Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-ck
February 13, 2002 - February 21, 2002
>
>
> On Tue, 12 February 2002, Fisherman Caye wrote:
>
> "Anybody have experience with rear view mirrors on the Pietenpol? I don't turn
around so easily anymore, so I never put in that little box compartment behind
the pilot's rear seat. But I have cut a long hole in the bulkhead box forward
of the front seat. Can store a few small things up there."
>
> Ray -
> The little catch-all in the turtle deck is where you can keep your gloves, leather
helmet, and white silk scarf. Also your aircraft papers.
> Most of us with open cockpit planes do use a rear view mirror mounted under the
center section somewhere. It's nice to watch the big grin on your face as
you fly, so get one of those convex mirrors.
> The white silk scarf is necessary in case you spot a broken flying wire - you
can crawl back and tie it into place with the scarf!
>
> Craig
>
>
> PeoplePC: It's for people. And it's just smart.
> http://www.peoplepc.com
>
>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Bell" <mikebell(at)sc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: A long winded perspective on when to make substitutions |
"Built and run a lot of boats using 250 year old technology"
The thing with boats, is that 250 year old technology was proven technology
for five hundred years before. There are many modern materials that may do
things with less weight and with greater strength, but the old methods were
proven with experience. Common sense suggested what methods to try and
experience proved which actually worked.
Our experience with aircraft is somewhat shorter. Also, as with boats, what
appears to be an obvious solution to a problem can be proven to be incorrect
when tested and the realization that a less obvious factor came into play.
A more complete understanding of a problem can vastly change the common
sense solution.
My understanding of aircraft comes mostly from books. This list suggests
many solutions and resources that I never would have found otherwise. Once
I decide that I want to use something alternate to the original design I
look to AC 43.13 to determine suitability. Within the range of the original
design and AC 43.13, I need to determine only that the two are equivalent.
Outside of this, I must first prove it to myself that it is a reliable
alternative and then I must document so that the FAA inspector can be
equally assured. If reasonable proof is beyond my capabilities, then I have
no business making the change.
A major part of the thrust behind experimental aircraft is education. This
has certainly been the case with me. Learning how an aircraft goes together
and what forces affect it was education that I got with models. Learning
about different construction methods and materials suitable for full size
aircraft has been a large part of what I have gained so far from my
Pietenpol.
If I wanted to build a Pietenpol quickly and at low cost, I would stick
exactly to the plans as the quickest path. Understanding the plans and
43.13 is a huge education in itself. Reaching outside of this envelope is
an even bigger and more challenging education. If you're not prepared to do
the homework, don't go there.
Mike Bell
President and CFO
Gaston Airplane Factory
Gaston, South Carolina
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | securing bungee ends |
Dick----thanks for posting something sane. There are many ways you can
secure the bungee ends. I think Doug Bryant had a good post on this in
the archives. What I did was buy 12 feet of 1/2" diameter aircraft grade
bungee
cord from Wicks. I tried West Marine but it had less rubber strands and
they were
thicker----not as easy to wrap, lets say. I cut the 12 foot length into
two six footers.
Wraped one wrap around the ash gear bearer and the axle and used good quality
nylon tye-wraps with a tye wrap gun. I put about five or next to each
other to make
the first loop. Cut off the excess tye wrap and file the ends smooth so
they won't
chaffe against your subsequent wrapings. I didn't realize how TIGHT you
have to
pull as you make each loop. They will break in over time so if you wrap
them kinda
loose the plane will be hard to handle in cross winds----really. You'll be
putting in
aileron on takeoff roll or landing and the wing will not bite or dig into
the side you
want because the gear is tilted one way or the other. Had this happen
after I replaced
my original set at the Waco fly-in and it was scary buddy. Thank God for
the rudder.
When you finally are done wrapping use a bunch more tye wraps to secure the
last
four or five inches of bungee, cut the excess and file. They are sharp
ends left un-filed.
The other way I've heard/seen guys do this is with hose clamps of the
proper size.
Another method is to lay your bungee across the axle mid-span of the bungee
and then
wrap either end round and round toward each other and secure. Tony B.
talks about
ways to secure bungees too. Some guys use the 5/8" diam. but I've heard
that is a
bear to stretch and wrap. Hope this helps,
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gene Rambo" <rambog(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Re: vertical stabilizer |
Craig, to be purely technical, the aviators of WWI did not wear white silk
scarves, but rather white cotton scarves which were used to wipe castor oil
from the goggles. The castor oil was slung from the rotary engines which
had one-way oiling. One WWI pilot I met told me they would have loved silk
scarves, but silk was too rare. He said that he used a discarded woman's
stocking, and added that he enjoyed obtaining it, whatever that meant. I
believe the neck chafing thing may have come about during WWII. In any
event, a silk scarf to protect the neck would be tucked in, not streaming in
the wind as the cotton ones were.
Gene (tongue also in cheek, but true)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: vertical stabilizer |
In a message dated 2/13/02 7:39:00 AM Eastern Standard Time,
cayecaulker(at)justice.com writes:
<< Now there is a common sense set of ideas and instructions!
I'll buy that! Where do you buy white scarfs and what kind of material
should they be made of? Got to stay technically correct for the purists, you
know.
>>
Fisherman, the scarves worn by WW1 pilots were typically made of silk. Should
be able to find silk scarves, but probably not at Wally World.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ian Holland" <iholland(at)telusplanet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 8 turnbuckles @ $128 |
If you have an industrial site close by and know any mechanics or
stores personnel, ask them if they have any Reynolds 51 industrial
drive chain. If you carefully grind off the riveted end pins, you will
find you have links with exact 3/16 inch holes. Once the pins are
ground, I used a drift pin to remove them. This gives 2 useful links
per go. Often when they charge out the lengths required they will have
1 or 2 feet left over that they throw out. It comes in long lengths. I
explored used chain and found that even though some of the side links
were worn pretty badly, the pin holes were still an interference fit.
You will be left with the inner assembly that has 1/4 inch holes.
Haven't found a use for those links yet. Hope this helps! I couldn't
find motorcycle links either when I started. Some of the chain that I
found was in service on 50HP drives for about 15 years continuous
service, and could still be used. (I didn't)
Good luck,
-=Ian=-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom & Michelle Brant" <tmbrant(at)uswest.net> |
| Subject: | gusset at tail end of fuse |
Wondering if the gusset at the tail end of the fuse is supposed to be on
both sides of each fuse truss. I'm assuming no, but thought I would get
others perspective. After joining the tail section I don't think there
would be any need for it.
Tom B.
MPLS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: gusset at tail end of fuse |
Tom,
You're right. The gussets only go on the "outside" of the fuselage
sides. You might check my post in the archives about fuselage assembly
and wielding the mighty Craftsman belt sander. It takes some work to
cut the angle into the joint, but it's not hard, just be careful.
Larry
Tom & Michelle Brant wrote:
>
>Wondering if the gusset at the tail end of the fuse is supposed to be on
>both sides of each fuse truss. I'm assuming no, but thought I would get
>others perspective. After joining the tail section I don't think there
>would be any need for it.
>
>Tom B.
>MPLS
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: gusset at tail end of fuse |
Tom B.
Yes, a gusset on every joint of the fuse structure. In the front , the
external ply acts as the gusset on the outside( with a gusset on the
inside), and in the rear portion, a gusset on the out and in everywhere.
walt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom & Michelle Brant" <tmbrant(at)uswest.net>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: gusset at tail end of fuse
>
> Wondering if the gusset at the tail end of the fuse is supposed to be on
> both sides of each fuse truss. I'm assuming no, but thought I would get
> others perspective. After joining the tail section I don't think there
> would be any need for it.
>
> Tom B.
> MPLS
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: gusset at tail end of fuse |
No, you don't need to do both sides. In fact, it is a pain to attach
the rudder hinge in there if you do both side. The original builder
of our plane did both sides and had to use wood screws to attach the
hinge that sits right in the middle of the fuselage tail.
I will be cutting out the inside gussets and using AN machine screws
and nuts (or nut plate) to attach that hinge instead - We may even
lose an ounce or two getting rid of those sheets of ply.
Kirk
>
>
>Wondering if the gusset at the tail end of the fuse is supposed to be on
>both sides of each fuse truss. I'm assuming no, but thought I would get
>others perspective. After joining the tail section I don't think there
>would be any need for it.
>
>Tom B.
>MPLS
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Doc Mosher <docshop(at)tds.net> |
| Subject: | Elevator cable slack |
Ken Perkins has a drawing or two of how he reworked the geometry of his
elevator system to remove the slack in the cables. You wanted to know his
address.
I looked in my "Pietenpol Owner Directory" and it reminded me that Ken's
Piet is Ford powered, and is N34KP. He just repainted it year ago, so it
kind of threw some of us who were used to seeing it at Brodhead without his
present bright colors. Nice guy. Drop him a line and ask for his
expertise on the elevator control cable fix.
Doc Mosher
Oshkosh USA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bert Conoly" <bconoly(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator cable slack- Thanks DOC! |
Whew! Finally! A handful of meaningfull posts back to back. I was
beginning to think the future was destined to be comprised of discussions of
white scarves, galvanized right angles, 14 guage wire, and "canned foam
stuff".
Thanks, Doc, for rescuing us!
I would also like to interrupt this rivetting cascade of information and ask
a quasi-serious question. I have a handful of threaded fork ends. I
understand that cut threads are a no-no. But these have a piper part number
on them - so I dont know if they are the good ones or bad ones. Is a cut
thread visibly discernible from a rolled thread? I hate to throw out a
bunch of fork ends that may be useable (and safe). How about it Mike Cuy?
Didn't you use fork ends on your lift struts. Gene Rambo - I bet you know
this. Don Hicks - what do you think?
Oh yeah Dont forget Sun N Fun coming up. Volunteers are needed. E-mail
me off-line if you're interested.
Later Fellas....
Bert
----- Original Message -----
From: "Doc Mosher" <docshop(at)tds.net>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Elevator cable slack
>
> Ken Perkins has a drawing or two of how he reworked the geometry of his
> elevator system to remove the slack in the cables. You wanted to know his
> address.
>
> I looked in my "Pietenpol Owner Directory" and it reminded me that Ken's
> Piet is Ford powered, and is N34KP. He just repainted it year ago, so it
> kind of threw some of us who were used to seeing it at Brodhead without
his
> present bright colors. Nice guy. Drop him a line and ask for his
> expertise on the elevator control cable fix.
>
> Doc Mosher
> Oshkosh USA
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Navratril" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net> |
| Subject: | Re: securing bungee ends |
Thanks Mike for the input. The tywrap idea sounds good to me. I have to
bungee from Wicks, your right, it has much thicker rubber strands than from
the marine stores.
The Piet project is getting hard to put down these days. I'm watching so
many things come together at this point. Cowlings going on, finishing
covering the wing, it's starting to look like a real plane.
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael D Cuy" <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: securing bungee ends
>
> Dick----thanks for posting something sane. There are many ways you can
> secure the bungee ends. I think Doug Bryant had a good post on this in
> the archives. What I did was buy 12 feet of 1/2" diameter aircraft grade
> bungee
> cord from Wicks. I tried West Marine but it had less rubber strands and
> they were
> thicker----not as easy to wrap, lets say. I cut the 12 foot length into
> two six footers.
> Wraped one wrap around the ash gear bearer and the axle and used good
quality
> nylon tye-wraps with a tye wrap gun. I put about five or next to each
> other to make
> the first loop. Cut off the excess tye wrap and file the ends smooth so
> they won't
> chaffe against your subsequent wrapings. I didn't realize how TIGHT you
> have to
> pull as you make each loop. They will break in over time so if you wrap
> them kinda
> loose the plane will be hard to handle in cross winds----really. You'll
be
> putting in
> aileron on takeoff roll or landing and the wing will not bite or dig into
> the side you
> want because the gear is tilted one way or the other. Had this happen
> after I replaced
> my original set at the Waco fly-in and it was scary buddy. Thank God for
> the rudder.
> When you finally are done wrapping use a bunch more tye wraps to secure
the
> last
> four or five inches of bungee, cut the excess and file. They are sharp
> ends left un-filed.
> The other way I've heard/seen guys do this is with hose clamps of the
> proper size.
> Another method is to lay your bungee across the axle mid-span of the
bungee
> and then
> wrap either end round and round toward each other and secure. Tony B.
> talks about
> ways to secure bungees too. Some guys use the 5/8" diam. but I've heard
> that is a
> bear to stretch and wrap. Hope this helps,
>
> Mike C.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | clif <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca> |
I just received my RAA mag today. Theres a Canadian Piet on floats.
Registered CF-AFN in 1935 it was built in Quebec and was around for
a number of years before disappearing off the register. It was powered by
an 80 hp Armstrong-Siddeley 5 cyl radial. Floats look commercial in pic.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Brusilow" <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator cable slack- Thanks DOC! |
----- Original Message -----
From: Bert Conoly
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 10:35 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Elevator cable slack- Thanks DOC!
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Elevator cable slack- Thanks DOC! |
I would also like to interrupt this rivetting cascade of information and ask
a quasi-serious question. I have a handful of threaded fork ends. I
understand that cut threads are a no-no. But these have a piper part number
on them - so I dont know if they are the good ones or bad ones. Is a cut
thread visibly discernible from a rolled thread? I hate to throw out a
bunch of fork ends that may be useable (and safe). How about it Mike Cuy?
Didn't you use fork ends on your lift struts. Gene Rambo - I bet you know
this. Don Hicks - what do you think?
Bert
Bert, there is nothing wrong with cut threads (all your AN hardware has cut
threads), it's just that rolled threads are stronger, particularly in
regards to fatigue strength. If you are really concerned, take them to a
shop that has a magnaflux machine and have them inspected for cracks, or buy
a dye pentrant inspection kit (Wick's and Aircraft Spruce both sell these
kits) and inspect them yourself.
You can tell rolled threads from cut threads very easily - cut threads will
always have the major diameter of the threads to be no larger than the shank
diameter of the rod (the diameter before the threads were cut). Rolled
threads have the major diameter of the thread larger than the shank
diameter, because the metal is upset and "squished" out to form the threads.
This is what makes them stronger, they are sort of "cold-forged" into the
metal, with smooth thread roots (the valley between the threads) whereas cut
threads tend to have sharp valleys, which tend to concentrate the stresses
at the valleys, leading to fatigue failures.
As Mike Brusilow said, if they have "Piper" stamped on them, they are
probably fine, unless they look very rusty or obviously worn.
Good Luck,
Jack Phillips
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | White Silk Scarfs |
Brackets! I bought and used those right angled Hardware brackets. They
worked very good on the six brackets needed for the bottom of the
stabilizer. Two holes in the frame and two holes in the stabilizer. But I
decided to use them for the rigging wires on the horizontal stabilizer and
the upper connection on the vertical stabilizer. I am not happy with the
result. I do suppose they are strong enough, but am going to change them
all. Lose two days work. When you put those preformed right angle hardware
brackets on a piece of iron I have, and hit them with a hammer to flatten
out the angle, they bend at one of the holes. These things are narrow,
about 1/2 inch. Still it is steel and they are probably strong enough. But
the doubts I have, after all those YOU WILL DIE! flames on the list, make me
wonder how they would stand up to vibration. I have no clue how much
vibration might happen back there in the tail. I notice the plans call for
a wider piece of steel by!
1/8 inch. Even so, these hardware steel brackets on each side of the
pre-drilled hole, where they bend when you whack them with a hammer on a
piece of iron are probably thicker slightly and stronger than the 14 guage
soft hardware store wire. But it is the vibration aspects and the idea they
might work and break eventually that worries me. I could not get the angle
that they come in, to bend, they always bend where the screw hole is,
weakening the structure. So I guess, I am going to Home Depot today and see
if they have any 5/8 or 3/4 strap flat iron lengths, that I can cut and
drill and bend in my teeny little vice ( if it doesnt break first ), as in
the plans.
Fisherman,
Please (and I think I have said this before) get the Tony Bingelis books
before you start making the fittings for this plane. Airplanes are not
boats, and they certainly are not homes. The hardware and strap steel you
can buy at a hardware store are made of the cheapest possible steel that
they can get away with. It is very soft, yet not very ductile and work
hardens rapidly, resulting in fractures. If you are lucky, it will crack
and break in two while you are forming it. More likely, it will crack but
not be visible and the crack won't propogate until you are at 1,000' over a
mangraove swamp full of hungry alligators.
Please use 4130 chrome-moly steel for your fittings. It is not very
expensive and is available from a number of sources, including Aircraft
Spruce & Specialty (www.aircraftspruce.com) , Wick's aircraft Supply
(www.wicksaircraft.com) , or (my personal favorite) Dillsburg Aeroplane
Works in Pennsylvania (114 Sawmill Rd., Dillsburg, PA 17019,
tel.717-432-4589).
This airplane is held together by all those fittings, and the best wood and
strongest glue is useless if the fittings break. One of the things the
Bingelis books teach is to bend the fittings first, then drill the holes.
You just learned this lesson the hard way.
If you are really in a hurry to make these fittings, and haven't yet got
your copy of Tony's books, you can also pull up the articles on the EAA's
website. Go to www.EAA.org , then go to the member's only section (you ARE
a member of EAA aren't you?). Under Homebuilder's Headquarters you will
find a section called "Articles by Author". Under that section you will
find Tony Bingelis. If you look through all his articles listed, you will
find 3 articles called "Making Fittings", Parts 1, 2, and 3. I could not
get the figures to pull up, but maybe you can. If not, at least the text
should help you, and maybe this will convince you that almost every question
you will have (and there will be many more) as you build this plane can be
answered in one of Tony's books.
Jack Phillips
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Fork ends and barrels |
Bert----YES.....I used rolled fork ends on all four struts. Cut threads
are not the way to go. Our IA showed me w/ a magnifying glass the
difference. I'm told the older struts on some Cubs had to be replaced
w/ rolled vs. cut threaded fork ends and some concern over corrosion.
The rolled threads look smoother where the thread starts and on the
peaks. You can buy the fork ends thru Wicks and possibly Dillsburg Aeroplane
Works (PA.....717-432-4589) I found some used fork ends and had them
magnafluxed prior to using them. (rolled type) Although expensive I purchased
new streamlined strut material from Dillsburg, some weldable 4130 threaded
barrels (Wicks) to accept the adjustable fork ends, and it all worked out well.
Many less expensive ways to do the strut ends----you can cut some costs
by going w/ the plans which work just fine, or doing just the rear struts as
adjustable for washout/rigging purposes, or go w/ all four. I copied Frankie
Pavliga and his Dad's setup w/ all four being adjustable. This is what lets me
put in or take out dihedral/washout/in....etc. Sorry, more than you
asked about
but at least something other listers can use------if they care to take any
advice.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fork ends and barrels |
| From: | John Hofmann <jhofmann(at)charter.net> |
Pieties!
I wrote a post a month or two ago outlining the Piper lift strut AD and
where to find cheap struts. I may have the AD posted on the web still. One
should be able to research the post in the archives. The gist of it was you
can find old Piper lift struts that had to be replaced (J-3 Cub to PA-22
Tri-Pacer) because of the cut threads on the strut ends. Well when a person
has to shell out $1200 - $2000 for new struts they find it hard to part with
the old ones. If you see a hangar with a ragwing Piper, look in the rafters.
I bet 50% of the time you will find an old set of struts up there. These
things are all over the place. They make good Pietenpol struts by cutting
off the old forks and adding new ones per Mike's post. You will have to cut
the struts anyway as the Piper ones are two long.
As I get my shop and project up to speed, I may start just hunting these
down for guys who may need them. I am always scrounging around old
airplanes/airports.
Adjustable struts will make life a lot easier, trust me. It is much easier
to rig a plane when you only have to make a small adjustment on a strut end
here or there.
-john-
Still a kinda young pup of 37 living about 70 years ago
>
>
> Bert----YES.....I used rolled fork ends on all four struts. Cut threads
> are not the way to go. Our IA showed me w/ a magnifying glass the
> difference. I'm told the older struts on some Cubs had to be replaced
> w/ rolled vs. cut threaded fork ends and some concern over corrosion.
> The rolled threads look smoother where the thread starts and on the
> peaks. You can buy the fork ends thru Wicks and possibly Dillsburg Aeroplane
> Works (PA.....717-432-4589) I found some used fork ends and had them
> magnafluxed prior to using them. (rolled type) Although expensive I
> purchased
> new streamlined strut material from Dillsburg, some weldable 4130 threaded
> barrels (Wicks) to accept the adjustable fork ends, and it all worked out
> well.
> Many less expensive ways to do the strut ends----you can cut some costs
> by going w/ the plans which work just fine, or doing just the rear struts as
> adjustable for washout/rigging purposes, or go w/ all four. I copied Frankie
> Pavliga and his Dad's setup w/ all four being adjustable. This is what lets
> me
> put in or take out dihedral/washout/in....etc. Sorry, more than you
> asked about
> but at least something other listers can use------if they care to take any
> advice.
>
> Mike C.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
| Subject: | White Silk Scarfs |
Jack
Thankyou for the detailed explanation and for taking the time to do it. I respond
to that positively. I have read that 4130 chrome-moly stuff before, but
to me steel is steel isn't it? But will see what I can do on getting some?
When you don't know what you want, or how to get it, what do you do? I mean does
this steel comes in 4' x 8' sheets or what? Different thicknesses. I kind
of like to go into a store and see what I am buying. Ask a few questions.
For an ignorant person, there really isn't any other way to compare.
Your comments on cheap soft steel, soft, ductile, work hardens, hit a chord of
familiarity I can identify with. But I really have no metallurgy experience,
so it is a complicated technical thing to understand for the layperson. But
I get you. Will call the local Aviation Supply House and see what they have
on hand? Trouble is, you can't see anything in that darned place from the counter
and if you don't know the sizes and thickness you want, it is hard to talk
sense to clerks dealing in parts numbers. They haven't got the time or patience
to deal with a homebuilding idiot.
But I definitely appreciate the well intentioned advice here.
Went to Home Depot an hour ago. They had 3/4 strap steel, then I found the same
size in aluminum. Weighed the two, talked a bit with a Hindu sales guy who
took the time to discuss matters with me, in light of his on the job experience.
Anyway, bought the aluminum strap home. Also bought a 4 ft rod of 1/8 steel
I guess, something or other. I guess with that, you would put eyes in the
ends and eliminate a lot of problems. Then I was looking at wires. Do you
know they have stainless steel wire, multi-strand in 50 lb and 100 lb strengths?
So I bought a roll of that ( 100 lb strength) , to play with on the stabilizers.
Took another look at that stabilizer. If it was a kite ( I have experience with
flying competition kites on Miami Beach ) I could hold that stabilizer myself
against a 20 knot wind. It is not that big. So wondered what the pressure
on it might be? I could presumably use that 100 lb stainless steel multi-filament
wire for braces?
Not to annoy Mike here, but my jabbering is helpful to me, to explain my own
thought processes to someone else. Not all of us, have the technical expertise
and there seem to be at least four builders are about where I am on this building
project and entering, or solving the same set of problems on this list.
My comments should be of interest to them. Certainly Mike and many others have
been there and done that, routine. So, I guess I and friends on this list
with a bit of levity
thrown in, can be annoying to the High Priests of esoteric intricate machine shop
expertise and knowledge.
There are people who are just curious, I'm one. I kind of like to explore fifty
different ways of doing something and select for myself. Usually this ends
up the same thing the experts said, way back in the beginning. It's a learning
process, and I enjoy it this way. To the pain of my pocket book though.
Okay on the bend them first and drill the holes afterward. Wish somebody had
mentioned that valuable nugget of knowledge a week ago.
The Tony Bingelis books are on order from the library, have no idea when they
will get here? Apparently there is only one library that has them, and the Library
of Congress. Got some novels of my own out there also. Four of them.
Rainy and drizzly today, can't work outside, but can diddle with metal pieces.
My scanner quit getting recognized and is driving me nuts, I cannot scan those
photos of my construction up to the website.
Will try the EAA website.
-------------------
For Mike and those of like mind, back in the 1960's or 1970's, Sport Aviation
had an excellent article printed around March or April, about this guy got a
war surplus plane engine, 12 or 16 cylinders and 4 bladed propeller. Tremendous
thousand or more horsepower. Anyway he built a homebuilt plane around the
engine, using consruction 2" x 4"'s and such. Surplus lumber and was afraid
to have the FAA inspector check it out. But couldn't resist putting a 55 gallon
drum of fuel in the spare seat ( might have been an Avenger engine ? ) and
taxing around the field. Unfortunately, when he touched the gas, he was flying
before he knew it and ended going straight up, hanging on this 4 bladed propeller
for dear life. Eventually it barrel rolled and came on down, and with the
last few spurts of gasoline sputtering away, he managed to land it in his pasture.
This story has stayed with me for 30 or 40 years. Wonderful story, with
an excellent surprise punch line at the end. I suggest those with straight
laced minds, might find that story educational in the extreme. For a story
to linger in my brain for 30 or 40 years from the EAA magazine, this has to be
the best one of all time. Look it up!
------------------
Ray Auxillou
-------------------------------------------
On Thu, 14 February 2002, "Jack Phillips" wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Brackets! I bought and used those right angled Hardware brackets. They
> worked very good on the six brackets needed for the bottom of the
> stabilizer. Two holes in the frame and two holes in the stabilizer. But I
> decided to use them for the rigging wires on the horizontal stabilizer and
> the upper connection on the vertical stabilizer. I am not happy with the
> result. I do suppose they are strong enough, but am going to change them
> all. Lose two days work. When you put those preformed right angle hardware
> brackets on a piece of iron I have, and hit them with a hammer to flatten
> out the angle, they bend at one of the holes. These things are narrow,
> about 1/2 inch. Still it is steel and they are probably strong enough. But
> the doubts I have, after all those YOU WILL DIE! flames on the list, make me
> wonder how they would stand up to vibration. I have no clue how much
> vibration might happen back there in the tail. I notice the plans call for
> a wider piece of steel by!
> 1/8 inch. Even so, these hardware steel brackets on each side of the
> pre-drilled hole, where they bend when you whack them with a hammer on a
> piece of iron are probably thicker slightly and stronger than the 14 guage
> soft hardware store wire. But it is the vibration aspects and the idea they
> might work and break eventually that worries me. I could not get the angle
> that they come in, to bend, they always bend where the screw hole is,
> weakening the structure. So I guess, I am going to Home Depot today and see
> if they have any 5/8 or 3/4 strap flat iron lengths, that I can cut and
> drill and bend in my teeny little vice ( if it doesnt break first ), as in
> the plans.
>
> Fisherman,
>
> Please (and I think I have said this before) get the Tony Bingelis books
> before you start making the fittings for this plane. Airplanes are not
> boats, and they certainly are not homes. The hardware and strap steel you
> can buy at a hardware store are made of the cheapest possible steel that
> they can get away with. It is very soft, yet not very ductile and work
> hardens rapidly, resulting in fractures. If you are lucky, it will crack
> and break in two while you are forming it. More likely, it will crack but
> not be visible and the crack won't propogate until you are at 1,000' over a
> mangraove swamp full of hungry alligators.
>
> Please use 4130 chrome-moly steel for your fittings. It is not very
> expensive and is available from a number of sources, including Aircraft
> Spruce & Specialty (www.aircraftspruce.com) , Wick's aircraft Supply
> (www.wicksaircraft.com) , or (my personal favorite) Dillsburg Aeroplane
> Works in Pennsylvania (114 Sawmill Rd., Dillsburg, PA 17019,
> tel.717-432-4589).
>
> This airplane is held together by all those fittings, and the best wood and
> strongest glue is useless if the fittings break. One of the things the
> Bingelis books teach is to bend the fittings first, then drill the holes.
> You just learned this lesson the hard way.
>
> If you are really in a hurry to make these fittings, and haven't yet got
> your copy of Tony's books, you can also pull up the articles on the EAA's
> website. Go to www.EAA.org , then go to the member's only section (you ARE
> a member of EAA aren't you?). Under Homebuilder's Headquarters you will
> find a section called "Articles by Author". Under that section you will
> find Tony Bingelis. If you look through all his articles listed, you will
> find 3 articles called "Making Fittings", Parts 1, 2, and 3. I could not
> get the figures to pull up, but maybe you can. If not, at least the text
> should help you, and maybe this will convince you that almost every question
> you will have (and there will be many more) as you build this plane can be
> answered in one of Tony's books.
>
> Jack Phillips
>
>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: White Silk Scarfs |
| From: | John Hofmann <jhofmann(at)charter.net> |
I have posted steel information from AC43-13 here:
http://www.johnnyskyrocket.com/piet/1r-ch4_1.pdf.
Good reading on what the numbers mean. Ray, if you decide to use aluminium
for the ass-end brackets, can you put me in your will for some of those new
power tools you had to buy? :)
-john-
> Jack
>
> Thankyou for the detailed explanation and for taking the time to do it. I
> respond to that positively. I have read that 4130 chrome-moly stuff before,
> but to me steel is steel isn't it? But will see what I can do on getting
> some? When you don't know what you want, or how to get it, what do you do?
I
> mean does this steel comes in 4' x 8' sheets or what? Different thicknesses.
> I kind of like to go into a store and see what I am buying. Ask a few
> questions. For an ignorant person, there really isn't any other way to
> compare.
>
> Your comments on cheap soft steel, soft, ductile, work hardens, hit a chord of
> familiarity I can identify with. But I really have no metallurgy experience,
> so it is a complicated technical thing to understand for the layperson. But
I
> get you. Will call the local Aviation Supply House and see what they have on
> hand? Trouble is, you can't see anything in that darned place from the
> counter and if you don't know the sizes and thickness you want, it is hard to
> talk sense to clerks dealing in parts numbers. They haven't got the time or
> patience to deal with a homebuilding idiot.
> But I definitely appreciate the well intentioned advice here.
>
> Went to Home Depot an hour ago. They had 3/4 strap steel, then I found the
> same size in aluminum. Weighed the two, talked a bit with a Hindu sales guy
> who took the time to discuss matters with me, in light of his on the job
> experience. Anyway, bought the aluminum strap home. Also bought a 4 ft rod
> of 1/8 steel I guess, something or other. I guess with that, you would put
> eyes in the ends and eliminate a lot of problems. Then I was looking at
> wires. Do you know they have stainless steel wire, multi-strand in 50 lb and
> 100 lb strengths? So I bought a roll of that ( 100 lb strength) , to play
> with on the stabilizers.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kip & Beth Gardner <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | White Silk Scarfs |
>
>
>Jack
>
> Thankyou for the detailed explanation and for taking the time to do it.
>I respond to that positively. I have read that 4130 chrome-moly stuff
>before, but to me steel is steel isn't it? But will see what I can do on
>getting some? When you don't know what you want, or how to get it, what
>do you do? I mean does this steel comes in 4' x 8' sheets or what?
>Different thicknesses. I kind of like to go into a store and see what I
>am buying. Ask a few questions. For an ignorant person, there really
>isn't any other way to compare.
>
> Your comments on cheap soft steel, soft, ductile, work hardens, hit a
>chord of familiarity I can identify with. But I really have no metallurgy
>experience, so it is a complicated technical thing to understand for the
>layperson. But I get you. Will call the local Aviation Supply House and
>see what they have on hand? Trouble is, you can't see anything in that
>darned place from the counter and if you don't know the sizes and
>thickness you want, it is hard to talk sense to clerks dealing in parts
>numbers. They haven't got the time or patience to deal with a
>homebuilding idiot.
> But I definitely appreciate the well intentioned advice here.
Ray,
The best advice Jack gave you (after "get the Bingelis books" ) was to look
up the articles on the EAA web site. There are lots of other articles
covering just about every topic of construction you might have questions
about.
Metallurgy for aircraft does not have to be that complicated! Go to the
library and peruse the books on metalworking if nothing else, but really,
you won't go wrong if you get 4130 and work with it properly (read those
articles!). The sizes & thicknesses you need are on the plans (although I
believe for sheet stock they are in gauge #'s rather than inches - don't
have my plans in front of me). Find a standard shop reference that has
conversion factors & you should be able to figure it out.
As far as sources, you should be able to find a local STEEL supplier that
will sell you small amounts & you can probably make all the fittings you
need from a couple of 2 x 2' sheets & some tubing. Don't bother any more
with your local aircraft parts store - they only want to deal with (as you
found out) part numbers - mainly because they only want to sell to people
with certificated aircraft. We have the same problem here in OH.
This leads to the OTHER good advice Jack gave you a while ago, namely get
the Aircraft Spruce & Specialty catalog, which you can order for free, from
their web site. Even if you don't buy anything from them, it has lots of
information that will help you.
But, by far the BEST advice Jack has given is "BUY the bingelis books"!
Even if you get them from the library, you'll need them for much longer
than the library will let you keep them. Besides, they will be an
invaluable reference when you need to do repairs.
As for people with 'their noses in the air' - well there is a lot of
experience on this list, much of it hard-won, & it kind of bends folks out
of joint when you ask advice & then come back with some half-cocked idea in
response because you didn't like their answers (or how much you think their
answers are going to cost you). As far as I'm concerned, it's not good,
safe engineering unless you can back it up with numbers. It seem to me that
a lot of what you are trying to do to keep your costs down falls way
outside of that envelope of safety. I spent enough time at sea to know that
there are some things you don't take chances with if you don't have to & I
am striving to apply that concept to my project. For me, spending some
extra $ to get materials that have been tested & evaluated is a 'have to' &
if that makes me a 'purist', so be it!
Cheers!
Kip Gardner (St. Kipper the Purist )
A
426 Schneider St. SE
North Canton, OH 44720
(330) 494-1775
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kent Hallsten <KHallsten(at)governair.com> |
I can't test this at this time, so I thought I'd toss this out to the group.
Does anyone know if zinc cold galvanizing spray paint is comparable to the
zinc phosphate/oxide aircraft stuff? I can get a few cans at work.
Our weld shop (HVAC company) uses the galvanized spray over the welds. I
wonder if it holds up under the chemicals used in aircraft covering?
Kent Hallsten
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary McNeel, Jr." <gmcneel(at)mykitplane.com> |
| Subject: | Fork ends and barrels |
If you find any extras, let me know. I will do the same. -Gary
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of John
> Hofmann
> Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 10:21 AM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fork ends and barrels
>
>
> Pieties!
>
> I wrote a post a month or two ago outlining the Piper lift strut AD and
> where to find cheap struts. I may have the AD posted on the web still. One
> should be able to research the post in the archives. The gist of
> it was you
> can find old Piper lift struts that had to be replaced (J-3 Cub to PA-22
> Tri-Pacer) because of the cut threads on the strut ends. Well
> when a person
> has to shell out $1200 - $2000 for new struts they find it hard
> to part with
> the old ones. If you see a hangar with a ragwing Piper, look in
> the rafters.
> I bet 50% of the time you will find an old set of struts up there. These
> things are all over the place. They make good Pietenpol struts by cutting
> off the old forks and adding new ones per Mike's post. You will
> have to cut
> the struts anyway as the Piper ones are two long.
>
> As I get my shop and project up to speed, I may start just hunting these
> down for guys who may need them. I am always scrounging around old
> airplanes/airports.
>
> Adjustable struts will make life a lot easier, trust me. It is much easier
> to rig a plane when you only have to make a small adjustment on a
> strut end
> here or there.
>
> -john-
>
> Still a kinda young pup of 37 living about 70 years ago
>
>
> >
> >
> > Bert----YES.....I used rolled fork ends on all four struts.
> Cut threads
> > are not the way to go. Our IA showed me w/ a magnifying glass the
> > difference. I'm told the older struts on some Cubs had to be replaced
> > w/ rolled vs. cut threaded fork ends and some concern over corrosion.
> > The rolled threads look smoother where the thread starts and on the
> > peaks. You can buy the fork ends thru Wicks and possibly
> Dillsburg Aeroplane
> > Works (PA.....717-432-4589) I found some used fork ends and had them
> > magnafluxed prior to using them. (rolled type) Although expensive I
> > purchased
> > new streamlined strut material from Dillsburg, some weldable
> 4130 threaded
> > barrels (Wicks) to accept the adjustable fork ends, and it all
> worked out
> > well.
> > Many less expensive ways to do the strut ends----you can cut some costs
> > by going w/ the plans which work just fine, or doing just the
> rear struts as
> > adjustable for washout/rigging purposes, or go w/ all four. I
> copied Frankie
> > Pavliga and his Dad's setup w/ all four being adjustable. This
> is what lets
> > me
> > put in or take out dihedral/washout/in....etc. Sorry, more than you
> > asked about
> > but at least something other listers can use------if they care
> to take any
> > advice.
> >
> > Mike C.
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JamesJboyer(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: White Silk Scarfs |
Hi Ray,
You can buy strips of 4130 steel from Aircraft Spruce and Spec. in widths
from 1/2" on up to 1 foot I believe. I bought almost all my steel that way.
The strips come in 72" lengths. You can also buy in 6x6, 6x12, 6x18, etc.
Just about any way you want that makes it easy to size to the required
fittings.
I call in my orders and usually they only take a week to get here. so gives a
lot of time to lay out patterns to cut from ( use rubber cement to glue them
to the steel).
Good luck Ray,
Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ric Ryburn" <ric(at)srclink.net> |
No, the spray is not the same.
The coating applied to hardware is an electrochemical process, and cannot be
readily reproduced using "at home" techniques.
Not that the spray stuff may not be useful... I've never used it before. If
you try it, let me know what you find!
Greetings, btw.
I'm new to the list, but not to aviation, homebuilding, or piets.
For several years, I've helped maintain the Sky Scout at the Airpower Museum
( http://www.aaa-apm.org/apm/collection/PietenpolScout.html ) and have flown
a few Air Campers. I currently work at a large FBO in Norfolk, VA as a recip
specialist, mostly Cessnas of late. Been around aviation my whole life, my
family owned and ran an FBO for 15 years, and I've been working on aircraft
off and on for the last thirty years or so.
Good list, and I'm glad to be here!
Ric Ryburn
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Kent
> Hallsten
> Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 4:42 PM
> To: 'pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com'
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Zinc primer
>
>
>
>
> I can't test this at this time, so I thought I'd toss this out to
> the group.
> Does anyone know if zinc cold galvanizing spray paint is comparable to the
> zinc phosphate/oxide aircraft stuff? I can get a few cans at work.
> Our weld shop (HVAC company) uses the galvanized spray over the welds. I
> wonder if it holds up under the chemicals used in aircraft covering?
>
> Kent Hallsten
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DonanClara(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator cable slack- Thanks DOC! |
In a message dated 02/13/2002 9:36:21 PM Central Standard Time,
bconoly(at)home.com writes:
<< I hate to throw out a
bunch of fork ends that may be useable (and safe). How about it Mike Cuy?
Didn't you use fork ends on your lift struts. Gene Rambo - I bet you know
this. Don Hicks - what do you think? >>
Bert...Have always avoided using cut threads on any critical applications but
have to admit I have never seen any testing info comparing the two. Just
don't want to play the guinnea pig. I wouldn't throw the cut ones out until
you have seen some expert analysis. I have held my tongue regarding the
recent garbage out of respect for the List Guidlines and the need to avoid
personal comments but am happy to see that those with a great deal more
diplomacy than I have addressed the issue. Thank goodness for level heads.
Don Hicks
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | clif <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | fisherman-steel,books,etc. |
Fish, why not find the nearest EAA chapter and join up? You'll make good friends
that will be of innestimable help with information, book and video loans( most
chapters
have a library) sources of materials and parts, both new and used and some good,clean
aerioplane fun Clif
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | clif <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca> |
----- Original Message -----
From: clif <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: RAA?
> Sorry about that. The Recreational Aircraft Association is our Canadian
> conterpart
> to the EAA. It works closely with our government to keep sportflying alive
> and
> well here. One thing the organization is responsible for that the EAA has
> chosen
> not to be is the final inspection and sign off of homebuilts. This keeps
it
> all in the
> family, so to speak. The magazine is equivalent to Sport Aviation of the
Eaa
> so
> you won't see it on news stands.
> Web site is www.inforamp.net/~raac
> The organization that wants info on Canadian homebuilts from the 20's and
> 30's
> is the Canada Aviation Museum at www.aeroweb-.org/muaeum/ont/cnam.htm
> Apprently there were some 75 known piets and heaths completed as well as a
> number of pou's since some of us are interested in these.
> Clif at
> CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.com
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: twinboom <twinboom(at)msn.com>
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 6:42 AM
> Subject: RAA?
>
>
> > C Dawson?
> > No signature at the end of your e-mail. What is the RAA magazine?
I'm
> in
> > So. Cal and have not seen that mag ion the newsatands.....curious minds.
> >
> >
> > Doug Blackburn, Arrowbear Lake, So. Cal.
> > Inland Slope Rebels, Riverside Ca.
> > <http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/ISR>
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
| Subject: | Re: White Silk Scarfs |
Jim
That is interesting, the note on one week delivery from Aircraft Spruce. I am
kind of curious about ordering and how they deliver? Is it by ordinary mail?
I mean, if I don't know what I want, and I order one six foot piece to try
out, it could get very expensive by Fed Ex for example. Usually, I just buy different
things and start monkeying around with them, to see how they would fit
and work. How do they send you one six foot piece of 4130 steel, 5/8" wide?
Will do a lot of checking around today, to see if I just can't get 4130 locally.
There must be a source, we have a variety of major and small airports in
this metropolitan County?
So far, the building has been all wood, a medium I am totally familiar with.
Or fiberglass, or ferro cement. But when it gets into metallurgy, I am experience
deficient, obviously.
Ray
P.S.
To Pietenpol owner/flyers.
As an added note, I am sort of curious about the flying range of a Pietenpol?
Any of you owners care to elaborate? I figure roughly speaking depending on
wind, that against the wind, you fly around 35 mph low speed and with the wind
about 75 mph. top speed. We are close to the Bahamas here and was just idly
contemplating an island hopping trip, when I am done. The boat show this weekend
has my travel itch salivating.
On Thu, 14 February 2002, JamesJboyer(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> Hi Ray,
>
> You can buy strips of 4130 steel from Aircraft Spruce and Spec. in widths
> from 1/2" on up to 1 foot I believe. I bought almost all my steel that way.
> The strips come in 72" lengths. You can also buy in 6x6, 6x12, 6x18, etc.
> Just about any way you want that makes it easy to size to the required
> fittings.
>
> I call in my orders and usually they only take a week to get here. so gives a
> lot of time to lay out patterns to cut from ( use rubber cement to glue them
> to the steel).
>
> Good luck Ray,
>
> Jim
>
>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary McNeel, Jr." <gmcneel(at)mykitplane.com> |
Super! Welcome to the list. Get ready to answer some questions.
Regards,
Gary P. McNeel, Jr.
MyKitPlane.com
EAA 665957
gmcneel(at)mykitplane.com
http://www.mykitplane.com
"What's the hurry? Are you afraid I won't come back?"
Manfred von Richthofen, 'The Red Baron,' last recorded words, in reply to
a request for an autograph as he was climbing into the cockpit of his plane.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ric
> Ryburn
> Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 11:31 PM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Zinc primer
>
>
> No, the spray is not the same.
>
> The coating applied to hardware is an electrochemical process,
> and cannot be
> readily reproduced using "at home" techniques.
> Not that the spray stuff may not be useful... I've never used it
> before. If
> you try it, let me know what you find!
>
> Greetings, btw.
> I'm new to the list, but not to aviation, homebuilding, or piets.
> For several years, I've helped maintain the Sky Scout at the
> Airpower Museum
> ( http://www.aaa-apm.org/apm/collection/PietenpolScout.html ) and
> have flown
> a few Air Campers. I currently work at a large FBO in Norfolk, VA
> as a recip
> specialist, mostly Cessnas of late. Been around aviation my whole life, my
> family owned and ran an FBO for 15 years, and I've been working
> on aircraft
> off and on for the last thirty years or so.
>
> Good list, and I'm glad to be here!
>
> Ric Ryburn
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Kent
> > Hallsten
> > Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 4:42 PM
> > To: 'pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com'
> > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Zinc primer
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I can't test this at this time, so I thought I'd toss this out to
> > the group.
> > Does anyone know if zinc cold galvanizing spray paint is
> comparable to the
> > zinc phosphate/oxide aircraft stuff? I can get a few cans at work.
> > Our weld shop (HVAC company) uses the galvanized spray over
> the welds. I
> > wonder if it holds up under the chemicals used in aircraft covering?
> >
> > Kent Hallsten
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | lshutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan) |
Maybe we should forget the list rules just as Fish has chosen to forget
common sense and safe building practices and safe materials. We say
don't use bail wire and he suggests rope to brace his tail. He has made
statements already that have legal ramifications when (not if) he kills
himself on his first test flight. I feel sorry for Home Depot when his
heirs and their lawyers tare into them for supplying non airworthy
material to him to build an airplane as if it was their fault. Ever
wonder why people run away screaming when you say airplane? Next Matt D.
and Matronics will be guilty by association. Remember the Int. Piet.
Ass.? Haven heard from them since the law suit they had to fight there
way out of. They beat the suit, but went broke doing it. Last week some
one told him that no FAA examiner in his right mind will give him an
airworthiness cert. He said in writing, on this sight (traceable back to
him) that he would fly with or without the c of a. In other words "I'm
going t brake the law". At that point we all should have raised our
voices and told him to unsubscribed and get lost immediately. By not
doing so we are on the same plane as the students who hear those wack
job kids who say that they are gong to bring a gun to school and kill
people, and don't tell the authorities. I'm sure those same lawyers will
be glad to add the names of each subscriber to any law suit they would
bring foreward. We are polite to him with good advise which he simply
ignores. Fisherman, some things should not be, you building an airplane
is one of them. You and your cheap skate construction are going to ruin
it for all of us. Your death will be another coffin nail in general and
sport aviation. A negative we don't need. I'm going to send a note to
Matt and ask him to ban Fisherman from the list before he gets us all
sued. If he doesn't go, I will. I can't be a part of his nuttiness. Leon
S. PS Fisherman< don,t waste your money on the Bengiles books.
They are ful of good advise which you will also ignore because he
dosn't recoment buying your mateial at a hardware store.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Warren D. Shoun" <wbnb(at)earthlink.net> |
Hi Leon,
This guy has scared the living be-jesus out of me also, with his
determination to build his Piet for $3000.00 regardless of safety issues, and
then buy a $1200.00 parachute, "just in case".
From his postings, I believe that he is a member of EAA Chapter 37. If it
is possible to gain the benefit of his membership there, and have the tech
counselor, officers and members get involved in this, I think it would be a
good thing. It may still be possible to salvage his efforts and keep our
flying privileges in tact.
I have also sent an offline note to Fish asking that he consider the
impact to the rest of the homebuilt community with his clear intention to fly
this thing with or without legal paperwork. If he continues to proceed in this
direction, we really do need to ask for an "intervention" by that EAA
Chapter. Your legal concerns do have a certain degree of validity, especially
now that this entire organization has received what easily qualifies as
"Notice" of his intentions to break the law and avoid most of the "ordinary
and accepted building practices" for homebuilt aircraft.
If any other subscriber is familiar with this EAA Chapter, please contact
me off line.
~Cheers,
~Warren
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Owen Davies" <owen(at)davies.mv.com> |
Among other things, Leon Stefan wrote:
> Fisherman, some things should not be, you building an airplane
> is one of them. You and your cheap skate construction are going to ruin
> it for all of us. Your death will be another coffin nail in general and
> sport aviation.
All this would be true if the Fish Guy were serious. I plain don't believe
it.
He's just pulling your chain, LHAO at how he's gotten to you. Relax, Leon.
Ignore him. If we all do, maybe he'll go away.
Gotta get used to it. The anonymity of e-mail brings out the a**ho!e
in some people. That's why e-mail sofware comes with a bozo filter.
Fish Guy hasn't gotten into mine yet, because at least he isn't overtly
abusive, like too many of the clowns I've run into on the Net. But the
day could come.
Owen Davies
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JamesJboyer(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: White Silk Scarfs |
Hi Ray,
I ordered two separate batches of steel from AS&S. The first batch was 4 or 5
strips and they just wrapped them together in three spots with tape and
wrapped the bunch in brown paper. I think it came UPS, but it came while I
was at work so am not sure.
The second bunch was just two strips and they taped it to a piece of wood 6
feet long and 2" wide and wrapped it in brown paper. The wood was very light,
in fact I found it very useful as backup strips when drilling mounting holes
for some of the Piet fittings.
Cheers, Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JamesJboyer(at)aol.com |
Why not continue to offer good advice and less vindictiveness. He has a right
to his opinion just as we have a right to voice ours.
Who knows he might even appreciate the good information. I for one would
rather have that than the waste fo space your message is.
Cheers, Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
Agreed,
I still maintain that he's pulling everyone's leg. I see this regularly
on other groups. Ours is a quiet little backwater and most of us are
not used to seeing these trolls.
One of the real dangers is that everyone gets thrown into a tizzie and
good working relationships are lost. Some trolls live for the
confrontation and are very adept at playing on emotions. Let's not let
that happen here.
I should point out that it's possible that he's up front. If so it
won't hurt to go on record as trying to dissuade him from bad
construction. Who knows you might save this guy's life rather than tick
him off and send him away to build on his own. I've also seen these
controversial figures turn out to be great list members once they get
the hang of it.
But the "fisherman" handle says it all for me. He's fishing, playing
his game, a benign one by comparison to others, but he's enjoying poking
fun at everything in sight. Personally, I don't mind too much. I think
I benefit from a reality check every now and then. I'd hate to wake up
one day to realize I've become a stuffed shirt.
Larry
Owen Davies wrote:
>
>Among other things, Leon Stefan wrote:
>
>>Fisherman, some things should not be, you building an airplane
>>is one of them. You and your cheap skate construction are going to ruin
>>it for all of us. Your death will be another coffin nail in general and
>>sport aviation.
>>
>
>All this would be true if the Fish Guy were serious. I plain don't believe
>it.
>He's just pulling your chain, LHAO at how he's gotten to you. Relax, Leon.
>Ignore him. If we all do, maybe he'll go away.
>
>Gotta get used to it. The anonymity of e-mail brings out the a**ho!e
>in some people. That's why e-mail sofware comes with a bozo filter.
>
>Fish Guy hasn't gotten into mine yet, because at least he isn't overtly
>abusive, like too many of the clowns I've run into on the Net. But the
>day could come.
>
>Owen Davies
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Warren D. Shoun" <wbnb(at)earthlink.net> |
Jim,
Your point is well taken, and if we should see and hear any indication that
Fish just might take any of the good advice that he has been given these past few
weeks, I will most happily join your side of the table.
His Home Depot sourcing and "that'l have to do" construction techniques don't
bother me nearly as much as his often stated intention to not have his aircraft
inspected by anyone, not register it, and to fly it off of some back country
pasture without getting his pilot's license. This will most certainly result in
a disaster in the South Florida news that will become one more uphill battle for
EAA and AOPA to deal with to protect your flying priveleges....caused by one
person.
~Cheers,
~Warren
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JamesJboyer(at)aol.com |
Hi Warren,
I agree with your concerns, but still think offering good advice and not
flaming him is the best response. It keeps everyone calmer and helps rational
thought.
And actually some of his ideas are thought provoking about finding better
ways to do things, or at least helping to identify just why things are done
the way they are.
So many people on this have really good information that the other stuff just
gets in the way.
Warren, we just have to hope he is pulling our legs and really is building a
good Piet or whatever. If Ray has been building boats as long as it sounds
like he could probably help us our in our woodwork as to joints, shaping
wood, etc.
Anyway, its the spice of life, well until women come around!
Cheers, Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alan Swanson" <swans071(at)tc.umn.edu> |
I agree with Larry- we have an obligation to try to dissuade any homebuilder
from making poor choices because they didn't know better. I would have made
some stupid errors if not for the good advice on this list. It would be
nice if the advice were taken a bit more seriously.
Soon after this whole series of threads began, I started a new Fisherman
Caye archive folder because I got a chuckle out of it. Especially when it
got to using string for tail feather bracing.
I for one hope he stays around, that he asks for and uses good advice, and
that eventually he will have a safe airplane to fly.
Al Swanson
-snip-
I should point out that it's possible that he's up front. If so it
won't hurt to go on record as trying to dissuade him from bad
construction. Who knows you might save this guy's life rather than tick
him off and send him away to build on his own. I've also seen these
controversial figures turn out to be great list members once they get
the hang of it.
But the "fisherman" handle says it all for me. He's fishing, playing
his game, a benign one by comparison to others, but he's enjoying poking
fun at everything in sight. Personally, I don't mind too much. I think
I benefit from a reality check every now and then. I'd hate to wake up
one day to realize I've become a stuffed shirt.
-snip-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Control bearings |
I just got back from checking out an aircraft salvage yard. No Cub
struts, but I did see a nice 2000hp R-2880! No, I won't go there... ;-)
While there an Old timer gave me a nice tip on the control bushings.
Where the long control tubes for stick and elevator bellcrank go through
the outer bearing "collars", drill a small 1/8"-1/4" hole on top of the
collar.
That way you can oil the bearing from the inside out and the little
depression will keep the lube in place till it soaks in.
I'd also add assemble with a corrosion resistant grease and from then on
lube with a heavy oil that'll stay put and resist running out onto your
nice woodwork. Take it apart at annual and clean out the grit that
accumulates too. The stuff gets like sandpaper and some aircraft will
get a sloppy stick if these clearances open up.
Larry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net> |
But how do we explain the pictures on the website that he has? A few weeks
ago he listed a web site and it shows a hammock, mango trees, and a Piet
under construction.
Chris
-----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: List rules
Agreed,
I still maintain that he's pulling everyone's leg. I see this regularly
on other groups. Ours is a quiet little backwater and most of us are
not used to seeing these trolls.
One of the real dangers is that everyone gets thrown into a tizzie and
good working relationships are lost. Some trolls live for the
confrontation and are very adept at playing on emotions. Let's not let
that happen here.
I should point out that it's possible that he's up front. If so it
won't hurt to go on record as trying to dissuade him from bad
construction. Who knows you might save this guy's life rather than tick
him off and send him away to build on his own. I've also seen these
controversial figures turn out to be great list members once they get
the hang of it.
But the "fisherman" handle says it all for me. He's fishing, playing
his game, a benign one by comparison to others, but he's enjoying poking
fun at everything in sight. Personally, I don't mind too much. I think
I benefit from a reality check every now and then. I'd hate to wake up
one day to realize I've become a stuffed shirt.
Larry
Owen Davies wrote:
>
>Among other things, Leon Stefan wrote:
>
>>Fisherman, some things should not be, you building an airplane
>>is one of them. You and your cheap skate construction are going to ruin
>>it for all of us. Your death will be another coffin nail in general and
>>sport aviation.
>>
>
>All this would be true if the Fish Guy were serious. I plain don't believe
>it.
>He's just pulling your chain, LHAO at how he's gotten to you. Relax, Leon.
>Ignore him. If we all do, maybe he'll go away.
>
>Gotta get used to it. The anonymity of e-mail brings out the a**ho!e
>in some people. That's why e-mail sofware comes with a bozo filter.
>
>Fish Guy hasn't gotten into mine yet, because at least he isn't overtly
>abusive, like too many of the clowns I've run into on the Net. But the
>day could come.
>
>Owen Davies
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
Very good point.
Again I'll say that he's asked some good questions. The lad's no dummy,
but I do think he really likes jerking a chain from time to time.
From the coy remarks about instruments I really felt that he knew
exactly what a static port was.
But then too, all this is inferred from reading emails and historically,
we are all extremely bad about reading things into them.
I'll keep talking to the Fisherman because he's curious and funny, that
is as long as he's not taken offense to me. He's sharp enough to take
advice too, as demonstrated. We just need to convince him it's not fair
to all of us if he busts his ass, especially him.
Larry
Christian Bobka wrote:
>
>But how do we explain the pictures on the website that he has? A few weeks
>ago he listed a web site and it shows a hammock, mango trees, and a Piet
>under construction.
>
>
>Chris
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Larry
>Neal
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: List rules
>
>
>Agreed,
>
>I still maintain that he's pulling everyone's leg. I see this regularly
>on other groups. Ours is a quiet little backwater and most of us are
>not used to seeing these trolls.
>
>One of the real dangers is that everyone gets thrown into a tizzie and
>good working relationships are lost. Some trolls live for the
>confrontation and are very adept at playing on emotions. Let's not let
>that happen here.
>
>I should point out that it's possible that he's up front. If so it
>won't hurt to go on record as trying to dissuade him from bad
>construction. Who knows you might save this guy's life rather than tick
>him off and send him away to build on his own. I've also seen these
>controversial figures turn out to be great list members once they get
>the hang of it.
>
>But the "fisherman" handle says it all for me. He's fishing, playing
>his game, a benign one by comparison to others, but he's enjoying poking
>fun at everything in sight. Personally, I don't mind too much. I think
>I benefit from a reality check every now and then. I'd hate to wake up
>one day to realize I've become a stuffed shirt.
>
>Larry
>
>Owen Davies wrote:
>
>>
>>Among other things, Leon Stefan wrote:
>>
>>>Fisherman, some things should not be, you building an airplane
>>>is one of them. You and your cheap skate construction are going to ruin
>>>it for all of us. Your death will be another coffin nail in general and
>>>sport aviation.
>>>
>>All this would be true if the Fish Guy were serious. I plain don't believe
>>it.
>>He's just pulling your chain, LHAO at how he's gotten to you. Relax, Leon.
>>Ignore him. If we all do, maybe he'll go away.
>>
>>Gotta get used to it. The anonymity of e-mail brings out the a**ho!e
>>in some people. That's why e-mail sofware comes with a bozo filter.
>>
>>Fish Guy hasn't gotten into mine yet, because at least he isn't overtly
>>abusive, like too many of the clowns I've run into on the Net. But the
>>day could come.
>>
>>Owen Davies
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
You guys have a lousy sense of humor, if any at all? You wouldn't recognize
satire, irony, or sarcasm if it hit you in the face. Building a plane project
is supposed to be fun!
----------------------------------------------
On that note, just made the circuit of 3 mechanics places over at Opa Locka Airport,
a big airport and they basically all sent me to a guy named John who does
Aero Welding. Met John before. The upshot of the morning was, that despite
being a major metropolitan county, with much wringing of hands, weeping and
tales of woe, from aircraft repairers, there is no longer any place in this county
with three major airports, anyplace to buy 4130 steel locally. All and sundry
say they get same from Aircraft Spruce about 1300 miles north of here in
Georgia. Even going to the airport nuts and bolts place is more expensive in
time and money, just 30 miles away, cause of the metropolitan traffic, they say
and I agree. Dade County might be known internationaly as a Banana Republic,
but boy today, it feels like a third world country too, trying to get stuff.
So the learning curve proceeds.
So, I guess today is a day spent figuring out what I need in 4130 steel to change
all those hardware brackets on the stabilizers? At least I have them up
and can use a tape measure now and more or less figure what I need to order?
As to the histronics, from the holier and thou experts. You win guys! I'm out
of here! For me, shooting the bull and making jokes is 60 % of the fun of
sitting under the mango trees building this plane sipping coconut water. The
talking is more than half the fun! Have met a few nice guys on the list though.
Enjoyed those jokes and if you want to talk to me privately, will do! See
Craig tomorrow and have a look at that Pietenpol.
--------------------------------------------
Unsubscribing now. You prigs can have the Pietenpol matronix list back fellas!
I know when I'm not wanted.
**Random House Dictionary definition: ( prig ) "one who displays or demands of
others pointless precise conformity, fussiness about trivialities, or exaggerated
propriety in a self righteous or irritating manner."
-----------------------------------------------------
On Fri, 15 February 2002, Leon Stefan wrote:
>
>
> Maybe we should forget the list rules just as Fish has chosen to forget
> common sense and safe building practices and safe materials. We say
> don't use bail wire and he suggests rope to brace his tail. He has made
> statements already that have legal ramifications when (not if) he kills
> himself on his first test flight. I feel sorry for Home Depot when his
> heirs and their lawyers tare into them for supplying non airworthy
> material to him to build an airplane as if it was their fault. Ever
> wonder why people run away screaming when you say airplane? Next Matt D.
> and Matronics will be guilty by association. Remember the Int. Piet.
> Ass.? Haven heard from them since the law suit they had to fight there
> way out of. They beat the suit, but went broke doing it. Last week some
> one told him that no FAA examiner in his right mind will give him an
> airworthiness cert. He said in writing, on this sight (traceable back to
> him) that he would fly with or without the c of a. In other words "I'm
> going t brake the law". At that point we all should have raised our
> voices and told him to unsubscribed and get lost immediately. By not
> doing so we are on the same plane as the students who hear those wack
> job kids who say that they are gong to bring a gun to school and kill
> people, and don't tell the authorities. I'm sure those same lawyers will
> be glad to add the names of each subscriber to any law suit they would
> bring foreward. We are polite to him with good advise which he simply
> ignores. Fisherman, some things should not be, you building an airplane
> is one of them. You and your cheap skate construction are going to ruin
> it for all of us. Your death will be another coffin nail in general and
> sport aviation. A negative we don't need. I'm going to send a note to
> Matt and ask him to ban Fisherman from the list before he gets us all
> sued. If he doesn't go, I will. I can't be a part of his nuttiness. Leon
> S. PS Fisherman< don,t waste your money on the Bengiles books.
> They are ful of good advise which you will also ignore because he
> dosn't recoment buying your mateial at a hardware store.
>
>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kip & Beth Gardner <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net> |
>
>Very good point.
>
>Again I'll say that he's asked some good questions. The lad's no dummy,
>but I do think he really likes jerking a chain from time to time.
> From the coy remarks about instruments I really felt that he knew
>exactly what a static port was.
>
>But then too, all this is inferred from reading emails and historically,
>we are all extremely bad about reading things into them.
>
>I'll keep talking to the Fisherman because he's curious and funny, that
>is as long as he's not taken offense to me. He's sharp enough to take
>advice too, as demonstrated. We just need to convince him it's not fair
>to all of us if he busts his ass, especially him.
>
>Larry
List,
Well, I'm going to throw in my final 2 cents' worth on this whole mess.
I always figured the Fisherman was exactly what he said he was & my only
aim was to try to be civil and convince him to consider the safety
ramifications of some of his choices. I've seen people killed - don't like
it a bit. My concerns were based BOTH on what he said on-list and on the
photos and text posted on his web site. I tried, and I hope mostly
suceeded, in letting him know what I thought about what he was doing
without attacking him and I hope he did not take offense at my concerns
either.
Am I sorry he told us off & left? Not sure. He was definitely entertaining,
and I think he did want our advice. But as I told him in one public post, I
felt that he wasn't listening to the experiences of the people who had
'done that' and that really worried me. I guess we'll never know now what
might have happened if he'd stayed on. I certainly would have been ticked
big time after reading a post like Leon's directed at me, although I think
I understand why Leon did it.
As for Leon's assertion that he had publicly stated his intention to 'break
the law', I'm not sure he actually ever said that he WOULD fly this plane
with or without legal documentation, although a Philadelphia Lawyer might
want to argue the fine points of that. Anyone who cares to check the
archive on this, that's your perogative, but I have no desire to do it. I
do think he was either pulling our legs or genuinely ignorant of the FAA's
requirements and the fact that they might apply to his project when he made
some of his comments about 'paperwork'.
All that said, I just don't know - feel like this is a bad ending to the
whole thing.
So let's get back to building.
Cheers!
Kip Gardner (St. Kipper the Purist)
426 Schneider St. SE
North Canton, OH 44720
(330) 494-1775
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
Well, you certainly can't fault anyone for trying to keep somebody safe
and out of trouble.
He'll be fine, we all get miffed occasionally and I'm no different.
But we all get over it.
You're right, back to building!
Larry
Kip & Beth Gardner wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Very good point.
>>
>>Again I'll say that he's asked some good questions. The lad's no dummy,
>>but I do think he really likes jerking a chain from time to time.
>>From the coy remarks about instruments I really felt that he knew
>>exactly what a static port was.
>>
>>But then too, all this is inferred from reading emails and historically,
>>we are all extremely bad about reading things into them.
>>
>>I'll keep talking to the Fisherman because he's curious and funny, that
>>is as long as he's not taken offense to me. He's sharp enough to take
>>advice too, as demonstrated. We just need to convince him it's not fair
>>to all of us if he busts his ass, especially him.
>>
>>Larry
>>
>
>List,
>
>Well, I'm going to throw in my final 2 cents' worth on this whole mess.
>
>I always figured the Fisherman was exactly what he said he was & my only
>aim was to try to be civil and convince him to consider the safety
>ramifications of some of his choices. I've seen people killed - don't like
>it a bit. My concerns were based BOTH on what he said on-list and on the
>photos and text posted on his web site. I tried, and I hope mostly
>suceeded, in letting him know what I thought about what he was doing
>without attacking him and I hope he did not take offense at my concerns
>either.
>
>Am I sorry he told us off & left? Not sure. He was definitely entertaining,
>and I think he did want our advice. But as I told him in one public post, I
>felt that he wasn't listening to the experiences of the people who had
>'done that' and that really worried me. I guess we'll never know now what
>might have happened if he'd stayed on. I certainly would have been ticked
>big time after reading a post like Leon's directed at me, although I think
>I understand why Leon did it.
>
>As for Leon's assertion that he had publicly stated his intention to 'break
>the law', I'm not sure he actually ever said that he WOULD fly this plane
>with or without legal documentation, although a Philadelphia Lawyer might
>want to argue the fine points of that. Anyone who cares to check the
>archive on this, that's your perogative, but I have no desire to do it. I
>do think he was either pulling our legs or genuinely ignorant of the FAA's
>requirements and the fact that they might apply to his project when he made
>some of his comments about 'paperwork'.
>
>All that said, I just don't know - feel like this is a bad ending to the
>whole thing.
>
>So let's get back to building.
>
>Cheers!
>
>Kip Gardner (St. Kipper the Purist)
>
>426 Schneider St. SE
>North Canton, OH 44720
>(330) 494-1775
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gene Rambo" <rambog(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator cable slack |
Since we are (hopefully) back to addressing building problems we all have,
could we get one volunteer (I have no problem to it being me) who can call
Mr. Perkins and get a full description of his solution to the bellcrank
geometry problem and share it with everyone here? I just suggest it as
opposed to several of us calling him.
Gene
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Flight test plan |
Nowhere near needing it yet, but was today thinking about a flight
testing plan.
There is nothing in the archives and I've yet to find anything on the
net, but I think this would be a good Idea to do and a good addition to
the archives.
If nothing turns up, I will want to put one together myself, so let me
know if anyone finds anything or has suggestions. Anything in Mr. B's
books?
As it happens I have a good friend who is a real live test pilot and
member of the national Association of Professional Test Pilots. Whether
we draw one up from scratch or find something, I'll run it by him.
Maybe we can get a stamp of approval and more brownie points for the
final inspection.
Larry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Flight test plan |
Nowhere near needing it yet, but was today thinking about a flight
testing plan.
There is nothing in the archives and I've yet to find anything on the
net, but I think this would be a good Idea to do and a good addition to
the archives.
If nothing turns up, I will want to put one together myself, so let me
know if anyone finds anything or has suggestions. Anything in Mr. B's
books?
As it happens I have a good friend who is a real live test pilot and
member of the national Association of Professional Test Pilots. Whether
we draw one up from scratch or find something, I'll run it by him.
Maybe we can get a stamp of approval and more brownie points for the
final inspection.
Larry
Larry I found a really neat book at Barnes & Noble called "Flight Testing
Homebuilt Aircraft" by Vaughn Askue. It does an excellent job of explaining
a number of important principles of stability and control and gives a step
by step plan for test flying your homebuilt. I intend to use it when I test
mine. The program will occupy most of the 25 hour test time required by the
FAA, but you've got to fly those 25 hours anyway and this way you will
thoroughly know your airplane at the end of that time, rather than just
spend 25 hours boring holes in the sky.
Jack
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kip & Beth Gardner <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net> |
List,
What with all the Fisherman stuff, I almost forgot about something truly
exciting that I found out about last night.
We had our local EAA chapter meeting last night, #846, Wadsworth, OH. Jim
Bede (BD4, BD5, BD10, etc.)is a member of our chapter and was the featured
speaker last night. He talked about his latest design project, the BD17
Nugget.
This plane's fuselage is fabricated from panels of honeycomb aluminum - two
0.020" sheets with 1/2" of honeycomb between them. Not too much new there,
it's been around the aircraft world for a while, although I don't recall it
being used extensively in a homebuilt before. It's very strong, light stuff.
So, the exciting part was this; he bonds the panels together with this
incredible epoxy and aluminum angle! This epoxy will bond to aluminum with
no particular surface prep aside from it being reasonably dry. When cured,
it has a bond strength of 3000psi (yes, 3 thousand!) in shear AND
compression. Jim did a demo piece during his talk, and after 15 minutes, no
one could separate the 2 pieces! He says they can jig and glue up a
complete fuselage in an hour.
Anyone who knows anything about adhesives should be impressed.
Although it cures too fast (15min) for a lot of Piet applications, I can
think of a few places where such incredible strength would be a definite
asset. The manufacturer might have slower-curing formulations - don't know
without checking.
Jim said he evaluated a couple hundred commercially-available adhesives
before settling on this stuff. He says that they refer to this system as
'chemical welding' because the bond is so strong and permanent.
Anyway, for anyone who is interested, the manufacturer is:
Extended Performance Adhesive Systems
11 New Zealand Rd.
Seabrook, NH
603-474-3070
The product Jim uses is called '#310 Extreme Epoxy' if I read the info on
the tube correctly.
It's kind of pricey stuff (Jim said about $25 for a 250ml kit). Don't try
it on anything you might possibly want to take apart later!
Cheers!
Kip Gardner
426 Schneider St. SE
North Canton, OH 44720
(330) 494-1775
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kip & Beth Gardner <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator cable slack |
>
>Since we are (hopefully) back to addressing building problems we all have,
>could we get one volunteer (I have no problem to it being me) who can call
>Mr. Perkins and get a full description of his solution to the bellcrank
>geometry problem and share it with everyone here? I just suggest it as
>opposed to several of us calling him.
>
>Gene
Go for it Gene! I for one am very interested in this particular issue -
should be starting work on controls & other metalwork in the next 6 months
or so.
Cheers!
Kip Gardner
426 Schneider St. SE
North Canton, OH 44720
(330) 494-1775
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bert Conoly" <bconoly(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Control bearings |
Wooohhhhh!
Another excellent post (one with a nice tip in it). Thanks Larry. That's
what this group is all about.
I say lets just ignore things and people that bug us.
Ignore Shield Up!
Later, bert
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Neal" <llneal2(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Control bearings
>
> I just got back from checking out an aircraft salvage yard. No Cub
> struts, but I did see a nice 2000hp R-2880! No, I won't go there... ;-)
>
> While there an Old timer gave me a nice tip on the control bushings.
> Where the long control tubes for stick and elevator bellcrank go through
> the outer bearing "collars", drill a small 1/8"-1/4" hole on top of the
> collar.
> That way you can oil the bearing from the inside out and the little
> depression will keep the lube in place till it soaks in.
>
> I'd also add assemble with a corrosion resistant grease and from then on
> lube with a heavy oil that'll stay put and resist running out onto your
> nice woodwork. Take it apart at annual and clean out the grit that
> accumulates too. The stuff gets like sandpaper and some aircraft will
> get a sloppy stick if these clearances open up.
>
> Larry
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Elevator cable slack |
I agree, Go for it Gene. I wish this information had been available a year
ago when I built my control system. Now I've got the slack built in, and I
ain't about to do it over. I will use Graham Hansen's approach with control
stops (another excellent post and proof that this forum can be very useful).
Jack
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kip & Beth
Gardner
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Elevator cable slack
>
>Since we are (hopefully) back to addressing building problems we all have,
>could we get one volunteer (I have no problem to it being me) who can call
>Mr. Perkins and get a full description of his solution to the bellcrank
>geometry problem and share it with everyone here? I just suggest it as
>opposed to several of us calling him.
>
>Gene
Go for it Gene! I for one am very interested in this particular issue -
should be starting work on controls & other metalwork in the next 6 months
or so.
Cheers!
Kip Gardner
426 Schneider St. SE
North Canton, OH 44720
(330) 494-1775
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary McNeel, Jr." <gmcneel(at)mykitplane.com> |
| Subject: | Elevator cable slack |
I found his email and sent it in to the list earlier. I have also sent him
an email. If that fails I will call him assuming I can find a phone number.
-Gary McNeel
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Gene
> Rambo
> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 5:39 PM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Elevator cable slack
>
>
> Since we are (hopefully) back to addressing building problems we all have,
> could we get one volunteer (I have no problem to it being me) who can call
> Mr. Perkins and get a full description of his solution to the bellcrank
> geometry problem and share it with everyone here? I just suggest it as
> opposed to several of us calling him.
>
> Gene
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary McNeel, Jr." <gmcneel(at)mykitplane.com> |
| Subject: | Flight test plan |
You can also get FAA Advisory Circular AC 90-89a Amateur-Built Aircraft
Flight Testing Handbook - which is excellent for this too.
http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular
.nsf/ACNumber/D08FA9393154B636862569BA006F6D7F?OpenDocument
You will find a PDF there too. If you have trouble getting to it, let me
know.
-Gary McNeel
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jack
> Phillips
> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 5:29 PM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Flight test plan
>
>
>
>
>
> Nowhere near needing it yet, but was today thinking about a flight
> testing plan.
>
> There is nothing in the archives and I've yet to find anything on the
> net, but I think this would be a good Idea to do and a good addition to
> the archives.
>
> If nothing turns up, I will want to put one together myself, so let me
> know if anyone finds anything or has suggestions. Anything in Mr. B's
> books?
>
> As it happens I have a good friend who is a real live test pilot and
> member of the national Association of Professional Test Pilots. Whether
> we draw one up from scratch or find something, I'll run it by him.
> Maybe we can get a stamp of approval and more brownie points for the
> final inspection.
>
> Larry
>
>
> Larry I found a really neat book at Barnes & Noble called "Flight Testing
> Homebuilt Aircraft" by Vaughn Askue. It does an excellent job of
> explaining
> a number of important principles of stability and control and gives a step
> by step plan for test flying your homebuilt. I intend to use it
> when I test
> mine. The program will occupy most of the 25 hour test time
> required by the
> FAA, but you've got to fly those 25 hours anyway and this way you will
> thoroughly know your airplane at the end of that time, rather than just
> spend 25 hours boring holes in the sky.
>
> Jack
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Flight test plan |
Jack,
Wonderful! My kids got me a B&N card for Christmas and I still have not
wasted it on computer stuff. This should slam-dunk it for me, but after
a look, maybe I can condense some stuff for other list members. I think
in a simple list I can do that without busting any copyrights. I'll get
a copy and run it past Jim for any additional thoughts.
Larry
Jack Phillips wrote:
>
>
>Nowhere near needing it yet, but was today thinking about a flight
>testing plan.
>
>There is nothing in the archives and I've yet to find anything on the
>net, but I think this would be a good Idea to do and a good addition to
>the archives.
>
>If nothing turns up, I will want to put one together myself, so let me
>know if anyone finds anything or has suggestions. Anything in Mr. B's
>books?
>
>As it happens I have a good friend who is a real live test pilot and
>member of the national Association of Professional Test Pilots. Whether
>we draw one up from scratch or find something, I'll run it by him.
> Maybe we can get a stamp of approval and more brownie points for the
>final inspection.
>
>Larry
>
>
>Larry I found a really neat book at Barnes & Noble called "Flight Testing
>Homebuilt Aircraft" by Vaughn Askue. It does an excellent job of explaining
>a number of important principles of stability and control and gives a step
>by step plan for test flying your homebuilt. I intend to use it when I test
>mine. The program will occupy most of the 25 hour test time required by the
>FAA, but you've got to fly those 25 hours anyway and this way you will
>thoroughly know your airplane at the end of that time, rather than just
>spend 25 hours boring holes in the sky.
>
>Jack
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: "miracle epoxy" |
Wow, imagine building an RV-6 with that stuff....
What's Bede been doing? I thought he had gotten the tar kicked out of
himself in liability and bankrupcy courts.
Larry
Kip & Beth Gardner wrote:
>
>List,
>
>What with all the Fisherman stuff, I almost forgot about something truly
>exciting that I found out about last night.
>
>We had our local EAA chapter meeting last night, #846, Wadsworth, OH. Jim
>Bede (BD4, BD5, BD10, etc.)is a member of our chapter and was the featured
>speaker last night. He talked about his latest design project, the BD17
>Nugget.
>
>This plane's fuselage is fabricated from panels of honeycomb aluminum - two
>0.020" sheets with 1/2" of honeycomb between them. Not too much new there,
>it's been around the aircraft world for a while, although I don't recall it
>being used extensively in a homebuilt before. It's very strong, light stuff.
>
>So, the exciting part was this; he bonds the panels together with this
>incredible epoxy and aluminum angle! This epoxy will bond to aluminum with
>no particular surface prep aside from it being reasonably dry. When cured,
>it has a bond strength of 3000psi (yes, 3 thousand!) in shear AND
>compression. Jim did a demo piece during his talk, and after 15 minutes, no
>one could separate the 2 pieces! He says they can jig and glue up a
>complete fuselage in an hour.
>
>Anyone who knows anything about adhesives should be impressed.
>
>Although it cures too fast (15min) for a lot of Piet applications, I can
>think of a few places where such incredible strength would be a definite
>asset. The manufacturer might have slower-curing formulations - don't know
>without checking.
>
>Jim said he evaluated a couple hundred commercially-available adhesives
>before settling on this stuff. He says that they refer to this system as
>'chemical welding' because the bond is so strong and permanent.
>
>Anyway, for anyone who is interested, the manufacturer is:
>
>Extended Performance Adhesive Systems
>11 New Zealand Rd.
>Seabrook, NH
>603-474-3070
>
>The product Jim uses is called '#310 Extreme Epoxy' if I read the info on
>the tube correctly.
>
>It's kind of pricey stuff (Jim said about $25 for a 250ml kit). Don't try
>it on anything you might possibly want to take apart later!
>
>Cheers!
>
>Kip Gardner
>
>
>426 Schneider St. SE
>North Canton, OH 44720
>(330) 494-1775
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Flight test plan |
Bingo, you guys are great, as always...
Gary McNeel, Jr. wrote:
>
>You can also get FAA Advisory Circular AC 90-89a Amateur-Built Aircraft
>Flight Testing Handbook - which is excellent for this too.
>
>http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular
>.nsf/ACNumber/D08FA9393154B636862569BA006F6D7F?OpenDocument
>
>You will find a PDF there too. If you have trouble getting to it, let me
>know.
>
>-Gary McNeel
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
>>[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jack
>>Phillips
>>Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 5:29 PM
>>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>>Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Flight test plan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Nowhere near needing it yet, but was today thinking about a flight
>>testing plan.
>>
>>There is nothing in the archives and I've yet to find anything on the
>>net, but I think this would be a good Idea to do and a good addition to
>>the archives.
>>
>>If nothing turns up, I will want to put one together myself, so let me
>>know if anyone finds anything or has suggestions. Anything in Mr. B's
>>books?
>>
>>As it happens I have a good friend who is a real live test pilot and
>>member of the national Association of Professional Test Pilots. Whether
>>we draw one up from scratch or find something, I'll run it by him.
>> Maybe we can get a stamp of approval and more brownie points for the
>>final inspection.
>>
>>Larry
>>
>>
>>Larry I found a really neat book at Barnes & Noble called "Flight Testing
>>Homebuilt Aircraft" by Vaughn Askue. It does an excellent job of
>>explaining
>>a number of important principles of stability and control and gives a step
>>by step plan for test flying your homebuilt. I intend to use it
>>when I test
>>mine. The program will occupy most of the 25 hour test time
>>required by the
>>FAA, but you've got to fly those 25 hours anyway and this way you will
>>thoroughly know your airplane at the end of that time, rather than just
>>spend 25 hours boring holes in the sky.
>>
>>Jack
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alan Swanson" <swans071(at)tc.umn.edu> |
| Subject: | Flight test plan |
There is a great section on flight testing at www.eaa.org in the
Homebuilders section, Testing. Several articles, and a checklist. Would be
a good starting point.
Al Swanson
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Larry
Neal
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Flight test plan
Nowhere near needing it yet, but was today thinking about a flight
testing plan.
There is nothing in the archives and I've yet to find anything on the
net, but I think this would be a good Idea to do and a good addition to
the archives.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Elevator cable slack |
In a message dated 2/15/02 3:35:21 PM Pacific Standard Time,
kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net writes:
> Since we are (hopefully) back to addressing building problems we all have,
> >could we get one volunteer (I have no problem to it being me) who can call
> >Mr. Perkins and get a full description of his solution to the bellcrank
> >geometry problem and share it with everyone here? I just suggest it as
> >opposed to several of us calling him.
> >
> >Gene
>
> Go for it Gene! I for one am very interested in this particular issue -
> should be starting work on controls & other metalwork in the next 6 months
> or so.
>
> Cheers!
>
> Kip Gardner
>
> 426 Schneider St. SE
> North Canton, OH 44720
> (330) 494-1775
>
>
>
Gents,
I have talked to Ken for hours at a time. He comes to our local EAA chapter
fly-in each summer. The essence of the installation on his plane simply puts
the centerline of the cable connections of the elevator horns so they rotate
about the hinge point. Its a geometry thing. The same applies to the
walking beam. It is made in such a way that the cable connections are made
to the center of the beam width so these points will rotate about the axis.
Doug Bryant Wichita, Ks
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator cable slack |
> Gents,
>
> I have talked to Ken for hours at a time. He comes
> to our local EAA chapter
> fly-in each summer. The essence of the installation
> on his plane simply puts
> the centerline of the cable connections of the
> elevator horns so they rotate
> about the hinge point. Its a geometry thing. The
> same applies to the
> walking beam. It is made in such a way that the
> cable connections are made
> to the center of the beam width so these points will
> rotate about the axis.
>
> Doug Bryant Wichita, Ks
Sounds easy BUT... This all was figured out by Ken by
trial and error, and he went to the trouble of making
prints making it easy for the rest of us. I am an
engineer and machinest and I could figure it out too.
but for the little that he charged me for his prints,
now I can build it right the first time and I don't
have to figure it out. He should be asked if he wants
to sell his prints, or if he doesn't want to anymore
then we could ask him if we could post it on the net
for everybody. could you ask him that Doug?
Del
http://sports.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ric Ryburn" <ric(at)srclink.net> |
| Subject: | Flight test plan |
For a really good flight test guide, get FAA AC 90-89A, Amateur-Built
Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook.
It's available on the internet for free at
http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular
.nsf/1ab39b4ed563b08985256a35006d56af/d08fa9393154b636862569ba006f6d7f/$FILE
/ATTLMVEO/AC90-89A.pdf
Note: It's 797KB, so if you download over a modem, it'll take awhile. :)
Ric
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jack
> Phillips
> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 6:29 PM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Flight test plan
>
>
>
>
>
> Nowhere near needing it yet, but was today thinking about a flight
> testing plan.
>
> There is nothing in the archives and I've yet to find anything on the
> net, but I think this would be a good Idea to do and a good addition to
> the archives.
>
> If nothing turns up, I will want to put one together myself, so let me
> know if anyone finds anything or has suggestions. Anything in Mr. B's
> books?
>
> As it happens I have a good friend who is a real live test pilot and
> member of the national Association of Professional Test Pilots. Whether
> we draw one up from scratch or find something, I'll run it by him.
> Maybe we can get a stamp of approval and more brownie points for the
> final inspection.
>
> Larry
>
>
> Larry I found a really neat book at Barnes & Noble called "Flight Testing
> Homebuilt Aircraft" by Vaughn Askue. It does an excellent job of
> explaining
> a number of important principles of stability and control and gives a step
> by step plan for test flying your homebuilt. I intend to use it
> when I test
> mine. The program will occupy most of the 25 hour test time
> required by the
> FAA, but you've got to fly those 25 hours anyway and this way you will
> thoroughly know your airplane at the end of that time, rather than just
> spend 25 hours boring holes in the sky.
>
> Jack
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeffrey Wilcox" <craigwilcox(at)peoplepc.com> |
| Subject: | Flight test plan info and other stuff |
Guys -
The FAA has a really nice FREE Advisory Circular out - AC 90-89A - regarding
"Amateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook". This is
available from the FAA website (www.faa.gov) as well as your local GADO. It
covers all aspects, from making a plan to carrying it out.
This list is extremely educational, and will be more so to all if you have a
little tolerance with the others on the list. I got involved in aviation in
1955, been around it ever since.
There are so many different points of view, especially in our field of E X P
E R I M E N T A L aircraft. There are so many different ways of safely
doing things! I am building my #5 and #6 airplanes now, and none of the six
have been alike.
Good workmanship? Well, I'm a Tech Counselor, and that is what we judge -
and I let other TC's judge my work before I cover it. And I put myself, and
my reputation, on the line everytime I make an inspection, as does every TC.
I am not an engineer, and I don't pretend to judge the suitability of
materials unless they are obviously inappropriate - and then I am not afraid
to speak up and say so.
Please show a little patience with those of us who like to have a bit of
"silk scarf" - type fun.
BTW - I'm supposed to meet with Ray tomorrow - I'll let ya'll know just what
he's really like.
Craig
>
> Nowhere near needing it yet, but was today thinking about a flight
> testing plan.
>
> There is nothing in the archives and I've yet to find anything on the
> net, but I think this would be a good Idea to do and a good addition to
> the archives.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Warren D. Shoun" <wbnb(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Flight test plan info and other stuff |
Hi Jeffrey,
As one of those who has publicly expressed my concern regarding Ray's approach
to
this endeavor of Homebuilts, I am very delighted that he has taken the often stated
advice to contact an EAA tech counselor.
I wish you the best in working with him and I sincerely hope that he finishes
building a very safe and reliable aircraft that he enjoys for many years. I would
gently ask that you try to let him know how genuinely concerned many of us have
become regarding his statements regarding flying an aircraft that was not inspected,
unlicensed, and without obtaining a pilots license. His jovial responses did often
seem to border on complete disregard for common sense.....and it is a bit difficult
to see the humor in some of this. I am a recent AOPA Airport Support Network
volunteer, and have just begun to learn how much of AOPA's time, expense and legal
hassle comes from a very few who from ignorance or disregard provide so much fodder
for those who wish to be critical and restrictive of our privilege to fly our custom
built and commercially built aircraft.
Great good luck and best wishes in helping Ray achieve his dreams. Really!
~Cheers,
~Warren
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kip & Beth Gardner <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: "miracle epoxy" |
>
>Wow, imagine building an RV-6 with that stuff....
>What's Bede been doing? I thought he had gotten the tar kicked out of
>himself in liability and bankrupcy courts.
>
>Larry
Larry,
Being new up here, I just met Jim for the first time at last night's
meeting, although I've been aware of his work since the early BD-5 days. He
is an incredibly knowledgeable and very funny speaker.
What's he been up to? Well, he's been putting all his effort into this
BD-17 Nugget & is gearing up to sell kits and have some sort of distributor
network. Apparently, each distributor is going to have a jig setup
available so kit buyers can come in and jig up & glue their fuselages
before they take their kit home - kinda slick '1-hour fuselages'! It's
featured in a recent issue of Kitplanes (like this month or last).
He also said he'd like to finish development and tooling of the BD-12 &
BD-14, but apparently the tooling for those 2 aircraft is going to be VERY
expensive & he's not going to do it until he has the resources to buy all
the tooling & start immediate production.
He's pretty much given up on the BD-10, still sells some plans, but says
that the market for a 2-place executive jet is pretty poor :). Too bad, it
was one hot plane!
Sounds like he's recovered from the lawsuit fallout pretty well.
Oh yeah, after the BD-5 experience, he says that he is never again going to
design an aircraft for a specific engine (can't imagine why!).
Cheers!
Kip Gardner
426 Schneider St. SE
North Canton, OH 44720
(330) 494-1775
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Dilatush" <dilatush(at)amigo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator cable slack |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary McNeel, Jr." <gmcneel(at)mykitplane.com>
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Elevator cable slack
List,
I have a copy of Ken Perkins drawing(s) and would be glad to mail them out
to those who need them. However, I don't feel comfortable doing this
without his permission.
So if someone does get in touch with him, and he doesn't want to go to the
bother of getting them copied and sending them out, and he gives me his
written permission, then I will do it for whatever it costs me.
John Dilatush NX114D "Almost ready to fly, just got to finish prop"
Salida, Colorado
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> I found his email and sent it in to the list earlier. I have also sent him
> an email. If that fails I will call him assuming I can find a phone
number.
>
> -Gary McNeel
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Gene
> > Rambo
> > Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 5:39 PM
> > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Elevator cable slack
> >
> >
> >
> > Since we are (hopefully) back to addressing building problems we all
have,
> > could we get one volunteer (I have no problem to it being me) who can
call
> > Mr. Perkins and get a full description of his solution to the bellcrank
> > geometry problem and share it with everyone here? I just suggest it as
> > opposed to several of us calling him.
> >
> > Gene
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 2/15/02 11:30:41 AM Eastern Standard Time,
swans071(at)tc.umn.edu writes:
<<
I for one hope he stays around, that he asks for and uses good advice, and
that eventually he will have a safe airplane to fly.
Al Swanson >>
I will have to agree with you Al, and Jim Boyer. This list is a collection of
people, some with experience, some just learning. Ray is in the just learning
camp. I do believe he means well and has a very good sense of humor. I think
we all need to lighten up and not get on our high horses. I think the Home
Depot comments keep us all in the right frame of mind that this isn't an
expensive high-dollar airplane. If I listened to some on this list, I'd have
to buy EVER single part from Aircraft Spruce and Specialty. Not that that
would be bad, but in some cases, this just isn't necessary. I think Ray has
shown that he will test the material he is putting in the aircraft to make
sure it does the job.
I see no reason to be alarmed to the point of having him banned from the
list. His opinions and ideas are just as welcome here as yours or mine, at
least I hope SO !
-dennis the menace
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: "miracle epoxy" |
In a message dated 2/15/02 6:30:51 PM Eastern Standard Time,
kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net writes:
<< We had our local EAA chapter meeting last night, #846, Wadsworth, OH. Jim
Bede (BD4, BD5, BD10, etc.)is a member of our chapter and was the featured
speaker last night. He talked about his latest design project, the BD17
Nugget.
>>
Hi Kip, I just read a good web pager / story on the BPA site
about a fellow by the name of Wilbur Graff. I listed Wadsworth as his
airport. Nice article - its at: http://users.aol.com/bpanews/wil.html
His Piet is: "Model 'A' powered Air Camper N1492G. "
Is he still there ? How many Piets are flying in that EAA chapter ?
-dennis the menace
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Flight test plan |
In a message dated 2/15/02 7:55:40 PM Eastern Standard Time, ric(at)srclink.net
writes:
<<
For a really good flight test guide, get FAA AC 90-89A, Amateur-Built
Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook.
It's available on the internet for free >>
Thank you for that information. I've downloaded it and have it saved to a CD
for further reference. (along with alot of other Piet pictures and web sites)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary McNeel, Jr." <gmcneel(at)mykitplane.com> |
| Subject: | Elevator cable slack |
John, he is still selling them. They are $20 per set. I am ordering a set. I
am asking him if he minds my posting his address information on the list. I
think he will be fine with that. In the meantime, I would be glad to pass on
his address to anyone wanting it (off list). My email is
gmcneel(at)mykitplane.com.
-Gary
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of John
> Dilatush
> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 10:22 PM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Elevator cable slack
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gary McNeel, Jr." <gmcneel(at)mykitplane.com>
> To:
> Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Elevator cable slack
>
> List,
>
> I have a copy of Ken Perkins drawing(s) and would be glad to mail them out
> to those who need them. However, I don't feel comfortable doing this
> without his permission.
>
> So if someone does get in touch with him, and he doesn't want to go to the
> bother of getting them copied and sending them out, and he gives me his
> written permission, then I will do it for whatever it costs me.
>
> John Dilatush NX114D "Almost ready to fly, just got to finish prop"
> Salida, Colorado
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>
> >
> > I found his email and sent it in to the list earlier. I have
> also sent him
> > an email. If that fails I will call him assuming I can find a phone
> number.
> >
> > -Gary McNeel
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Gene
> > > Rambo
> > > Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 5:39 PM
> > > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> > > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Elevator cable slack
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Since we are (hopefully) back to addressing building problems we all
> have,
> > > could we get one volunteer (I have no problem to it being me) who can
> call
> > > Mr. Perkins and get a full description of his solution to the
> bellcrank
> > > geometry problem and share it with everyone here? I just
> suggest it as
> > > opposed to several of us calling him.
> > >
> > > Gene
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kip & Beth Gardner <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: "miracle epoxy" |
>
>In a message dated 2/15/02 6:30:51 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net writes:
>
><< We had our local EAA chapter meeting last night, #846, Wadsworth, OH. Jim
> Bede (BD4, BD5, BD10, etc.)is a member of our chapter and was the featured
> speaker last night. He talked about his latest design project, the BD17
> Nugget.
> >>
>
>Hi Kip, I just read a good web pager / story on the BPA site
>about a fellow by the name of Wilbur Graff. I listed Wadsworth as his
>airport. Nice article - its at: http://users.aol.com/bpanews/wil.html
>His Piet is: "Model 'A' powered Air Camper N1492G. "
>Is he still there ? How many Piets are flying in that EAA chapter ?
>-dennis the menace
Dennis,
Wilbur is a member of our chapter, but I have not met him yet or seen his
plane. Apparently, he spends about half the year in FL like a lot of other
guys lucky enough to be permanently retired! Hope to catch up with him in
the Spring when he migrates back 'nawth'.
According to our chapter roster, there is one other guy working on a Piet,
but I haven't managed to catch up with him either.
In general, this is a very Piet-rich environment. Mike Cuy lives 45 min.
away and Frank Pavliga (Sky Gypsy) keeps his plane at Barber Field in
Alliance - 20 min. from here and the airport where I tend to hang out &
will be starting instruction at once I'm employed full-time again. As
anyone who has ever seen them knows, these are beautiful planes (Frank is
in the process of building a Waco replica - wish I could weld like he
does!).
There are also many other flying Piets or Piets under construction within a
1-2 hr. driving radius of here. I've been in touch with a few guys to
suggest organizing an OH fly-in, but so far no one has expressed great
enthusiasm for the idea - maybe I need to talk it up a little. Forrest
Barber, the operator of the field in Alliance hosts a Taylorcraft fly-in
every summer & this year for the first time, the national Aeronca fly-in
will be there too, so a Piet fly-in there would be a natural!
Cheers!
Kip Gardner
426 Schneider St. SE
North Canton, OH 44720
(330) 494-1775
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave and Connie <dmatt(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: "miracle epoxy" |
Kip,
Stop by and say hello at the Taylorcraft flyin. I have a
white and dark green '41 - N36078. Piet building has slowed
since I bought it.
Dave
Retsof, NY
>
>
>There are also many other flying Piets or Piets under construction within a
>1-2 hr. driving radius of here. I've been in touch with a few guys to
>suggest organizing an OH fly-in, but so far no one has expressed great
>enthusiasm for the idea - maybe I need to talk it up a little. Forrest
>Barber, the operator of the field in Alliance hosts a Taylorcraft fly-in
>every summer & this year for the first time, the national Aeronca fly-in
>will be there too, so a Piet fly-in there would be a natural!
>
>Cheers!
>
>Kip Gardner
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
"piet discussion"
| Subject: | looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65 |
Anyone scan a manual for a Carb for an A-65, that they could share?
thanks
walt
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65 |
Walt, if you find one I could use it too. I occasionally see one for sale
on eBay. Maybe next time I'll buy it.
Jack
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of walter
evans
Subject: Pietenpol-List: looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65
Anyone scan a manual for a Carb for an A-65, that they could share?
thanks
walt
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65 |
Jack,
Yeah, when I ordered a needle float, I should have gotten it for the xtra
$15.00.
If I find one, I'll let you know.
walt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65
>
> Walt, if you find one I could use it too. I occasionally see one for sale
> on eBay. Maybe next time I'll buy it.
>
> Jack
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of walter
> evans
> Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 4:18 PM
> To: Fishnet; piet discussion
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65
>
>
>
> Anyone scan a manual for a Carb for an A-65, that they could share?
> thanks
> walt
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65 |
There is a fair manual in the old A series manual. The old C series manual
is a little more complete. What do you need to know?
Cy Galley - Bellanca Champion Club
Newsletter Editor & EAA TC
www.bellanca-championclub.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65
Anyone scan a manual for a Carb for an A-65, that they could share?
thanks
walt
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dean Pacetti <gpacetti(at)yahoo.com> |
subscribe
http://sports.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65 |
Do not try to set the float level by bending the float! It is set by
changing the thickness of the seat gasket so as to get a 13/32" below the
parting surface of the carb.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
Always looking for articles for the Experimenter
----- Original Message -----
From: "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65
Jack,
Yeah, when I ordered a needle float, I should have gotten it for the xtra
$15.00.
If I find one, I'll let you know.
walt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65
>
> Walt, if you find one I could use it too. I occasionally see one for sale
> on eBay. Maybe next time I'll buy it.
>
> Jack
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of walter
> evans
> Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 4:18 PM
> To: Fishnet; piet discussion
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65
>
>
>
> Anyone scan a manual for a Carb for an A-65, that they could share?
> thanks
> walt
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65 |
Cy,
Had done my A-65 over before I started the Piet. It sat till about a month
ago when I ran it. Ran kind of sloppy and rich. My mentor checked it out
and the rear cyl.s had real bad valves. I had lapped them in thinking that
that was it, during my rebuild, but it turns out that they leaked like a
seive. After pulling the cyl's off my mentor was good enough to redo the
seats and the valves, so that's not a problem anymore. But still got the
carb problem. When idling, I can run the idle screw all the way in (where
it runs the best) but it still won't kill the engine( at 550 rpm) which they
say it should do. It's got to be getting gas from somewhere else, but I
can't figure it out. Should have bought the Stromberg manual for $15.00,
but I didn't. figured someone might have it in their computer.
walt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65
>
> There is a fair manual in the old A series manual. The old C series manual
> is a little more complete. What do you need to know?
>
> Cy Galley - Bellanca Champion Club
> Newsletter Editor & EAA TC
> www.bellanca-championclub.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net>
> To: "Fishnet" ; "piet discussion"
>
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65
>
>
>
>
> Anyone scan a manual for a Carb for an A-65, that they could share?
> thanks
> walt
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65 |
Cy,
Yeah, thanks, that I knew. Well actually my Ap (mentor) had set that all up
before I got it. And after I had the problem I rechecked it with the 19" of
gas head and the measurement to the top of the bowl. and it all came out
good. I have the brown manual for the A-65 rebuild. They do have a good
section on the carb, but it's all in text. I just figured that the
Stromberg rebuild book had some better stuff in it.
walt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65
>
> Do not try to set the float level by bending the float! It is set by
> changing the thickness of the seat gasket so as to get a 13/32" below the
> parting surface of the carb.
>
> Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
>
> Editor, EAA Safety Programs
> cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
>
> Always looking for articles for the Experimenter
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65
>
>
>
>
> Jack,
> Yeah, when I ordered a needle float, I should have gotten it for the xtra
> $15.00.
> If I find one, I'll let you know.
> walt
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net>
> To:
> Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65
>
>
>
> >
> > Walt, if you find one I could use it too. I occasionally see one for
sale
> > on eBay. Maybe next time I'll buy it.
> >
> > Jack
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of walter
> > evans
> > Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 4:18 PM
> > To: Fishnet; piet discussion
> > Subject: Pietenpol-List: looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65
> >
> >
> >
> > Anyone scan a manual for a Carb for an A-65, that they could share?
> > thanks
> > walt
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dennis Engelkenjohn <wingding(at)usmo.com> |
| Subject: | Ford "model B" carb on corvair |
does anyone on the list have any experience with the Ford model B carb
on the corvair engine? Vi Kapler sells a manifold for this carb, and I
am wondering how it works, if anyone is currently using it and does it
have an adjustable main jet?
These carbs should be more economical than the Stromberg if they
work, but I would like to get some information from someone who is using
one.
Dennis Engelkenjohn
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dennis Engelkenjohn <wingding(at)usmo.com> |
| Subject: | Ford "model B" carb on corvair |
Does anyone on the list have any experience with or know anyone who
has experience with the Ford "model B" carb on the corvair engine?
Vi Kapler sells a manifold for this, but I want to talk to someone
who is using this system. It would seem to be more economical than the
Stromberg if it works.
Also want to know if the "B" carb has an adjustable main jet?
Dennis Engelkenjohn
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65 |
Who's "they"? You may have a damaged needle valve or seat. The adjusting
needle should not be bottomed as you will damage the needle which can be
replaced or the seat which is part of the carb body and can't be replaced.
Now can you get the engine to idle? If so what is the problem? Check the
float level with the page I just sent to IF you can't get it to idle. My
manual says that the idle circuit only works up to "approximately 900 to
1000 RPM."
My large manual says that if it still idles too rich to first check the
primer.
Your idle may be too fast as the C series manual says 475 to 525 but this
would be after break in. The butterfly throttle should be mid-way between
the two idle ports.
The float level needle only needs replacing if the carb drips a lot of gas
after being shut down. Even if you replace this needle, some complain that
it still drips. It is recommended to replace the rubber tipped needle the
later model delrin needle. If you go with the delrin needle you have to
re-weight the float per ACSB-84 which you can find a copy in the Univair
catalog.
I have sent this on to Glen Jeffries who has forgotten more than I'll ever
know about small Continentals.
----- Original Message -----
From: "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65
Cy,
Had done my A-65 over before I started the Piet. It sat till about a month
ago when I ran it. Ran kind of sloppy and rich. My mentor checked it out
and the rear cyl.s had real bad valves. I had lapped them in thinking that
that was it, during my rebuild, but it turns out that they leaked like a
seive. After pulling the cyl's off my mentor was good enough to redo the
seats and the valves, so that's not a problem anymore. But still got the
carb problem. When idling, I can run the idle screw all the way in (where
it runs the best) but it still won't kill the engine( at 550 rpm) which they
say it should do. It's got to be getting gas from somewhere else, but I
can't figure it out. Should have bought the Stromberg manual for $15.00,
but I didn't. figured someone might have it in their computer.
walt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65
>
> There is a fair manual in the old A series manual. The old C series manual
> is a little more complete. What do you need to know?
>
> Cy Galley - Bellanca Champion Club
> Newsletter Editor & EAA TC
> www.bellanca-championclub.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net>
> To: "Fishnet" ; "piet discussion"
>
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65
>
>
>
>
> Anyone scan a manual for a Carb for an A-65, that they could share?
> thanks
> walt
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Ford "model B" carb on corvair |
In a message dated 2/16/02 5:57:42 PM Pacific Standard Time,
wingding(at)usmo.com writes:
> does anyone on the list have any experience with the Ford model B carb
> on the corvair engine? Vi Kapler sells a manifold for this carb, and I
> am wondering how it works, if anyone is currently using it and does it
> have an adjustable main jet?
> These carbs should be more economical than the Stromberg if they
> work, but I would like to get some information from someone who is using
> one.
> Dennis Engelkenjohn
>
>
>
Dennis ,
BHP used aftermarket copies of the B carb on his two Corvair airplanes.
There is an aircamper here in Wichita which has been doing engine runs with
an aftermarket B (I have three of them) and now I have given the owner a B
carb to try also. The B carbs and the aftermarket B carbs have adjustable
main jets. Vi Kapler told me last week to open the jets to the next numbered
drill size for a little better performance. I use B carbs on my aircampers.
To me it is a first class carb. Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DonanClara(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Ford "model B" carb on corvair |
In a message dated 02/16/2002 8:33:08 PM Central Standard Time,
Doug413(at)aol.com writes:
<< Dennis ,
BHP used aftermarket copies of the B carb on his two Corvair airplanes.
There is an aircamper here in Wichita which has been doing engine runs with
an aftermarket B (I have three of them) and now I have given the owner a B
carb to try also. The B carbs and the aftermarket B carbs have adjustable
main jets. Vi Kapler told me last week to open the jets to the next
numbered
drill size for a little better performance. I use B carbs on my aircampers.
To me it is a first class carb. Doug Bryant
>>
Doug,
Who was the manufacturer of the aftermarket Model B carb? I have two Marvel
Scheblers that are quite similar to the B and have the same orientation of
the float. I have been unable to get them to run properly on my A but
understand from Terry Oberer that they are an excellent carb and would like
to rebuild them if parts are available. Don Hicks
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65 |
Cy,
My responses between yours,,,
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65
>
> Who's "they"? You may have a damaged needle valve or seat. The adjusting
> needle should not be bottomed as you will damage the needle which can be
> replaced or the seat which is part of the carb body and can't be replaced.
>
My mentor says that the engine should be able to be starved , and quit if
you turn in the idle screw too much. I can turn mine in to the bottom and
continues to run.
> Now can you get the engine to idle? If so what is the problem? Check the
> float level with the page I just sent to IF you can't get it to idle. My
> manual says that the idle circuit only works up to "approximately 900 to
> 1000 RPM."
>
Idles ok. if needle in all the way---idles richly. if opened slightly goes
raggedey
> My large manual says that if it still idles too rich to first check the
> primer.
>
Checked the primer by disconnecting the tube at the "spyder" and sucking
thru it, but can't pull anything thru it.
> Your idle may be too fast as the C series manual says 475 to 525 but this
> would be after break in. The butterfly throttle should be mid-way between
> the two idle ports.
>
My guy said that with a light plane like the piet, should be around 550, or
the plane will be creeping. All the problems I had were at 550/575 rpm.
> The float level needle only needs replacing if the carb drips a lot of gas
> after being shut down. Even if you replace this needle, some complain
that
> it still drips. It is recommended to replace the rubber tipped needle the
> later model delrin needle. If you go with the delrin needle you have to
> re-weight the float per ACSB-84 which you can find a copy in the Univair
> catalog.
>
Replaced the float needle just last week. Just before I found out the
valves were bad. Just today I had some drizzeling at the carb. But in the
long run, the carb doesn't leak. Like overnight. Just that the carb heat
box is a sloppy mess after running.
> I have sent this on to Glen Jeffries who has forgotten more than I'll ever
> know about small Continentals.
>
Thanks Cy,
walt
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65
>
>
>
>
> Cy,
> Had done my A-65 over before I started the Piet. It sat till about a
month
> ago when I ran it. Ran kind of sloppy and rich. My mentor checked it out
> and the rear cyl.s had real bad valves. I had lapped them in thinking
that
> that was it, during my rebuild, but it turns out that they leaked like a
> seive. After pulling the cyl's off my mentor was good enough to redo the
> seats and the valves, so that's not a problem anymore. But still got the
> carb problem. When idling, I can run the idle screw all the way in (where
> it runs the best) but it still won't kill the engine( at 550 rpm) which
they
> say it should do. It's got to be getting gas from somewhere else, but I
> can't figure it out. Should have bought the Stromberg manual for $15.00,
> but I didn't. figured someone might have it in their computer.
> walt
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65
>
>
> >
> > There is a fair manual in the old A series manual. The old C series
manual
> > is a little more complete. What do you need to know?
> >
> > Cy Galley - Bellanca Champion Club
> > Newsletter Editor & EAA TC
> > www.bellanca-championclub.com
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net>
> > To: "Fishnet" ; "piet discussion"
> >
> > Subject: Pietenpol-List: looking for a Stromberg manual for A-65
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Anyone scan a manual for a Carb for an A-65, that they could share?
> > thanks
> > walt
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kip & Beth Gardner <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: B model carb |
List,
Can the B model carb several of you were discussing be configured in a
gravity-feed/updraft configuration with carb heat like a Stromberg or other
aircraft carb? Can you rig a mixture control & does that make sense? It
sounds like a good, economical alternative to a Stromberg or one of those
new, pricey throttle-body carbs that are out there. Any particular problems
with it? Wm. Wynne says that his conversion needs a carb that will suck at
least 350cfm, is the B up to that? I've heard enough discssions on this
list of problems with old Strombergs like what Walt is currently
experiencing that I'm not sure I want to go that route.
I hadn't known (or had forgotten - more pre-senior moments these days!)
that Bernie used the model B on his Corvair-powered planes. Andrew P. let
me look over "The Last Original" when I visited him a couple years ago, but
we didn't pull the cowling, so I didn't get a look under the hood.
Cheers!
Kip Gardner
426 Schneider St. SE
North Canton, OH 44720
(330) 494-1775
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
| Subject: | Craig visit to Chapter ??? up in West Palm Beach area. |
Pancake
breakfast.
Well by popular acclaim, I return to the face the lions in their den. The overwhelming
number of e-mails I received to do so, convinced me! And if you believe
that, then maybe I can sell you the Rickenbacker Causeway bridge? The
truth be known, ( shhh! this is a secret ) I'm so dumb, I can't figure out how
to unsubscribe and make it work. So, we will make do with the situation. (
this is a bit of joking for the mentally retarded and prigs on the list, so we
don't misunderstand what is in print? )
Spent the weekend up visiting Craig, at the Chapter pancake breakfast. Those
pancakes stayed with me and the wife for the whole day and into the evening.
( a compliment not a criticism ) Forget the chapter number? Was intrigued by
a Long Eze and that is definitely a plane I would like to have, but probably
will never be able to afford, for commuting from Florida to Central and South
America.
Craig is genial, a soft sell kind of guy, my kind of guy actually. A tech counsellor,
which must be somebody important in aviation, cause I'm not a joiner,
but presupposes he knows what he is talking about, I am told my all and sundry
in this specialized niche field of aviation. And he really, really, went out
of his way to play the good samaritan and host. He didn't treat my amateur
opinons like a disease either! His having built 6 or 7 planes of course is impressive,
and all his work is top notch and quality and EXPENSIVE. But he did
have some neat short cuts to offer. I like Craig and can get along with him
real easy. We talk the same language, but I suspect Craig unlike me, can get
along with anybody. Anyway, he charmed me real good.
I cleared up the bit about the PIANO WIRE somebody had suggested. Now this ignoramus,
( me ) thought piano wire was soft wire. But no siree! It is hard
wire, or rod like. One of Craig's chapter friends in an aside mentioned you cannot
bend it, for it will break, you have to thread it. Now that was a very
interesting nugget of information, whoever contributed to this list should have
contributed to that pearl of wisdom. It is amazing what a picture in their
mind, a dummie like me gets with incomplete suggestions. Anyway, I think piano
wire is out for me.
Met Craig's friend, forget his name, who builds airplane engines at Indiantown
airport. Which has a grass taxi way long enough to be the airport and another
real 6700 foot grass strip that is actually the airport surrounded by citrus
plantations, or whatever they call them in mid-Florida? Now Craig's friend
had definite opinions on converting auto engines, which basically were, don't
do it, unless you let somebody who knows how, like him do it for a lot of money.
It is not exactly a piece of advice I would take to heart myself, though there
is probably a lot of truth in such an opinion.
There does some to be hundreds of one people businesses in the homebuilt magazines
making a living of trying to sell stuff to amateurs like me, for the price
of a second hand Lexus and such. Like Carnegie said, " there is a sucker born
every minute".
The Pietenpol was a work of art. Beautiful craftsmanship. I will certainly
work hard, or more sloppy shall we say, to make darned sure mine doesn't turn
out like that. I want mine to turn out, like a little one person plane, that
was parked by some agriculture bi-plane spray planes down the grass taxi way.
I'll get to that little plane in a minute and how it impressed me more than
the Pietenpol, or some of the sincere concerned do-gooders on this list. ( Have
I offended you? Don't mean to, just expressing a difference in opinion as in
any freewheeling debate I am used to doing.)
Anyway, the story is; this Pietenpol plane is donated to a Chapter 501 C organization
by somebody who had heart by-pass or something and lost his medical.
So far, so good. It is a beautiful plane, a work of art. I betcha, you stick
that thing on a trailer and truck it up to Oskosh for judging, it will garner
trophies and cups, galore for the best made Pietenpol. Photographs in magazines
and so on! The propeller is out for fixing and re-pitching. I never quite
got the story straight, whether the plane won't fly with that propeller as it
is pitched; or it flys and won't climb with the pitch in the propeller? There
is a Continental 65 hp I think powering that plane.
I am anxiously waiting to see if it will fly with the re-pitched propeller.
Then will make up my mind. But the plane has to fly? Amusingly enough, Craig's
friend in a long conversation, stated some stories about VW diesel engines
and how none of those planes are flying either, but they look good at Oskosh.
Therein, lies the essence of the Pietenpol. Can you fly it to Oskosh? Or do
you have to truck it in on a trailer?
Craig has built 6 or 7 planes, and I have built zero. So we wait and see what
happens with that propeller? Now me, I would want to know how much compression
you are supposed to have on that 40 year old many times rebuilt engine and
then do a compression check on the cylinders too. I believe with the re-pitched
propeller and if the engine is up to snuff, the plane might fly, but not likely
fly well. There was another item I noticed, but really didn't express at
the time, until I slept overnight and let my subconscious work on what I saw
and form an opinion. The plane had been built SAFE! I mean real safe, with
all the bells and whistles that the safety nuts like Leon on this list insist
on. So SAFE in fact, I think it weighs too much to get off the ground. Or if
it gets off the ground, it is going to be dangerous, cause it has no margins
of safety on 65 hp. I could be wrong though? Cause I have never built an airplane
and those guys have and the saftey freaks on this list have built planes
too. So they probably know more than I do?
But I did notice HUGE WING STRUTS. I also noticed that the wood fuselage braces
and longerons I could see, were not built to specs. At least they were 4
times the size of mine thereabouts. What the rest of the fuselage looks like,
I don't know under that fabric? That plane has so much stuff on there, it is
overweight would be my guess? I think before anybody bought that plane, they
would have to check the engine for compression and check how much that plane
actually weighs? Maybe I am all wet here. But that is my brief opinion. Ted
over in Naples is flying his Pietenpol. When this one in West Palm flies,
I want to see it? From the ground though!
I did learn how to make a step in the side of the fuselage for climbing in and
out of the cockpit. I am definitely going to incorporate that idea. Great idea!
Little flap door for your toes and step on the bottom longeron.
I did mention the little plane, that looks like a Pietenpol Scout, except the
wing thingmajigs that hold up the wing, or support the fuselage go to a pyramid
instead. This was half a mile down the grass taxi way, tied down. This plane
looked crude, cheap and well used. It has a Pietenpol wing and fuselage.
Some kind of engine that you pull a starter cord and a 4 cog belt reduction
over aluminum pulleys. The Cowling was fastened on with those snaps, like you
used to have on suitcases. The tail wheel kind of looked like a rubber wheel
off a supermarket cart. The speedometer was one of those $5 plastic gadget like
tubes, with a floater inside, in which you point the bottom open clear plastic
tube at the wind and it lifts the floater and the wind speed is marked on
the test tube looking gadget. This was clamped with a plastic tie to a wing
strut. Beautiful makeshift. Off hand, the plane looked like it has been flown
often and hard. For workmanship, it would not win a single prize I think.
But I would estimate the guy built it for about a $1000 in today's money. That
was one nice rugged little plane that somebody has had a heck of a lot of fun
out of.
The Pietenpol on the other hand, looks like it cost the better part of $30,000
and doesn't fly. So you take your choices?
Now Craig's friend is in the engine rebuilding business, engine making business
and also builds replicas to scale and also models. He sounded a bit like
the purists on this list. I listened and absorbed this outlook, trying to get
an insight into what makes people build stuff like this. In his case, it is
money and a living. That makes a lot of logical sense. But the arguments about
whether it is a TRUE Pietenpol or a GN-1, which I think means it is a modification
left me a bit amused. But that is just my character fault?
Essentially, there seem to be people in this new world I am entering, who are
antique replica builders, or modify things to suit them. I fall in the latter
category. To the former purists, there also seem to be a couple of categories.
I never could quite get the difference settled in my mind. And since I'm
not the least bit interested, never paid it no mind. But after the flames on
this listserve, I tried to learn as Kip says for me, apologetically.
As far as I can see, there are no authentic, original Pietenpols anywhere in
the world? There are however a lot of replicas. An authentic Pietenpol has to
have a tail skid with a steel wedge welded on, that digs through the grass field,
or strip. If it has a wheel, it is not authentic. An authentic Pietenpol
has to have cotton fabric doped. You can't use Ceconite, or Dacron, etc.
An authentic Pietenpol has to have the D shaped front leading edge of the wing,
formed with Quaker Oats cardboard cylinder cartons, cut and pasted together.
And so it goes.
Craig gave me some very valuable lessons in steel, different types and how they
are either flexible, or hard and crack and so on. The 4130 steel if the difference
in price does not seem too bad sounds like a good idea. 4130 steel
is mentioned on the plans, the three set I have. But I think these plans have
been modified a few times since 1929? Some archive and knowledge buff, might
just tell us when 4130 steel was invented? What year? I kind of think that
it didn't exist in 1929, but I could easily be wrong as this is a new field and
who am I a neophyte dummy to question the knowledge of my betters? ( That's
a joke Leon and like minded friends! You are supposed to laugh Ha! Ha! Ha! )
Then we come to control cables. I looked at it on the different planes and
so on. I don't know what to say? The stainless steel cable I saw, would be used
to pull a one ton boat, on a boat trailer up a boat ramp by a pickup truck.
The ailerons and elevators and rudder don't seem to require more than 15 or
20 lbs pressure to move them liddle biddy things? A ton strength stainless steel
wire to move a 15 pound pressure aileron doen't seem matched? Craig said
it right, that a 3/16 wire was probably good enough. Then there are all those
nylon, and plastic pulleys? Surely they did not exist in 1929?
If you are going to modernize for SAFETY sakes which is not a bad idea, then
the Pietenpol is a GN-1 apparently? True or false? If you are going to use 1/8
stainless control cables and plastic pulleys, then you are not authentic?
Anyway, the Pietenpol I looked at was over built and obviously overweight to some
extent. Pulleys and turnbuckles. I was really impressed with Craigs use
of rod. Threaded ends and some kind of forked Y end things you screw on and braze.
I think I will go that route. But if you purists insist on using modern materials
in the pursuit of SAFETY, then do keep in mind, you are no longer a purist
authentic. Not in my opinion anyway. A model A radiator sticking up there
makes you a replica, but not authentic, again in my opinion.
Actually, I've not got around to building a Carbon Dragon yet, but when I do,
and learn how to do those carbon fiber control rods, that is the way I would
really go, to save weight and increase strength and safety. But there you go,
no experience in that area yet?
Enough! Let the FLAMES BEGIN!
Ray Auxillou
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Craig visit to Chapter ??? up in West Palm Beach area. |
Pancake breakfast.
One comment! If you plan to get your "Piet" judged at Oshkosh it must by
flown.
You can either fly in or truck in then it must be assembled and flown before
the judging deadline. Most are flown in. Less than one every 5 years have
been trucked it.
We have helped assemble these trucked in planes but in 30 years, only one
has won. We and the owners spent almost the entire week getting it to run so
it could be flown. They only beat the judging deadline about 5 minutes. This
was an antique.
I believe that experimentals have to have their test time flown off before
judging. But what do I know, I only fix them.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
Always looking for articles for the Experimenter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fisherman Caye" <cayecaulker(at)justice.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Craig visit to Chapter ??? up in West Palm Beach
area. Pancake breakfast.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JamesJboyer(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Craig visit to Chapter ??? up in West Palm Beach area. |
Pa...
Hi Ray,
Welcome back,
I think the steel they used earlier was tha alloy 1025. 1025 was used in the
Piper Cubs, Taylorcrafts, etc. for many years. I don't know when 4130 came
along but it is relatively new.
Its the same story, everyone gets bent out of shape over aircraft plywood. I
doubt that Cherry Grove Minnesota had any aircraft plywood. I doubt it had
yet been noted as aircraft ply in 1929. Anyway I used Marine 4mm and 6 mm
inplace of 1/8" and 1/4". It was about 1/3 price of aircraft and is beautiful
ply.
People tend to think about things in light of todays technology. Most of
which did not exist in the 1920's or 30's.
Anyway, its great to read your message Ray.
Cheers, Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Brusilow" <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Hey Ray;
The Piet you saw tied down at Indiantown is a Piet ultralight version .
I didn't get to see the one in the hangar, but it sounds like a Grega.
Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kip & Beth Gardner <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Craig visit to Chapter ??? up in West Palm |
Beach area. Pancake breakfast.
Ray,
Well, I can't even begin to respond to your whole letter, I have a kid to
keep tabs on, so I'm lucky to get 10 min. free at a time.
However, to address your major points:
First, there IS such a thing as a 'real' Pietenpol. It's one built
more-or-less to Bernie Pietenpol's plans. This leaves a lot of room for
modifications inthe areas Bernie did not address very clearly, or where the
tecnology has improved, as in the use of 4130 steel as opposed to the older
1025 alloy that was used in Bernie's early days.
Bernie built 20 or so versions of this plane in his lifetime, of which 2 or
3 survive. One of them is owned by his grandson, Andrew. I mention it
because it demonstrates the progression from ther original 1929 model to
the 1966 model, both built by Bernie. The 1966 model incorporated all the
modern advancements that Bernie could get his hands on relative to his
original 1929 version, namely, Ceconite fabric wings, 4130 steel, aircraft
grade nuts & bolts, and a Corvair engine. Bernie was not a stickler for
keeping things original - he incorporated improvements all through his
life. The plans, howevr, were not changed al that much - just 2 major
revisions in all those years.
My point is that you can build a 'real' Pietenpol in any number of ways,
but you should stick to the plans for the basic stuff.
Second, the 'Pietenpol' that you saw that impressed you so much sounds
suspiciously like an Ultralight Pietenpol replica commonly known as the
"Ultra Piet". It's a nice little plane, but is a legal ultralight, not a
full-size Piet.
Third, I can't comment on the 'beautiful' Pietenpol you saw and it's flying
or non-flying qualities. But, I can tell you this. I've seen or flown in
four different Piets. All were excellent or truly beautiful examples of
workmanship, care and choice of materials. At one time or another, all
have made at least one trip to Oshkosh or Brodhead (the Pietenpol fly-in in
Wisconsin every summer). For two of these planes, that's a 500 mile trip,
and for one of them, it's a trip of over a thousand miles.
Their engines? Two are powered by A65's and two use Corvairs. One of these
planes (Mike Cuy's) was Grand Champion at Oskosh in 1998. (Remember, he
flew it there). All of these planes were built to the plans, with different
modifications in non-critical areas that suited the particular builders
ideas (notice I said 'non-critical').
Fourthly: Part of the reason I keep pushing the Corvair engine is that
William Wynne is a truly good guy who's main goal is to see people
sucessfully convert their own engines for aircraft use. He IS NOT
interested in doing rebuilds and selling them for big bucks - he told me
it's more trouble than it's worth.
Also, he is only a few hours north of you, and every Memorial Day weekend
he hosts a FREE engine building clinic at his shop for anyone who shows up.
If you go prepared with a rebuildable engine & parts, etc. you can have the
majority of your engine work done by the end of the weekend. Mark
MacKellar, on this list, did exactly that last year.
This is not to say that the A65 or C85 is not a good engine & if you look
around you can find one in good condition. Lots of guys are FLYING their
Piets every day with them, no problems.
Glad you hit it off with Craig, I think he can be a big help to you. More
importantly, use the resources of your local chapter too. I'm sure you have
a tech counselor there. Look him up.
I've said it more than once, but I'll say it again - most of us on this
list want you to build a safe plane, and many list members have the
experience to be real help. If someone suggests that something you propose
trying is not safe, ask them why. They may tell you directly, or they may
refer you to something like the Bingelis books or other written reference -
check those out if they do. I think one of the reasons some of the guys got
impatient with you was that it appeared that you were not willing to 'do
your homework' when they suggested you research something - it sure bugged
me!
Good luck!
Kip Gardner (No Flames here, but I don't pull any punches either)
426 Schneider St. SE
North Canton, OH 44720
(330) 494-1775
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Owen Davies" <owen(at)davies.mv.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Craig visit to Chapter ??? up in West Palm Beach area. |
Pancake breakfast.
Among other comments, Fisherman Caye observed:
> Met Craig's friend, forget his name, who builds airplane engines at
Indiantown airport.
> Which has a grass taxi way long enough to be the airport and another real
6700 foot
> grass strip that is actually the airport surrounded by citrus
plantations...
I've been by Indiantown--driving, unfortunately. Seemed like a nice little
place, though
stuck out in a part of Florida that didn't appeal to me as much as some of
the more
popular sections. They were talking about putting in an airpark on the far
side
of the runway. Any idea whether it ever happened?
When I was there in the mid-'80s, there was an old guy teaching taildragger
technique
in a Stearman. Probably knew what he was doing. According to a newspaper
profile
that was up on the wall, he'd started one of the first crop dusting
operations in the
country; his partner was a fellow named Lindbergh. He'd also been the
instructor for
a guy named Wiley Post. He'd vanished by the last time I was there, around
'90 or
'91. Wish I could remember his name.
No, alas, I didn't get any stick time with him. Never happened to be there
when he was.
Owen Davies
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 2002 Edition of the Pietenpol Owner Directory |
I would like a copy. $5 is in the mail.
William Koucky
972 S. Forestlane Dr.
Traverse City, MI 49686
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 2002 Edition of the Pietenpol Owner Directory |
Sorry about that. That was to be sent to Doc Mosher and not the list.
William Koucky
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kip & Beth Gardner <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Craig visit to Chapter ??? up in West Palm |
Beach area. Pa...
>
>Hi Ray,
>
>Welcome back,
>
>I think the steel they used earlier was tha alloy 1025. 1025 was used in the
>Piper Cubs, Taylorcrafts, etc. for many years. I don't know when 4130 came
>along but it is relatively new.
>
>Its the same story, everyone gets bent out of shape over aircraft plywood. I
>doubt that Cherry Grove Minnesota had any aircraft plywood. I doubt it had
>yet been noted as aircraft ply in 1929. Anyway I used Marine 4mm and 6 mm
>inplace of 1/8" and 1/4". It was about 1/3 price of aircraft and is beautiful
>ply.
>
>People tend to think about things in light of todays technology. Most of
>which did not exist in the 1920's or 30's.
>
>Anyway, its great to read your message Ray.
>
>Cheers, Jim
Jim/Ray,
If someone has a more accurate date, feel free to correct me, but I think
4130 came into general usage around WW2. I have a book on aircraft
materials and processes published in 1946 that talks a lot about 4130, but
in such a way that it's obviously fairly new technology for the time.
Ray, one other thought on materials safety, since you are a long-time boat
guy. Consider that when you are flying along at 85-90mph (a normal Piet
cruise speed), the forces acting on your plane are the equivalent of flying
in a class 2 hurricane the whole time you are in the air! And that's in
calm air! Add any wind or turbulence, and the forces increase accordingly,
all over the aircraft. Now, how often do you build a boat to stand up to
that every time you go out in it? I don't know about you, but I spent more
time than I wanted to aboard ships 'enjoying' weather that I'd much rather
have experienced from the safety of my bed at home.
Granted, it's not hard to build a vessel to stand up to such conditions,
but you are going to pay a big weight penalty for the strength (ever been
aboard an icebreaker?).
Now, add to your airplane the complicating fact that in addition to the
needed strength, it HAS to be light enough to get into the air. That's the
reason we keep pounding on you to use aircraft-grade materials or a
WELL-RESEARCHED alternative for structural,strength-critical areas.
One of the reasons to use aircraft-grade hardware in structural areas is
that the standard low-carbon alloy hardware-store variety hardware would
have to be twice as large (and 2-4 times heavier) to get the same strength.
And then you have the issues that Jack Phillips raised about hardware-store
stuff getting embrittled by vibration & cold-working. And you can't
safety-wire hardware-store nuts, so they will eventually work loose from
their bolts because of the same vibration issues. There are other
considerations as well, but that should be enough to make you think about
it!
BTW, in those places where your hardware is not for structural purposes
(like the bolts that attach the horizontal stabilizer), you can use
hardware store bolt & nuts, but it would probably be a good idea to get
stainless-steel. Most good harware stores carry them. You get the advantage
of corrosion resistance, and stainless bolts are usually fine-thread like
aircraft-grade ones, so you gain some strength there.
On the other hand, Jim's point about marine plywood is well-taken. Several
varieties of European marine ply have specs very close to current
aircraft-grade plywood (Gary Meadows researched this), and you can probably
safely use it as a direct substitute for aircraft ply. My point is,
somebody on the list CAREFULLY checked out the specs of the alternative
material, determined that they were good enough for aircraft use and shared
that information with the group.
Cheers!
Kip Gardner
426 Schneider St. SE
North Canton, OH 44720
(330) 494-1775
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | Belated List of Contributors #2... |
Dear Listers,
I'd like to apologize for the delay in posting the 2001 List of
Contributors Number 2, as well as getting behind in the List Photo
Shares. Here's my sad story... Over the Christmas holidays, I was working
out in the shop on a rotating drum sander. I was sanding out the woofer
hole in a speaker enclosure and, long story short, the part got away from
me and started spinning like a Hula hoop on the drum. Rather than just
turning the machine off like I should have done, I tried to grab the part
and in the process badly broke the ring fingers on *both* my right and left
hands!! I had to go in for surgery on the left hand because of the joint
damage and was stuck in a thing called an "external fixator" for almost 4
weeks. The right hand has healed up well, but the left one is very stiff
and I'm currently only getting about 70 degrees of bend. The doctor says
that I will get 80-90% of the moment back with a great deal of therapy and
I'm going to hold them to that...
The moral of the story is that even a sander can be a dangerous tool. I
had been working with a table saw, drill press, scroll saw, and high power
routers all day long and afforded them all the respect they deserved. But
with the sander, I never even thought about how things could go bad. It
just didn't seem like a dangerous tool. Be careful out there in the
shop. In a moment you can hurt yourself; hurt yourself in such a way that
you will have to live with the damage the rest of your life. Nothing is
worth that.
I'm finally back working on the computer and getting back to email and
other stuff. Later today I will be processing the mound of Photo Shares
that have backed up while I was out. I also just finished up the 2001 List
Contributions and have included the List Number 2 below.
I want to thank everyone that has so generously contributed to the List
this past year! It is your Contributions that make these Lists possible.
I understand that the Van's Videos from the Builder's Bookstore should be
shipping very soon if not already, and the discount coupons from Brown
Tools should already have arrived. Thanks again to Andy Gold and Michael
Brown for their generous support of the Lists this year with these giveaways!
Oh, and now that my fingers are working pretty well again, I've decided to
go ahead and finish my RV-4!! I had a LOT of guilt over wanting to sell
it... :-)
Happy Building and Flying!
Matt Dralle
Email List Administrator
Alexander, Don
Alexander, George
Andrews, Jim
Anonymous
Blake, James
Bowman, John
Buryl, Hill
Butler, Sherman
Cantrell, Jimmy
DeRuiter, Marcel
Deffner, David
Graumlich, Tom
Griffin, Randy
Harbour, Keith
Hunt, Robin
Jannon, Terence
Johnson, Jackie
Kahn, Steve
Labhart, Norm
Laird, David
Larson, Joe
Licking, Larry
Maynard, Brad
Navratil, Richard
Noonan, Thomas
Petersen, Paul
Reed, Gary
Rogers, Ken
Salter, Phillip
Schmit, John
Schultz, David
Sheffield, Ray
Smith, Edmond
Staley, Dick
Utterback, Tom
Uvanni, Bruce
Williams, Henry
Wilson, Robert
Woodward, Don
Worthington, Victor
Zirges, Malcom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gene Rambo" <rambog(at)erols.com> |
I'd be curious to know who told the Fisherman that Piano wire can't be bent,
but must be threaded. There are a lot of pianos out there that must be
breaking strings right and left.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
Merrily we go along. Seem to have got some responses as I check. It is going
to be too many for me to come back on. And since I don't know what I am talking
about probably fruitless. But all opinions are useful for what seems to
be a lot of amateurs and inexperienced people like me, planning or starting to
build a Pietenpol.
Now don't take my remarks about antiques, replicas and such as the final word
from me. I am after all, if you take the time to look up the word iconoclast
not serious, only agitating. In case, the serious guys like Leon and friends
can't understand that nuance? Seems exceedingly strange to have to explain humor?
I tend to explain my thinking processes with an analogy. I certainly liked that
one I just read about with the Force 2 Hurricane winds. That I can easily
and immediately imagine and relate to. Another much earlier remark which made
a profound impression on me, as to technical steel preferences, was the fellow
that said to write him in my WILL, if I used that aluminum strap I bought from
Home Depot. The aluminum strap immediately went into the scrap box as a result
of that comment.
There are therefore other ways to stress SAFETY, material preferences and strengths,
using an analogy, or better yet, a bit of history and comparisons. Just
because some expert says something is the only way to do something in his
experience, while valid, I still question such an attitude? Cause everybody's
experience results in different conclusions. The old "I'm from Missouri" cliche
is appropriate.
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
| Subject: | new photo on building page |
http://members.tripod.com/~speculation/pietenpolplaneconstruction.html
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | [ Michael Brusilow ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
| From: | Email List Photo Shares <pictures(at)matronics.com> |
A new Email List Photo Share is available:
Poster: Michael Brusilow
Subject: Mr Sam & Friend
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/mb-albany@worldnet.att.net.02.17.2002/index.html
--------------------------------------------
o EMAIL LIST PHOTO SHARE
Share your files and photos with other List members simply by
emailing the files to:
pictures(at)matronics.com
Please view the typical Share above and include the Description Text
Fields as shown along with your submission of files and photos.
o Main Photo Share Index:
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
--------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | [ John Dilatush ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
| From: | Email List Photo Shares <pictures(at)matronics.com> |
A new Email List Photo Share is available:
Poster: John Dilatush
Subject: John Dilatush Piet
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/dilatush@amigo.net.02.17.2002/index.html
--------------------------------------------
o EMAIL LIST PHOTO SHARE
Share your files and photos with other List members simply by
emailing the files to:
pictures(at)matronics.com
Please view the typical Share above and include the Description Text
Fields as shown along with your submission of files and photos.
o Main Photo Share Index:
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
--------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Ford "model B" carb on corvair |
In a message dated 2/16/02 7:57:00 PM Pacific Standard Time,
DonanClara(at)aol.com writes:
> Doug,
> Who was the manufacturer of the aftermarket Model B carb? I have two Marvel
>
> Scheblers that are quite similar to the B and have the same orientation of
> the float. I have been unable to get them to run properly on my A but
> understand from Terry Oberer that they are an excellent carb and would like
>
> to rebuild them if parts are available. Don Hicks
>
>
>
Don,
I am not sure who the manufacture was. They were sold by many places such as
Western Auto, Sears, Wards, etc. I have been told that parts are not
available for the aftermarket B style carbs. I bought the ones I have at the
antique car show here. The Actual B carbs are probably better. The
aftermarket carbs would sometimes warp at the parting line. Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JamesJboyer(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: new photo on building page |
In a message dated 2/17/2002 1:10:47 PM Pacific Standard Time,
cayecaulker(at)justice.com writes:
> http://members.tripod.com/~speculation/pietenpolplaneconstruction.html
>
Hey Ray,
Great photos and text as well. Except that I have 81 pieces of steel cut I
think you are at the same point I am.
I have to fix my camera software. When I get it back up, hopefully Tuesday I
will send you some pictures of my Piet.
Cheers, Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "twinboom" <twinboom(at)MSN.com> |
We use piano wire all the time for control rods in R/C airplanes. It is
extremely stout. It is bendable, but not easily done.
Doug Blackburn, Arrowbear Lake, So. Cal.
Inland Slope Rebels, Riverside Ca.
<http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/ISR>
----- Original Message -----
From: Gene Rambo <rambog(at)erols.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: piano wire
>
> I'd be curious to know who told the Fisherman that Piano wire can't be
bent,
> but must be threaded. There are a lot of pianos out there that must be
> breaking strings right and left.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: new photo on building page |
In a message dated 2/17/02 4:10:47 PM Eastern Standard Time,
cayecaulker(at)justice.com writes:
<<
http://members.tripod.com/~speculation/pietenpolplaneconstruction.html
>>
Looks like its coming right along Ray. You and Sam look like you are having
alot of fun! Looking at the picture of the inside of the cockpit, where the
seat is, wondered what kind of plywood you used ?
-dennis the menace
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Ford "model B" carb on corvair |
I just read that the model B aftermarket carbs were made by Tillotson. THis
is per the article in the fall 2001 To Fly written by Bob Whittier.
Chris bobka
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
Doug413(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Ford "model B" carb on corvair
In a message dated 2/16/02 7:57:00 PM Pacific Standard Time,
DonanClara(at)aol.com writes:
> Doug,
> Who was the manufacturer of the aftermarket Model B carb? I have two
Marvel
>
> Scheblers that are quite similar to the B and have the same orientation of
> the float. I have been unable to get them to run properly on my A but
> understand from Terry Oberer that they are an excellent carb and would
like
>
> to rebuild them if parts are available. Don Hicks
>
>
Don,
I am not sure who the manufacture was. They were sold by many places such
as
Western Auto, Sears, Wards, etc. I have been told that parts are not
available for the aftermarket B style carbs. I bought the ones I have at
the
antique car show here. The Actual B carbs are probably better. The
aftermarket carbs would sometimes warp at the parting line. Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net> |
The 4130 steel spec goes back to the mid 1920's. Many of the parts on the
Waco Model 10 and its derivatives call for its use. Thsi in the age when the
OX-5 was king. Elsewhere in the waco the 1025 carbon steel, still pretty
strong in its own right, was used. 1025 is not "mild steel" by any stretch
of the imagination.
Chria bobka
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Kip &
Beth Gardner
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Craig visit to Chapter ??? up in West
PalmBeach area. Pa...
>
>Hi Ray,
>
>Welcome back,
>
>I think the steel they used earlier was tha alloy 1025. 1025 was used in
the
>Piper Cubs, Taylorcrafts, etc. for many years. I don't know when 4130 came
>along but it is relatively new.
>
>Its the same story, everyone gets bent out of shape over aircraft plywood.
I
>doubt that Cherry Grove Minnesota had any aircraft plywood. I doubt it had
>yet been noted as aircraft ply in 1929. Anyway I used Marine 4mm and 6 mm
>inplace of 1/8" and 1/4". It was about 1/3 price of aircraft and is
beautiful
>ply.
>
>People tend to think about things in light of todays technology. Most of
>which did not exist in the 1920's or 30's.
>
>Anyway, its great to read your message Ray.
>
>Cheers, Jim
Jim/Ray,
If someone has a more accurate date, feel free to correct me, but I think
4130 came into general usage around WW2. I have a book on aircraft
materials and processes published in 1946 that talks a lot about 4130, but
in such a way that it's obviously fairly new technology for the time.
Ray, one other thought on materials safety, since you are a long-time boat
guy. Consider that when you are flying along at 85-90mph (a normal Piet
cruise speed), the forces acting on your plane are the equivalent of flying
in a class 2 hurricane the whole time you are in the air! And that's in
calm air! Add any wind or turbulence, and the forces increase accordingly,
all over the aircraft. Now, how often do you build a boat to stand up to
that every time you go out in it? I don't know about you, but I spent more
time than I wanted to aboard ships 'enjoying' weather that I'd much rather
have experienced from the safety of my bed at home.
Granted, it's not hard to build a vessel to stand up to such conditions,
but you are going to pay a big weight penalty for the strength (ever been
aboard an icebreaker?).
Now, add to your airplane the complicating fact that in addition to the
needed strength, it HAS to be light enough to get into the air. That's the
reason we keep pounding on you to use aircraft-grade materials or a
WELL-RESEARCHED alternative for structural,strength-critical areas.
One of the reasons to use aircraft-grade hardware in structural areas is
that the standard low-carbon alloy hardware-store variety hardware would
have to be twice as large (and 2-4 times heavier) to get the same strength.
And then you have the issues that Jack Phillips raised about hardware-store
stuff getting embrittled by vibration & cold-working. And you can't
safety-wire hardware-store nuts, so they will eventually work loose from
their bolts because of the same vibration issues. There are other
considerations as well, but that should be enough to make you think about
it!
BTW, in those places where your hardware is not for structural purposes
(like the bolts that attach the horizontal stabilizer), you can use
hardware store bolt & nuts, but it would probably be a good idea to get
stainless-steel. Most good harware stores carry them. You get the advantage
of corrosion resistance, and stainless bolts are usually fine-thread like
aircraft-grade ones, so you gain some strength there.
On the other hand, Jim's point about marine plywood is well-taken. Several
varieties of European marine ply have specs very close to current
aircraft-grade plywood (Gary Meadows researched this), and you can probably
safely use it as a direct substitute for aircraft ply. My point is,
somebody on the list CAREFULLY checked out the specs of the alternative
material, determined that they were good enough for aircraft use and shared
that information with the group.
Cheers!
Kip Gardner
426 Schneider St. SE
North Canton, OH 44720
(330) 494-1775
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | I dont think you can thread piano wire |
If I remember right, my attempts at threading piano wire were futile. It is
too hard and would most like ruin the die or the tool bit.
Chris Bobka
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Fisherman
Caye
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Craig visit to Chapter ??? up in West Palm
Beach area. Pancake breakfast.
Well by popular acclaim, I return to the face the lions in their den. The
overwhelming number of e-mails I received to do so, convinced me! And if
you believe that, then maybe I can sell you the Rickenbacker Causeway
bridge? The truth be known, ( shhh! this is a secret ) I'm so dumb, I
can't figure out how to unsubscribe and make it work. So, we will make do
with the situation. ( this is a bit of joking for the mentally retarded and
prigs on the list, so we don't misunderstand what is in print? )
Spent the weekend up visiting Craig, at the Chapter pancake breakfast.
Those pancakes stayed with me and the wife for the whole day and into the
evening. ( a compliment not a criticism ) Forget the chapter number? Was
intrigued by a Long Eze and that is definitely a plane I would like to have,
but probably will never be able to afford, for commuting from Florida to
Central and South America.
Craig is genial, a soft sell kind of guy, my kind of guy actually. A tech
counsellor, which must be somebody important in aviation, cause I'm not a
joiner, but presupposes he knows what he is talking about, I am told my all
and sundry in this specialized niche field of aviation. And he really,
really, went out of his way to play the good samaritan and host. He didn't
treat my amateur opinons like a disease either! His having built 6 or 7
planes of course is impressive, and all his work is top notch and quality
and EXPENSIVE. But he did have some neat short cuts to offer. I like Craig
and can get along with him real easy. We talk the same language, but I
suspect Craig unlike me, can get along with anybody. Anyway, he charmed me
real good.
I cleared up the bit about the PIANO WIRE somebody had suggested. Now
this ignoramus, ( me ) thought piano wire was soft wire. But no siree! It
is hard wire, or rod like. One of Craig's chapter friends in an aside
mentioned you cannot bend it, for it will break, you have to thread it. Now
that was a very interesting nugget of information, whoever contributed to
this list should have contributed to that pearl of wisdom. It is amazing
what a picture in their mind, a dummie like me gets with incomplete
suggestions. Anyway, I think piano wire is out for me.
Met Craig's friend, forget his name, who builds airplane engines at
Indiantown airport. Which has a grass taxi way long enough to be the
airport and another real 6700 foot grass strip that is actually the airport
surrounded by citrus plantations, or whatever they call them in mid-Florida?
Now Craig's friend had definite opinions on converting auto engines, which
basically were, don't do it, unless you let somebody who knows how, like him
do it for a lot of money.
It is not exactly a piece of advice I would take to heart myself, though
there is probably a lot of truth in such an opinion.
There does some to be hundreds of one people businesses in the homebuilt
magazines making a living of trying to sell stuff to amateurs like me, for
the price of a second hand Lexus and such. Like Carnegie said, " there is a
sucker born every minute".
The Pietenpol was a work of art. Beautiful craftsmanship. I will
certainly work hard, or more sloppy shall we say, to make darned sure mine
doesn't turn out like that. I want mine to turn out, like a little one
person plane, that was parked by some agriculture bi-plane spray planes down
the grass taxi way. I'll get to that little plane in a minute and how it
impressed me more than the Pietenpol, or some of the sincere concerned
do-gooders on this list. ( Have I offended you? Don't mean to, just
expressing a difference in opinion as in any freewheeling debate I am used
to doing.)
Anyway, the story is; this Pietenpol plane is donated to a Chapter 501 C
organization by somebody who had heart by-pass or something and lost his
medical. So far, so good. It is a beautiful plane, a work of art. I
betcha, you stick that thing on a trailer and truck it up to Oskosh for
judging, it will garner trophies and cups, galore for the best made
Pietenpol. Photographs in magazines and so on! The propeller is out for
fixing and re-pitching. I never quite got the story straight, whether the
plane won't fly with that propeller as it is pitched; or it flys and won't
climb with the pitch in the propeller? There is a Continental 65 hp I think
powering that plane.
I am anxiously waiting to see if it will fly with the re-pitched
propeller. Then will make up my mind. But the plane has to fly?
Amusingly enough, Craig's friend in a long conversation, stated some stories
about VW diesel engines and how none of those planes are flying either, but
they look good at Oskosh.
Therein, lies the essence of the Pietenpol. Can you fly it to Oskosh? Or
do you have to truck it in on a trailer?
Craig has built 6 or 7 planes, and I have built zero. So we wait and see
what happens with that propeller? Now me, I would want to know how much
compression you are supposed to have on that 40 year old many times rebuilt
engine and then do a compression check on the cylinders too. I believe with
the re-pitched propeller and if the engine is up to snuff, the plane might
fly, but not likely fly well. There was another item I noticed, but really
didn't express at the time, until I slept overnight and let my subconscious
work on what I saw and form an opinion. The plane had been built SAFE! I
mean real safe, with all the bells and whistles that the safety nuts like
Leon on this list insist on. So SAFE in fact, I think it weighs too much to
get off the ground. Or if it gets off the ground, it is going to be
dangerous, cause it has no margins of safety on 65 hp. I could be wrong
though? Cause I have never built an airplane and those guys have and the
saftey freaks on t!
his list have built planes too. So they probably know more than I do?
But I did notice HUGE WING STRUTS. I also noticed that the wood fuselage
braces and longerons I could see, were not built to specs. At least they
were 4 times the size of mine thereabouts. What the rest of the fuselage
looks like, I don't know under that fabric? That plane has so much stuff on
there, it is overweight would be my guess? I think before anybody bought
that plane, they would have to check the engine for compression and check
how much that plane actually weighs? Maybe I am all wet here. But that is
my brief opinion. Ted over in Naples is flying his Pietenpol. When this
one in West Palm flies, I want to see it? From the ground though!
I did learn how to make a step in the side of the fuselage for climbing in
and out of the cockpit. I am definitely going to incorporate that idea.
Great idea! Little flap door for your toes and step on the bottom longeron.
I did mention the little plane, that looks like a Pietenpol Scout, except
the wing thingmajigs that hold up the wing, or support the fuselage go to a
pyramid instead. This was half a mile down the grass taxi way, tied down.
This plane looked crude, cheap and well used. It has a Pietenpol wing and
fuselage. Some kind of engine that you pull a starter cord and a 4 cog belt
reduction over aluminum pulleys. The Cowling was fastened on with those
snaps, like you used to have on suitcases. The tail wheel kind of looked
like a rubber wheel off a supermarket cart. The speedometer was one of
those $5 plastic gadget like tubes, with a floater inside, in which you
point the bottom open clear plastic tube at the wind and it lifts the
floater and the wind speed is marked on the test tube looking gadget. This
was clamped with a plastic tie to a wing strut. Beautiful makeshift. Off
hand, the plane looked like it has been flown often and hard. For
workmanship, it would not win!
a single prize I think. But I would estimate the guy built it for about a
$1000 in today's money. That was one nice rugged little plane that somebody
has had a heck of a lot of fun out of.
The Pietenpol on the other hand, looks like it cost the better part of
$30,000 and doesn't fly. So you take your choices?
Now Craig's friend is in the engine rebuilding business, engine making
business and also builds replicas to scale and also models. He sounded a
bit like the purists on this list. I listened and absorbed this outlook,
trying to get an insight into what makes people build stuff like this. In
his case, it is money and a living. That makes a lot of logical sense. But
the arguments about whether it is a TRUE Pietenpol or a GN-1, which I think
means it is a modification left me a bit amused. But that is just my
character fault?
Essentially, there seem to be people in this new world I am entering, who
are antique replica builders, or modify things to suit them. I fall in the
latter category. To the former purists, there also seem to be a couple of
categories. I never could quite get the difference settled in my mind. And
since I'm not the least bit interested, never paid it no mind. But after
the flames on this listserve, I tried to learn as Kip says for me,
apologetically.
As far as I can see, there are no authentic, original Pietenpols anywhere
in the world? There are however a lot of replicas. An authentic Pietenpol
has to have a tail skid with a steel wedge welded on, that digs through the
grass field, or strip. If it has a wheel, it is not authentic. An
authentic Pietenpol has to have cotton fabric doped. You can't use
Ceconite, or Dacron, etc. An authentic Pietenpol has to have the D shaped
front leading edge of the wing, formed with Quaker Oats cardboard cylinder
cartons, cut and pasted together. And so it goes.
Craig gave me some very valuable lessons in steel, different types and
how they are either flexible, or hard and crack and so on. The 4130 steel
if the difference in price does not seem too bad sounds like a good idea.
4130 steel is mentioned on the plans, the three set I have. But I think
these plans have been modified a few times since 1929? Some archive and
knowledge buff, might just tell us when 4130 steel was invented? What year?
I kind of think that it didn't exist in 1929, but I could easily be wrong as
this is a new field and who am I a neophyte dummy to question the knowledge
of my betters? ( That's a joke Leon and like minded friends! You are
supposed to laugh Ha! Ha! Ha! )
Then we come to control cables. I looked at it on the different planes
and so on. I don't know what to say? The stainless steel cable I saw,
would be used to pull a one ton boat, on a boat trailer up a boat ramp by a
pickup truck. The ailerons and elevators and rudder don't seem to require
more than 15 or 20 lbs pressure to move them liddle biddy things? A ton
strength stainless steel wire to move a 15 pound pressure aileron doen't
seem matched? Craig said it right, that a 3/16 wire was probably good
enough. Then there are all those nylon, and plastic pulleys? Surely they
did not exist in 1929?
If you are going to modernize for SAFETY sakes which is not a bad idea,
then the Pietenpol is a GN-1 apparently? True or false? If you are going
to use 1/8 stainless control cables and plastic pulleys, then you are not
authentic? Anyway, the Pietenpol I looked at was over built and obviously
overweight to some extent. Pulleys and turnbuckles. I was really impressed
with Craigs use of rod. Threaded ends and some kind of forked Y end things
you screw on and braze.
I think I will go that route. But if you purists insist on using modern
materials in the pursuit of SAFETY, then do keep in mind, you are no longer
a purist authentic. Not in my opinion anyway. A model A radiator sticking
up there makes you a replica, but not authentic, again in my opinion.
Actually, I've not got around to building a Carbon Dragon yet, but when I
do, and learn how to do those carbon fiber control rods, that is the way I
would really go, to save weight and increase strength and safety. But there
you go, no experience in that area yet?
Enough! Let the FLAMES BEGIN!
Ray Auxillou
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Borodent(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator cable slack |
Piet Pilots
Has anyone noticed, when flying in climb or dive attitude that the cables
that go from the stick to the bellcrank -that one or the other gets slack?
-------------------------
Prior to building the torque tube etc, I made a mockup that showed such
slackness. But it uses real thin cables and the slackness effect in the
actual as per plans built torque tube may be unnoticeable (which is what I
suspect).
-------------------------
I would appreciate any feedback on this
Henry Williams ( borodent)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JEFFREY WILCOX <craigwilcox(at)peoplepc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Craig visit to Chapter ??? up in West Palm |
Beach area. Pancake breakfast.
I categorically deny anything nice Ray might have said about me in his post!
Unfortunately, my email sorter puts the last message received first, so I read
many replies to Ray's nice letter (short book???) before I actually read the document.
The Piet in the hanger (Len Bechtold - www.team-38.com - ) is a plans built Piet. It did not use streamline tube for the struts, however, just round tubing. It is a bit overbuilt, but generally was built as per plans. It had a cruise pitch prop on it, and the owner didn't like the way it climbed - like above 2,000 feet, it didn't want to climb at all. Of course, the fact that he weighed over 300 lb. may have had a bit to do with it.
The little plane that Ray saw farther down the field is a homebuilt powered by
a kawasaki. Nothing to do with a Piet, ultra or otherwise, except that it has
wings and flies. The owner flies it about 2 -3 hours per week, and has a lot
of fun.
Indiantown Airport still has a small fleet of Stearmans, mostly used for mosquito
or crop dusting. No "airpark" yet! Great place to practice flying off grass,
and quiet enough to build some great planes in the hangers.
Ray and I had a lot of fun, visited a couple of projects. The piano wire that
Bill Perry introduced him to was 3/16" hard stuff - I guess you could bend it
if you tried really hard. I personally used some 3/16" 316 or 321 SS, threaded
on each end. Different airplane from a Piet, tho, a bit larger/heavier. Wish
I could make the round wire streamlined!!!
We did have a lot of discussions about using aircraft quality materials where appropriate
on his airplane, and the reasons for doing so. He admits to stating
a few odd things "just to stir things up". I like a bit of that, 'cause it
makes us thing about why we are using the things we are, instead of just going
along blindly. AN/MS things are great, but you don't need them to hold on the
instrument panel. And for an 1700 lb gross airplane like I'm building, 1/8"
SS cable is necessary from the strength aspect. For a smaller, lighter airplane,
it may be necessary due to the size of the pulleys, but 3/16" would work
as well. Hardware store cable for flight controls is a whole other storey - and
we won't go there 'cause it is not suitable for the application, regardless
of strength.
Both Chapter 203 and I enjoyed Ray and Sylvia's visit, and hope that he comes again.
Craig
PeoplePC: It's for people. And it's just smart.
http://www.peoplepc.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Your homepage updates |
Slow load times I suspect. I will reduce the page and make it two web pages later
today.
Was at a friend Virgil's last night and tried to show him the page. In half
an hour he was still loading photographs. I have forgotten what Juno.com ISP
was like and an internal modem, loading at 28,800 bps. I use DSL from the phone
company and they load around quarter million bps, almost instantly.
So, I will make two pages.
He has the collection of "How To" books from EAA back in the 60's and 70's I
used to have. He let me copy some of the 25 titles I want to buy from somebody
at $2.50 each.
I would like to get, if anybody can part with them the following booklets. They
are thin soft cover things.
1) EAA's Aircraft Handbook Vol. 3, 1970
2) EAA Aircraft Design Vol 3, 1970
3)Welding How to series 1970
4) EAA Design Vol 1, File 3
5) EAA Design Vol 2 File 3
6) Modern Aircraft Covering Techniques 1973
Anybody can part with them, for reasons like medical or so forth. I would sincerely
appreciate it?
Ray Auxillou
On Sun, 17 February 2002, "twinboom" wrote:
>
> Ray,
> Checked out your Home page just now. I could get the last two pictures
> to load. They were down at the bottom. One being the Roaring Creek Gorge.
> The other was right above it. I'll try again but thought it might be my
> loading time maybe? The music is cool too! Nice site.......
>
> Doug Blackburn, Arrowbear Lake, So. Cal.
> Inland Slope Rebels, Riverside Ca.
> <http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/ISR>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
| Subject: | Re: new photo on building page |
Used quarter inch construction grade plywood from Home Depot for the seats.
But they flex a bit and am going to strengthen the seat bracing. The way Ted
landed over in Naples, I think the seat has to be stronger if I duplicate that
on a dirt strip. I already broke one glue joint on the cross beam in the center
bouncing on it for a test. Should have used wood lap joints. I thought about
it at the time. BUUUT! So a couple of little light galvanized hardware
store angle irons are called for someplace in there.
Glad to hear the Pietenpol flew over at West Palm, Indiantown.
Craig and I were having a get to know you chat at the pancake breakfast. Apparently
he has been in planes his whole life. Unlike me! Spray pilot and so
forth, with the Air Force. Hinted he was in the DEA in Belize one time back in
the 70's.
I got a kick out of that and joked with him a bit on it. In the 70's, tourism
was non-existant on the Great Barrier Reef of Belize ( about 10,000 islands
) I was pioneering it, in my twin diesel motorsailer and in those days, the only
folks visiting Belize had to come by ship, or air. There was no way to get
there. It was one of the FOUR CORNERS OF THE WORLD! Which is why I liked it.
Tourists fell into several categories. The Shah of Iran types, who were hunting
jaguars and I took their wives out cruising while they waited for 10 days
or so. Oil prospectors and drillers. A fair amount of DEA cowboys with ankle
holster, automatic rifles in the back of the pickup and that sort of thing and
of course your friendly pot smuggler from the USA who was waiting around for
a month or two, for a local crop to ripen and get his load. I made lots of life
time friends from the DEA agents and pot smuggler types and am in touch with
these retired fat, bald headed old guys ( some of them, even today ). It was
a friendly family handshake business in the 70's. But got very violent in the
80's. Anyway, Central America being the hot spot it was then and still is,
I sort of wandered in and around every war in Central America for the last thirty
years. So the CIA and DEA types were always chartering my motorsailer to
go scuba dive the Blue Hole and secretly pump me for information. I was telling
Craig, I have a file 26 feet tall someplace up in Virginia, I suspect. He
told me no, it was only an inch as everything is on microfilm these days.
We were a couple of older guys reminiscing and shooting the bull basically.
Doing the one upmanship jokes. He got me on the one inch micro film put down.
But I got him on the wife bit. He is going to fly his iron version of the Pietenpol,
something like Bacon Duce or some kind of name, to southern Brazil.
Longest leg from Trinidad to the Guyanas about 318 miles. Anyway he has a second
wife from Brazil and mentioned he sort of robbed the cradle cause his Brazilian
wife was 12 years younger than him. Couldn't let it pass, and casually
mentioned, mine was Colombian and she was 14 years younger than me. Fun day
actually. Couple of old guys reminiscing our wild youth.
Anyway, the Pietenpol is coming along. Hasn't cost a thousand dollars yet in
materials, Leon! I remember the $3000 sarcastic crack buddy.
Got my rudder fittings from Vitalis Kapler out of the mail box this morning.
They probably have been sitting there since Saturday, when I was away.
I couldn't afford the rents at Indiantown for the Pietenpol grass strip. But
would like to buy 10 acres or so in either Glades or Hendry county and make my
own. Anybody interested in partnering?
The Pietenpol was chosen by me, to fly the mountains of the Maya Mountain Pine
Ridge in Belize. It has to be picturesque. White scarfes and open cockpit
fit the bill. Leon and the straight laced FAA crowd have to understand, when
I chose this plane back in November to build, I never intended it for the USA.
It was intended for the jungles of Belize.
That said, if I have to fly it here, will try to comply with all local regulations.
But if it is going down to Central America, then I will fly it down.
Local regulations there will apply and I am going to write them, or have an influence.
I flew an Ercoupe across the USA and through Mexico and to Central America
back in 1961. On a students license as far as Brownsville and a $7.50 Mexican
pilots license it took ten minutes to get in Matamorus after that. Learned
a lot of useful stuff. Couldn't get gas several times, the distances were
too far apart, so landed on village plazas and siphoned gas out of farm trucks
for a price. Once bounced for a heck of long time on a very strange long strip,
ashpalt paved surrounded by mountains trying to take off. Must have looked
like a chicken on one leg, trying to take off, hopping down the runway. Later
in the Gulf of Carmen, I read my big thick students HOW TO FLY manual more
carefully and rechecked my Texaco gas station navigation map again. Turned
out the strip was at 6000 feet and I just had a lesson that day in mountain flying
and air density. Betcha that lesson will stay with me to the grave. ( whoops
- wrong analogy there? Ha! Ha! )
Anyway, the Pietenpol will be an Ultra Light in Belize, no license, etc. required.
I have been asked several times over the last few years to design the newer
aviation regulations and do a white paper on it. I plan to basically adopt
the Canadian regulations, in which the Ultra Light weight is around 1200 lbs
or so. It is a lot more anyway than in the USA. Which I personally find ridiculous.
I'm going to write the legislation to make ultra light no registration
no license required at 1600 lbs gross weight, to give Belizeans an edge in
the international aviation business and tourist trade.
So you can see, all the blather by Leon and his like friends, doesn't sweat me
a bit. A friend of mine taking his pilots license north of Orlando is saying
it is costing him around $140 an hour total for flying lessons and my daughter
Wendy just here, says she took some for awhile up here in Miami, but they were
too expensive. There are, or will be shortly a couple of Flying Instructors,
and there are already two A & P's FAA licensed around Consejo Shores in Belize,
in which Sam Riggs of Oklahoma is in process of transferring his Agriculture
Pilot Training business down there. He had just got 50 acres and an airstrip
ready made from the Government. We would like to teach the building of airplanes
to locals down there too. Anybody interested in retiring with the expertise
to Consejo Shores, Belize and volunteer to help out building planes?
http://members.tripod.com/~speculation/firstbelizeanaircraft.html
( 3 of these now in Belize - not test flown yet, waiting for Sam to return from
Oklahoma )
http://members.tripod.com/~speculation/Belizetrip.html
Anyway life is fun and the Pietenpol listserve is adding to it. We will see
how it all turns out? Challenges, that is the secret to a fun life. Each morning
you wake up is a blessing and a surprise!
------------------------------------
On Sun, 17 February 2002, Dmott9(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> In a message dated 2/17/02 4:10:47 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> cayecaulker(at)justice.com writes:
>
> <<
>
> http://members.tripod.com/~speculation/pietenpolplaneconstruction.html
>
> >>
> Looks like its coming right along Ray. You and Sam look like you are having
> alot of fun! Looking at the picture of the inside of the cockpit, where the
> seat is, wondered what kind of plywood you used ?
> -dennis the menace
>
>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Fw: [f-AA] A65 for sale |
FYI
----- Original Message -----
From: <ThomasTholmes512(at)aol.com>
Subject: [f-AA] A65 for sale
Folks,
one of the guys at Selma just put an O200 in his Luscombe. He has an approx
800 hr A65 for sale. Complete w/logs, Carb, and Bendix mags. Mags recently
rebuilt. He's asking $3500 for it.
Jim Sani, jpsani(at)pacbell.net.
Aeronca mailing list
Aeronca(at)mail.westmont.edu
http://mail.westmont.edu/mailman/listinfo/aeronca
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hubbard, Eugene" <ehubbard(at)titan.com> |
| Subject: | I dont think you can thread piano wire |
You also wouldn't want to, since cut (rather than rolled) threads are a
stress point.
Gene
-----Original Message-----
From: Christian Bobka [mailto:bobka(at)charter.net]
Subject: Pietenpol-List: I dont think you can thread piano wire
If I remember right, my attempts at threading piano wire were futile. It is
too hard and would most like ruin the die or the tool bit.
Chris Bobka
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Fisherman
Caye
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Craig visit to Chapter ??? up in West Palm
Beach area. Pancake breakfast.
Well by popular acclaim, I return to the face the lions in their den. The
overwhelming number of e-mails I received to do so, convinced me! And if
you believe that, then maybe I can sell you the Rickenbacker Causeway
bridge? The truth be known, ( shhh! this is a secret ) I'm so dumb, I
can't figure out how to unsubscribe and make it work. So, we will make do
with the situation. ( this is a bit of joking for the mentally retarded and
prigs on the list, so we don't misunderstand what is in print? )
Spent the weekend up visiting Craig, at the Chapter pancake breakfast.
Those pancakes stayed with me and the wife for the whole day and into the
evening. ( a compliment not a criticism ) Forget the chapter number? Was
intrigued by a Long Eze and that is definitely a plane I would like to have,
but probably will never be able to afford, for commuting from Florida to
Central and South America.
Craig is genial, a soft sell kind of guy, my kind of guy actually. A tech
counsellor, which must be somebody important in aviation, cause I'm not a
joiner, but presupposes he knows what he is talking about, I am told my all
and sundry in this specialized niche field of aviation. And he really,
really, went out of his way to play the good samaritan and host. He didn't
treat my amateur opinons like a disease either! His having built 6 or 7
planes of course is impressive, and all his work is top notch and quality
and EXPENSIVE. But he did have some neat short cuts to offer. I like Craig
and can get along with him real easy. We talk the same language, but I
suspect Craig unlike me, can get along with anybody. Anyway, he charmed me
real good.
I cleared up the bit about the PIANO WIRE somebody had suggested. Now
this ignoramus, ( me ) thought piano wire was soft wire. But no siree! It
is hard wire, or rod like. One of Craig's chapter friends in an aside
mentioned you cannot bend it, for it will break, you have to thread it. Now
that was a very interesting nugget of information, whoever contributed to
this list should have contributed to that pearl of wisdom. It is amazing
what a picture in their mind, a dummie like me gets with incomplete
suggestions. Anyway, I think piano wire is out for me.
Met Craig's friend, forget his name, who builds airplane engines at
Indiantown airport. Which has a grass taxi way long enough to be the
airport and another real 6700 foot grass strip that is actually the airport
surrounded by citrus plantations, or whatever they call them in mid-Florida?
Now Craig's friend had definite opinions on converting auto engines, which
basically were, don't do it, unless you let somebody who knows how, like him
do it for a lot of money.
It is not exactly a piece of advice I would take to heart myself, though
there is probably a lot of truth in such an opinion.
There does some to be hundreds of one people businesses in the homebuilt
magazines making a living of trying to sell stuff to amateurs like me, for
the price of a second hand Lexus and such. Like Carnegie said, " there is a
sucker born every minute".
The Pietenpol was a work of art. Beautiful craftsmanship. I will
certainly work hard, or more sloppy shall we say, to make darned sure mine
doesn't turn out like that. I want mine to turn out, like a little one
person plane, that was parked by some agriculture bi-plane spray planes down
the grass taxi way. I'll get to that little plane in a minute and how it
impressed me more than the Pietenpol, or some of the sincere concerned
do-gooders on this list. ( Have I offended you? Don't mean to, just
expressing a difference in opinion as in any freewheeling debate I am used
to doing.)
Anyway, the story is; this Pietenpol plane is donated to a Chapter 501 C
organization by somebody who had heart by-pass or something and lost his
medical. So far, so good. It is a beautiful plane, a work of art. I
betcha, you stick that thing on a trailer and truck it up to Oskosh for
judging, it will garner trophies and cups, galore for the best made
Pietenpol. Photographs in magazines and so on! The propeller is out for
fixing and re-pitching. I never quite got the story straight, whether the
plane won't fly with that propeller as it is pitched; or it flys and won't
climb with the pitch in the propeller? There is a Continental 65 hp I think
powering that plane.
I am anxiously waiting to see if it will fly with the re-pitched
propeller. Then will make up my mind. But the plane has to fly?
Amusingly enough, Craig's friend in a long conversation, stated some stories
about VW diesel engines and how none of those planes are flying either, but
they look good at Oskosh.
Therein, lies the essence of the Pietenpol. Can you fly it to Oskosh? Or
do you have to truck it in on a trailer?
Craig has built 6 or 7 planes, and I have built zero. So we wait and see
what happens with that propeller? Now me, I would want to know how much
compression you are supposed to have on that 40 year old many times rebuilt
engine and then do a compression check on the cylinders too. I believe with
the re-pitched propeller and if the engine is up to snuff, the plane might
fly, but not likely fly well. There was another item I noticed, but really
didn't express at the time, until I slept overnight and let my subconscious
work on what I saw and form an opinion. The plane had been built SAFE! I
mean real safe, with all the bells and whistles that the safety nuts like
Leon on this list insist on. So SAFE in fact, I think it weighs too much to
get off the ground. Or if it gets off the ground, it is going to be
dangerous, cause it has no margins of safety on 65 hp. I could be wrong
though? Cause I have never built an airplane and those guys have and the
saftey freaks on t!
his list have built planes too. So they probably know more than I do?
But I did notice HUGE WING STRUTS. I also noticed that the wood fuselage
braces and longerons I could see, were not built to specs. At least they
were 4 times the size of mine thereabouts. What the rest of the fuselage
looks like, I don't know under that fabric? That plane has so much stuff on
there, it is overweight would be my guess? I think before anybody bought
that plane, they would have to check the engine for compression and check
how much that plane actually weighs? Maybe I am all wet here. But that is
my brief opinion. Ted over in Naples is flying his Pietenpol. When this
one in West Palm flies, I want to see it? From the ground though!
I did learn how to make a step in the side of the fuselage for climbing in
and out of the cockpit. I am definitely going to incorporate that idea.
Great idea! Little flap door for your toes and step on the bottom longeron.
I did mention the little plane, that looks like a Pietenpol Scout, except
the wing thingmajigs that hold up the wing, or support the fuselage go to a
pyramid instead. This was half a mile down the grass taxi way, tied down.
This plane looked crude, cheap and well used. It has a Pietenpol wing and
fuselage. Some kind of engine that you pull a starter cord and a 4 cog belt
reduction over aluminum pulleys. The Cowling was fastened on with those
snaps, like you used to have on suitcases. The tail wheel kind of looked
like a rubber wheel off a supermarket cart. The speedometer was one of
those $5 plastic gadget like tubes, with a floater inside, in which you
point the bottom open clear plastic tube at the wind and it lifts the
floater and the wind speed is marked on the test tube looking gadget. This
was clamped with a plastic tie to a wing strut. Beautiful makeshift. Off
hand, the plane looked like it has been flown often and hard. For
workmanship, it would not win!
a single prize I think. But I would estimate the guy built it for about a
$1000 in today's money. That was one nice rugged little plane that somebody
has had a heck of a lot of fun out of.
The Pietenpol on the other hand, looks like it cost the better part of
$30,000 and doesn't fly. So you take your choices?
Now Craig's friend is in the engine rebuilding business, engine making
business and also builds replicas to scale and also models. He sounded a
bit like the purists on this list. I listened and absorbed this outlook,
trying to get an insight into what makes people build stuff like this. In
his case, it is money and a living. That makes a lot of logical sense. But
the arguments about whether it is a TRUE Pietenpol or a GN-1, which I think
means it is a modification left me a bit amused. But that is just my
character fault?
Essentially, there seem to be people in this new world I am entering, who
are antique replica builders, or modify things to suit them. I fall in the
latter category. To the former purists, there also seem to be a couple of
categories. I never could quite get the difference settled in my mind. And
since I'm not the least bit interested, never paid it no mind. But after
the flames on this listserve, I tried to learn as Kip says for me,
apologetically.
As far as I can see, there are no authentic, original Pietenpols anywhere
in the world? There are however a lot of replicas. An authentic Pietenpol
has to have a tail skid with a steel wedge welded on, that digs through the
grass field, or strip. If it has a wheel, it is not authentic. An
authentic Pietenpol has to have cotton fabric doped. You can't use
Ceconite, or Dacron, etc. An authentic Pietenpol has to have the D shaped
front leading edge of the wing, formed with Quaker Oats cardboard cylinder
cartons, cut and pasted together. And so it goes.
Craig gave me some very valuable lessons in steel, different types and
how they are either flexible, or hard and crack and so on. The 4130 steel
if the difference in price does not seem too bad sounds like a good idea.
4130 steel is mentioned on the plans, the three set I have. But I think
these plans have been modified a few times since 1929? Some archive and
knowledge buff, might just tell us when 4130 steel was invented? What year?
I kind of think that it didn't exist in 1929, but I could easily be wrong as
this is a new field and who am I a neophyte dummy to question the knowledge
of my betters? ( That's a joke Leon and like minded friends! You are
supposed to laugh Ha! Ha! Ha! )
Then we come to control cables. I looked at it on the different planes
and so on. I don't know what to say? The stainless steel cable I saw,
would be used to pull a one ton boat, on a boat trailer up a boat ramp by a
pickup truck. The ailerons and elevators and rudder don't seem to require
more than 15 or 20 lbs pressure to move them liddle biddy things? A ton
strength stainless steel wire to move a 15 pound pressure aileron doen't
seem matched? Craig said it right, that a 3/16 wire was probably good
enough. Then there are all those nylon, and plastic pulleys? Surely they
did not exist in 1929?
If you are going to modernize for SAFETY sakes which is not a bad idea,
then the Pietenpol is a GN-1 apparently? True or false? If you are going
to use 1/8 stainless control cables and plastic pulleys, then you are not
authentic? Anyway, the Pietenpol I looked at was over built and obviously
overweight to some extent. Pulleys and turnbuckles. I was really impressed
with Craigs use of rod. Threaded ends and some kind of forked Y end things
you screw on and braze.
I think I will go that route. But if you purists insist on using modern
materials in the pursuit of SAFETY, then do keep in mind, you are no longer
a purist authentic. Not in my opinion anyway. A model A radiator sticking
up there makes you a replica, but not authentic, again in my opinion.
Actually, I've not got around to building a Carbon Dragon yet, but when I
do, and learn how to do those carbon fiber control rods, that is the way I
would really go, to save weight and increase strength and safety. But there
you go, no experience in that area yet?
Enough! Let the FLAMES BEGIN!
Ray Auxillou
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | threaded stainless |
The threaded stainless, even cut threads, is acceptable as that is what many
of the restoration shops use on the old biplanes. Many people do not
realize that according to an early 70s vintage article in Sport Aviation
about the MacWhyte streamline wires, they have cut threads.
chris
-----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: Craig visit to Chapter ??? up in West Palm
Beach area. Pancake breakfast.
I categorically deny anything nice Ray might have said about me in his post!
Unfortunately, my email sorter puts the last message received first, so I
read many replies to Ray's nice letter (short book???) before I actually
read the document.
The Piet in the hanger (Len Bechtold - www.team-38.com - ) is a plans built
Piet. It did not use streamline tube for the struts, however, just round
tubing. It is a bit overbuilt, but generally was built as per plans. It
had a cruise pitch prop on it, and the owner didn't like the way it
climbed - like above 2,000 feet, it didn't want to climb at all. Of course,
the fact that he weighed over 300 lb. may have had a bit to do with it.
The little plane that Ray saw farther down the field is a homebuilt powered
by a kawasaki. Nothing to do with a Piet, ultra or otherwise, except that
it has wings and flies. The owner flies it about 2 -3 hours per week, and
has a lot of fun.
Indiantown Airport still has a small fleet of Stearmans, mostly used for
mosquito or crop dusting. No "airpark" yet! Great place to practice flying
off grass, and quiet enough to build some great planes in the hangers.
Ray and I had a lot of fun, visited a couple of projects. The piano wire
that Bill Perry introduced him to was 3/16" hard stuff - I guess you could
bend it if you tried really hard. I personally used some 3/16" 316 or 321
SS, threaded on each end. Different airplane from a Piet, tho, a bit
larger/heavier. Wish I could make the round wire streamlined!!!
We did have a lot of discussions about using aircraft quality materials
where appropriate on his airplane, and the reasons for doing so. He admits
to stating a few odd things "just to stir things up". I like a bit of that,
'cause it makes us thing about why we are using the things we are, instead
of just going along blindly. AN/MS things are great, but you don't need
them to hold on the instrument panel. And for an 1700 lb gross airplane
like I'm building, 1/8" SS cable is necessary from the strength aspect. For
a smaller, lighter airplane, it may be necessary due to the size of the
pulleys, but 3/16" would work as well. Hardware store cable for flight
controls is a whole other storey - and we won't go there 'cause it is not
suitable for the application, regardless of strength.
Both Chapter 203 and I enjoyed Ray and Sylvia's visit, and hope that he
comes again.
Craig
PeoplePC: It's for people. And it's just smart.
http://www.peoplepc.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hubbard, Eugene" <ehubbard(at)titan.com> |
| Subject: | Turnbuckles and Common Sense |
I hate to get involved in this discussion, but I got some advice from a
farmer-turned-engineer about 25 years ago that seems to bear on this
subject.
Think real hard about what an AN turnbuckle and a home depot turnbuckle
looks like. Forget about the materials for now. The ends of the AN
turnbuckle are a continuous loop, while both hook and eye end of the
hardware store devices are bent wire. Now imagine taking a big pair of slip
joint pliers and unbending the loops. If you can't imagine doing that, you
probably know someone who could. Now think about the ends of the AN
hardware, and doing the same thing. I can imagine bending it a bit, and
scratching it up, but not opening it. Get out your imaginary welding torch
and at least weld the loops closed.
Now think about the barrel parts of both turnbuckles. I don't know what the
hardware store varity is made of. I'll assume they're forged, sort of like
a very light, inexpensive C-clamp, but there's no material specification--it
could be die-cast zinc. Think about the shoulder of the turnbuckle where it
bends from the threaded part to the straight part. If there's a problem it
will be at the bend. Remember how the light C-clamp twists when it's
overtightened? Quite honestly, I don't really see the barrel coming apart
that way, but I can certainly imagine a flaw in the casting that lets one
side part. You know what a broken casting looks like: a rough slanted
surface with a view of the crystal structure. If you're even going to think
about using one of these, clamp a test piece in your vice, take a slege
hammer, and see how it breaks.
There are about 30 turnbuckles in the entire airplane. Total cost is less
than $500, without the 15% AS&S discount. I would love to save the money
using hardware store devices on my plane. But for me, it's the hardware
store stuff that doesn't get past the common sense test.
Gene Hubbard
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kent Hallsten <KHallsten(at)governair.com> |
| Subject: | I dont think you can thread piano wire |
Just searching around on rec.crafts.metalworking shows a TON of messages on
rolled/cut threads. Some pertain to aviation.
Further along on rec.aviation.homebuilt I found a link to
www.deaircraft.com who have drag\anti-drag wires and tail brace wires.
Take a look Ray,( but they are trying to make a living. ) They have lots of
wing parts that someone could use on a Piet. Aluminum extruded spars! I
never imagined that. I thought aluminum spars were built up, riveted deals
like a RV spar.
As far as my progress goes, it's slow. I'm lucky to get 4-5 hours a week on
it. I built my rib jig twice, and poked around trying to come up with a
quick way to cut rib pieces. Cutting by hand was not my idea of fun, so I
picked up a tablesaw book at the library and built a sliding table jig. It
was easy to make. Basically get two strips of hardwood to fit the mitre
slots, and screw a good flat board on top. I used 3/4" MDF. Then screwed a
3/4 x 3/4 x 15 arm that pivots at one end near the blade. I had cut a
master of all the rib pieces, so I place the master against the blade, pivot
the arm to meet it, and pin the arm down at the other end. Then clamp a
block at the end of the rib piece, and cut away!! For each part I cut 30 or
so pieces from the long strips then re-cut them to the exact angle/length
size. I cut about 1/3 of all rib pieces in no time at all !! I have my rib
pieces laid out so one end is 90degrees and the other has an angle. Makes
it easier than multi angles on each piece. I stack them in numbered tin
cans by the jig. This is the way to go!
Kent Hallsten
Almost done cutting rib pieces
-----Original Message-----
From: Hubbard, Eugene [mailto:ehubbard(at)titan.com]
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: I dont think you can thread piano wire
You also wouldn't want to, since cut (rather than rolled) threads are a
stress point.
Gene
-----Original Message-----
From: Christian Bobka [mailto:bobka(at)charter.net]
Subject: Pietenpol-List: I dont think you can thread piano wire
If I remember right, my attempts at threading piano wire were futile. It is
too hard and would most like ruin the die or the tool bit.
Chris Bobka
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hubbard, Eugene" <ehubbard(at)titan.com> |
| Subject: | threaded stainless |
This could be useful... I'm sure there are restrictions. Is this for
stainless only? What de-rating is required? Do you have a good reference?
Thanks, Gene
-----Original Message-----
From: Christian Bobka [mailto:bobka(at)charter.net]
Subject: Pietenpol-List: threaded stainless
The threaded stainless, even cut threads, is acceptable as that is what many
of the restoration shops use on the old biplanes. Many people do not
realize that according to an early 70s vintage article in Sport Aviation
about the MacWhyte streamline wires, they have cut threads.
chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
| Subject: | I dont think you can thread piano wire |
Interesting post. But I don't have a band saw and the ribs are done. Varnished
a couple today and ripped the planks for the wing spars today to size. Varnishing
those as well. But one spar has twisted. I think I shall have to buy
another over at the lumber yard. This one will probably make the smaller aileron
spars, I forgot about in the process. In the meantime, the grandkids are
here and just trying to save the plane fuselage in one piece. What with a dog,
coconuts being tossed around to fetch and other sundry things 3 kids 10 to
13 can get into. That is a chore in of itself.
I'm off the tail pieces for this week and concentrating on the wings. Change
of pace. Unless I actually run into a source of HARD WIRE 14 guage. Going to
skip turnbuckles, too much cost and aggravation included. Don't like the wind
drag either.
On Mon, 18 February 2002, Kent Hallsten wrote:
>
>
> Just searching around on rec.crafts.metalworking shows a TON of messages on
> rolled/cut threads. Some pertain to aviation.
>
> Further along on rec.aviation.homebuilt I found a link to
> www.deaircraft.com who have drag\anti-drag wires and tail brace wires.
> Take a look Ray,( but they are trying to make a living. ) They have lots of
> wing parts that someone could use on a Piet. Aluminum extruded spars! I
> never imagined that. I thought aluminum spars were built up, riveted deals
> like a RV spar.
>
> As far as my progress goes, it's slow. I'm lucky to get 4-5 hours a week on
> it. I built my rib jig twice, and poked around trying to come up with a
> quick way to cut rib pieces. Cutting by hand was not my idea of fun, so I
> picked up a tablesaw book at the library and built a sliding table jig. It
> was easy to make. Basically get two strips of hardwood to fit the mitre
> slots, and screw a good flat board on top. I used 3/4" MDF. Then screwed a
> 3/4 x 3/4 x 15 arm that pivots at one end near the blade. I had cut a
> master of all the rib pieces, so I place the master against the blade, pivot
> the arm to meet it, and pin the arm down at the other end. Then clamp a
> block at the end of the rib piece, and cut away!! For each part I cut 30 or
> so pieces from the long strips then re-cut them to the exact angle/length
> size. I cut about 1/3 of all rib pieces in no time at all !! I have my rib
> pieces laid out so one end is 90degrees and the other has an angle. Makes
> it easier than multi angles on each piece. I stack them in numbered tin
> cans by the jig. This is the way to go!
>
> Kent Hallsten
> Almost done cutting rib pieces
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hubbard, Eugene [mailto:ehubbard(at)titan.com]
> To: 'pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com'
> Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: I dont think you can thread piano wire
>
>
>
> You also wouldn't want to, since cut (rather than rolled) threads are a
> stress point.
>
> Gene
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christian Bobka [mailto:bobka(at)charter.net]
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: I dont think you can thread piano wire
>
>
>
> If I remember right, my attempts at threading piano wire were futile. It is
> too hard and would most like ruin the die or the tool bit.
>
> Chris Bobka
>
>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gene Rambo" <rambog(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Ford "model B" carb on corvair |
I believe the after market carbs you are referring to were built by
Tillotsen (I know, it isn't spelled right, but something like that)
----- Original Message -----
From: <Doug413(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Ford "model B" carb on corvair
>
> In a message dated 2/16/02 7:57:00 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> DonanClara(at)aol.com writes:
>
>
> > Doug,
> > Who was the manufacturer of the aftermarket Model B carb? I have two
Marvel
> >
> > Scheblers that are quite similar to the B and have the same orientation
of
> > the float. I have been unable to get them to run properly on my A but
> > understand from Terry Oberer that they are an excellent carb and would
like
> >
> > to rebuild them if parts are available. Don Hicks
> >
> >
> >
>
> Don,
>
> I am not sure who the manufacture was. They were sold by many places such
as
> Western Auto, Sears, Wards, etc. I have been told that parts are not
> available for the aftermarket B style carbs. I bought the ones I have at
the
> antique car show here. The Actual B carbs are probably better. The
> aftermarket carbs would sometimes warp at the parting line. Doug Bryant
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Elevator cable slack |
In a message dated 2/17/02 10:01:40 PM Pacific Standard Time,
Borodent(at)aol.com writes:
> Piet Pilots
> Has anyone noticed, when flying in climb or dive attitude that the cables
> that go from the stick to the bellcrank -that one or the other gets slack?
> -------------------------
> Prior to building the torque tube etc, I made a mockup that showed such
> slackness. But it uses real thin cables and the slackness effect in the
> actual as per plans built torque tube may be unnoticeable (which is what I
> suspect).
> -------------------------
> I would appreciate any feedback on this
> Henry Williams ( borodent)
>
>
>
Henry,
I have 110 hours so far with no bad side effects. My planes are rigged just
tight enough to not bind anywhere in the full limit of the travel. Cable
slack is not an issue to me and wasn't while I was building the first plane.
Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gene Rambo" <rambog(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Re: threaded stainless |
There is a world of difference between threaded stainless rod, which is what
I think Craig is talking about, and music wire, also called spring wire
because it is used for exactly that, making springs. I'm not sure what kind
of restoration shop would put stainless rods in wings in the place of hard
wire, unless they are replacing original threaded steel rods with stainless.
I'd have to see the article, because I never understood flying wires to be
cut threads. I've seen accidents where someone cut additional threads on a
wire and had it break, though.
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: Christian Bobka <bobka(at)charter.net>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: threaded stainless
>
> The threaded stainless, even cut threads, is acceptable as that is what
many
> of the restoration shops use on the old biplanes. Many people do not
> realize that according to an early 70s vintage article in Sport Aviation
> about the MacWhyte streamline wires, they have cut threads.
>
> chris
>
> -----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: Craig visit to Chapter ??? up in West Palm
> Beach area. Pancake breakfast.
>
>
>
>
>
> I categorically deny anything nice Ray might have said about me in his
post!
>
> Unfortunately, my email sorter puts the last message received first, so I
> read many replies to Ray's nice letter (short book???) before I actually
> read the document.
>
> The Piet in the hanger (Len Bechtold - www.team-38.com - ) is a plans
built
> Piet. It did not use streamline tube for the struts, however, just round
> tubing. It is a bit overbuilt, but generally was built as per plans. It
> had a cruise pitch prop on it, and the owner didn't like the way it
> climbed - like above 2,000 feet, it didn't want to climb at all. Of
course,
> the fact that he weighed over 300 lb. may have had a bit to do with it.
>
> The little plane that Ray saw farther down the field is a homebuilt
powered
> by a kawasaki. Nothing to do with a Piet, ultra or otherwise, except that
> it has wings and flies. The owner flies it about 2 -3 hours per week, and
> has a lot of fun.
>
> Indiantown Airport still has a small fleet of Stearmans, mostly used for
> mosquito or crop dusting. No "airpark" yet! Great place to practice
flying
> off grass, and quiet enough to build some great planes in the hangers.
>
> Ray and I had a lot of fun, visited a couple of projects. The piano wire
> that Bill Perry introduced him to was 3/16" hard stuff - I guess you could
> bend it if you tried really hard. I personally used some 3/16" 316 or 321
> SS, threaded on each end. Different airplane from a Piet, tho, a bit
> larger/heavier. Wish I could make the round wire streamlined!!!
>
> We did have a lot of discussions about using aircraft quality materials
> where appropriate on his airplane, and the reasons for doing so. He
admits
> to stating a few odd things "just to stir things up". I like a bit of
that,
> 'cause it makes us thing about why we are using the things we are, instead
> of just going along blindly. AN/MS things are great, but you don't need
> them to hold on the instrument panel. And for an 1700 lb gross airplane
> like I'm building, 1/8" SS cable is necessary from the strength aspect.
For
> a smaller, lighter airplane, it may be necessary due to the size of the
> pulleys, but 3/16" would work as well. Hardware store cable for flight
> controls is a whole other storey - and we won't go there 'cause it is not
> suitable for the application, regardless of strength.
>
> Both Chapter 203 and I enjoyed Ray and Sylvia's visit, and hope that he
> comes again.
>
> Craig
>
>
> PeoplePC: It's for people. And it's just smart.
> http://www.peoplepc.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gene Rambo" <rambog(at)erols.com> |
Now for a different discussion: The plans state that the wingtip bow is
curved to match the centerline of the wing rib, which makes sense because
many tip bows do. HOWEVER, the tip bow on the Piet also serves as the outer
compression rib. Is this another oops in the plans? I would think that the
bow would have to be straight because it is a compression rib.
Opinions??
Gene
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 2/18/02 2:28:48 PM Pacific Standard Time, rambog(at)erols.com
writes:
>
> Now for a different discussion: The plans state that the wingtip bow is
> curved to match the centerline of the wing rib, which makes sense because
> many tip bows do. HOWEVER, the tip bow on the Piet also serves as the
> outer
> compression rib. Is this another oops in the plans? I would think that
> the
> bow would have to be straight because it is a compression rib.
>
> Opinions??
>
> Gene
>
>
>
Gene,
It does indeed act as a compression strut. It needs to be to the plans and
will work just fine. I make mine (making a set now for the Scout) by
laminating three pieces 1/3 inch x 1 inch to form a final 1x1. Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
Hi Gene,
You are correct, the wing tip is curved, and the wingtip is the outer
compression member. I've never seen that done on any other plane. I too
worried a little about a curved compression member (at least you know which
direction it is going to buckle), so I laminated my wingtips in the correct
curve. I made a form from a 2 x 4 cut to the centerline curve minus one
half the tip thickness and used 1/4" laminations glued together with
resorcinol. Man, are those tips stiff! Tony Bingelis tells how to laminate
wood in one of his books, or it might be in the EAA Wood book. If you need
detailed instructions I can send them to you, or can scan the appropriate
articles (I got a scanner for Christmas).
I had so much fun laminating those tips that I have done a bunch more
laminations in the plane, including the circular cutout I added to the
centersection, the landing gear struts, and some circular bows to reinforce
the instrument panels. Laminated parts are unbelievably rigid, and are very
light.
Jack
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gene Rambo
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: wingtip bow
Now for a different discussion: The plans state that the wingtip bow is
curved to match the centerline of the wing rib, which makes sense because
many tip bows do. HOWEVER, the tip bow on the Piet also serves as the outer
compression rib. Is this another oops in the plans? I would think that the
bow would have to be straight because it is a compression rib.
Opinions??
Gene
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kip & Beth Gardner <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: B Model Carb |
List,
I posted this once before, but no one bothered to pick up on it. Anybody
out there have ANY comments?
*****************************************************************************
Can the B model carb several of you were discussing be configured in a
gravity-feed/updraft configuration with carb heat like a Stromberg or other
aircraft carb? Can you rig a mixture control & does that make sense? It
sounds like a good, economical alternative to a Stromberg or one of those
new, pricey throttle-body carbs that are out there. Any particular problems
with it? Wm. Wynne says that his conversion needs a carb that will suck at
least 350cfm, is the B up to that? I've heard enough discssions on this
list of problems with old Strombergs like what Walt is currently
experiencing that I'm not sure I want to go that route.
I hadn't known (or had forgotten - more pre-senior moments these days!)
that Bernie used the model B on his Corvair-powered planes. Andrew P. let
me look over "The Last Original" when I visited him a couple years ago, but
we didn't pull the cowling, so I didn't get a look under the hood.
Cheers!
Kip Gardner
426 Schneider St. SE
North Canton, OH 44720
(330) 494-1775
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gene Rambo" <rambog(at)erols.com> |
That doesn't answer the question. Why would/should a compression strut be
curved? The more you try to tighten the drag/antidrag wires, the more it
will bow.
----- Original Message -----
From: <Doug413(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: wingtip bow
>
> In a message dated 2/18/02 2:28:48 PM Pacific Standard Time,
rambog(at)erols.com
> writes:
>
>
> >
> > Now for a different discussion: The plans state that the wingtip bow is
> > curved to match the centerline of the wing rib, which makes sense
because
> > many tip bows do. HOWEVER, the tip bow on the Piet also serves as the
> > outer
> > compression rib. Is this another oops in the plans? I would think that
> > the
> > bow would have to be straight because it is a compression rib.
> >
> > Opinions??
> >
> > Gene
> >
> >
> >
>
> Gene,
>
> It does indeed act as a compression strut. It needs to be to the plans
and
> will work just fine. I make mine (making a set now for the Scout) by
> laminating three pieces 1/3 inch x 1 inch to form a final 1x1. Doug
Bryant
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeffrey Wilcox" <craigwilcox(at)peoplepc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: threaded stainless |
----- Original Message -----
From: Gene Rambo <rambog(at)erols.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: threaded stainless
>
> There is a world of difference between threaded stainless rod, which is
what
> I think Craig is talking about, and music wire, also called spring wire
> because it is used for exactly that, making springs. I'm not sure what
kind
> of restoration shop would put stainless rods in wings in the place of hard
> wire, unless they are replacing original threaded steel rods with
stainless.
> I'd have to see the article, because I never understood flying wires to be
> cut threads. I've seen accidents where someone cut additional threads on
a
> wire and had it break, though.
>
> Gene
Gene, others:
I don't believe that I'm doing anything new or different here, and there
really isn't much stress on these tail wires. I have made the tail flying
wires from all sorts of aviation-grade things, like 1/16" cable, 1/8" cable,
and 3/16" SS, with cut threads. I have yet to put turnbuckles on any of
them. I do like the threaded rods, and inspection times are meant to catch
possible cracks. That's what magnaflux/zyglo is for. But the airplane will
not fall out of the sky if one breaks.
How do I rig the cables without turnbuckles?
I try to rig my horizontal stab in the right position - sometimes it takes
some stout string, or a little wedge, whatever, to hold it there. Now,
where the top of the wire fastens to the vert stab, I put one side fitting
on, then two flat washers, then insert it through the stab. Then two more
washers, the fitting, and the nut. Do the same thing on the top and bottom
of the horiz. stab, then start attaching the wires, with ss thimbles and
nico sleeves. Do the top first. At the bottom (top of the horiz. stab),
put the thimble through the hole in the fitting, slip a nico on, put the
cable through the thimble, and back through the nico. snug it up nice and
tight, then crimp it. Do the same thing from the bottom of the stab to the
bottom of the airplane, whereever the fitting attaches.
Now, to adjust it to be a bit tighter (and you do not need to play "Nearer
My God To Thee" on the danged things!!!!!), take out one, two, three or all
four washers. You'll find that things go together very well, and no
turnbuckles.
What's that? How do you adjust it when the cables stretch? How much
stretch is there in a few feet of cable? I used to maintain a C-121 (Super
Connie, to you other old folks) that had literally a mile of cable in it.
Unless I replaced a fitting, I NEVER ADJUSTED A SINGLE TURNBUCKLE! And I
can't imagine any of you replacing a horizontal or vertical stab without
taking the time to make a new set of cables - you can make a whole set in an
hour or two!
OK, so you goof a time or two making them as above - this project is
supposed to be educational, so chalk it up to education, and try again.
Like me, you'll eventually get it right.
BTW - if you make an airplane with a folding tail, it's OK to use
turnbuckles on the bottom wires.
Craig - now donning the flam-proof suit. TGF Nomex!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DonanClara(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Ford "model B" carb on corvair |
In a message dated 02/17/2002 10:34:28 PM Central Standard Time,
bobka(at)charter.net writes:
<< I just read that the model B aftermarket carbs were made by Tillotson.
THis
is per the article in the fall 2001 To Fly written by Bob Whittier.
Chris bobka >>
Thanks Chris, I'll have to get a copy of Whittier's article. Mr. Pietenpol
recommended the B carb mainly because the side-to-side motion of the float
dampened the bouncing tendency that the fore-and-aft float on the A carb had
and which caused the engine to sputter on takeoff from rough fields...not a
comfortable condition ! Unfortunately, the Tillotson X is configured the same
as the A and likely would act the same.Don Hicks
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Brusilow" <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: I dont think you can thread piano wire |
----- Original Message -----
From: Fisherman Caye
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 5:08 PM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: I dont think you can thread piano wire
.......... Going to skip turnbuckles, too much cost and aggravation
included. Don't like the wind drag either................
-------------------------------
Hey Ray, don't sweat it, that will proably add .001 mph to the Piet's
airspeed.
Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )
Lk Worth FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Borodent(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator cable slack |
Doug thanks for the input, Henry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gene Rambo" <rambog(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Re: threaded stainless |
Craig:
I never said you were doing anything new or different . . . I only said that
I never understood that McWhyte cut their threads. I was also trying to
clear up where I believe some people on here are confusing several
distinctly different things, namely the difference between threaded
stainless rod and music wire. There is nothing wrong with anything you have
described here, but you don't need me to tell you that. I bet you save
several pounds in the tail by not using turnbuckles. I might have to give
that serious thought.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Borodent(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator cable slack |
Mike C
I am interested in the problem of cable slack and tension in going from the
stick to the elevator bellcrank. In the archives I found this eqrlier
responce opf yours
=================
William- not to worry. This is typical of the Piet control system design.It
drove me nuts because the one cable would go taught, the other would
droop.Guess what ? That's normal. I tried every combination of upper and
lowercable lengths to the elevator bellcrank and there is just no perfect
setup.It's going to do that by nature of the geometry. For this reason make
sure youuse pulley guards as shown in the Bingelis books. For sure do this
on EVERYpulley. They are easy and will keep you alive and the cable in the
groove of thepulley. Plus a good FAA inspector will demand these.Mike C.
=========================
Did you end up building the torque tube etc as per plans or did you find any
change to improve the geometry ( all the changes I tried didnt help much )
Henry Williams ( Borodent)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: B Model Carb |
In a message dated 2/18/02 3:28:56 PM Pacific Standard Time,
kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net writes:
> Can the B model carb several of you were discussing be configured in a
> gravity-feed/updraft configuration with carb heat like a Stromberg or other
> aircraft carb? Can you rig a mixture control & does that make sense? It
> sounds like a good, economical alternative to a Stromberg or one of those
> new, pricey throttle-body carbs that are out there. Any particular problems
> with it? Wm. Wynne says that his conversion needs a carb that will suck at
> least 350cfm, is the B up to that? I've heard enough discssions on this
> list of problems with old Strombergs like what Walt is currently
> experiencing that I'm not sure I want to go that route.
>
> I hadn't known (or had forgotten - more pre-senior moments these days!)
> that Bernie used the model B on his Corvair-powered planes. Andrew P. let
> me look over "The Last Original" when I visited him a couple years ago, but
> we didn't pull the cowling, so I didn't get a look under the hood.
>
> Cheers!
>
> Kip Gardner
>
>
Kip,
I hope I understood your question correctly. The B is an updraft carb. I
have only seen it used with gravity fuel systems, on Piets. It may be able
to be rigged with mixture, however, for most flying the mixture control is
probably not needed. BHP used this carb on most of the A powered airplanes a
nd the two Corvair powered ones with simple sucess. The installation on the
Corvair places the carb inside the cowling so the carb intake has some heat
all the time to prevent ice. The A installations also have heat all the time
from the front stack. It makes a very suitable carb for the Corvair as
already developed. I pulled the cowling pins on the Vair in the museum at
Oshkosh and studied the installation carefully; very impressive, and simple.
I sure like the B carb on my A powered planes. I have been buying them at
the car swap meets here.at a cost range from about $15 to $65. Carb kits are
available which include everything except the float. Hopes this helps some.
Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John McNarry" <jmcnarry(at)escape.ca> |
Kip
The float assembly, hinged at the side is the biggest advantage of a B over
an A carb. They both have adjustable slow speed jets in conjunction with the
choke. Usually wired off for Piets. High speed changes would have to be made
with jetting. The A and b engines process about 80 to 100 cfm max. It does
look something like a Stromberg or Marvel Schleber updraft. Ever considered
a big SU from say a 2 liter Volvo?
John Mc
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Kip &
Beth Gardner
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: B Model Carb
List,
I posted this once before, but no one bothered to pick up on it. Anybody
out there have ANY comments?
****************************************************************************
*
Can the B model carb several of you were discussing be configured in a
gravity-feed/updraft configuration with carb heat like a Stromberg or other
aircraft carb? Can you rig a mixture control & does that make sense? It
sounds like a good, economical alternative to a Stromberg or one of those
new, pricey throttle-body carbs that are out there. Any particular problems
with it? Wm. Wynne says that his conversion needs a carb that will suck at
least 350cfm, is the B up to that? I've heard enough discssions on this
list of problems with old Strombergs like what Walt is currently
experiencing that I'm not sure I want to go that route.
I hadn't known (or had forgotten - more pre-senior moments these days!)
that Bernie used the model B on his Corvair-powered planes. Andrew P. let
me look over "The Last Original" when I visited him a couple years ago, but
we didn't pull the cowling, so I didn't get a look under the hood.
Cheers!
Kip Gardner
426 Schneider St. SE
North Canton, OH 44720
(330) 494-1775
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary McNeel, Jr." <gmcneel(at)mykitplane.com> |
| Subject: | Ken Perkins Contact Info RE: Redesigned Fuselage Bellcrank |
System
Hello Gang. Here is Ken's contact information. I will also put it on my web
site.
Drawings for the fuselage bell crank system that is in his airplane that
makes the elevator cables and control stick cables tight. The drawings also
show the elevator stops on the front control stick and how to make the
elevator horns. $20.00 + $1.25 for postage.
Ken Perkins
1480 Martway
Olathe, Ks. 66061
(913) 764 6949
Regards,
Gary P. McNeel, Jr.
MyKitPlane.com
EAA 665957
gmcneel(at)mykitplane.com
http://www.mykitplane.com
"What's the hurry? Are you afraid I won't come back?"
Manfred von Richthofen, 'The Red Baron,' last recorded words, in reply to
a request for an autograph as he was climbing into the cockpit of his plane.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary McNeel, Jr." <gmcneel(at)mykitplane.com> |
Hello all. Can anyone tell me where I can find information on the next
Brodhead gathering? Is there a new site keeping track of this information? I
will put it on my site if someone will give me the details. I am trying to
make plans to be there. Need to stock up on film. TIA.
Regards,
Gary P. McNeel, Jr.
MyKitPlane.com
EAA 665957
gmcneel(at)mykitplane.com
http://www.mykitplane.com
"What's the hurry? Are you afraid I won't come back?"
Manfred von Richthofen, 'The Red Baron,' last recorded words, in reply to
a request for an autograph as he was climbing into the cockpit of his plane.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Greg Cardinal" <gcardinal(at)startribune.com> |
Even with a slight curve in it, the wing tip bow is plenty strong enough to act
as a compression member.
Greg Cardinal
>>> rambog(at)erols.com 02/18 5:03 PM >>>
Now for a different discussion: The plans state that the wingtip bow is
curved to match the centerline of the wing rib, which makes sense because
many tip bows do. HOWEVER, the tip bow on the Piet also serves as the outer
compression rib. Is this another oops in the plans? I would think that the
bow would have to be straight because it is a compression rib.
Opinions??
Gene
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
| Subject: | How high does a Pietenpol fly? |
How high does a Pietenpol fly? Question for Pietenpol owner/flyers.
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: How high does a Pietenpol fly? |
I have an old post from one of the pilots across the Atlantic that did a jaunt
up
to 10,000ft. Climb rate was pretty slow, but he said he could have gone a little
higher - don't remember the engine used.
I'll look up the post and forward it if found
Kirk
Fisherman Caye wrote:
>
> How high does a Pietenpol fly? Question for Pietenpol owner/flyers.
>
> FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
> http://www.FindLaw.com
> Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
> http://mail.Justice.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Flight test plan |
Larry---both the Bingelis books and the FAA's guide book
you can get from your local FSDO/MIDO office have flight test
guidelines. Actually the FAA guide was pretty good. Bingelis
also gives a good 'final' inspection check before your inspector comes out.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
Pieters,
Was just before ordering some dacron this am to do some experimenting on
covering paints when I realized that I should seek some advice from this
group as to where I may find the best price on some 1.7 at least 70 in wide
uncertified. I would appreciate a phone # / e-mail address or mailing
address. Thanks.
Corky in La where we are still recovering from the '27 flood.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
Kip/ group-----Wil Graff from Wadsworth, Ohio has a nice
cream and red Ford Piet that he's taken to Brodhead & Oshkosh
for many years now. He, like Lowell Frank and some others are
Ford experts and it shows----never a forced landing and good performance.
Will comes to many fly-in's, pancake breakfasts around the area. Good guy.
He also built and flies a Bearhawk. The other guy at Wadsworth is Brian
Jorgenson---young guy. A&P, has a mostly complete project I think. Other
interests keeping him from it. The Taylorcraft Fly-In IS the Piet fly in
also, Kip !
Well, we usually have 3 or so there. That is where I met T-Craft owner
and Piet
builder Dave from NY ! Not enough Piets to have a separate fly-in so we
kinda
just piggy-back off the T-Craft fly in !
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike King" <mikek120(at)mindspring.com> |
Hey guys, what headset / intercom system would you
recommend for open cockpit flying?
I tried using my intercom and a couple of headsets,
but the outside wind and noise made it very hard
to talk and understand. Also, I could not use my
handheld ICOM with headset adapter for the same
reasons.
Thanks.
Mike King
GN-1
77MK
Dallas, Texas
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
Try Bob Leyner electra(at)rmi.net
----- Original Message -----
From: <Isablcorky(at)aol.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Covering
Pieters,
Was just before ordering some dacron this am to do some experimenting on
covering paints when I realized that I should seek some advice from this
group as to where I may find the best price on some 1.7 at least 70 in wide
uncertified. I would appreciate a phone # / e-mail address or mailing
address. Thanks.
Corky in La where we are still recovering from the '27 flood.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
One thing that helps is a wind sock over the mic.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
Always looking for articles for the Experimenter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike King" <mikek120(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Intercom
Hey guys, what headset / intercom system would you
recommend for open cockpit flying?
I tried using my intercom and a couple of headsets,
but the outside wind and noise made it very hard
to talk and understand. Also, I could not use my
handheld ICOM with headset adapter for the same
reasons.
Thanks.
Mike King
GN-1
77MK
Dallas, Texas
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com> |
a curved piece of wood can work some kind as a
compression piece with the proper attaching points, if
is not acting as a bow and arrow (pulled as in a bow
by a string), because of the properties of the wood, .
Hope I get understood in my opinion, an arc in a
structure is an example.
Saludos
Gary Gower
--- Greg Cardinal wrote:
> Cardinal"
>
> Even with a slight curve in it, the wing tip bow is
> plenty strong enough to act as a compression member.
>
> Greg Cardinal
>
> >>> rambog(at)erols.com 02/18 5:03 PM >>>
>
>
> Now for a different discussion: The plans state
> that the wingtip bow is
> curved to match the centerline of the wing rib,
> which makes sense because
> many tip bows do. HOWEVER, the tip bow on the Piet
> also serves as the outer
> compression rib. Is this another oops in the plans?
> I would think that the
> bow would have to be straight because it is a
> compression rib.
>
> Opinions??
>
> Gene
>
>
>
> Forum -
> Contributions of
> any other form
>
> latest messages.
> other List members.
>
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> http://www.matronics.com/search
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
>
>
>
>
http://sports.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
Many thanks Dale
I went to visit Virgil, a 30 mile ride away and he has a collection of old books.
He had some photocopied stuff on wood blanks and prop carving specs too.
Which I copied at Office Depot. So I am going to have plenty of information
making my own prop.
thanks Ray
On Tue, 19 February 2002, "D.Dale Johnson" wrote:
>
> Hi Ray
> Your prop book is on it's way.
> I sure hope it's what you wanted and can make use of it.
> I sent a bill for coping and postage.
> If you have any questions on building your piet contact me directly.
> good luck
> Dale Mpls.
> ________________________________________________________________
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
| Subject: | 6000 ft Pietenpol airport landings? |
Well I'm kind of curious on how high I can expect this Pietenpol to climb when
it is finished?
One airport is going to be at 3000 ft and Craig suggested going to higher horsepower.
Who knows, might even get down to Panama with it and trying landing
at the 6000 ft airport at Volcan, in the province of Chiriqui?
That is IF the Pietenpol can perform up that high?
Craig mentioned the poor climb rate for the one up in Indiantown they were fixing
with a bigger pitch climbing propeller. He said something about 2000 ft
and straining with a 300 lb guy aboard.
So I wonder? With two 180 # guys you are going to be carrying 360 #'s of weight.
Can you land at a 3000 ft airstrip, or 6000 ft. Better yet, can you get off
again?
We had to disassemble a Luscombe one time, up in Chichicastenango in the Guatemalan
Highlands one time and take it down by truck as it could not get off the
ground, even with a very very long airport.
On the archive, there is mention of a fellow in Utah flying over 9,500 ft mountains,
I THINK that is what he implied? It was a humorous piece about a run
in with the law and smoking up a small town.
You pretty much have to have 12,000 ft capability to get through most mountain
passes in South America on the Pacific side.
If I remember rightly from my old EAA "HOW TO" books, you can get climb two ways.
Either horsepower, or wing span? Do I have that right?
I remember my old Ercoupe was rated in the book for 12,000 ft, but in fact I
NEVER ever got it over 7500 ft and that was an hour long climbing struggle. Had
to fly around the mountains going south in Mexico before Vera Cruz as I could
not climb over them and they were not really high at around 8000 ft or so.
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Piet ceiling? |
Here is the post concerning Alan James' ceiling exploration
>From: "Alan Maragret & Debbie James" <MADjames(at)theknapp.freeserve.co.uk>
>To:
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Piet ceiling?
>Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2000 23:07:14 +0100
>Sender: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
>Reply-To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
>
>Hi Kirk - One Saturday morning a little while back I decided I would try a
>climb and see if I could get to 10,000 feet in G-BUCO. It took 24 minutes in
>all but I had a bit of a breather at 6,000 feet just to admire the view of
>the English coastline 30 miles away. I can tell you that while you are
>climbing to that height in your own home-built, you have time to think about
>all the hundreds of parts you made over the years that have gone into your
>machine, and hope they all stay together! I flew solo with 2/3 fuel, home
>carved prop and no mixture control. Empty weight is 750lb. 90hp Continental.
>The first 1000 feet took 70 seconds and the last 1000 feet four and a
>quarter minutes. I know she'll go higher but the rule here is you need
>oxygen to try it. As for spinning, I've never tried it in a Pietenpol and I
>don't intend to.
>Regards to you all - Alan James
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Kirk Huizenga <kirkh@unique-software.com>
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Date: 01 July 2000 03:07
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: Piet ceiling?
>
>
><kirkh@unique-software.com>
>>
>>I know we are the low and slow crowd, but what is the max altitude
>>people on the list have flown their Piet?
>>
>>Also, I've asked a few times but haven't ever heard if someone has
>>purposefully or accidently put a Piet into a spin. How did it enter
>>and exit?
>>
>>Still building/rebuilding.
>>Kirk
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Jack and others:
I also had reservations about the curved wingtip bow being
used as a compression member in the drag truss. And I was
also a bit concerned about the rather long cantilevered por-
tion of the wing beyond the lift strut attachment possibly lack-
ing torsional rigidity, so I incorporated two 3/4 inch square
spruce struts at the outboard tip rib, similar to the the parallel
struts at the lift strut fittings. The drag/antidrag cable attach-
ment fittings are mounted at the centerline of the spars bet-
ween these struts which butt against the spar flanges, and are
held in place by 1/8 inch plywood gussets at the top and bot-
tom spar surfaces. This, I hoped, would slightly increase the
torsional rigidity of the outboard portion of the wing and let
the wingtip bow be just a "wingtip bow".
In comparison with other Piets that use the wing tip bow as a
compression member per the plans, I think my wing is slightly
stiffer in torsion outboard from the lift struts, but this could be
due to my use of Douglas fir for my spars. So the results are
inconclusive at best.
In the final analysis of all this, I don't think it was worthwhile be-
cause it seems there has never been a problem with the wing
as designed. Having a curved member loaded in compression
is contrary to sound engineering practice, but the outboard bay
of the Pietenpol drag truss is lightly loaded in comparison with
the inboard bay and the curved tip has done the job well for a
long time. As I recall, the plans call for 3/32" cable bracing in both
bays; I used 1/8" cable for both, but now would go with 3/32" for
the outer and 1/8" for the inner.
I laminated my tip bows in much the same way that Jack descri-
bed and they have been completely satisfactory for 31(+) years.
There are a few places where the design could be improved but,
in my view, the wing tip bow-in-compression isn't one of them---
especially when it is laminated. I built mine a long time ago, and
experience has taught me that I didn't have to second guess BHP
in a lot places where I did so.
Cheers,
Graham Hansen (CF-AUN)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Brusilow" <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: How high does a Pietenpol fly? |
----- Original Message -----
From: Fisherman Caye
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 7:52 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: How high does a Pietenpol fly?
How high does a Pietenpol fly? Question for Pietenpol owner/flyers
_______________________________________________________________
2000 feet, above that I get a nose bleed.
Ray, if you intend to fly a Piet at gross over high altitude rugged
terrain you are headed to that great fishing ground in the sky.
Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave and Connie <dmatt(at)frontiernet.net> |
>
>
> That is where I met T-Craft owner and Piet
>builder Dave from NY ! Not enough Piets to have a separate fly-in so we
kinda
>just piggy-back off the T-Craft fly in !
>
They have just about everything at that fly in. I took a balloon pilot up
last year. The wind kicked up too much in the afternoon to do the balloon
thing later on. I am going to get Ben up in your plane one of these years.
He will be 13 this summer and just 3 years from a solo as a sport pilot in
the TCart. Maybe he will get me going on the Piet so I have something to
fly when he steals my plane. I am already planning on getting a sport
pilot instructor (they don't call it CFI in the NPRM) so that we can
start logging the time. He is already pretty good at navigating and
flying straight and level.
Dave
N36078 '41 BC-12-65
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Conkling" <hpvs(at)southwind.net> |
If you are just talking between cockpits, you could rig up a "gosport"
system -- my instructor in the Sterman (a few years back!) had a 1-way
system (he got to do ALL the talking -- I just got to nod my head ! ;-)
Mike C.
Pretty Prairie, KS
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike King" <mikek120(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Intercom
>
> Hey guys, what headset / intercom system would you
> recommend for open cockpit flying?
>
> I tried using my intercom and a couple of headsets,
> but the outside wind and noise made it very hard
> to talk and understand. Also, I could not use my
> handheld ICOM with headset adapter for the same
> reasons.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Mike King
> GN-1
> 77MK
> Dallas, Texas
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 6000 ft Pietenpol airport landings? |
In a message dated 2/19/02 4:20:19 PM Eastern Standard Time,
cayecaulker(at)justice.com writes:
<< On the archive, there is mention of a fellow in Utah flying over 9,500
ft mountains, I THINK that is what he implied? It was a humorous piece about
a run in with the law and smoking up a small town.
>>
Ray, you might want to check out this site which details the mountains that
Steve and Duane climbed over. 10,500' at one point !
Steve Eldredge's Hangar or
http://aircamper.byu.edu/Piet.htm
Here's a quote from Steve's trip log:
" We landed at Vernal behind 2 RV-4's while Duane play's chicken with a
Skywest Commuter. He wisely bugs out. On to Rock Springs means back up to
9500'. Pretty country and quite high for our little Pietenpols. We top out
at Elk Mountain at 10,500' climbing in early afternoon boomer thermals.
After a quick lunch at Rawlins we head off for Laramie. About this time we
learn why we brought so much padding. I have 5 inches of soft foam and Duane
is using his sleeping pad. "
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom & Michelle Brant" <tmbrant(at)uswest.net> |
I'm pleased to say that I have now completed the first fuselage side
(right side, port, starboard, whatever...) Had a few small nots in the
surface of the okoume plywood but the vertical and diagonals went right
in over them with a bit of planning. I happen to be of the "use more
glue than less" philosiphy so when I checked the glue joints on the fuse
side after it had cured, the plywood was all full of glue that had
squeezed out. I was pretty dissapointed in this but after about an hour
with an orbital sander, all seams look pretty nice. I hate those
orbital sanders though, it allways seams to leave some little "swirl"
marks. Guess I'll final sand by hand. One note that you'd think I
would have thought of earlier is that I didn't put in the spruce wedges
until after the gussets and side were on... This made them very
difficult to fit up with the excess glue that was in the joints. Next
time the wedges go on at the same time the rest of spruce goes together.
Anyway, so far I have about 34 hours into it. This includes time for
putting one side together (spruce only) and then starting over. How
does this compare to others time involved? Not that I'm grading myself,
just curious...
Tom Brant
Mpls
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | 6000 ft Pietenpol airport landings? |
I had a 65 hp taylorcraft rented from Evergreen Field in Vancouver WA that I
took above Mount Hood in Oregon. With a little orographic lifting, I was
easily at 12 or 13 k. Also, took my 65 hp Tcraft above some building
cumulus in Texas one summer day (the cumulus has to push air out of its way
as it goes up and that was the air I was in). I was up to 14,500' when I
bugged out because I was so cold. I did take a picture of the altimeter
though.
The point here is that if you learn to use the air currents to your
advantage, you can get pretty high on very little power. I imagine there
are some good breezes coming onshore in Belize and good rising air as you
get inland. Ray?
Chris Bobka
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
Dmott9(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: 6000 ft Pietenpol airport landings?
In a message dated 2/19/02 4:20:19 PM Eastern Standard Time,
cayecaulker(at)justice.com writes:
<< On the archive, there is mention of a fellow in Utah flying over 9,500
ft mountains, I THINK that is what he implied? It was a humorous piece
about
a run in with the law and smoking up a small town.
>>
Ray, you might want to check out this site which details the mountains that
Steve and Duane climbed over. 10,500' at one point !
Steve Eldredge's Hangar or
http://aircamper.byu.edu/Piet.htm
Here's a quote from Steve's trip log:
" We landed at Vernal behind 2 RV-4's while Duane play's chicken with a
Skywest Commuter. He wisely bugs out. On to Rock Springs means back up to
9500'. Pretty country and quite high for our little Pietenpols. We top out
at Elk Mountain at 10,500' climbing in early afternoon boomer thermals.
After a quick lunch at Rawlins we head off for Laramie. About this time we
learn why we brought so much padding. I have 5 inches of soft foam and
Duane
is using his sleeping pad. "
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "twinboom" <twinboom(at)MSN.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 6000 ft Pietenpol airport landings? |
Ray and others,
John Dilatush out of Colorado, is building his Piet with a turbo subaru
as he is in the 11,000 range right on the Continental Divide where he lives.
He has been flying more years then I'll be able to after I get my license,
but know's what he is doing. Check out his NEW JPG's on the photo server
site. Very nice workmanship on his Piet. CHeck him out at
mailto:dilatush(at)amigo.com .
Doug Blackburn, Arrowbear Lake, So. Cal.
Inland Slope Rebels, Riverside Ca.
<http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/ISR>
----- Original Message -----
From: <Dmott9(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: 6000 ft Pietenpol airport landings?
>
> In a message dated 2/19/02 4:20:19 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> cayecaulker(at)justice.com writes:
>
> << On the archive, there is mention of a fellow in Utah flying over
9,500
> ft mountains, I THINK that is what he implied? It was a humorous piece
about
> a run in with the law and smoking up a small town.
> >>
>
> Ray, you might want to check out this site which details the mountains
that
> Steve and Duane climbed over. 10,500' at one point !
>
> Steve Eldredge's Hangar
or
> http://aircamper.byu.edu/Piet.htm
>
> Here's a quote from Steve's trip log:
>
> " We landed at Vernal behind 2 RV-4's while Duane play's chicken with a
> Skywest Commuter. He wisely bugs out. On to Rock Springs means back up
to
> 9500'. Pretty country and quite high for our little Pietenpols. We top
out
> at Elk Mountain at 10,500' climbing in early afternoon boomer thermals.
> After a quick lunch at Rawlins we head off for Laramie. About this time
we
> learn why we brought so much padding. I have 5 inches of soft foam and
Duane
> is using his sleeping pad. "
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: How high does a Pietenpol fly? |
Fisherman and others:
I dunno. Never tried to see how high I could get mine, but did take
it (once) to about 5000 feet above ground level (approx. 7500 feet
above sea level in these parts) back in the 1970's when it was
powered by an A 65 Continental.
Several things will discourage you from taking a Pietenpol to
higher altitudes. Namely:
1. It seems to take forever to get there---and does indeed take a
long time.
2. I found it was darned cold in the open cockpit.
3. At about a mile above the surface, one develops a precarious
sensation, realizing that he is sitting in a little wooden box
under a wing in the middle of a vast sky. This discourages all
but the bravest from trying for the absolute ceiling, or even
the service ceiling, of the a/c. There is comfort in flying this type
of airplane closer to the surface where you can count the cows,
etc.
4. It takes a long time to come back down and you must be careful
lest your engine cools too much. If this happens, you will be the
captain of a glider. So take this into account before you fly high. If
you are on a cross-country flight, the letdown can be gradual, co-
vering a lot of distance with enough power on to keep the engine
warm. But if you have to descend practically over your airport, it
is much more difficult to keep the engine temps. up.
.
5. Airspace restrictions may prevent you from finding how high your
bird can fly, so any further discussion becomes academic.
****************************************************************************
*
During WW I, the little Sopwith Pup biplanes were routinely taken to
well over 20,000 feet and they were powered by a rotary engine of
80 horsepower turning a large diameter propeller at maybe 1100
to 1300 rpm. Very efficient for an 80 -90 mph airplane. An 85 hp Piet
like mine couldn't come even close to that height. How those young
fellows managed without breathing oxygen, I can't imagine. Rarely
did they dogfight at those heights, but would have the advantage of
height in order to dive on an enemy a/c spotted below them. The Pup
was a pretty light airplane and its altitude capability would be amaz-
ing even today.
If you want a "good read" about this sort of thing, try to find a pocket-
book edition of NO PARACHUTE by Arthur Gould Lee, published in
1969 (I think), in Great Britain. A.G.L. flew Pups and, later, Camels.
His book is simply excellent. If anyone is interested, I'll try to find the
ISBN and publisher. No doubt, it is long out of print.
****************************************************************************
**
Anyway, Pietenpols are not designed to fly high. Remember the logo
on the back of Steve Eldredge's caps:
"Low and slow for 70 years."
Cheers,
Graham Hansen (CF-AUN)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 6000 ft Pietenpol airport landings? |
Hmmmnnnn! Thinking ahead. Already flying the plane that hasn't been built yet.
Now if I go down the Pacific Coast and come inland from Guayaquil, Ecuador, maybe
I could get through that pass into the Valley of the Volcanoes. I think it
is around 10,000' or so and Quito is up there someplace around 9000 ft and 10,000
ft. Bogota on the plateau at the airport is also somewhere around 10,000
feet. The whole valley, towns and roads are almost around 8500 ft to 9500 ft
around those parts. Down in Peru, all the towns and highways start around 8500
ft and go up from there, as high as 13,000 feet in passes. Just something
to think about?
I think a bigger engine, or more wingspan?
How about a GN-2 modification. Sticking a lower biplane wing on the bottom of
the fuselage, but only out about 10 feet on each side? Would that give the
climbing ability?
----------------------------
On Tue, 19 February 2002, "twinboom" wrote:
>
>
> Ray and others,
> John Dilatush out of Colorado, is building his Piet with a turbo subaru
> as he is in the 11,000 range right on the Continental Divide where he lives.
> He has been flying more years then I'll be able to after I get my license,
> but know's what he is doing. Check out his NEW JPG's on the photo server
> site. Very nice workmanship on his Piet. CHeck him out at
> mailto:dilatush(at)amigo.com .
>
> Doug Blackburn, Arrowbear Lake, So. Cal.
> Inland Slope Rebels, Riverside Ca.
> <http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/ISR>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <Dmott9(at)aol.com>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: 6000 ft Pietenpol airport landings?
>
>
> >
> > In a message dated 2/19/02 4:20:19 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> > cayecaulker(at)justice.com writes:
> >
> > << On the archive, there is mention of a fellow in Utah flying over
> 9,500
> > ft mountains, I THINK that is what he implied? It was a humorous piece
> about
> > a run in with the law and smoking up a small town.
> > >>
> >
> > Ray, you might want to check out this site which details the mountains
> that
> > Steve and Duane climbed over. 10,500' at one point !
> >
> > Steve Eldredge's Hangar
> or
> > http://aircamper.byu.edu/Piet.htm
> >
> > Here's a quote from Steve's trip log:
> >
> > " We landed at Vernal behind 2 RV-4's while Duane play's chicken with a
> > Skywest Commuter. He wisely bugs out. On to Rock Springs means back up
> to
> > 9500'. Pretty country and quite high for our little Pietenpols. We top
> out
> > at Elk Mountain at 10,500' climbing in early afternoon boomer thermals.
> > After a quick lunch at Rawlins we head off for Laramie. About this time
> we
> > learn why we brought so much padding. I have 5 inches of soft foam and
> Duane
> > is using his sleeping pad. "
> >
> >
>
>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
| Subject: | Re: airplane project |
Craig
Okay! Be there Friday.
Give me driving directions? I expect it is about 50 or 60 miles from here? I'll
come up I-95.
Will bring along the Pietenpol plans and some photo copies I made full size of
the little bits and
pieces that have to be made out of 4130 steel. Some tubing for the landing gear
also is 4130, I think? Will have to take another look at the plans. Couple
of lengths of 6 feet of 5/8 wide strap on hand wouldn't be hard to take Friday
either of 4130. Just in case I have to bring it back and cut it and drill it
and bend it myself to move along.
I'm on a strict budget. So, if he can make em at a VERY GOOD PRICE to me, will
certainly let him do them. Otherwise, I shall have to struggle along with
a $1 hacksaw from Dollar Store, pliers, hammer, 4 inch vise and 3/8 inch hand
drill and make them. Which reminds me, I have to buy a small round file for something
or other, but I don't remember for what right now? Trying to build the
whole plane for $3000, which goal I might not make, but going to try.
Give me an address and time and include those phone numbers again. Do I bring
beer? Spike it with rum to get him in a mellow mood and lower the price? (
Ha! Ha! ) Whats the trick here?
Ray Auxillou
-------------------------------------
On Tue, 19 February 2002, "Craig Duncan" wrote:
>
> Hi Ray,
> I talked to my machinist friend about your project and he is very
> familiar with 4130. Definitely aircraft grade-very hard, but machinable. He
> suggested Alro Metals in Boynton Beach as a source of supply, but I have a
> better idea. I go over to his shop every Friday afternoon for a beer and
> conversation. Why don't you join us, bring the prints of your fittings and
> you can pick his brain as to the best way to proceed. I'm sure he can order
> the material from his suppliers and save you the legwork. Also, bring some
> pictures of your plane-I checked out your building website, but couldn't
> bring up many of the pictures. I got a kick out of what you are doing, my
> wife said it was exactly like something I would do- the music was great too.
> Let me know what you think- you have my numbers- hope to see you Friday.
> Best Regards,
> Craig Duncan
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Investment Trust" <sb30840(at)hotmail.com>
> To:
> Cc:
> Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 9:35 PM
> Subject: Re: Nature of Reality
>
>
> > A machinist and WOW, talk about arranging reality? Glad to meet with you
> > SOON. I need some brackets of 5/8 4130 steel, for my horizontal and
> > vertical stabilizers and Craig up in West Palm said they had it only in
> Ft.
> > Lauderdale. But I forgot the name of the firm. I was going to drive up
> and
> > buy strap 4130 and cut it laboriously by hand with a $1 hacksaw from
> DOLLAR
> > STORE and drill it with my hand drill after bending them in a tiny vice I
> > just bought from Home Depot. But a guy with real TOOLS? Hmmmnnnn!
> > Going to have to make a bunch of iddly biddy fittings also, which stage
> I
> > have not got to yet on this homebuilt plane. All apparently out of this
> > mysterious 4130 steel, not found in Miami/Dade County, Florida.
> >
> > My homebuilding plane site is at:
> > http://members.tripod.com/~speculation/pietenpolplaneconstruction.html
> >
> > If you are using an ISP and an internal modem the many photos take LONG
> to
> > load, about 20 minutes or more, depending on your baud rate? I use DSL
> from
> > Bell South, so it loads fast here.
> >
> > Please use this e-mail address for communication:
> >
> > Cayecaulker(at)justice.com
> >
> > This one at hotmail gets too much trash and I often dump all the
> messages.
> > I keep it for the Instant Messenger and world wide communication that it
> > gives me for business and family.
> >
> > http://members.tripod.com/~speculation/changingreality.html
> > This is another one of mine you will find interesting, if you liked the
> > web page http://members.tripod.com/~speculation/brainwave.html
> >
> > There is another one on the bottom of that page too, of a similar kind. I
> > did several in the same theme a year or more ago.
> >
> > Ray Auxillou
> > ------------------------------
> >
> >
> > >From: "Craig Duncan" <cdwoodman(at)mediaone.net>
> > >To: "Investment Trust"
> > >Subject: Re: Nature of Reality
> > >Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2002 23:16:47 -0500
> > >
> > >Hi Ray,
> > > Plantation is west Ft. Lauderdale. We are just on the other
> side
> > >of 441. I used to take my son to OpaLocka when they had the airshows
> there.
> > >It sounds like you are into quite a project. A good friend of mine is an
> > >excellent machinist if it would be of any help to you.I have a
> fabricating
> > >shop in Ft. Lauderdale, which is where I am all day practically every
> day.
> > >Next time you're in the area, call or stop by. 954-763-4101(shop) or
> > >954-587-6144(home).
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Craig Duncan
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > >From: "Investment Trust" <sb30840(at)hotmail.com>
> > >To:
> > >Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 2:18 PM
> > >Subject: Re: Nature of Reality
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hi Craig
> > > >
> > > > I'm in Opa Locka, Fl. Sure thing. I'm building an airplane in the
> > > > backyard right now. Was up to Lake Okeechobie and West Palm and
> > >Indiantown
> > > > on the weekend comparing planes with others.
> > > > Don't know where Plantation is, but next time in the car, will take
> a
> > >look
> > > > at the map.
> > > >
> > > > Ray
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >From: "Craig Duncan" <cdwoodman(at)mediaone.net>
> > > > >To:
> > > > >Subject: Nature of Reality
> > > > >Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 01:32:16 -0500
> > > > >
> > > > >Hi Ray,
> > > > > I read your ideas on brain entrainment and creating
> reality
> > >out
> > > > >of
> > > > >thoughts with much interest. I stumbled across this concept while
> > >reading
> > > > >the Seth Material by Jane Roberts almost twenty years ago. I realized
> > >that
> > > > >I
> > > > >had been doing this all my life, but could never make any sense out
> of
> > >it.
> > > > >Your insights have helped clarify a lot of points for me. I have
> played
> > > > >around with Electro-magnetic fields- built a plasma tube device that
> > > > >generates frequencies and also have a Flanagan "neurophone". I live
> in
> > > > >Plantation,Fl. and judging from your exploits with the citrus police,
> > >you
> > > > >must be in the same general area. If you would like to talk things
> > >over,
> > > > >please reply. If not, it was a pleasure reading your material
> > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > > Craig Duncan
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > > Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
> >
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
Corky---an note to say that I DID get my light grade uncertified 1.8 oz fabric
from Superflite in 1997 in the wide 72" width, but I just went to their
homepage
and they only show the 1.8 oz stuff in a 67" width ! Of course the
heavier stuff
comes in the 72" width. Anyway----ring their chain if you'd like---it's
1-800-323-0611
They list the 1.8 oz dacron as SF 104 non-cert. at $3.95 per yard.
http://www.superflite.com/cov.html#fabric You might even pick their
brain as to WHO
does carry the wider stuff. I know why you want the wide fabric----same as
me. I did
the top of the wing, then the bottom and overlapped the seams at the
leading and trailing
edges rather than trying to have someone sew me an envelope. It worked
great and I'd
do it all over again-----hope you get a lead on the the wider fabric. I
don't think the 67" is
enough to get the req'd overlap, do you ?
Keep us posted,
Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
| Subject: | aircraft building photos |
In light of the problem people with telephone lines analogue data only, and slow
internal modem speeds, I split my homepage for aircraft construction photos,
into three pages.
You might be able to load this now in 5 minutes or so.
http://members.tripod.com/~speculation/pietpage3.html
This has the latest photo.
Ray Auxillou
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fabric--Corky |
| From: | John Hofmann <jhofmann(at)charter.net> |
Corky,
I am with Mike on this one. I have never been one much for envelopes. I have
never cared for that unsightly seam. Also, I have had some very poor
envelopes done. They were too big (beyond the range of safe shrinking) and I
had to redo them anyway. After that experience the blanket method is the way
to go if possible. It is a cleaner installation and really quite easy to do.
Just make your edges straight when gluing the fabric to the leading edge cuz
a crooked edge shows through. Try Polyfiber.com and see if they have 70 inch
or wider fabric.
-john-
>
>
> Corky---an note to say that I DID get my light grade uncertified 1.8 oz fabric
> from Superflite in 1997 in the wide 72" width, but I just went to their
> homepage
> and they only show the 1.8 oz stuff in a 67" width ! Of course the
> heavier stuff
> comes in the 72" width. Anyway----ring their chain if you'd like---it's
> 1-800-323-0611
>
> They list the 1.8 oz dacron as SF 104 non-cert. at $3.95 per yard.
>
> http://www.superflite.com/cov.html#fabric You might even pick their
> brain as to WHO
> does carry the wider stuff. I know why you want the wide fabric----same as
> me. I did
> the top of the wing, then the bottom and overlapped the seams at the
> leading and trailing
> edges rather than trying to have someone sew me an envelope. It worked
> great and I'd
> do it all over again-----hope you get a lead on the the wider fabric. I
> don't think the 67" is
> enough to get the req'd overlap, do you ?
>
> Keep us posted,
> Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Fabric--Corky |
Mike and John and anyone else.
Would that 68 in be wide enough for the wings plus the little lap
Corky in beautiful La where you could fly a Piet today.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mark boynton <marktboynton(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: How high does a Pietenpol fly? |
Graham,
I'd like to have that ISBN if you come across it.
Thanks,
Mark Boynton
Gilbert, AZ
--- Graham Hansen <grhans@cable-lynx.net> wrote:
> Hansen" <grhans@cable-lynx.net>
>
> Fisherman and others:
>
> I dunno. Never tried to see how high I could get
> mine, but did take
> it (once) to about 5000 feet above ground level
> (approx. 7500 feet
> above sea level in these parts) back in the 1970's
> when it was
> powered by an A 65 Continental.
>
> Several things will discourage you from taking a
> Pietenpol to
> higher altitudes. Namely:
>
> 1. It seems to take forever to get there---and does
> indeed take a
> long time.
>
> 2. I found it was darned cold in the open cockpit.
>
> 3. At about a mile above the surface, one develops a
> precarious
> sensation, realizing that he is sitting in a
> little wooden box
> under a wing in the middle of a vast sky. This
> discourages all
> but the bravest from trying for the absolute
> ceiling, or even
> the service ceiling, of the a/c. There is
> comfort in flying this type
> of airplane closer to the surface where you can
> count the cows,
> etc.
>
> 4. It takes a long time to come back down and you
> must be careful
> lest your engine cools too much. If this
> happens, you will be the
> captain of a glider. So take this into account
> before you fly high. If
> you are on a cross-country flight, the letdown
> can be gradual, co-
> vering a lot of distance with enough power on to
> keep the engine
> warm. But if you have to descend practically
> over your airport, it
> is much more difficult to keep the engine temps.
> up.
> .
> 5. Airspace restrictions may prevent you from
> finding how high your
> bird can fly, so any further discussion becomes
> academic.
>
>
>
****************************************************************************
> *
> During WW I, the little Sopwith Pup biplanes were
> routinely taken to
> well over 20,000 feet and they were powered by a
> rotary engine of
> 80 horsepower turning a large diameter propeller at
> maybe 1100
> to 1300 rpm. Very efficient for an 80 -90 mph
> airplane. An 85 hp Piet
> like mine couldn't come even close to that height.
> How those young
> fellows managed without breathing oxygen, I can't
> imagine. Rarely
> did they dogfight at those heights, but would have
> the advantage of
> height in order to dive on an enemy a/c spotted
> below them. The Pup
> was a pretty light airplane and its altitude
> capability would be amaz-
> ing even today.
>
> If you want a "good read" about this sort of thing,
> try to find a pocket-
> book edition of NO PARACHUTE by Arthur Gould Lee,
> published in
> 1969 (I think), in Great Britain. A.G.L. flew Pups
> and, later, Camels.
> His book is simply excellent. If anyone is
> interested, I'll try to find the
> ISBN and publisher. No doubt, it is long out of
> print.
>
****************************************************************************
> **
> Anyway, Pietenpols are not designed to fly high.
> Remember the logo
> on the back of Steve Eldredge's caps:
>
> "Low and slow for 70 years."
>
> Cheers,
>
> Graham Hansen (CF-AUN)
>
>
>
> Forum -
> Contributions of
> any other form
>
> latest messages.
> other List members.
>
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> http://www.matronics.com/search
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
>
>
>
>
http://sports.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fabric--Corky |
| From: | John Hofmann <jhofmann(at)charter.net> |
Corky,
Are you saying you have a little lap? Not sure I would want to broadcast
that to the world :)
I haven't looked and just getting ready to start on this project but take
your chord measurement (taking into account the airfoil shape) add about 4
inches for the overlap then add another 10 percent for shrinkage. That
should give you a safe estimate.
Or, tape a piece of string under the trailing edge to simulate the overlap.
Then just follow the top of the rib and bring the string down and around the
leading edge just like it was a piece of dacron. Add 10% for shrinkage and
voila, you should have an accurate measurement.
TakeCare,
-john-
>
> Mike and John and anyone else.
> Would that 68 in be wide enough for the wings plus the little lap
> Corky in beautiful La where you could fly a Piet today.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
I saw this aviation compass in the Pietenpol at Indian something or other. Last
weekend.
I have one, so I took it out of the panel and turned it around. It doesnt read,
but has a 5 prong plug on the back. I presume this is a gyrocompass? The glass
has an airplane on it in front.
Anybody know what it needs to work? Should I put it in my Piet panel?
------------------------
Thanks for the information on high flying. 10,000 feet is possible with 90 hp
Continental. So I get the picture. If the telephone poles, road and cows are
at 8700 ft and you are doodling along a 100 feet off the ground, going slow
and low. Then I guess you are at 8800 feet above sea level?
Landed that Ercoupe once in a cow town in the hills, looking for gasoline in
Mexico. I came around the valley and over the little town and lined up with the
runway. Hopped over the barbed wire fence and came in about 8 feet above the
runway. I was wondering for what reason a cow town of 2000 people would need
an airstrip so long? A couple of miles looked like and the terminal was way
off in the middle of the strip, but looked so tiny and so far away. Anyway,
I just flew about 110 mph toward the terminal, 8 feet off the runway and when
I got close, decided to settle the plane down, to 2 feet off the runway and get
ready to flare it out. So, I pulled back the throttle to an airspeed of 75
to 80 mph and promptly dropped out of the sky like the proverbial two ton rock.
Bounced a few bounces and got the thing stopped. It was the next day that
I finally figured it out? I knew something was wrong, but not what?
When trying to decide between the parafoil glider and the Pietenpol for the Roaring
Creek Gorge waterfall, it was mostly the wider choice of engines that decided
me.
The parafoil glider runs at a steady 26 mph air speed, no matter what. The Pietenpol
runs fast enough you could get some cross country time in. At least
use it to go to the store and buy groceries. But the parafoil glider only has
limited engine choices, due to aircooling and weight requirements and all those
engines are expensive. Very expensive! Could sew the parachute alright, but
finding cash to buy the engine is something else again. But the Pietenpol
is not as safe as a flying parachute, but has a lot more choices of engines.
So essentially, it was the engine choices that decided me.
Beautiful day in Miami area. SE Gulf Stream trade winds, 75 degrees, balmy,
spring weather, sleepy stuff and a Gulf Stream ocean smell back here 12 miles
inland from the ocean.
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
I saw this aviation compass in the Pietenpol at Indian something or other.
Last weekend.
I have one, so I took it out of the panel and turned it around. It doesnt
read, but has a 5 prong plug on the back. I presume this is a gyrocompass?
The glass has an airplane on it in front.
Anybody know what it needs to work? Should I put it in my Piet panel?
------------------------
Fisherman,
It sounds like a Directional Gyro, also called a Heading Indicator or a Gyro
Compass. It could also be the indicator unit of an ADF (Automatic Direction
Finder - a radio device), or it could be a remote magnetic indicator (RMI).
Where did you get it?
Whatever, it can be used as a backup to a magnetic compass (assuming you can
get it to work and can figure out how to wire it, and you have an electrical
system to power it), but you still need a plain old magnetic whisky compass
such as an Airpath or equivalent. I picked up a good working Airpath
compass on eBay for less than $20. Without a magnetic compass to set a
Directional Gyro to, you would have no idea how much it has precessed, and
it would give erroneous readings in a matter of hours or minutes, depending
on how good the gyro's bearings are.
Have fun. Check out eBay. It's a good source for cheap parts, but you need
to know what you're buying.
Jack
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hofmann <jhofmann(at)charter.net> |
Hi Ray,
I think I would lose that compass. You need to keep it light so no
electrical system IMHO. Use your connections and try to find an old whiskey
compass. There should be a few around the Chapter 37 bunch I would think. Or
maybe you could trade the one you have to somebody with a fancy plane with
electric start instead of the reliable Armstrong Starter of which most Piets
are equipped. I have even heard that there new-fangled airplanes with a
Can-O-Pee over their head. Why anybody would want that is beyond me. That
just plain sounds messy....
-john-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
You probably need the flux gate plus the inverter for power. These parts
alone weigh about 3 pounds if the power supple is solid state.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
Always looking for articles for the Experimenter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: compass
I saw this aviation compass in the Pietenpol at Indian something or other.
Last weekend.
I have one, so I took it out of the panel and turned it around. It doesnt
read, but has a 5 prong plug on the back. I presume this is a gyrocompass?
The glass has an airplane on it in front.
Anybody know what it needs to work? Should I put it in my Piet panel?
------------------------
Fisherman,
It sounds like a Directional Gyro, also called a Heading Indicator or a Gyro
Compass. It could also be the indicator unit of an ADF (Automatic Direction
Finder - a radio device), or it could be a remote magnetic indicator (RMI).
Where did you get it?
Whatever, it can be used as a backup to a magnetic compass (assuming you can
get it to work and can figure out how to wire it, and you have an electrical
system to power it), but you still need a plain old magnetic whisky compass
such as an Airpath or equivalent. I picked up a good working Airpath
compass on eBay for less than $20. Without a magnetic compass to set a
Directional Gyro to, you would have no idea how much it has precessed, and
it would give erroneous readings in a matter of hours or minutes, depending
on how good the gyro's bearings are.
Have fun. Check out eBay. It's a good source for cheap parts, but you need
to know what you're buying.
Jack
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Hofmann <jhofmann(at)charter.net> |
Not only will the flux gate be needed but if installed in parallel with the
flux capacitor time travel should be possible. See "Back to the Future" for
reference.
-john's alter ego....IdiotMan-
>
> You probably need the flux gate plus the inverter for power. These parts
> alone weigh about 3 pounds if the power supple is solid state.
>
> Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Fabric--Corky |
John, Imeasured from the lower part of nose piece to the 1 in on the unfer
side of the trailing edge, 67 inches. Sorry no material for shrinkage. Top of
wing of course.
Corky
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: Fabric--Corky |
Corky----although your measurement doesn't give ya the recommended
4" or whatever overlap on the leading edge you could and CAN use a nice
wide say 4 to six inch leading edge tape over that overlap. I did that,
though
it was narrower. You'll want to do that anyway. See what Cy, Bobka, etc.
say. Not to mention the zillion other great guys on this list who know
fabric.
Mike C.
(the one in cloudy Cleveland)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fabric--Corky |
| From: | John Hofmann <jhofmann(at)charter.net> |
Corky,
Check this page at Wicks:
http://www.wicksaircraft.com/showPage.phtml?pagenum=221
They say they have lightweight Ceconite in 70 inch widths. From what I have
seen it is only coming in 60-64 inch widths now. The 2.7 oz is available in
70-72 for an extra 3 bucks per yard. Required for a factory plane but the
lightweight punches at 97 lbs which is more than adequate for a Pietenpol.
Let me know offlist if I can do anymore research for you.
Mike has a good idea on the wide tape. That gives it a really nice finished
look especially if pinked. I never cared for straight edged tapes myself.
TakeCare,
-john-
>
> John, Imeasured from the lower part of nose piece to the 1 in on the unfer
> side of the trailing edge, 67 inches. Sorry no material for shrinkage. Top of
> wing of course.
> Corky
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net> |
The fabric is glued on and then it is shrunk. Why do you need extra witdth
for shrinkage? We do not shrink it first and then glue it on. Am I not
understanding something? Sounds to me like a 68 " wide piece does the job
well enough if you are careful to keep trailing and leading edges of the
material in a straight line, which is what you strive for anyway.
chris bobka
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
Isablcorky(at)aol.com
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fabric--Corky
John, Imeasured from the lower part of nose piece to the 1 in on the unfer
side of the trailing edge, 67 inches. Sorry no material for shrinkage. Top
of
wing of course.
Corky
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fabric--Corky |
Corky,
I got the AS&S low priced dacron. 1.8 oz. Listed at $3.10 per yard. 64"
wide, but a good straight edge. Was perfect for the 1"overlap at trailing
edge, and the 2" on leading. No cutting, and good quality.
walt
Doing last wing now.
----- Original Message -----
From: <Isablcorky(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fabric--Corky
>
> Mike and John and anyone else.
> Would that 68 in be wide enough for the wings plus the little lap
> Corky in beautiful La where you could fly a Piet today.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fabric--Corky |
| From: | John Hofmann <jhofmann(at)charter.net> |
I certainly did not mean to imply that before! Of course you glue and shrink
but you should not be pulling it on as tight as a drum. 68 inches would be
plenty here. I just like to add a fudge factor to allow for trimming and
removing the lumpy edge I seem to keep finding. You can always remove fabric
but adding to it is pretty tough.
The problem for Corky seems to be finding that 68-70 inch fabric in a
non-certified form vs. having to go to 2.7 oz. certified which comes in
standard width of 70 inches. The fabric I am finding in the lightweight
category (researching instead of working) seems to be in the 60-64 inch
range. I am sure it is out there still, just have to look. I miss HS90X.
That stuff was great for Piet type planes.
Sorry if I was misleading before.
>
> The fabric is glued on and then it is shrunk. Why do you need extra witdth
> for shrinkage? We do not shrink it first and then glue it on. Am I not
> understanding something? Sounds to me like a 68 " wide piece does the job
> well enough if you are careful to keep trailing and leading edges of the
> material in a straight line, which is what you strive for anyway.
>
> chris bobka
>
> -----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
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fabric--Corky
>
>
>
> John, Imeasured from the lower part of nose piece to the 1 in on the unfer
> side of the trailing edge, 67 inches. Sorry no material for shrinkage. Top
> of
> wing of course.
> Corky
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net> |
Rereading my last comment makes me appear rather testy. I did not mean it
that way. Just trying to use as few words as possible to convey the
meaning.
Yes, HS-90X was a really good fabric to work with.
chris bobka
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of John
Hofmann
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fabric--Corky
I certainly did not mean to imply that before! Of course you glue and shrink
but you should not be pulling it on as tight as a drum. 68 inches would be
plenty here. I just like to add a fudge factor to allow for trimming and
removing the lumpy edge I seem to keep finding. You can always remove fabric
but adding to it is pretty tough.
The problem for Corky seems to be finding that 68-70 inch fabric in a
non-certified form vs. having to go to 2.7 oz. certified which comes in
standard width of 70 inches. The fabric I am finding in the lightweight
category (researching instead of working) seems to be in the 60-64 inch
range. I am sure it is out there still, just have to look. I miss HS90X.
That stuff was great for Piet type planes.
Sorry if I was misleading before.
>
> The fabric is glued on and then it is shrunk. Why do you need extra
witdth
> for shrinkage? We do not shrink it first and then glue it on. Am I not
> understanding something? Sounds to me like a 68 " wide piece does the job
> well enough if you are careful to keep trailing and leading edges of the
> material in a straight line, which is what you strive for anyway.
>
> chris bobka
>
> -----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
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fabric--Corky
>
>
> John, Imeasured from the lower part of nose piece to the 1 in on the unfer
> side of the trailing edge, 67 inches. Sorry no material for shrinkage. Top
> of
> wing of course.
> Corky
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
Hi Jack
I haven't figured out how to use or look at E BAY yet. Haven't had the time.
Did poke my nose in it for a half hour one day, but the learning curve was too
steep and time consuming, so I quit.
This is a compass indicator, made by Hamilton Instruments, Inc., of Houston,
Texas and I see them in all the light planes, or a number of them anyway.
-------------------------
On Wed, 20 February 2002, "Cy Galley" wrote:
>
>
> You probably need the flux gate plus the inverter for power. These parts
> alone weigh about 3 pounds if the power supple is solid state.
>
> Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
>
> Editor, EAA Safety Programs
> cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
>
> Always looking for articles for the Experimenter
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net>
> To:
> Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: compass
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I saw this aviation compass in the Pietenpol at Indian something or other.
> Last weekend.
> I have one, so I took it out of the panel and turned it around. It doesnt
> read, but has a 5 prong plug on the back. I presume this is a gyrocompass?
> The glass has an airplane on it in front.
>
> Anybody know what it needs to work? Should I put it in my Piet panel?
>
> ------------------------
>
> Fisherman,
>
> It sounds like a Directional Gyro, also called a Heading Indicator or a Gyro
> Compass. It could also be the indicator unit of an ADF (Automatic Direction
> Finder - a radio device), or it could be a remote magnetic indicator (RMI).
> Where did you get it?
>
> Whatever, it can be used as a backup to a magnetic compass (assuming you can
> get it to work and can figure out how to wire it, and you have an electrical
> system to power it), but you still need a plain old magnetic whisky compass
> such as an Airpath or equivalent. I picked up a good working Airpath
> compass on eBay for less than $20. Without a magnetic compass to set a
> Directional Gyro to, you would have no idea how much it has precessed, and
> it would give erroneous readings in a matter of hours or minutes, depending
> on how good the gyro's bearings are.
>
> Have fun. Check out eBay. It's a good source for cheap parts, but you need
> to know what you're buying.
>
> Jack
>
>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave and Connie <dmatt(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fabric--Corky |
Corky,
Last I knew Jim and Dondi Miller had some 1.7 left. It
probably isn't advertised so give them a call. They always
answer the cell phone. http://www.aircrafttechsupport.com
should do the trick.
Dave
>
>
>Corky---an note to say that I DID get my light grade uncertified 1.8 oz
fabric
>from Superflite in 1997 in the wide 72" width, but I just went to their
>homepage
>and they only show the 1.8 oz stuff in a 67" width ! Of course the
>heavier stuff
>comes in the 72" width. Anyway----ring their chain if you'd like---it's
>1-800-323-0611
>
>They list the 1.8 oz dacron as SF 104 non-cert. at $3.95 per yard.
>
>http://www.superflite.com/cov.html#fabric You might even pick their
>brain as to WHO
>does carry the wider stuff. I know why you want the wide fabric----same as
>me. I did
>the top of the wing, then the bottom and overlapped the seams at the
>leading and trailing
>edges rather than trying to have someone sew me an envelope. It worked
>great and I'd
>do it all over again-----hope you get a lead on the the wider fabric. I
>don't think the 67" is
>enough to get the req'd overlap, do you ?
>
>Keep us posted,
>Mike
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "George Allen" <GeorgeA(at)PAonline.com> |
| Subject: | Re: project status |
Tom, I've been using a random orbit sander on the wing ribs
and it leaves a great finish.
George Allen
Harrisburg, PA
GeorgeA(at)PAonline.com
(Peitenpol builder)
20 ribs done & starting the tail feathers.
>I hate those
> orbital sanders though, it allways seams to leave some little "swirl"
> marks. Guess I'll final sand by hand. One note that you'd think I
> Tom Brant
> Mpls
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ted Tuckerman" <ws133b341(at)cox.net> |
Gary:
A good source is via the Brodhead Pietenpol Association, C/O The
Independent-Register, P.O. Box 255, Brodhead, WI 53520-0255. They have
included numerous reminders from EAA Chapter 431 in their newsletter, but
alas, not on their web site at www.pietenpol.org. They can be reached via
email at bpa(at)indreg.com. The dates listed are 19 & 20 Jul 02. Cheers.
Ted Tuckerman
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary McNeel, Jr." <gmcneel(at)mykitplane.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Brodhead...
>
> Hello all. Can anyone tell me where I can find information on the next
> Brodhead gathering? Is there a new site keeping track of this information?
I
> will put it on my site if someone will give me the details. I am trying to
> make plans to be there. Need to stock up on film. TIA.
>
> Regards,
>
> Gary P. McNeel, Jr.
> MyKitPlane.com
> EAA 665957
> gmcneel(at)mykitplane.com
> http://www.mykitplane.com
>
> "What's the hurry? Are you afraid I won't come back?"
>
> Manfred von Richthofen, 'The Red Baron,' last recorded words, in reply to
> a request for an autograph as he was climbing into the cockpit of his
plane.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Owen Davies" <owen(at)davies.mv.com> |
| Subject: | Re: project status |
George Allen wrote:
> Tom, I've been using a random orbit sander on the wing ribs
> and it leaves a great finish.
I can't think how a random orbit sander would help in making
wing ribs. In fact, other than scuffing down the edges of the
gussets near the fabric, I'm not sure what one would use any
sander for in rib construction. What am I missing?
Owen Davies
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fabric--Corky |
In a message dated 2/20/02 8:41:18 AM Eastern Standard Time,
Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov writes:
<< Corky---an note to say that I DID get my light grade uncertified 1.8 oz
fabric
from Superflite in 1997 in the wide 72" width, but I just went to their
homepage
and they only show the 1.8 oz stuff in a 67" width ! Of course the
heavier stuff
comes in the 72" width. Anyway----ring their chain if you'd like---it's
1-800-323-0611
They list the 1.8 oz dacron as SF 104 non-cert. at $3.95 per yard.
http://www.superflite.com/cov.html#fabric You might even pick their
brain as to WHO
does carry the wider stuff. >>
I read over all the information on this site. There is a WEALTH of
information here. Looks like a whole lot of good information here.
I saw also they sell slips, or presewn socks for the entire wing. WOuld there
be any of them that would fit a Piet ? Hmmm, might make things a little
simpler when covering.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: aircraft building photos |
In a message dated 2/20/02 9:04:08 AM Eastern Standard Time,
cayecaulker(at)justice.com writes:
<< You might be able to load this now in 5 minutes or so.
http://members.tripod.com/~speculation/pietpage3.html
This has the latest photo.
Ray Auxillou >>
Ray, I get this message, guess I'll wait an hour! :
"Temporarily Unavailable
The Tripod site you are trying to reach has been temporarily suspended due to
excessive bandwidth consumption.
The site will be available again in approximately 1 hours! "
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Lou Larsen" <pietlars(at)earthlink.net> |
Mr. Corky:
Don't remember if I mentioned it before but I got my 70" wide and 1.7 oz
dacron from The Great Atlantic Aeroplane Company, Inc. in Avon Park, FL.
It happened to be certified material, but since they had a price of $5.50/
lineal yard and gave me a 10% discount that made it $4.95/yd, which I
didn't think was too bad.
You can call them at 1-888-453-2376 and they will send you a free catalog.
They seem to have most everything that AS has and are usually a bit cheaper
even with out the discount. I bought my stuff from them last month, so this
is a current price.
Have my tail feathers and ailerons covered and starting on the stiching.
Lou Larsen
----- Original Message -----
From: <Isablcorky(at)aol.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Covering
>
> Pieters,
> Was just before ordering some dacron this am to do some experimenting on
> covering paints when I realized that I should seek some advice from this
> group as to where I may find the best price on some 1.7 at least 70 in
wide
> uncertified. I would appreciate a phone # / e-mail address or mailing
> address. Thanks.
> Corky in La where we are still recovering from the '27 flood.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "George Allen" <GeorgeA(at)PAonline.com> |
| Subject: | Re: project status |
Owen, I'm just using it for sanding the top and bottom surface of the rib.
Levels the gussets. I also sand the un-gusseted side of the rib after
I take it out of the fixture, after the first side has set (24hrs).
I glue up one side, then the next day, finish the other side and
start another one. Sanding the unfinished side makes for a nice gluing
surface. Only takes a minute.
It probably doesn't need it, but I'm a little paranoid anyway. I plan on
flying something I've made.
> George Allen wrote:
>
>
> > Tom, I've been using a random orbit sander on the wing ribs
> > and it leaves a great finish.
>
> I can't think how a random orbit sander would help in making
> wing ribs. In fact, other than scuffing down the edges of the
> gussets near the fabric, I'm not sure what one would use any
> sander for in rib construction. What am I missing?
>
> Owen Davies
George Allen
Harrisburg, PA
GeorgeA(at)PAonline.com
(Peitenpol builder)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "George Allen" <GeorgeA(at)PAonline.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fabric--Corky |
Is there any problem using the 2.7 wt. fabric other then a little more
weight?
Checking out that page, it's cheaper!!
George Allen
Harrisburg, PA
GeorgeA(at)PAonline.com
(Peitenpol builder)
>
> << Corky---an note to say that I DID get my light grade uncertified 1.8 oz
> fabric
> from Superflite in 1997 in the wide 72" width, but I just went to their
> homepage
> and they only show the 1.8 oz stuff in a 67" width ! Of course the
> heavier stuff
> comes in the 72" width. Anyway----ring their chain if you'd
like---it's
> 1-800-323-0611
>
> They list the 1.8 oz dacron as SF 104 non-cert. at $3.95 per yard.
>
> http://www.superflite.com/cov.html#fabric You might even pick their
> brain as to WHO
> does carry the wider stuff. >>
>
> I read over all the information on this site. There is a WEALTH of
> information here. Looks like a whole lot of good information here.
> I saw also they sell slips, or presewn socks for the entire wing. WOuld
there
> be any of them that would fit a Piet ? Hmmm, might make things a little
> simpler when covering.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | clif <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Fabric--Corky |
OK, How about using the 2.7 oz wide material on top of the wing
and 1.7 on the bottom. The calculations I come up with says that
you will only gain 2lbs total wt. but it may cause a problem with a
difference in tension between the two surfaces. So, if you do the entire
wing in 2.7 and everything else in 1.7 your only up 4lbs and you've
saved yourself one hell of lot of anxiety and hassle.
How about someone else checking my calculations just to be sure
I have'nt missed something. The wing is 29 ft by 5 ft, the top surface
is a little longer so I calc. 301 sq ft for both sides. Polyfibre says
2.7oz weighs 0.94 oz / sq ft and 1.7 oz weighs 0.72 oz / sq ft
finished. the difference is 0.22 oz. multiplying area by this gives above
figures.
Clif
----- Original Message -----
From: "George Allen" <GeorgeA(at)PAonline.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fabric--Corky
>
> Is there any problem using the 2.7 wt. fabric other then a little more
> weight?
> Checking out that page, it's cheaper!!
>
> George Allen
> Harrisburg, PA
> GeorgeA(at)PAonline.com
> (Peitenpol builder)
>
> >
> > << Corky---an note to say that I DID get my light grade uncertified 1.8
oz
> > fabric
> > from Superflite in 1997 in the wide 72" width, but I just went to their
> > homepage
> > and they only show the 1.8 oz stuff in a 67" width ! Of course the
> > heavier stuff
> > comes in the 72" width. Anyway----ring their chain if you'd
> like---it's
> > 1-800-323-0611
> >
> > They list the 1.8 oz dacron as SF 104 non-cert. at $3.95 per yard.
> >
> > http://www.superflite.com/cov.html#fabric You might even pick their
> > brain as to WHO
> > does carry the wider stuff. >>
> >
> > I read over all the information on this site. There is a WEALTH of
> > information here. Looks like a whole lot of good information here.
> > I saw also they sell slips, or presewn socks for the entire wing. WOuld
> there
> > be any of them that would fit a Piet ? Hmmm, might make things a little
> > simpler when covering.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave and Connie <dmatt(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fabric--Corky |
The weight difference is more than just the weight of the fabric.
Fatter fabric takes more paint to fill. The paint is where all
of the weight is.
Dave
>
>
>OK, How about using the 2.7 oz wide material on top of the wing
>and 1.7 on the bottom. The calculations I come up with says that
>you will only gain 2lbs total wt. but it may cause a problem with a
>difference in tension between the two surfaces. So, if you do the entire
>wing in 2.7 and everything else in 1.7 your only up 4lbs and you've
>saved yourself one hell of lot of anxiety and hassle.
>How about someone else checking my calculations just to be sure
>I have'nt missed something. The wing is 29 ft by 5 ft, the top surface
>is a little longer so I calc. 301 sq ft for both sides. Polyfibre says
>2.7oz weighs 0.94 oz / sq ft and 1.7 oz weighs 0.72 oz / sq ft
>finished. the difference is 0.22 oz. multiplying area by this gives above
>figures.
>Clif
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | clif <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: project status |
Orbital sanders are all different. RPM is important. I had one of those big
pad
B&D things that did that because the speed was slow. I've got a Rockwell
that turns up 20,000 rpm in little tight orbits, no marks.
Also, are you letting the tool do the work with no pressure from you?
This is necessary for fine work. Heres another trick-put on 3 or 4
sheets at a time then tear each off when worn.
Here's something you're probably all doing anyway but I'll add it just in
case. Take a piece of plywood, screw down a hacksaw blade across
it then mark a line at 4.5" and 5.5" parallel to the blade. Slide in paper
and rip. Sanders are made to take 1/2 or 1/4 sheets. Clif
----- Original Message -----
From: "George Allen" <GeorgeA(at)PAonline.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: project status
>
> Tom, I've been using a random orbit sander on the wing ribs
> and it leaves a great finish.
>
> George Allen
> Harrisburg, PA
> GeorgeA(at)PAonline.com
> (Peitenpol builder)
> 20 ribs done & starting the tail feathers.
>
> >I hate those
> > orbital sanders though, it allways seams to leave some little "swirl"
> > marks. Guess I'll final sand by hand. One note that you'd think I
>
> > Tom Brant
> > Mpls
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JamesJboyer(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Fabric--Corky |
In a message dated 2/20/2002 7:01:00 PM Pacific Standard Time,
cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca writes:
> The calculations I come up with says that
> you will only gain 2lbs total wt. but it may cause a problem with a
> difference in tension between the two surfaces.
How about the weight of the extra drop it will take to fill the weave of the
heavier fabric? Is that significant?
Cheers, Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | clif <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Fabric--Corky |
Please check what I said. The figures given are for completely
painted fabrics-out of the polyfiber manual, p 89.
Finished,painted wt using 2.7 oz fabric is 0.94 oz/ sq ft
Using 1.7 oz/sq yard fabric you end up with 0.72 oz/sq ft painted.
Clif
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave and Connie" <dmatt(at)frontiernet.net>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fabric--Corky
>
> The weight difference is more than just the weight of the fabric.
> Fatter fabric takes more paint to fill. The paint is where all
> of the weight is.
>
> Dave
>
>
> >
> >
> >OK, How about using the 2.7 oz wide material on top of the wing
> >and 1.7 on the bottom. The calculations I come up with says that
> >you will only gain 2lbs total wt. but it may cause a problem with a
> >difference in tension between the two surfaces. So, if you do the entire
> >wing in 2.7 and everything else in 1.7 your only up 4lbs and you've
> >saved yourself one hell of lot of anxiety and hassle.
> >How about someone else checking my calculations just to be sure
> >I have'nt missed something. The wing is 29 ft by 5 ft, the top surface
> >is a little longer so I calc. 301 sq ft for both sides. Polyfibre says
> >2.7oz weighs 0.94 oz / sq ft and 1.7 oz weighs 0.72 oz / sq ft
> >finished. the difference is 0.22 oz. multiplying area by this gives above
> >figures.
> >Clif
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net> |
Dave,
The man said that the weights furnished were for the fabric "finished"
which, therefore, includes the paint's weight.
Chris bobka
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Dave and
Connie
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fabric--Corky
The weight difference is more than just the weight of the fabric.
Fatter fabric takes more paint to fill. The paint is where all
of the weight is.
Dave
>
>
>OK, How about using the 2.7 oz wide material on top of the wing
>and 1.7 on the bottom. The calculations I come up with says that
>you will only gain 2lbs total wt. but it may cause a problem with a
>difference in tension between the two surfaces. So, if you do the entire
>wing in 2.7 and everything else in 1.7 your only up 4lbs and you've
>saved yourself one hell of lot of anxiety and hassle.
>How about someone else checking my calculations just to be sure
>I have'nt missed something. The wing is 29 ft by 5 ft, the top surface
>is a little longer so I calc. 301 sq ft for both sides. Polyfibre says
>2.7oz weighs 0.94 oz / sq ft and 1.7 oz weighs 0.72 oz / sq ft
>finished. the difference is 0.22 oz. multiplying area by this gives above
>figures.
>Clif
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | clif <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Fabric--Corky |
Again, thats two pounds total painted weight. I guess I
wasn't clear in the way I explained it all. Sorry about that.
I was trying not to be too wordy as I know I get carried away
sometimes. The cloth wt is based on a sq yard which is 9 sq
ft so 2.7 oz fabric weighs 0.3 oz per square foot. The rest of the
0.94 oz is paint. So there's 31 times more paint than fabric.
----- Original Message -----
From: <JamesJboyer(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fabric--Corky
>
> In a message dated 2/20/2002 7:01:00 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca writes:
>
>
> > The calculations I come up with says that
> > you will only gain 2lbs total wt. but it may cause a problem with a
> > difference in tension between the two surfaces.
>
> How about the weight of the extra drop it will take to fill the weave of
the
> heavier fabric? Is that significant?
>
> Cheers, Jim
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | clif <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Fabric--Corky |
Thanks Chris. The one thing I was really hoping to get some
input on was whether one could get away with using heavy
fabric on top and light on bottom or would the differences in
tension cause undue stress and/or warping. That would be
a little unpleasant,wouldn't it. The funny thing is, the only
place heavy fabric would be useful is on the bottom of the
fuselage where rocks and mud will whack it. When you
think about it, it's really quite funny what necessities drive
our choices, isn't it.
Clif
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net>
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Fabric--Corky
>
> Dave,
>
> The man said that the weights furnished were for the fabric "finished"
> which, therefore, includes the paint's weight.
>
> Chris bobka
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Dave and
> Connie
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fabric--Corky
>
>
>
>
> The weight difference is more than just the weight of the fabric.
> Fatter fabric takes more paint to fill. The paint is where all
> of the weight is.
>
> Dave
>
>
> >
> >
> >OK, How about using the 2.7 oz wide material on top of the wing
> >and 1.7 on the bottom. The calculations I come up with says that
> >you will only gain 2lbs total wt. but it may cause a problem with a
> >difference in tension between the two surfaces. So, if you do the entire
> >wing in 2.7 and everything else in 1.7 your only up 4lbs and you've
> >saved yourself one hell of lot of anxiety and hassle.
> >How about someone else checking my calculations just to be sure
> >I have'nt missed something. The wing is 29 ft by 5 ft, the top surface
> >is a little longer so I calc. 301 sq ft for both sides. Polyfibre says
> >2.7oz weighs 0.94 oz / sq ft and 1.7 oz weighs 0.72 oz / sq ft
> >finished. the difference is 0.22 oz. multiplying area by this gives above
> >figures.
> >Clif
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JamesJboyer(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Fabric--Corky |
In a message dated 2/20/2002 8:09:54 PM Pacific Standard Time,
cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca writes:
> Again, thats two pounds total painted weight. I guess I
> wasn't clear in the way I explained it all.
No, I probably didn't read it well. Thanks though as it is lighter than I had
thought. I was wondering if the advantage of using the 1.7 oz was worth it,
but it doesn't look like that will really be a factor unless you put a super
rubbed out car like finish and (my opinion) is that doesn't fit a Piet
anyway.
Thanks again, Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net> |
Do not worry about the differing tensions of the differnet weight fabrics.
It is insignificant.
Chris Bobka
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of clif
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fabric--Corky
Thanks Chris. The one thing I was really hoping to get some
input on was whether one could get away with using heavy
fabric on top and light on bottom or would the differences in
tension cause undue stress and/or warping. That would be
a little unpleasant,wouldn't it. The funny thing is, the only
place heavy fabric would be useful is on the bottom of the
fuselage where rocks and mud will whack it. When you
think about it, it's really quite funny what necessities drive
our choices, isn't it.
Clif
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net>
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Fabric--Corky
>
> Dave,
>
> The man said that the weights furnished were for the fabric "finished"
> which, therefore, includes the paint's weight.
>
> Chris bobka
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Dave and
> Connie
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fabric--Corky
>
>
>
>
> The weight difference is more than just the weight of the fabric.
> Fatter fabric takes more paint to fill. The paint is where all
> of the weight is.
>
> Dave
>
>
> >
> >
> >OK, How about using the 2.7 oz wide material on top of the wing
> >and 1.7 on the bottom. The calculations I come up with says that
> >you will only gain 2lbs total wt. but it may cause a problem with a
> >difference in tension between the two surfaces. So, if you do the entire
> >wing in 2.7 and everything else in 1.7 your only up 4lbs and you've
> >saved yourself one hell of lot of anxiety and hassle.
> >How about someone else checking my calculations just to be sure
> >I have'nt missed something. The wing is 29 ft by 5 ft, the top surface
> >is a little longer so I calc. 301 sq ft for both sides. Polyfibre says
> >2.7oz weighs 0.94 oz / sq ft and 1.7 oz weighs 0.72 oz / sq ft
> >finished. the difference is 0.22 oz. multiplying area by this gives above
> >figures.
> >Clif
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fabric--Corky |
In a message dated 2/20/02 5:52:26 PM Pacific Standard Time,
GeorgeA(at)PAonline.com writes:
> Is there any problem using the 2.7 wt. fabric other then a little more
> weight?
> Checking out that page, it's cheaper!!
>
> George Allen
>
George,
There is no problem using the 2.7 oz covering. It is the equivalent to grade
A cotton. I use it on my planes and it is inexpensive. I did try some 1.8
oz on the tail of my Scout.
Doug Bryant
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
I haven't got there yet, but am absorbing all this stuff on cloth and paint.
I have used 3 cans of Home Depot Marine Spar Varnish so far on fuselage and ribs
and spars. I think that is going to do it? But I have another can. This
is only one coat and these cans of varnish, weigh about a pound each is my guess?
For paint, I am not sure. I did get my daughter who flew up from Caye Caulker
on the Belize Great Barrier Reef over last weekend to bring me some Chinese
Laquer from the Chinese Hardware Store. Made in Hong Kong this stuff and great
paint on boats. A little bit covers a huge area and the paint holds up for
a year or more in intense ultraviolet tropical sun. Whereas most marine paints
last about 8 weeks. Never could find Hong Kong made Chinese Laquer here in
the Miami/Dade County area from Chinese owned hardware stores. Not sure why not?
They sell all this polyurethane paint garbage. She flew back on Tuesday
loaded with HUGE bags full of shopping stuff for the house rentals on the beach,
which you can't buy down there in a remote area, or the country itself for
that matter.
But that varnish weighs mon! I am just following the crowd here like a sheep.
But I was kind of wondering why I am using varnish? Shouldn't a wood filler
primer be better?
-----------------------------------
On Wed, 20 February 2002, "Lou Larsen" wrote:
>
>
> Mr. Corky:
>
> Don't remember if I mentioned it before but I got my 70" wide and 1.7 oz
> dacron from The Great Atlantic Aeroplane Company, Inc. in Avon Park, FL.
> It happened to be certified material, but since they had a price of $5.50/
> lineal yard and gave me a 10% discount that made it $4.95/yd, which I
> didn't think was too bad.
>
> You can call them at 1-888-453-2376 and they will send you a free catalog.
> They seem to have most everything that AS has and are usually a bit cheaper
> even with out the discount. I bought my stuff from them last month, so this
> is a current price.
>
> Have my tail feathers and ailerons covered and starting on the stiching.
>
> Lou Larsen
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <Isablcorky(at)aol.com>
> To:
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Covering
>
>
> >
> > Pieters,
> > Was just before ordering some dacron this am to do some experimenting on
> > covering paints when I realized that I should seek some advice from this
> > group as to where I may find the best price on some 1.7 at least 70 in
> wide
> > uncertified. I would appreciate a phone # / e-mail address or mailing
> > address. Thanks.
> > Corky in La where we are still recovering from the '27 flood.
> >
> >
>
>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
| Subject: | John and Jean Dilatush |
Many thanks to John and Jean Dilatush who sent me a very encouraging package
of photos of their plane. If it was meant to encourage, sorry it makes me despondent.
( Cry! Waaauuuughhh! I'll never finish?)
Nor do I feel up to making a plane that will even come close to the quality you
built. That thing is gorgeous.
Buuut!!! Life is too short. I'm electing to go the strong, rough sloppy route
and get flying, forget the finishing. This plane has a job to do. It's a
workhorse. Plus I have a host of adventures and other projects to get started
on and I am only 64 and time is running out. Got to get running, or I will never
climb Mt. Kilamanjero, or build a Long EZE.
I enjoyed that web page about the trip to Brodhead, and Oskosh done in 1999 from
Utah. Stuck a link to it on my last web page. Called it a PIETENPOL LOVE
STORY!
Boy if that writer can rhapsodize over corn fields in Iowa and Wisconsin, just
think what he would write, as he circled the Volcanoes of Lake Atitlan and ate
in a restaurant at Panajchel in Guatemala? Or circled the Mayan ruins of Tikal
in the Peten, Xunantanich in Belize, or Caracol in Belize? The writing
would be absolutely lyrical! ( Lyrical- not sure what it means but it sounds
nice! )
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | More on lightweight- Fabric--Corky |
Group- Once again the old hands (and I mean IA's, A&P's...) at the airport
told me
there was no reason to use a heavier fabric on the Piet so that sealed it
for me.
There are some pro's and con's to using the 1.8 vs. the 2.7 or whatever
they weigh.
The 1.8 is NICE to work with----it goes around corners easier, it fills
with paint easier
as the weave is much tighter than the 2.7, and is tough as nails like all
the fabrics.
The cons include dangers when pressing with your iron over fittings, bolt
heads, hard
objects just under your fabric---the heat builds up quickly if you linger
and boom, you've
got a burn hole and a hole to patch. Using various grades of Scotch-Brite
pads to take
off the 'nubs' the dust, high spots between your coats and or sandpaper you
can do the
same thing---sand or rub right thru the fabric more easily with the 1.8 oz.
when you are
over "bumps" and things under your fabric. You get so in tune with this
danger that you
find yourself running one hand over an area to be sanded to find what is
"under there" and
the other hand to do the work and avoid sanding thru. This danger is true
of any fabric, just
that you must be more aware of it w/ the lighter fabric. Another nice
thing about the 1.7 is
that if you use the 1.7 oz finishing tapes, edge tapes, pinked or
otherwise they are nice and
easy to work with----especially around corners. They shrink quick tho too
and curl and narrow
if you over heat them just like the 2.7, but at a faster pace. I had to
shop Wicks, Superflite,
Poly Wolly, and others to find all my 1.7 oz tapes and such. Not all
places carry the lighter
finishing tapes that you will need. I DID follow the good procedures
outlined in the Polyfiber
manual tho did not use their process. Dope.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | addendum to 1.8 oz |
Doug B. is right. There is absolutely nothing wrong with using
the 2.7 oz fabric at all. Another one of those thousand choices we
have and decisions to make when building a plane.
(at least we learn something----not like those bolt-together "I don't know
how these things rate for the 51% rule:))))
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary McNeel, Jr." <gmcneel(at)mykitplane.com> |
Thanks Ted. I will look into getting the news letter.
-Gary
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ted
> Tuckerman
> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 6:22 PM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Brodhead...
>
>
> Gary:
>
> A good source is via the Brodhead Pietenpol Association, C/O The
> Independent-Register, P.O. Box 255, Brodhead, WI 53520-0255. They have
> included numerous reminders from EAA Chapter 431 in their newsletter, but
> alas, not on their web site at www.pietenpol.org. They can be reached via
> email at bpa(at)indreg.com. The dates listed are 19 & 20 Jul 02. Cheers.
>
> Ted Tuckerman
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gary McNeel, Jr." <gmcneel(at)mykitplane.com>
> To: "Pietenpol-List"
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Brodhead...
>
>
>
> >
> > Hello all. Can anyone tell me where I can find information on the next
> > Brodhead gathering? Is there a new site keeping track of this
> information?
> I
> > will put it on my site if someone will give me the details. I
> am trying to
> > make plans to be there. Need to stock up on film. TIA.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Gary P. McNeel, Jr.
> > MyKitPlane.com
> > EAA 665957
> > gmcneel(at)mykitplane.com
> > http://www.mykitplane.com
> >
> > "What's the hurry? Are you afraid I won't come back?"
> >
> > Manfred von Richthofen, 'The Red Baron,' last recorded words,
> in reply to
> > a request for an autograph as he was climbing into the cockpit of his
> plane.
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
February 13, 2002 - February 21, 2002
Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-ck