |
The issue of wing dihedral has come up almost every year at Brodhead and
Oshkosh forums--a little bit adds stability but the more you add the more
air "spills" off the ends of the wings and you lose lift efficiency.
Bernie supposedly set his piets up with the wings flat when sitting on the
ground--then when in the air with the weight of fuselage hanging down, the
wings would naturally flex just a tad giving a bit of dihedral and, viola,
stability!
Mac in Oregon
-----Original Message-----
From: Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Date: Friday, October 19, 2001 5:55 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: wing dihedral
>
>Doug wrote:
>
>>I would have a hard time believing that either way would have
>>any effect on the flying characteristics of this plane.
>
>Well, history would agree with you, and I think Don Pietenpol's notes say
>that BHP tried adding dihedral and didn't find it worthwhile. Hundreds of
>builders over the years would agree with you too.
>
>The purpose is to make the plane more stable or "self-righting", with the
>mass of the fuselage "hanging" between the two lifting surfaces, or the
lift
>vectors acting slightly toward the center axis of the airplane and counter
>to gravity so that the plane would tend to fly wings-level. But however
all
>the engineering and vector stuff works, the intent of adding dihedral is to
>make the plane more stable. However, the intent of me making the comment
is
>to get in a little ribbing on Mike ;o)
>
>Oscar Zuniga
>Medford, Oregon
>mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
>website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re:Tail Feathers |
| From: | Chris Tracy <catdesigns(at)juno.com> |
I used the same method as Ed Grentzer but I used the hinge beam "T"
section for the ends of the horizontal stabilizer and the freelance taper
as Ed called it on the Flippers (that would be the elevators). Looks
great if I do say so my self.
Chris
Sacramento, CA
writes:
>
>
> Hi there!
>
> Got a good question for you guys that have your tail feathers
> finished --
> which cross-sections are used for the ends of the rudder, elevators
> & etc.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jannica Wunge" <jannicaw(at)hotmail.com> |
Hello list.
Thank you all for the kind replays to my last letter. They have strengthened
me in my plans to go ahead with an Aircamper project. I have also taken
contact with the Swedish chapter of EAA, chapter 222, and got there
blessing.
I got a lot of tips from you considering the choice of engine and
fortunately I dont have to make any decision for some time. But I
will surely consider your advice.
Today, my husband, and me where over to the airfield and collected our
glider. It is now stowed in our garage for winter maintenance. We expect the
first snow any day now and with the glider under roof we are ready for it.
Jannica in Sweden
Hmta MSN Explorer kostnadsfritt p http://explorer.msn.se
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | NormDecou(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | looking for a corvair engine |
HI,
I am looking for a Corvair engine- 110HP -1965-69 preferred letter codes RD,
RF, RH, RX, RK. For anyone else looking into this option these are the
codes which are recomended by WIlliam Wynne(also available on the Corvair
Site). I live in Windsor, Ont., Canada (right across from Detroit,Michigan).
I am hoping to find one in the area(Ontario,MIchigan,Indiana,Ohio, and maybe
some parts of New York,& Illinois) so I can drive and pick it up(within
6hrs). I would really appreciate any help in tracking one down.
Thanks
Norm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dkowell <dkowell(at)cstone.net> |
| Subject: | Re: SAA articles |
ok guys what is theweb address for saa
Doug413(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> In a message dated 10/17/01 7:48:23 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
> taildrags(at)hotmail.com writes:
>
> > Those of you who subscribe/contribute to SAA have gotten (or will soon get)
> > your Fall 2001 issue of "To Fly", and will find a couple of stories on
> > Piets
> > and pictures of same. There is one that I really found interesting, on pg.
> > 36, showing BHP's Corvair-powered plane parked with his hangar in the
> > background. The straight line of the top of the hangar doors stretches
> > across the photo right above the wing, and boy does it exaggerate the fact
> > that that wing is flat as a pancake. Since I'm new on this list I'll
> > probably get instantly excommunicated for this and sorry, Mike- the
> > "replica
> > police" are right on this one: "Bent wings are for sissies" ;o)
> >
> >
>
> Oscaar,
>
> That airplane has a very small amount of dihedral which was bent into it
> during wing installation (one piece wing) and strut fabrication. I believe
> both of the last two Piets had this small amount. My planes are A powered,
> have straight wings, and fly fine. The straight wing actually looks drooped
> as viewed from the front. I would have a hard time believing that either way
> would have any effect on the flying characteristics of this plane. I use the
> straight wing because it is easier for me to install and strut. Doug Bryant
> Wichuta Ks
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeffrey Wilcox" <craigwilcox(at)peoplepc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: SAA articles |
www.sportaviation.org
----- Original Message -----
From: dkowell <dkowell(at)cstone.net>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: SAA articles
>
> ok guys what is theweb address for saa
>
> Doug413(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> >
> > In a message dated 10/17/01 7:48:23 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
> > taildrags(at)hotmail.com writes:
> >
> > > Those of you who subscribe/contribute to SAA have gotten (or will soon
get)
> > > your Fall 2001 issue of "To Fly", and will find a couple of stories on
> > > Piets
> > > and pictures of same. There is one that I really found interesting,
on pg.
> > > 36, showing BHP's Corvair-powered plane parked with his hangar in the
September 20, 2001 - October 21, 2001
Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-cc