Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-ez
March 19, 2006 - April 05, 2006
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: my Piet pics |
Chris,
Even tho the tailwheel supplied with my Fisher 404 kit was right off a shopping
cart, I didn't use it.
The wheel I used on the Piet was from AS&S. part #06-03500 (4" solid) Nice
wheel that's held up nicely on both paved and grass runways. It has ball bearings.
I used the same tubing as the plans for the swing arms, but like I had mentioned,
had to add more like a truss to stop torsional loads. Now it's very solid and
worry free.
While on the subject, could NOT get used to the rudder bar. Didn't want to change
it cause of the "crush the rudder horn " deal. So added higher rudder "pedals"
to the bar. You can see them in the Yahoo pics. After so many hours using
your feet like flippers for the rudder, I couldn't get into seasawing my legs
to acuate the bar. When things got busy landing, my feet are flipping but the
rudder isn't ruddering.
The pucker factor called for a change.
I'm also very happy with how these came out.
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: Catdesign
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 1:49 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: my Piet pics
Walt,
I have heard about using heavy duty casters before. So you just used a off the
shelf caster? Any wisdom on selection one? Or did you just grab whatever they
had. How's it holding up? Do you land on grass or pavement? I'll be landing
on pavement. I have heard that if built to the plans the tubing might bend.
I think it was Steve Eldrige who also had this happen. I think he recommended
increasing the size of the down tubes. Pictures would be great.
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
----- Original Message -----
From: walt evans
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 5:13 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: my Piet pics
Chris,
I added an L shaped plate under the coil spring to give a surface parallel
to the ground. With a hole for a pivot bolt. Then kind of fabricated a tailwheel
holder to take a cheap 4" (I think) wheel. Then had to make a bracket that
holds 2 pullies for cables to go over. These were at the pivot point of the
swingarm, holding the wheel assy. The front of the cables were swaged to the
rudder cables under the seat, and the rear was attached, with springs, to the
tailwheel arms.
Turns out that cause the height of the wheel was like a lever, during tight
turns the swingarm tubes twisted. So had to fabricate like a truss assy on the
arms.
Kind of hard to explain, I'll try to dig up pics.
walt evans
NX140DL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Catdesign" <catdesign(at)intergate.com> |
| Subject: | Tail Wheel was my Piet pics |
Let me see if I have this strait, your saying you used the wheel bracket (basically
one off a shopping cart) but swapped out the wheel. From the pictures I
have it doesn't look like any caster I have seen. If so I just might have to take
a look at some of the abandoned shopping carts next to my office Monday.
I think I can also see you added two cross brace between the to down tubes and
some diagonals. I have like a bunch of Piet photos I've collected over the years
but few show any details about tail wheels. Isn't that the way it always
happens. I remember you problems with the rudder bar. I keep going back and
forth about using a rudder bar or pedals.
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
----- Original Message -----
From: walt evans
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 12:01 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: my Piet pics
Chris,
Even tho the tailwheel supplied with my Fisher 404 kit was right off a shopping
cart, I didn't use it.
The wheel I used on the Piet was from AS&S. part #06-03500 (4" solid) Nice
wheel that's held up nicely on both paved and grass runways. It has ball bearings.
I used the same tubing as the plans for the swing arms, but like I had mentioned,
had to add more like a truss to stop torsional loads. Now it's very solid
and worry free.
While on the subject, could NOT get used to the rudder bar. Didn't want to change
it cause of the "crush the rudder horn " deal. So added higher rudder "pedals"
to the bar. You can see them in the Yahoo pics. After so many hours using
your feet like flippers for the rudder, I couldn't get into seasawing my legs
to acuate the bar. When things got busy landing, my feet are flipping but
the rudder isn't ruddering.
The pucker factor called for a change.
I'm also very happy with how these came out.
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: Catdesign
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 1:49 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: my Piet pics
Walt,
I have heard about using heavy duty casters before. So you just used a off
the shelf caster? Any wisdom on selection one? Or did you just grab whatever
they had. How's it holding up? Do you land on grass or pavement? I'll be landing
on pavement. I have heard that if built to the plans the tubing might bend.
I think it was Steve Eldrige who also had this happen. I think he recommended
increasing the size of the down tubes. Pictures would be great.
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
----- Original Message -----
From: walt evans
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 5:13 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: my Piet pics
Chris,
I added an L shaped plate under the coil spring to give a surface parallel
to the ground. With a hole for a pivot bolt. Then kind of fabricated a tailwheel
holder to take a cheap 4" (I think) wheel. Then had to make a bracket
that holds 2 pullies for cables to go over. These were at the pivot point of the
swingarm, holding the wheel assy. The front of the cables were swaged to the
rudder cables under the seat, and the rear was attached, with springs, to the
tailwheel arms.
Turns out that cause the height of the wheel was like a lever, during tight
turns the swingarm tubes twisted. So had to fabricate like a truss assy on
the arms.
Kind of hard to explain, I'll try to dig up pics.
walt evans
NX140DL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Tail Wheel was my Piet pics |
Chris,
No, just related a past story about a Fisher 404 that supplied a shopping cart
wheel for their tail wheel,,,that I didn't use.
I just came back from the airport and I'll either send you the pics directly, or
post them on the Yahoo site. I'll let you know
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: Catdesign
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 4:10 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Tail Wheel was my Piet pics
Let me see if I have this strait, your saying you used the wheel bracket (basically
one off a shopping cart) but swapped out the wheel. >From the pictures
I have it doesn't look like any caster I have seen. If so I just might have to
take a look at some of the abandoned shopping carts next to my office Monday.
I think I can also see you added two cross brace between the to down tubes
and some diagonals. I have like a bunch of Piet photos I've collected over the
years but few show any details about tail wheels. Isn't that the way it always
happens. I remember you problems with the rudder bar. I keep going back and
forth about using a rudder bar or pedals.
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
----- Original Message -----
From: walt evans
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 12:01 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: my Piet pics
Chris,
Even tho the tailwheel supplied with my Fisher 404 kit was right off a shopping
cart, I didn't use it.
The wheel I used on the Piet was from AS&S. part #06-03500 (4" solid)
Nice wheel that's held up nicely on both paved and grass runways. It has ball
bearings.
I used the same tubing as the plans for the swing arms, but like I had mentioned,
had to add more like a truss to stop torsional loads. Now it's very solid
and worry free.
While on the subject, could NOT get used to the rudder bar. Didn't want to
change it cause of the "crush the rudder horn " deal. So added higher rudder
"pedals" to the bar. You can see them in the Yahoo pics. After so many hours
using your feet like flippers for the rudder, I couldn't get into seasawing my
legs to acuate the bar. When things got busy landing, my feet are flipping but
the rudder isn't ruddering.
The pucker factor called for a change.
I'm also very happy with how these came out.
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: Catdesign
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 1:49 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: my Piet pics
Walt,
I have heard about using heavy duty casters before. So you just used a off
the shelf caster? Any wisdom on selection one? Or did you just grab whatever
they had. How's it holding up? Do you land on grass or pavement? I'll be landing
on pavement. I have heard that if built to the plans the tubing might bend.
I think it was Steve Eldrige who also had this happen. I think he recommended
increasing the size of the down tubes. Pictures would be great.
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
----- Original Message -----
From: walt evans
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 5:13 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: my Piet pics
Chris,
I added an L shaped plate under the coil spring to give a surface parallel
to the ground. With a hole for a pivot bolt. Then kind of fabricated a tailwheel
holder to take a cheap 4" (I think) wheel. Then had to make a bracket
that holds 2 pullies for cables to go over. These were at the pivot point of
the swingarm, holding the wheel assy. The front of the cables were swaged to
the rudder cables under the seat, and the rear was attached, with springs, to
the tailwheel arms.
Turns out that cause the height of the wheel was like a lever, during tight
turns the swingarm tubes twisted. So had to fabricate like a truss assy
on the arms.
Kind of hard to explain, I'll try to dig up pics.
walt evans
NX140DL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Tail Wheel was my Piet pics |
Chris,
Just uploaded to Yahoo. But sent them to you directly also. If you need them bigger,
let me know. Pardon the last years debris.
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: Catdesign
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 4:10 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Tail Wheel was my Piet pics
Let me see if I have this strait, your saying you used the wheel bracket (basically
one off a shopping cart) but swapped out the wheel. >From the pictures
I have it doesn't look like any caster I have seen. If so I just might have to
take a look at some of the abandoned shopping carts next to my office Monday.
I think I can also see you added two cross brace between the to down tubes
and some diagonals. I have like a bunch of Piet photos I've collected over the
years but few show any details about tail wheels. Isn't that the way it always
happens. I remember you problems with the rudder bar. I keep going back and
forth about using a rudder bar or pedals.
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
----- Original Message -----
From: walt evans
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 12:01 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: my Piet pics
Chris,
Even tho the tailwheel supplied with my Fisher 404 kit was right off a shopping
cart, I didn't use it.
The wheel I used on the Piet was from AS&S. part #06-03500 (4" solid)
Nice wheel that's held up nicely on both paved and grass runways. It has ball
bearings.
I used the same tubing as the plans for the swing arms, but like I had mentioned,
had to add more like a truss to stop torsional loads. Now it's very solid
and worry free.
While on the subject, could NOT get used to the rudder bar. Didn't want to
change it cause of the "crush the rudder horn " deal. So added higher rudder
"pedals" to the bar. You can see them in the Yahoo pics. After so many hours
using your feet like flippers for the rudder, I couldn't get into seasawing my
legs to acuate the bar. When things got busy landing, my feet are flipping but
the rudder isn't ruddering.
The pucker factor called for a change.
I'm also very happy with how these came out.
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: Catdesign
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 1:49 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: my Piet pics
Walt,
I have heard about using heavy duty casters before. So you just used a off
the shelf caster? Any wisdom on selection one? Or did you just grab whatever
they had. How's it holding up? Do you land on grass or pavement? I'll be landing
on pavement. I have heard that if built to the plans the tubing might bend.
I think it was Steve Eldrige who also had this happen. I think he recommended
increasing the size of the down tubes. Pictures would be great.
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
----- Original Message -----
From: walt evans
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 5:13 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: my Piet pics
Chris,
I added an L shaped plate under the coil spring to give a surface parallel
to the ground. With a hole for a pivot bolt. Then kind of fabricated a tailwheel
holder to take a cheap 4" (I think) wheel. Then had to make a bracket
that holds 2 pullies for cables to go over. These were at the pivot point of
the swingarm, holding the wheel assy. The front of the cables were swaged to
the rudder cables under the seat, and the rear was attached, with springs, to
the tailwheel arms.
Turns out that cause the height of the wheel was like a lever, during tight
turns the swingarm tubes twisted. So had to fabricate like a truss assy
on the arms.
Kind of hard to explain, I'll try to dig up pics.
walt evans
NX140DL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | One more leak detection method to add to the list |
My wife came up with yet another method of testing for fuel tank leaks.
Actually a variation on the big ballon or condom method some of you guys
suggested. I just blow up 'Mr. Leaky' and as long as he stays happy I stay
happy.
Rick H.
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "The Schuerrs" <schuerrs(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: my Piet pics |
Walt,
Thanks for sharing. These were very inspiring pictures of a beautiful plane.
Thanks again,
Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: walt evans
To: piet list
Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 4:18 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: my Piet pics
Just ran into my Yahoo pic acct. Forgot I had it. Here's the link in case any
one wants to browse my project in a nutshell. Click to make them bigger.
http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/joepiet/album?.dir=3D5f03
walt evans
NX140DL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Catdesign" <catdesign(at)intergate.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Tail Wheel was my Piet pics |
Thanks, I'll take a look at them. The weed look good, like it's a plane that's
flown.
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
----- Original Message -----
From: walt evans
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 3:30 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Tail Wheel was my Piet pics
Chris,
Just uploaded to Yahoo. But sent them to you directly also. If you need them
bigger, let me know. Pardon the last years debris.
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: Catdesign
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 4:10 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Tail Wheel was my Piet pics
Let me see if I have this strait, your saying you used the wheel bracket (basically
one off a shopping cart) but swapped out the wheel. >From the pictures
I have it doesn't look like any caster I have seen. If so I just might have
to take a look at some of the abandoned shopping carts next to my office Monday.
I think I can also see you added two cross brace between the to down tubes
and some diagonals. I have like a bunch of Piet photos I've collected over
the years but few show any details about tail wheels. Isn't that the way it always
happens. I remember you problems with the rudder bar. I keep going back
and forth about using a rudder bar or pedals.
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
----- Original Message -----
From: walt evans
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 12:01 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: my Piet pics
Chris,
Even tho the tailwheel supplied with my Fisher 404 kit was right off a shopping
cart, I didn't use it.
The wheel I used on the Piet was from AS&S. part #06-03500 (4" solid)
Nice wheel that's held up nicely on both paved and grass runways. It has ball
bearings.
I used the same tubing as the plans for the swing arms, but like I had mentioned,
had to add more like a truss to stop torsional loads. Now it's very solid
and worry free.
While on the subject, could NOT get used to the rudder bar. Didn't want to
change it cause of the "crush the rudder horn " deal. So added higher rudder
"pedals" to the bar. You can see them in the Yahoo pics. After so many hours
using your feet like flippers for the rudder, I couldn't get into seasawing
my legs to acuate the bar. When things got busy landing, my feet are flipping
but the rudder isn't ruddering.
The pucker factor called for a change.
I'm also very happy with how these came out.
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: Catdesign
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 1:49 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: my Piet pics
Walt,
I have heard about using heavy duty casters before. So you just used a
off the shelf caster? Any wisdom on selection one? Or did you just grab whatever
they had. How's it holding up? Do you land on grass or pavement? I'll be
landing on pavement. I have heard that if built to the plans the tubing might
bend. I think it was Steve Eldrige who also had this happen. I think he recommended
increasing the size of the down tubes. Pictures would be great.
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
----- Original Message -----
From: walt evans
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 5:13 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: my Piet pics
Chris,
I added an L shaped plate under the coil spring to give a surface parallel
to the ground. With a hole for a pivot bolt. Then kind of fabricated a
tailwheel holder to take a cheap 4" (I think) wheel. Then had to make a bracket
that holds 2 pullies for cables to go over. These were at the pivot point
of the swingarm, holding the wheel assy. The front of the cables were swaged
to the rudder cables under the seat, and the rear was attached, with springs,
to the tailwheel arms.
Turns out that cause the height of the wheel was like a lever, during
tight turns the swingarm tubes twisted. So had to fabricate like a truss assy
on the arms.
Kind of hard to explain, I'll try to dig up pics.
walt evans
NX140DL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | Test Message, Please Ignore... |
This is a test message to try and see if I can get one of those "NOT DELIVERED"
messages sent directly to me. Please ignore this message. -Matt
----------
You Have Been Selected to Win a Million Dollars
Discover when a Slot Machine will Payoff
If you no longer wish to receive WebRevealed offers
Visit here to be purged from future offers.
Approval in 10 minutes, No doctor visit
Click here for list removal
BREAKING MARKET NEWS REPORT
* Urgent Notification
Thank you for your interest in a home based business
no thank you, no more offers please
Sweepstakes
Do you want to u O r V i E h R p P u A y Y for your i M q e p d j i u a c c q t
p i d o x n i s?
Exclusive 2 day Sale on ink prices with free us delivery
Free Shipping
FREE Gifts
SAVE up to an additional 75% OFF on our combo packages
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matronics Information <info(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | Test Message, Please Ignore (#2)... |
This is a test message to try and see if I can get one of those "NOT
DELIVERED" messages sent directly to me. Please ignore this message. -Matt
----------
You Have Been Selected to Win a Million Dollars
Discover when a Slot Machine will Payoff
If you no longer wish to receive WebRevealed offers
Visit here to be purged from future offers.
Approval in 10 minutes, No doctor visit
Click here for list removal
BREAKING MARKET NEWS REPORT
* Urgent Notification
Thank you for your interest in a home based business
no thank you, no more offers please
Sweepstakes
Do you want to u O r V i E h R p P u A y Y for your i M q e p d j i u
a c c q t p i d o x n i s?
Exclusive 2 day Sale on ink prices with free us delivery
Free Shipping
To unsubscribe click here.
FREE Gifts
SAVE up to an additional 75% OFF on our combo packages
Product Information | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551
925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | info(at)matronics.com Email
http://www.matronics.com WWW | Specializing in Aircraft Avionics
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | harvey rule <harvey.rule(at)bell.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: One more leak detection method to add to the list |
HAHAHA,ya gotta love it!
Rick Holland wrote:
>
> My wife came up with yet another method of testing for fuel tank
> leaks. Actually a variation on the big ballon or condom method some of
> you guys suggested. I just blow up 'Mr. Leaky' and as long as he stays
> happy I stay happy.
>
> Rick H.
>
> --
> Rick Holland
>
> "Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
>
> Name: P1010417.JPG
> P1010417.JPG Type: JPEG Image (image/jpeg)
> Encoding: base64
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Douwe Blumberg" <douweblumberg(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | model A engine costs |
Mark,
After much research, I am going the Model A route, but be warned, it is anything
but a clear issue.
As you delve into the flying history of the A on Piets, you'll find some very successful
installations and then lots of unsuccessful installations. You'll also
hear lots of strong opinions from people who have never worked or flown them.
It gets hard to know who to listen to.
I decided the only way to get the straight scoop was to track down as many people
who actually flew them and compile a list of thier experiences. To date I
have interviewed about 12 people who have actual flying experience with A's.
What was interesting was what often lay behind the problems was not the engine,
for example Ken Perkins' engine. He's had three major problems, including two
quits. The first one was due to a bad babbit job which came apart and broke
a rod ( the engine kept chugging away). The second was a broken crank, which
broke because he had welded it twice to get it up to specs (a NONO). The most
recent was due to an aircraft certified magneto. So, were these problems due
to the engine?
I didn't run across many broken cranks (none besides Ken's). I will say that MOST
of the problems were accessory related like carburation (#1), mags (usually
aircraft mags), mag housing problems etc. Also lots of problems due to mistakes
made in design or maintenence (like flying around with two sheared prop bolts!)
Anyways, the A is a very tough, overbuilt engine. If built up well, following
the plans, with lots of care given to the carburation and accessories, they can
be successful, but they have also caused many headaches for people who have
given up.
Regarding power, I spoke with guys who flew two people all the time on hot days.
I also spoke with many guys who could barely stagger into the air on a hot
day solo. There seems to be many variables. I think it is safe to say that a
good running A will fly the plane fine, but you won't be overpowered, and you
better keep the weight down. Remember, these designs required a different kind
of flying than a modern highly-powered design, you just don't have the extra
power, you've got to let it fly itself.
Regarding money, I really overspent on my job. I had most of the work done for
me because I wanted to finish my plane and I'm not much of an engine guy. I
also went down some wrong tracks which ended up costing money. I've also done
things like installed two mags, which REALLY adds to the cost (price two new
magnetos these days!). But I know guys like Larry Williams who were very smart
about what they did and ended up with nice reliable units for decent prices.
I'd say realistically that you'll pay between 2,000 to 6,000 depending on how much
you do and the decisions you make regarding babbit/inserts, dual mags, etc.
If you'd like to see my A journal, email me and I'll shoot you a copy.
Douwe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | CG check before and after covering and paint |
I have seen pictures of many Piets completely assembled including engine and
prop minus covering and paint. Was wondering if anyone had done a weight and
balance before and after covering, paint, and adding a cowling.
Am starting to design a motor mount and would like to better predict the
final CG. I would guess that covering the wing wouldn't change the balance
much but covering the tail and fuselage would shift it slightly to the rear
although adding a cowling would offset that somewhat.
Thanks
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | harvey rule <harvey.rule(at)bell.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: CG check before and after covering and paint |
Why don't you leave it uncovered and then you won't have to worry about
it!HAHAHAHA!
Rick Holland wrote:
>
> I have seen pictures of many Piets completely assembled including
> engine and prop minus covering and paint. Was wondering if anyone had
> done a weight and balance before and after covering, paint, and adding
> a cowling.
>
> Am starting to design a motor mount and would like to better predict
> the final CG. I would guess that covering the wing wouldn't change the
> balance much but covering the tail and fuselage would shift it
> slightly to the rear although adding a cowling would offset that
> somewhat.
>
> Thanks
>
> --
> Rick Holland
>
> "Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | CG check before and after covering and paint |
| From: | "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal.com> |
Depends A LOT on the type of paint used. I used Polyurethane on mine
and admire its bulletproof endurance (until you need to repair it) but
found it to be VERY heavy. I figure the fabric and paint on my plane
weighed at least 65 lbs, and most of that was paint.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rick
Holland
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 9:49 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: CG check before and after covering and paint
I have seen pictures of many Piets completely assembled including engine
and prop minus covering and paint. Was wondering if anyone had done a
weight and balance before and after covering, paint, and adding a
cowling.
Am starting to design a motor mount and would like to better predict the
final CG. I would guess that covering the wing wouldn't change the
balance much but covering the tail and fuselage would shift it slightly
to the rear although adding a cowling would offset that somewhat.
Thanks
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
Working together. For life.(sm)
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error,
please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use
of the email by you is prohibited.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack T. Textor" <jtextor(at)thepalmergroup.com> |
Great pictures Walt and very helpful!
Jack Textor
Just ran into my Yahoo pic acct. Forgot I had it. Here's the link in
case any one wants to browse my project in a nutshell. Click to make
them bigger.
http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/joepiet/album?.dir=3D5f03
walt evans
NX140DL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | harvey rule <harvey.rule(at)bell.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: my Piet pics |
Amen to that!They are very helpful indeed,thanks a million.I was
wondering how necessary those cooling covers would be on an 80hp
Franklin?My AME hasn't said a thing about putting anything like that on
so far.Maybe we'll have to see about heating factors when we get her
going in flight.Just wondering.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cinda Gadd" <csfog(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | CG check before and after covering and paint |
Rick,
Haven't done it yet, but here is my plan for weight and balance.
The plane will be complete except for motor mount, cowling, and boot cowl.
Will then build a scrap wood or tube motor mount which will allow me to slide the
engine front and back.
Do the weight and balance and slide the engine so the cg is at the center of cg
range.
Build the motor mount and cowl.
Do the weight and balance again and tilt cabanes to get the cg exact.
Build the boot cowl to the location of the cabanes.
Skip Gadd
PS Corvair, short(flyer and glider) fuse, I weigh 155 lbs.
Am starting to design a motor mount and would like to better predict the final
CG. I would guess that covering the wing wouldn't change the balance much but
covering the tail and fuselage would shift it slightly to the rear although adding
a cowling would offset that somewhat.
Thanks
Rick Holland
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CG check before and after covering and paint |
Any idea how that 65 lbs changed your CG Jack?
Rick H
On 3/20/06, Phillips, Jack wrote:
>
> Depends A LOT on the type of paint used. I used Polyurethane on mine and
> admire its bulletproof endurance (until you need to repair it) but found it
> to be VERY heavy. I figure the fabric and paint on my plane weighed at
> least 65 lbs, and most of that was paint.
>
>
> Jack Phillips
>
> NX899JP
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:
> owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Rick Holland
> *Sent:* Monday, March 20, 2006 9:49 AM
> *To:* pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> *Subject:* Pietenpol-List: CG check before and after covering and paint
>
>
> I have seen pictures of many Piets completely assembled including engine
> and prop minus covering and paint. Was wondering if anyone had done a weight
> and balance before and after covering, paint, and adding a cowling.
>
> Am starting to design a motor mount and would like to better predict the
> final CG. I would guess that covering the wing wouldn't change the balance
> much but covering the tail and fuselage would shift it slightly to the rear
> although adding a cowling would offset that somewhat.
>
> Thanks
>
> --
> Rick Holland
>
> "Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
>
> Working together. For life.(sm)
> _________________________________________________
>
proprietary, or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error,
please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use
of the email by you is prohibited.
>
>
>
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | CG check before and after covering and paint |
| From: | "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal.com> |
AFT! Very little covered surface is forward of the CG.
I had originally estimated that my CG would be fine with the wing
shifted aft 2-1/2" from vertical (cabanes). Once I finished it and
weighed it, I ended up moving the wing another 1-3/8" aft.
Jack
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rick
Holland
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 11:18 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: CG check before and after covering and
paint
Any idea how that 65 lbs changed your CG Jack?
Rick H
On 3/20/06, Phillips, Jack wrote:
Depends A LOT on the type of paint used. I used Polyurethane on mine
and admire its bulletproof endurance (until you need to repair it) but
found it to be VERY heavy. I figure the fabric and paint on my plane
weighed at least 65 lbs, and most of that was paint.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rick
Holland
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 9:49 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: CG check before and after covering and paint
I have seen pictures of many Piets completely assembled including engine
and prop minus covering and paint. Was wondering if anyone had done a
weight and balance before and after covering, paint, and adding a
cowling.
Am starting to design a motor mount and would like to better predict the
final CG. I would guess that covering the wing wouldn't change the
balance much but covering the tail and fuselage would shift it slightly
to the rear although adding a cowling would offset that somewhat.
Thanks
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
Working together. For life.(sm)
This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain
privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information. If you have
received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete
Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese - Nederlands
- Norsk - Portuguese - Svenska:
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
Working together. For life.(sm)
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error,
please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use
of the email by you is prohibited.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "gbowen(at)ptialaska.net" <gbowen(at)ptialaska.net> |
| Subject: | CG check before and after covering and paint |
Rick,
Except for the paint on the tail feathers, you should be able to just about
ignore the paint. As for the engine: you know the following---a) you want
the empty cg to be about 2" ahead of the main gear axles, b) you can get a
good approx. of the engines weight from books or by weighing it separately.
SOOOOOO do the math. Put the plane sans engine on some scales and see how
far behind the axles the current empty cg is......., arm x mass, calulate
how much forward arm you need with engine's known mass to move the new
total mass of plane plus engine to a empty cg in front of the axles. I
had to do this configuration because of my weight of 280 lbs and the fact
we used a 0-235 engine. Moved the battery around to insure my loaded cg
was within the 25-32% of wing chord when loaded and flying. Gotta get good
with the math. After fuel starvation due to some dumb mistake by
builder/test pilot, screwing up the loaded CG for flight is second most
likely reason for homebuilder crashes and burns.
Gordon Bowen
Original Message:
-----------------
From: Rick Holland at7000ft(at)gmail.com
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 07:48:48 -0700
Subject: Pietenpol-List: CG check before and after covering and paint
I have seen pictures of many Piets completely assembled including engine and
prop minus covering and paint. Was wondering if anyone had done a weight and
balance before and after covering, paint, and adding a cowling.
Am starting to design a motor mount and would like to better predict the
final CG. I would guess that covering the wing wouldn't change the balance
much but covering the tail and fuselage would shift it slightly to the rear
although adding a cowling would offset that somewhat.
Thanks
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | looking for Bendix mag |
Hello, low 'n' slow fliers;
I'm looking for a Bendix S4RN-21 magneto for my A65-8; right-hand rotation,
with impulse coupling (and gear, if possible), serviceable, airworthy. None
on eBay so I'm asking around. Please reply directly to me, not to the list,
at taildrags(at)hotmail.com
Thanks!
Oscar Zuniga
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Gillespie" <MARGDICK(at)peoplepc.com> |
I have a restored Piet for sale. Wide cockpits and a strong
A-65 w/Slicks. New wing and tail fabrics and all new paint. Located at LaBelle,
FL. $12,500.00. E-mail direct for more info.
Dick Gillespie margdick(at)peoplepc.com
239/936-2774
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | harvey rule <harvey.rule(at)bell.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: CG check before and after covering and paint |
We used tedlar on our Lazairs but it was somewhat milky.Mylar is the
cleanest for see through but you can't leave it out in the sun for long
because it turns brittle and will break with the least amount of
pressure.Some kid once said hey daddy look at the selefain plane,
refering to my aircraft.The covering has to be taped on and I'm not sure
how it would stand up to the speeds at which you will fly.Our top speed
was a vne of 55mph and we cruised at 30 mph,in the air at 19 mph.It
would look neat though.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo |
Pardon the grass.
http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/joepiet/album?.dir=3D5f03
walt evans
NX140DL
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo |
| From: | "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal.com> |
Walt, looking at your tailwheel setup it is obvious you discovered the
same problem with the BHP design I did - the darn thing wants to twist
when the tailwheel is turned. I ended up making my A-arm of 5/8" x .049
wall tubing, and added cross pieces to prevent twisting (after breaking
the one I made per the plans after only 3 hours of flying). Of course
Bernard designed this mount for a tailskid which by its nature can't
force the kind of twisting loads that a swiveling tailwheel can. The
coil spring does nothing to resist the A-arm twisting and the whole
assembly can go through some alarming gyrations, which make for some
interesting ground-handling characteristics.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of walt
evans
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 4:26 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo
Pardon the grass.
http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/joepiet/album?.dir=3D5f03
walt evans
NX140DL
Working together. For life.(sm)
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error,
please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use
of the email by you is prohibited.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo |
Jack,
Yeah, I thought all was OK, till someone said that the wheel was laying over. Then
it made perfect sense. The height of the wheel is a lever that can twist
those tubes with not much pressure. So I discussed it with my mentor, and he
gave me the general Idea, and where the loads were. I came up with this which
was added to the original tubes. He approved, so I painted it and put it on.
No problems with it except for the fact that it added a smidge to the already
heavy tail.
AIN"T LIFE GRAND!! :
)
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: Phillips, Jack
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 4:40 PM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo
Walt, looking at your tailwheel setup it is obvious you discovered the same problem
with the BHP design I did - the darn thing wants to twist when the tailwheel
is turned. I ended up making my A-arm of 5/8" x .049 wall tubing, and added
cross pieces to prevent twisting (after breaking the one I made per the plans
after only 3 hours of flying). Of course Bernard designed this mount for
a tailskid which by its nature can't force the kind of twisting loads that a swiveling
tailwheel can. The coil spring does nothing to resist the A-arm twisting
and the whole assembly can go through some alarming gyrations, which make
for some interesting ground-handling characteristics.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of walt evans
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 4:26 PM
To: piet list
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo
Pardon the grass.
http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/joepiet/album?.dir=3D5f03
walt evans
NX140DL
Working together. For life.(sm)
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error,
please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use
of the email by you is prohibited.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Catdesign" <catdesign(at)intergate.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo |
Hey Jack, I have pictures of your plane with a leaf spring tail wheel and the Pietenpol
designed A-arm style. What are you running now and when did you switch.
The A-arm looks like the one Ken Perkins builds. Is this one of them? Got
any good pictures of you reinforced A-Arm?
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
----- Original Message -----
From: walt evans
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 3:01 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo
Jack,
Yeah, I thought all was OK, till someone said that the wheel was laying over.
Then it made perfect sense. The height of the wheel is a lever that can twist
those tubes with not much pressure. So I discussed it with my mentor, and
he gave me the general Idea, and where the loads were. I came up with this which
was added to the original tubes. He approved, so I painted it and put it on.
No problems with it except for the fact that it added a smidge to the already
heavy tail.
AIN"T LIFE GRAND!! :
)
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: Phillips, Jack
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 4:40 PM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo
Walt, looking at your tailwheel setup it is obvious you discovered the same
problem with the BHP design I did - the darn thing wants to twist when the tailwheel
is turned. I ended up making my A-arm of 5/8" x .049 wall tubing, and
added cross pieces to prevent twisting (after breaking the one I made per the
plans after only 3 hours of flying). Of course Bernard designed this mount for
a tailskid which by its nature can't force the kind of twisting loads that a
swiveling tailwheel can. The coil spring does nothing to resist the A-arm twisting
and the whole assembly can go through some alarming gyrations, which make
for some interesting ground-handling characteristics.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of walt evans
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 4:26 PM
To: piet list
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo
Pardon the grass.
http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/joepiet/album?.dir=3D5f03
walt evans
NX140DL
Working together. For life.(sm)
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error,
please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use
of the email by you is prohibited.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "gcardinal" <gcardinal(at)mn.rr.com> |
FYI -
Former list member Richard DeCosta is selling his Air Camper project in Maine.
Here is the link:
http://www.richarddecosta.com/images/piet/Piet.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo |
Jack and Walt,
Do you guys have the Long Fuselage tailwheel swingarm ? The long fuse has a
longer swingarm, and has more tendency to twist with side loads. I have the
short fuselage, and the shorter original design tailskid, with a tailwheel
added. I built it so the wheel is behind the original skid location. It keeps
the tail lower when landing so full stall landings are easier, but I still have
to drag the tail on first, before the mains, to get the full stall landing.
I've never had any problems with twisting the swingarm, and I even do loops on
the ground, with one brake applied heavily. I have this maneuver on my video,
with smoke on. The plane almost disappears in a cloud of Smoke !!
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | looking for John Dilatush |
Anybody know if John is still out there in Pietenpol land? He built the
turbo Subaru-powered Piet called "Mountain Piet" and I'm trying to get in
touch with him.
Thanks!
Oscar Zuniga
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gene Beenenga <kgbunltd(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Piet/GN-1 performance |
Steve, thanks for your input, sounds good to me! Gene
-----Original Message-----
>From: Steve Ruse <steve(at)wotelectronics.com>
>Sent: Mar 17, 2006 10:27 AM
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Piet/GN-1 performance
>
>
>Gene,
>
>My GN-1 is based at a 2,100' grass strip, and even with two people I routinely
>get up in 1,000' or less, even with 18 gallons of fuel. This is with an A-75
>turning a 68"x42 prop near 2,400 RPM static. With just me on board and a
>slight headwind, I can get off in a few hundred feet.
>
>Here is a picture of the field showing obstructions.
>http://www.wotelectronics.com/O44.jpg
>On runway 35, I am always up before the "slight bump" indicated in the
>picture,
>even with two people. Elevation is 1,135'MSL.
>
>Hope this helps, let me know if I can provide any other information.
>
>Steve Ruse
>Norman, OK
>
>
>Quoting Gene Beenenga :
>
>>
>> attn Piet/GN-1 pilots:
>>
>> I need some input from those of you that have experience with the
>> GN-1 in particular, but more so, those of you that have flown off
>> short grass.
>>
>> What I need is a few examples verified of actual "roll out distance
>> on grass" to clear a 15' obsticle at take off. Even though may
>> particular situation has no obstacles at either end of this EW strip
>> but farm ground and a country road at one of the ends. The altitude
>> varies 2 feet from one end to the other and is at 680' MSL
>>
>> Here is the situation, i am trying to get dept. of aeronautics to
>> approve a 1330' grass strip for "restricted use for specified
>> aircraft (i.e. GN-1)", they want some "performance input" on this
>> scenerio. Other factor(s) include; stock Corvair turning 3100 RPM on
>> a 2 blade warp drive, 68" ground adjustable prop. The gear on my
>> GN-1 is basically a J4 with standard tires, and a 4" Scott tail.
>>
>> "Mean" Gene
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Greg Bacon <gbacon67(at)direcway.com> |
| Subject: | Re: looking for John Dilatush |
Oscar,
I'll email John's number to your hotmail account.
Greg Bacon
Prairie Home, MO
gbacon67(at)direcway.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 7:33 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: looking for John Dilatush
>
>
> Anybody know if John is still out there in Pietenpol land? He built the
> turbo Subaru-powered Piet called "Mountain Piet" and I'm trying to get in
> touch with him.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Oscar Zuniga
> San Antonio, TX
> mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
> website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Vought" <carbarvo(at)knology.net> |
| Subject: | Re: looking for John Dilatush |
Oscar...Sorry I don't have much to offer, but as you probably already know,
the directory has him at 6780 County Road, Salida, CO 81201. I've attached a
couple of photos taken at Brodhead shortly before his accident. Carl Vought
----- Original Message -----
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 7:33 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: looking for John Dilatush
>
>
> Anybody know if John is still out there in Pietenpol land? He built the
> turbo Subaru-powered Piet called "Mountain Piet" and I'm trying to get in
> touch with him.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Oscar Zuniga
> San Antonio, TX
> mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
> website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | url for this list |
Hey Guys
Can I get the url for this list just one more time? I get only the digest
but I want to check the photos occasionally.
Ken in Austin, drawing out the instrument panel, slowly as usual.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "malcolm Zirges" <macz(at)macsells.com> |
| Subject: | Re: model A engine costs |
Hello. I am also planning on using an A in my Piet. I have the plane all framed
up and several engines to work with but no actual modifications to engines
yet. Please send me your A info if you have a chance.
Thanks, Mac in Oregon
----- Original Message -----
From: Douwe Blumberg
To: pietenpolgroup
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 5:20 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: model A engine costs
Mark,
After much research, I am going the Model A route, but be warned, it is anything
but a clear issue.
As you delve into the flying history of the A on Piets, you'll find some very
successful installations and then lots of unsuccessful installations. You'll
also hear lots of strong opinions from people who have never worked or flown
them. It gets hard to know who to listen to.
I decided the only way to get the straight scoop was to track down as many people
who actually flew them and compile a list of thier experiences. To date
I have interviewed about 12 people who have actual flying experience with A's.
What was interesting was what often lay behind the problems was not the engine,
for example Ken Perkins' engine. He's had three major problems, including
two quits. The first one was due to a bad babbit job which came apart and broke
a rod ( the engine kept chugging away). The second was a broken crank, which
broke because he had welded it twice to get it up to specs (a NONO). The most
recent was due to an aircraft certified magneto. So, were these problems due
to the engine?
I didn't run across many broken cranks (none besides Ken's). I will say that
MOST of the problems were accessory related like carburation (#1), mags (usually
aircraft mags), mag housing problems etc. Also lots of problems due to mistakes
made in design or maintenence (like flying around with two sheared prop
bolts!)
Anyways, the A is a very tough, overbuilt engine. If built up well, following
the plans, with lots of care given to the carburation and accessories, they
can be successful, but they have also caused many headaches for people who have
given up.
Regarding power, I spoke with guys who flew two people all the time on hot days.
I also spoke with many guys who could barely stagger into the air on a hot
day solo. There seems to be many variables. I think it is safe to say that
a good running A will fly the plane fine, but you won't be overpowered, and you
better keep the weight down. Remember, these designs required a different
kind of flying than a modern highly-powered design, you just don't have the extra
power, you've got to let it fly itself.
Regarding money, I really overspent on my job. I had most of the work done for
me because I wanted to finish my plane and I'm not much of an engine guy.
I also went down some wrong tracks which ended up costing money. I've also done
things like installed two mags, which REALLY adds to the cost (price two new
magnetos these days!). But I know guys like Larry Williams who were very smart
about what they did and ended up with nice reliable units for decent prices.
I'd say realistically that you'll pay between 2,000 to 6,000 depending on how
much you do and the decisions you make regarding babbit/inserts, dual mags, etc.
If you'd like to see my A journal, email me and I'll shoot you a copy.
Douwe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | Re: url for this list |
At 09:17 AM 3/21/2006 Tuesday, you wrote:
>Hey Guys
>
>Can I get the url for this list just one more time? I get only the digest but
I want to check the photos occasionally.
>
>Ken in Austin, drawing out the instrument panel, slowly as usual.
Ken,
All the goodies can be found here:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
Best regards,
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Admin
Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551
925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle(at)matronics.com Email
http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Ruse <steve(at)wotelectronics.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Piet/GN-1 performance |
Gene,
After re-reading that, I feel that I should add one caveat. Although takeoff
roll is short, with two people and full fuel (basically at or near gross
weight), climb performance is poor, and honestly makes me a little nervous at
times. With two people I tend to fly very flat, i.e., I make very shallow,
slow turns to avoid losing speed or altitude. I should probably do some
testing with a passenger to find the optimal AOA for climb...pulling the nose
up too far results in reduced climb along with airspeed, although I am still
far from a power-on stall. At these times, I'm always wishing for the extra
25hp of an O-200. The 75 is OK, but you could get yourself in trouble if you
get yourself in a situation where you need more than 200-300fpm climb,
say on a
go-around after a botched landing, where you are already very slow and running
out of runway. If your Corvair is putting out near 95hp static, I would
imagine it would be a great performer.
I'd like to hear some other input from people on the climb & flight
characteristics of their planes near gross.
Steve Ruse
Norman, OK
Quoting Gene Beenenga :
>
> Steve, thanks for your input, sounds good to me! Gene
>
> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Steve Ruse <steve(at)wotelectronics.com>
>> Sent: Mar 17, 2006 10:27 AM
>> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Piet/GN-1 performance
>>
>>
>> Gene,
>>
>> My GN-1 is based at a 2,100' grass strip, and even with two people I
>> routinely
>> get up in 1,000' or less, even with 18 gallons of fuel. This is
>> with an A-75
>> turning a 68"x42 prop near 2,400 RPM static. With just me on board and a
>> slight headwind, I can get off in a few hundred feet.
>>
>> Here is a picture of the field showing obstructions.
>> http://www.wotelectronics.com/O44.jpg
>> On runway 35, I am always up before the "slight bump" indicated in the
>> picture,
>> even with two people. Elevation is 1,135'MSL.
>>
>> Hope this helps, let me know if I can provide any other information.
>>
>> Steve Ruse
>> Norman, OK
>>
>>
>> Quoting Gene Beenenga :
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> attn Piet/GN-1 pilots:
>>>
>>> I need some input from those of you that have experience with the
>>> GN-1 in particular, but more so, those of you that have flown off
>>> short grass.
>>>
>>> What I need is a few examples verified of actual "roll out distance
>>> on grass" to clear a 15' obsticle at take off. Even though may
>>> particular situation has no obstacles at either end of this EW strip
>>> but farm ground and a country road at one of the ends. The altitude
>>> varies 2 feet from one end to the other and is at 680' MSL
>>>
>>> Here is the situation, i am trying to get dept. of aeronautics to
>>> approve a 1330' grass strip for "restricted use for specified
>>> aircraft (i.e. GN-1)", they want some "performance input" on this
>>> scenerio. Other factor(s) include; stock Corvair turning 3100 RPM on
>>> a 2 blade warp drive, 68" ground adjustable prop. The gear on my
>>> GN-1 is basically a J4 with standard tires, and a 4" Scott tail.
>>>
>>> "Mean" Gene
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Barry Davis" <bed(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Drag wires and flying wires |
I remember about a year ago we talked about threading solid wires and someone had
an address for someone threading stainless rod for under $5 each. Also had
information about spoke type nipples to fit these wires.
I can't seen to get the archives to work, so does anyone have this information?
Barry Davis
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard deCosta <curiousspider(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | 35% piet kit available for sale AGAIN |
Through an unfortunate set of circumstances which I
won't get into, my 35% complete Piet is available for
sale again.
http://www.richarddecosta.com/images/piet/Piet.html
Short fuse.
$3000 OBO.
Buyer must pick up in Maine.
.O. Composer, Artistic & General Director @ Turing*Shop
..O www.RicharddeCosta.com
OOO
There are 10 types of people in this world: those who understand
binary and those who don't.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "bike.mike" <bike.mike(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 35% piet kit available for sale AGAIN |
Richard,
I keep getting redirected to your opera page. I like opera but I want to
see your airplane.
Mike
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard deCosta" <curiousspider(at)yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 12:04 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: 35% piet kit available for sale AGAIN
>
> Through an unfortunate set of circumstances which I
> won't get into, my 35% complete Piet is available for
> sale again.
>
> http://www.richarddecosta.com/images/piet/Piet.html
>
> Short fuse.
>
> $3000 OBO.
>
> Buyer must pick up in Maine.
>
> .O. Composer, Artistic & General Director @ Turing*Shop
> ..O www.RicharddeCosta.com
> OOO
>
> There are 10 types of people in this world: those who understand
> binary and those who don't.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard deCosta <curiousspider(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 35% piet kit available for sale AGAIN |
Darn, I get that problem sometimes. Try this url:
http://africangospelrhythms.org/piet/Piet.html
Richard
--- "bike.mike" wrote:
>
>
> Richard,
> I keep getting redirected to your opera page. I
> like opera but I want to
> see your airplane.
> Mike
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Richard deCosta" <curiousspider(at)yahoo.com>
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 12:04 PM
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: 35% piet kit available for
> sale AGAIN
>
>
> deCosta
>
> >
> > Through an unfortunate set of circumstances which
> I
> > won't get into, my 35% complete Piet is available
> for
> > sale again.
> >
> >
> http://www.richarddecosta.com/images/piet/Piet.html
> >
> > Short fuse.
> >
> > $3000 OBO.
> >
> > Buyer must pick up in Maine.
> >
> > .O. Composer, Artistic & General Director @
> Turing*Shop
> > ..O www.RicharddeCosta.com
> > OOO
> >
> > There are 10 types of people in this world: those
> who understand
> > binary and those who don't.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> browse
> Subscriptions page,
> FAQ,
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
>
> Admin.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
.O. Composer, Artistic & General Director @ Turing*Shop
..O www.RicharddeCosta.com
OOO
There are 10 types of people in this world: those who understand
binary and those who don't.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo |
Chuck,
I built the long fuse. It's been awhile, but I think the swing arm is the same
print for both. Maybe not. Just know that after my mods, I don't have to worry
about the tail.
walt evans
NX140DL
PS Chuck, Your video was great. Got a real kick out of it!
----- Original Message -----
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 1:04 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo
Jack and Walt,
Do you guys have the Long Fuselage tailwheel swingarm ? The long fuse has a
longer swingarm, and has more tendency to twist with side loads. I have the short
fuselage, and the shorter original design tailskid, with a tailwheel added.
I built it so the wheel is behind the original skid location. It keeps the
tail lower when landing so full stall landings are easier, but I still have
to drag the tail on first, before the mains, to get the full stall landing. I've
never had any problems with twisting the swingarm, and I even do loops on
the ground, with one brake applied heavily. I have this maneuver on my video,
with smoke on. The plane almost disappears in a cloud of Smoke !!
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: model A engine costs |
In a message dated 3/21/2006 11:40:13 AM Central Standard Time,
macz(at)macsells.com writes:
Hello. I am also planning on using an A in my Piet. I have the plane all
framed up and several engines to work with but no actual modifications to
engines yet. Please send me your A info if you have a chance.
Thanks, Mac in Oregon
I have a page on my web site that is dedicated to my experience with the
Model A engine. Lots of pictures.
http://nx770cg.com/ModelAEngine.html
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo |
In a message dated 3/21/2006 3:42:41 PM Central Standard Time,
waltdak(at)verizon.net writes:
Chuck,
I built the long fuse. It's been awhile, but I think the swing arm is the
same print for both. Maybe not. Just know that after my mods, I don't have to
worry about the tail.
walt evans
NX140DL
PS Chuck, Your video was great. Got a real kick out of it!
Walt,
I didn't realize there was different length swing arms for the two different
lengths fuselages either, until Brodhead '04 when I was looking over Larry W.
award winning Model A Pietenpol. He pointed out that that's the reason for
the cross bar between the Vee, up close to where the pivot mount is, is because
the swing arm would twist without it. I've never seen any drawings of the
longer one.
Chuck G.
NX770CG
p.s. Prop rework is complete, but I still have to complete my Condition
Inspection. Too cold to fly, but I'm getting real ansey to get back in the air
!!
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo |
| From: | "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal.com> |
Hi Chris,
When I had the forced landing and broke the axle, the subsequent
groundloop destroyed the leaf spring tailwheel, and cracked the lower
longeron. I elected to change to the BHP design thinking it would be
lighter and stronger. No, Ken didn't build it. I built it, then built
another, stronger one as I described to Walt after the first one built
to the plans proved unsatisfactory.
I'm in California on business, but I'll try to find some pics and send
them to you.
Jack Phillips, PE
Sr. Manager, Disposables Product Development
Clinical Technologies and Services
Cardinal Health
Creedmoor, NC
(919) 528-5212
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Catdesign
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 8:39 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo
Hey Jack, I have pictures of your plane with a leaf spring tail wheel
and the Pietenpol designed A-arm style. What are you running now and
when did you switch. The A-arm looks like the one Ken Perkins builds.
Is this one of them? Got any good pictures of you reinforced A-Arm?
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
----- Original Message -----
From: walt evans <mailto:waltdak(at)verizon.net>
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 3:01 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo
Jack,
Yeah, I thought all was OK, till someone said that the wheel was
laying over. Then it made perfect sense. The height of the wheel is a
lever that can twist those tubes with not much pressure. So I
discussed it with my mentor, and he gave me the general Idea, and where
the loads were. I came up with this which was added to the original
tubes. He approved, so I painted it and put it on. No problems with it
except for the fact that it added a smidge to the already heavy tail.
AIN"T LIFE GRAND!! :
)
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: Phillips, Jack <mailto:Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal.com>
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 4:40 PM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Added tailwheel pics to my
Yahoo
Walt, looking at your tailwheel setup it is obvious you
discovered the same problem with the BHP design I did - the darn thing
wants to twist when the tailwheel is turned. I ended up making my A-arm
of 5/8" x .049 wall tubing, and added cross pieces to prevent twisting
(after breaking the one I made per the plans after only 3 hours of
flying). Of course Bernard designed this mount for a tailskid which by
its nature can't force the kind of twisting loads that a swiveling
tailwheel can. The coil spring does nothing to resist the A-arm
twisting and the whole assembly can go through some alarming gyrations,
which make for some interesting ground-handling characteristics.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of walt
evans
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 4:26 PM
To: piet list
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Added tailwheel pics to my
Yahoo
Pardon the grass.
http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/joepiet/album?.dir=3D5f03
walt evans
NX140DL
Working together. For life.(sm)
_________________________________________________
This message is for the designated recipient only and
may contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information.
If you have received it in error, please notify the sender immediately
and delete the original. Any other use of the email by you is
prohibited.
Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano -
Japanese - Nederlands - Norsk - Portuguese - Svenska:
Working together. For life.(sm)
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error,
please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use
of the email by you is prohibited.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kip and Beth Gardner <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: looking for John Dilatush = large photo attachments!!!! |
>Guys,
It's bben a while since anyone mentioned this, so perhaps some of the
newer members aren't aware of it & maybe some of the long-time
members have forgotten:
Some of us luddites still have VERY SLOW dial-up connections. When
you tack on a couple of large .jpg type picture files to a list
posting, it takes forever for these to transfer.
PLEASE, if you have photos, send them to the photo share function, or
convert them to smaller files in .gif format or something similar.
It's a real pain to have to wait 20-30 minutes for e-mail because a
post with multiple photos is transferring.
Thanks!
KIp Gardner
>>
>>Anybody know if John is still out there in Pietenpol land? He
>>built the turbo Subaru-powered Piet called "Mountain Piet" and I'm
>>trying to get in touch with him.
>>
>>Thanks!
>>
>>Oscar Zuniga
>
--
North Canton, OH
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com> |
Sorry to bring up this subject again but since the plans call for 13 gauge
solid (I believe) drag wires and since their doesn't seem to be solid
aircraft grade wire I took a look through the archives. Looks like people
have used 3/32 and 1/8, (Jack, you must have the strength of the Terminator
to bend 1x19 1/8" stainless around a thimble). Do you guys know of Piets
that have successfully flown for many hours using 3/32" 7x7 or 7x19? If not
then I better go for the safer (and heaver) 1/8".
If 1/8" cable is used any drawbacks to using 7x19 galvanized?
Thanks
Rick H
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | 1/8" 7x19 galvanized Drag wires |
Rick-- I could not see going thru the hassle of making solid drag and
anti-drag wires since I had already
done much work with the 1/8" cable assys. in our elevator/stick system so I
went with the 1/8" cables in the wings
with turnbuckles. It was really very easy and on annual condition
inspections I find them to be in good shape tension wise.
I use a highly sophisticated method in checking the tension and that
consists of removing a few inspection covers in the bottom
of the wings and sticking my hand in there to tug on them here and there.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "DJ Vegh" <dj(at)veghdesign.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 1/8" 7x19 galvanized Drag wires |
> I use a highly sophisticated method in checking the tension and that
> consists of removing a few inspection covers in the bottom
>
> of the wings and sticking my hand in there to tug on them here and there.
>
> Mike C.
that sounds awfully similar to a complex and very precise method I use to
check the structural integrity of the stabilizer before flying my Cheetah.
I grab hold of the end of one side and give her a good yanking up and down.
DJ
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo |
| From: | "Bill Church" <eng(at)canadianrogers.com> |
Chuck,
I just checked through the full set of drawings, and there is only one
size of tailskid swing arms shown. (There really are no new details
given for the "long" fuselage other than one side view of the fuselage
framework and one side view of the fuselage framework with the plywood
and turtledeck added.) The tailskid is not redrawn for the supplemental
"long fuse" plans.
So, there's likely a pretty good reason why you have never seen any
drawings of the longer one.
Bill C.
________________________________
I didn't realize there was different length swing arms for the two
different lengths fuselages either, until Brodhead '04 when I was
looking over Larry W. award winning Model A Pietenpol. He pointed out
that that's the reason for the cross bar between the Vee, up close to
where the pivot mount is, is because the swing arm would twist without
it. I've never seen any drawings of the longer one.
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed G." <flyboy_120(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo |
>From: "Bill Church" <eng(at)canadianrogers.com>
>Reply-To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo
>Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 17:07:41 -0500
>
>Chuck,
>
>I just checked through the full set of drawings, and there is only one
>size of tailskid swing arms shown. (There really are no new details
>given for the "long" fuselage other than one side view of the fuselage
>framework and one side view of the fuselage framework with the plywood
>and turtledeck added.) The tailskid is not redrawn for the supplemental
>"long fuse" plans.
>So, there's likely a pretty good reason why you have never seen any
>drawings of the longer one.
>
>Bill C.
>
>________________________________
>
>I didn't realize there was different length swing arms for the two
>different lengths fuselages either, until Brodhead '04 when I was
>looking over Larry W. award winning Model A Pietenpol. He pointed out
>that that's the reason for the cross bar between the Vee, up close to
>where the pivot mount is, is because the swing arm would twist without
>it. I've never seen any drawings of the longer one.
>
>Chuck G.
>NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo |
In a message dated 3/22/2006 4:12:13 PM Central Standard Time,
eng(at)canadianrogers.com writes:
Chuck,
I just checked through the full set of drawings, and there is only one size
of tailskid swing arms shown. (There really are no new details given for the
"long" fuselage other than one side view of the fuselage framework and one side
view of the fuselage framework with the plywood and turtledeck added.) The
tailskid is not redrawn for the supplemental "long fuse" plans.
So, there's likely a pretty good reason why you have never seen any drawings
of the longer one.
Bill C.
I didn't realize there was different length swing arms for the two different
lengths fuselages either, until Brodhead '04 when I was looking over Larry W.
award winning Model A Pietenpol. He pointed out that that's the reason for
the cross bar between the Vee, up close to where the pivot mount is, is because
the swing arm would twist without it. I've never seen any drawings of the
longer one.
Chuck G.
NX770CG
Bill,
I didn't measure it, but I seem to remember that Larry's swing arm sure
looked longer. That last bay is one of the places that B.H.P. added 2". It may
be
mentioned somewhere else, other than the drawings. Has anyone else heard of
the longer swing arm ?
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "bike.mike" <bike.mike(at)charter.net> |
Jack,
I'd like the month of May, when the fish get hungry for summer bugs, the rains
slacken and the honeysuckle is in bloom. I'll bring a case of whatever you drink,
no dog, my own fuel, and lots of flying stories.
Mike
PS Will your neighbor's daughter be home from college yet?
----- Original Message -----
From: Kenneth M. Heide
Jack,
I would like reservation for mid summer, one person, staying for a two weeks,
have dog with leash, needing plenty of fuel for days of scenic flying....
Fargo Ken
"Phillips, Jack" wrote:
Way to go Ed! I'm in a similar condition - I've got a contract on a lot
right on the runway at Smith Mountain Lake airport in Virginia, with
deeded runway access. Eventually plan to retire and open a Bed &
Breakfast & Hangar right on the airport, catering to the fly-in crowd.
Anyone flying in a Pietenpol will get a huge discount.
Jack Phillips
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "gcardinal" <gcardinal(at)mn.rr.com> |
Hi Rick,
Dale and I used 1/8" 7X19 galvanized cable for the drag / anti-drag cables on NX18235.
Tested / pre-stretched to 60% of rated strength (1200#) prior to installation.
No drawbacks.
Greg Cardinal
Minneapolis
----- Original Message -----
From: Rick Holland
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 8:39 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Drag wires
Sorry to bring up this subject again but since the plans call for 13 gauge solid
(I believe) drag wires and since their doesn't seem to be solid aircraft grade
wire I took a look through the archives. Looks like people have used 3/32
and 1/8, (Jack, you must have the strength of the Terminator to bend 1x19 1/8"
stainless around a thimble). Do you guys know of Piets that have successfully
flown for many hours using 3/32" 7x7 or 7x19? If not then I better go for the
safer (and heaver) 1/8".
If 1/8" cable is used any drawbacks to using 7x19 galvanized?
Thanks
Rick H
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Shaun Smith <shaun-s(at)sbcglobal.net> |
take me off your list
gcardinal wrote: Hi Rick,
Dale and I used 1/8" 7X19 galvanized cable for the drag / anti-drag cables on
NX18235.
Tested / pre-stretched to 60% of rated strength (1200#) prior to installation.
No drawbacks.
Greg Cardinal
Minneapolis
----- Original Message -----
From: Rick Holland
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 8:39 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Drag wires
Sorry to bring up this subject again but since the plans call for 13 gauge solid
(I believe) drag wires and since their doesn't seem to be solid aircraft grade
wire I took a look through the archives. Looks like people have used 3/32 and
1/8, (Jack, you must have the strength of the Terminator to bend 1x19 1/8"
stainless around a thimble). Do you guys know of Piets that have successfully
flown for many hours using 3/32" 7x7 or 7x19? If not then I better go for the
safer (and heaver) 1/8".
If 1/8" cable is used any drawbacks to using 7x19 galvanized?
Thanks
Rick H
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Drilled Bolts or Not |
| From: | "Catdesign" <Catdesign(at)intergate.com> |
What style of AN3-17 do we use on the lower cabaine fittings? Drilled shank with
a castle nut or use a nyloc nut or just a plane old nut and washer? When
is it ok to use non-drilled bolts and when should you use drilled (for safety
wire)? I know I should know this but I don't know this, ya know what I mean?
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=23646#23646
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Catdesign" <Catdesign(at)intergate.com> |
What style of drill bits are people using to drill through the wood. Twist? Brad
Point? Are you drilling the correct size hole first or sneaking up on it with
increasingly larger bits?
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=23647#23647
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Drilled Bolts or Not |
Don't think the inspectors allow nylon in the engine compartment due to
heat. I used drilled with cotter pins anywhere you could see them to look
authentic. Anywhere hidden, like inside wings or fuse,,,, nylon.
Also anywhere on moving or twisting parts, controls, gear attach points,
Drilled and cotter.
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: "Catdesign" <Catdesign(at)intergate.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 2:12 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Drilled Bolts or Not
>
>
> What style of AN3-17 do we use on the lower cabaine fittings? Drilled
> shank with a castle nut or use a nyloc nut or just a plane old nut and
> washer? When is it ok to use non-drilled bolts and when should you use
> drilled (for safety wire)? I know I should know this but I don't know
> this, ya know what I mean?
>
> Chris Tracy
> Sacramento, Ca
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=23646#23646
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com> |
Thanks Greg, how did you pre-stretch them? Hook up a come-along and a strain
gauge between a couple big trees and hope the cable doesn't break?
Rick H
On 3/22/06, gcardinal wrote:
>
> *Hi Rick,*
> *Dale and I used 1/8" 7X19 galvanized cable for the drag / anti-drag
> cables on NX18235.*
> *Tested / pre-stretched to 60% of rated strength (1200#) prior to
> installation. No drawbacks.*
> **
> *Greg Cardinal*
> *Minneapolis*
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Rick Holland
> *To:* pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 22, 2006 8:39 AM
> *Subject:* Pietenpol-List: Drag wires
>
> Sorry to bring up this subject again but since the plans call for 13 gauge
> solid (I believe) drag wires and since their doesn't seem to be solid
> aircraft grade wire I took a look through the archives. Looks like people
> have used 3/32 and 1/8, (Jack, you must have the strength of the Terminator
> to bend 1x19 1/8" stainless around a thimble). Do you guys know of Piets
> that have successfully flown for many hours using 3/32" 7x7 or 7x19? If not
> then I better go for the safer (and heaver) 1/8".
>
> If 1/8" cable is used any drawbacks to using 7x19 galvanized?
>
> Thanks
> Rick H
>
> --
> Rick Holland
>
> "Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
>
>
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo |
| From: | "Bill Church" <eng(at)canadianrogers.com> |
________________________________
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Sent: March 22, 2006 7:16 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo
In a message dated 3/22/2006 4:12:13 PM Central Standard Time,
eng(at)canadianrogers.com writes:
Chuck,
I just checked through the full set of drawings, and there is
only one size of tailskid swing arms shown. (There really are no new
details given for the "long" fuselage other than one side view of the
fuselage framework and one side view of the fuselage framework with the
plywood and turtledeck added.) The tailskid is not redrawn for the
supplemental "long fuse" plans.
So, there's likely a pretty good reason why you have never seen
any drawings of the longer one.
Bill C.
________________________________
I didn't realize there was different length swing arms for the
two different lengths fuselages either, until Brodhead '04 when I was
looking over Larry W. award winning Model A Pietenpol. He pointed out
that that's the reason for the cross bar between the Vee, up close to
where the pivot mount is, is because the swing arm would twist without
it. I've never seen any drawings of the longer one.
Chuck G.
NX770CG
Bill,
I didn't measure it, but I seem to remember that Larry's swing arm sure
looked longer. That last bay is one of the places that B.H.P. added 2".
It may be mentioned somewhere else, other than the drawings. Has anyone
else heard of the longer swing arm ?
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________
Chuck,
That's a good point. The "long fuselage" is 2 7/8" longer in the last
bay than the "improved" fuselage. Logic would suggest that the tailskid
assembly mounting points would be situated in the same relative location
(i.e. directly below the last upright, on top of the 1/8" plywood gusset
plates), and as a result, the swing arms should be 2 7/8" longer for the
"long" fuselage.
I can imagine alot of builders would probably make the tailskid assembly
to the plans, then find that it doesn't quite seem right when they go to
fasten it to the plane.
The "long" fuselage plans definitely leave a bit to be desired when it
comes to details - such as a top or bottom view, or landing gear
placement, etc. I guess the builders of the long fuselage get to "learn"
more.
Bill C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Drilled Bolts or Not |
| From: | "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal.com> |
Wherever I could, I used solid bolts with MS21042 locknuts. These nuts
are low profile, usually allowing you to use a bolt one dash number
shorter. They are also lighter than either nylon locknuts or AN316
castellated nuts but are designed to get the full strength of the bolt.
They were used throughout the F-16, back when I was working at General
Dynamics as a young engineer fresh out of college. They are all metal
and can be used throughout the airframe, including in the engine
compartment.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of walt
evans
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 5:45 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Drilled Bolts or Not
Don't think the inspectors allow nylon in the engine compartment due to
heat. I used drilled with cotter pins anywhere you could see them to
look
authentic. Anywhere hidden, like inside wings or fuse,,,, nylon.
Also anywhere on moving or twisting parts, controls, gear attach points,
Drilled and cotter.
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: "Catdesign" <Catdesign(at)intergate.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 2:12 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Drilled Bolts or Not
>
>
> What style of AN3-17 do we use on the lower cabaine fittings?
Drilled
> shank with a castle nut or use a nyloc nut or just a plane old nut and
> washer? When is it ok to use non-drilled bolts and when should you
use
> drilled (for safety wire)? I know I should know this but I don't know
> this, ya know what I mean?
>
> Chris Tracy
> Sacramento, Ca
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=23646#23646
>
>
>
Working together. For life.(sm)
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error,
please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use
of the email by you is prohibited.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
Jack wrote-
>Anyone flying in a Pietenpol will get a huge discount.
Knowing Pietenpolers, they will expect nothing less than a 100% discount
(especially if they are TACOs). Our friend "The Fisherman" might try to
convince us that Belize is Piet Paradise, eh? And Bike.Mike wrote-
>PS Will your neighbor's daughter be home from college yet?
...and my wife heard me laughing all the way downstairs in another room ;o)
Oscar Zuniga
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com> |
Cc: shaun-s(at)sbcglobal.net
Adding a little "please" will not hurt...
Go to the bottom of this mail and follow simple instructions, please.
Saludos
Gary Gower.
Shaun Smith wrote:
take me off your list
gcardinal wrote: Hi Rick,
Dale and I used 1/8" 7X19 galvanized cable for the drag / anti-drag cables on
NX18235.
Tested / pre-stretched to 60% of rated strength (1200#) prior to installation.
No drawbacks.
Greg Cardinal
Minneapolis
----- Original Message -----
From: Rick Holland
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 8:39 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Drag wires
Sorry to bring up this subject again but since the plans call for 13 gauge solid
(I believe) drag wires and since their doesn't seem to be solid aircraft grade
wire I took a look through the archives. Looks like people have used 3/32 and
1/8, (Jack, you must have the strength of the Terminator to bend 1x19 1/8"
stainles s around a thimble). Do you guys know of Piets that have successfully
flown for many hours using 3/32" 7x7 or 7x19? If not then I better go for the
safer (and heaver) 1/8".
If 1/8" cable is used any drawbacks to using 7x19 galvanized?
Thanks
Rick H
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hans Vander Voort <hans.vander.voort(at)alfalaval.com> |
One 3/32 cable is rated for 920 Lbs, one such drag wire in a Pietenpol wing
it can compensated up to 300 Lbs of drag on the wing.
There are 4 drag wires (and 4 anti-drag wires) thus 4 cables can take a
1200 Lbs load of drag.
Now I only have to figure out how my little Corvair can ever produce 1200
Lbs of thrust, :-)
Feel free to use 1/8" but 3/32" is already over engineered.
Best regards,
Hans
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "gcardinal" <gcardinal(at)mn.rr.com> |
A 10' piece of steel channel, hydraulic jack, some uni-strut and all-thread were
used to construct a cable testing rig.
A pressure gauge was tapped into the hydraulic jack and calibrated to read pounds
of stress directly off the gauge.
Simply anchor the ends of the cable in the rig, pump up the jack to 1200# (for
1/8" cable) and hold for a few minutes.
Use a black felt tip marker to mark the cables at the nicopress or swage fittings
prior to stretching to see if your assemblies slip at all.
Greg Cardinal
----- Original Message -----
From: Rick Holland
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 8:47 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Drag wires
Thanks Greg, how did you pre-stretch them? Hook up a come-along and a strain
gauge between a couple big trees and hope the cable doesn't break?
Rick H
On 3/22/06, gcardinal wrote:
Hi Rick,
Dale and I used 1/8" 7X19 galvanized cable for the drag / anti-drag cables
on NX18235.
Tested / pre-stretched to 60% of rated strength (1200#) prior to installation.
No drawbacks.
Greg Cardinal
Minneapolis
----- Original Message -----
From: Rick Holland
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 8:39 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Drag wires
Sorry to bring up this subject again but since the plans call for 13 gauge
solid (I believe) drag wires and since their doesn't seem to be solid aircraft
grade wire I took a look through the archives. Looks like people have used
3/32 and 1/8, (Jack, you must have the strength of the Terminator to bend 1x19
1/8" stainless around a thimble). Do you guys know of Piets that have successfully
flown for many hours using 3/32" 7x7 or 7x19? If not then I better go for
the safer (and heaver) 1/8".
If 1/8" cable is used any drawbacks to using 7x19 galvanized?
Thanks
Rick H
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Drag wires & other Cables |
In a message dated 3/23/2006 2:45:47 PM Central Standard Time,
hans.vander.voort(at)alfalaval.com writes:
One 3/32 cable is rated for 920 Lbs, one such drag wire in a Pietenpol wing
it can compensated up to 300 Lbs of drag on the wing.
There are 4 drag wires (and 4 anti-drag wires) thus 4 cables can take a
1200 Lbs load of drag.
Now I only have to figure out how my little Corvair can ever produce 1200
Lbs of thrust, :-)
Feel free to use 1/8" but 3/32" is already over engineered.
Best regards,
Hans
I used 3/32" for the drag / anti-drag cables, too. I also used 3/32" cable
for the lift strut cables, cabane cables, and the entire flipper control
system. The only place I used 1/8" cable is for the rudder. I used 1/16" cable
for
the flying wires on the tail, and 1/16" cable for the tailwheel, that goes
all the way up to the rudder bar..
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gene Beenenga <kgbunltd(at)earthlink.net> |
-----Original Message-----
>From: gcardinal <gcardinal(at)mn.rr.com>
>Sent: Mar 23, 2006 3:35 PM
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Drag wires
>
>A 10' piece of steel channel, hydraulic jack, some uni-strut and all-thread were
used to construct a cable testing rig.
>A pressure gauge was tapped into the hydraulic jack and calibrated to read pounds
of stress directly off the gauge.
>Simply anchor the ends of the cable in the rig, pump up the jack to 1200# (for
1/8" cable) and hold for a few minutes.
>Use a black felt tip marker to mark the cables at the nicopress or swage fittings
prior to stretching to see if your assemblies slip at all.
>
>Greg Cardinal
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Rick Holland
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 8:47 AM
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Drag wires
>
>
> Thanks Greg, how did you pre-stretch them? Hook up a come-along and a strain
gauge between a couple big trees and hope the cable doesn't break?
>
> Rick H
>
>
> On 3/22/06, gcardinal wrote:
> Hi Rick,
> Dale and I used 1/8" 7X19 galvanized cable for the drag / anti-drag cables
on NX18235.
> Tested / pre-stretched to 60% of rated strength (1200#) prior to installation.
No drawbacks.
>
> Greg Cardinal
> Minneapolis
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Rick Holland
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 8:39 AM
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Drag wires
>
>
> Sorry to bring up this subject again but since the plans call for 13 gauge
solid (I believe) drag wires and since their doesn't seem to be solid aircraft
grade wire I took a look through the archives. Looks like people have used
3/32 and 1/8, (Jack, you must have the strength of the Terminator to bend 1x19
1/8" stainless around a thimble). Do you guys know of Piets that have successfully
flown for many hours using 3/32" 7x7 or 7x19? If not then I better go for
the safer (and heaver) 1/8".
>
> If 1/8" cable is used any drawbacks to using 7x19 galvanized?
>
> Thanks
> Rick H
>
> --
> Rick Holland
>
> "Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
>
>
> --
> Rick Holland
>
> "Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
Hans,
The original plans specify 3/32" cable for the drag/antidrag bracing. I have
never heard of any breaking during normal operations.
About 15 years ago two Pietenpols met head-on, at a grass airstrip near
here, and each wound up with smashed right wings. The pilots were uninjured,
but substantial damage to both aircraft resulted. An expensive lesson, for
sure. Both a/c were soon repaired and are still in service.
No.1 Piet had 1/8" cable bracing and No.2 had 3/32" cable bracing. The wing
of No.2 was virtually destroyed and the 3/32" inboard drag cable broke. The
1/8" cable of the No.1 did not break, but did stretch somewhat, and its wing
required a leading edge section repair, a new front spar (due to evidence of
a tiny compression failure) and many rib repairs. The leading edge is much
over-strength and this resulted in damage to most of the rib nose sections
of both machines. While extensive, the damage to No.1's wing was light
compared to the wing of the other Pietenpol, which had to be totally rebuilt
with new spars, ribs, etc. The leading edge "bone" of No.2 only required a
new section about three feet long, and was the largest surviving wooden
part!
One could conclude from this episode that the 3/32" cable is adequate.
However, being of a suspicious nature, I had used 1/8" 7 x 19 galvanized
cable bracing on my Pietenpol for all internal and external wing bracing
long before the above incident happened. If I were to build another Piet
(which I won't), I would use 1/8" cable inboard and 3/32" cable for the
outboard bay in order to save a bit of weight--and I would use a sheet
aluminum, or 1/16" plywood, leading edge instead of the over-strength,
overweight "bone" for the same reason.
BTW, my own Pietenpol was not involved in this incident, and it still has
"no damage history" after 35 years (Touch wood!).
Graham Hansen (Pietenpol CF-AUN in Alberta, Canada)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dale Johnson" <ddjohn(at)earthlink.net> |
Hi Rick
To test the cables I mounted a high pressure gauge on a bottle jack. Than mounted
the bottle jack on a I beam.
The gauge wa calibrater in 20 pound incurments. I hope this makes sense.
The cable was mounted on the I beam & jack . Than the jack was pumped up to the
required reading and left to
soak.
Dale Johnson in Mpls,
----- Original Message -----
From: Rick Holland
Sent: 3/23/2006 8:52:56 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Drag wires
Thanks Greg, how did you pre-stretch them? Hook up a come-along and a strain gauge
between a couple big trees and hope the cable doesn't break?
Rick H
On 3/22/06, gcardinal wrote:
Hi Rick,
Dale and I used 1/8" 7X19 galvanized cable for the drag / anti-drag cables on NX18235.
Tested / pre-stretched to 60% of rated strength (1200#) prior to installation.
No drawbacks.
Greg Cardinal
Minneapolis
----- Original Message -----
From: Rick Holland
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 8:39 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Drag wires
Sorry to bring up this subject again but since the plans call for 13 gauge solid
(I believe) drag wires and since their doesn't seem to be solid aircraft grade
wire I took a look through the archives. Looks like people have used 3/32 and
1/8, (Jack, you must have the strength of the Terminator to bend 1x19 1/8"
stainless around a thimble). Do you guys know of Piets that have successfully
flown for many hours using 3/32" 7x7 or 7x19? If not then I better go for the
safer (and heaver) 1/8".
If 1/8" cable is used any drawbacks to using 7x19 galvanized?
Thanks
Rick H
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "DJ Vegh" <dj(at)veghdesign.com> |
> Now I only have to figure out how my little Corvair can ever produce 1200
> Lbs of thrust, :-)
hmmm I see visions of a torque rolling Piet! actually I just installed an
AC brushless motor into my RC Piet model and the thrust is nearly 45oz. on
a model that weighs in at about 36oz.... hmm do the math! I've hovered
that little Piet (vertical) for about a minute straight... talk about a
strange sight!
DJ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com> |
Graham
When I was talking to William Wayne about his Piet crash he mentioned that
the impact caused his 3/32" flying strut cables to break (the nicopress
held). He recommended 1/8" cable for these.
Rick H
On 3/23/06, Graham Hansen <grhans@cable-lynx.net> wrote:
>
> grhans@cable-lynx.net>
>
> Hans,
>
> The original plans specify 3/32" cable for the drag/antidrag bracing. I
> have
> never heard of any breaking during normal operations.
>
> About 15 years ago two Pietenpols met head-on, at a grass airstrip near
> here, and each wound up with smashed right wings. The pilots were
> uninjured,
> but substantial damage to both aircraft resulted. An expensive lesson, for
> sure. Both a/c were soon repaired and are still in service.
>
> No.1 Piet had 1/8" cable bracing and No.2 had 3/32" cable bracing. The
> wing
> of No.2 was virtually destroyed and the 3/32" inboard drag cable broke.
> The
> 1/8" cable of the No.1 did not break, but did stretch somewhat, and its
> wing
> required a leading edge section repair, a new front spar (due to evidence
> of
> a tiny compression failure) and many rib repairs. The leading edge is much
> over-strength and this resulted in damage to most of the rib nose sections
> of both machines. While extensive, the damage to No.1's wing was light
> compared to the wing of the other Pietenpol, which had to be totally
> rebuilt
> with new spars, ribs, etc. The leading edge "bone" of No.2 only required a
> new section about three feet long, and was the largest surviving wooden
> part!
>
> One could conclude from this episode that the 3/32" cable is adequate.
> However, being of a suspicious nature, I had used 1/8" 7 x 19 galvanized
> cable bracing on my Pietenpol for all internal and external wing bracing
> long before the above incident happened. If I were to build another Piet
> (which I won't), I would use 1/8" cable inboard and 3/32" cable for the
> outboard bay in order to save a bit of weight--and I would use a sheet
> aluminum, or 1/16" plywood, leading edge instead of the over-strength,
> overweight "bone" for the same reason.
>
> BTW, my own Pietenpol was not involved in this incident, and it still has
> "no damage history" after 35 years (Touch wood!).
>
> Graham Hansen (Pietenpol CF-AUN in Alberta, Canada)
>
>
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
>
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hans Vander Voort <hans.vander.voort(at)alfalaval.com> |
Guys,
We engineer airplanes to be safe for flying.
Looking at points of the airframe that break during a crash is not
necessarily relevant.
During a crash impact, loads are distributed on the airframe are completely
different.
But more importantly: if engineered to handle crash impacts, it will also
be to heavy to fly.
By the way, on my Pietenpol I used 3/32" stainless steel wire on all but
two places.
The cross bracing between the Lift struts is 1/8" and tail bracing wires
are 1/16".
Hans
"Rick Holland"
To
Sent by: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
owner-pietenpol-l cc
ist-server@matron
ics.com Subject
Re: Pietenpol-List: Drag wires
03/23/2006 11:58
PM
Please respond to
pietenpol-list@ma
tronics.com
Graham
When I was talking to William Wayne about his Piet crash he mentioned that
the impact caused his 3/32" flying strut cables to break (the nicopress
held). He recommended 1/8" cable for these.
Rick H
On 3/23/06, Graham Hansen <grhans@cable-lynx.net> wrote:
grhans@cable-lynx.net>
Hans,
The original plans specify 3/32" cable for the drag/antidrag bracing. I
have
never heard of any breaking during normal operations.
About 15 years ago two Pietenpols met head-on, at a grass airstrip near
here, and each wound up with smashed right wings. The pilots were
uninjured,
but substantial damage to both aircraft resulted. An expensive lesson,
for
sure. Both a/c were soon repaired and are still in service.
No.1 Piet had 1/8" cable bracing and No.2 had 3/32" cable bracing. The
wing
of No.2 was virtually destroyed and the 3/32" inboard drag cable broke.
The
1/8" cable of the No.1 did not break, but did stretch somewhat, and its
wing
required a leading edge section repair, a new front spar (due to evidence
of
a tiny compression failure) and many rib repairs. The leading edge is
much
over-strength and this resulted in damage to most of the rib nose
sections
of both machines. While extensive, the damage to No.1's wing was light
compared to the wing of the other Pietenpol, which had to be totally
rebuilt
with new spars, ribs, etc. The leading edge "bone" of No.2 only required
a
new section about three feet long, and was the largest surviving wooden
part!
One could conclude from this episode that the 3/32" cable is adequate.
However, being of a suspicious nature, I had used 1/8" 7 x 19 galvanized
cable bracing on my Pietenpol for all internal and external wing bracing
long before the above incident happened. If I were to build another Piet
(which I won't), I would use 1/8" cable inboard and 3/32" cable for the
outboard bay in order to save a bit of weight--and I would use a sheet
aluminum, or 1/16" plywood, leading edge instead of the over-strength,
overweight "bone" for the same reason.
BTW, my own Pietenpol was not involved in this incident, and it still has
"no damage history" after 35 years (Touch wood!).
Graham Hansen (Pietenpol CF-AUN in Alberta, Canada)
========================= - The Pietenpol-List Email = the many
List utilities such as the Subscriptions page,
www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
========================= - List Contribution Web Sip;
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
================================================
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ANNCARLEK(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 19 Msgs - 03/23/06 |
In a message dated 3/24/06 4:08:46 AM, pietenpol-list-digest(at)matronics.com
writes:
<< Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Drag wires
Cc: shaun-s(at)sbcglobal.net
Adding a little "please" will not hurt...
Go to the bottom of this mail and follow simple instructions, please.
Saludos
Gary Gower.
Thank you Gary. I was struck by the unpleasentness of this message. do not
archive.
Carl at Compton Airport.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Blackwell" <markb1958(at)verizon.net> |
Hans lots of airplanes are effectively designed to crash and they fly just
fine. Just look at most of the crop dusters working. They have heavy roll
cages built into a structure, and yes they weigh a lot more but they fly
well for what they do. The trick is to find the right balance for the type
of flying that one plans to do.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hans Vander Voort" <hans.vander.voort(at)alfalaval.com>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 8:15 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Drag wires
>
>
> Guys,
>
> We engineer airplanes to be safe for flying.
>
> Looking at points of the airframe that break during a crash is not
> necessarily relevant.
> During a crash impact, loads are distributed on the airframe are
> completely
> different.
>
> But more importantly: if engineered to handle crash impacts, it will also
> be to heavy to fly.
>
> By the way, on my Pietenpol I used 3/32" stainless steel wire on all but
> two places.
> The cross bracing between the Lift struts is 1/8" and tail bracing wires
> are 1/16".
>
> Hans
>
>
> "Rick Holland"
> om> To
> Sent by: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> owner-pietenpol-l cc
> ist-server@matron
> ics.com Subject
> Re: Pietenpol-List: Drag wires
>
> 03/23/2006 11:58
> PM
>
>
> Please respond to
> pietenpol-list@ma
> tronics.com
>
>
> Graham
>
> When I was talking to William Wayne about his Piet crash he mentioned that
> the impact caused his 3/32" flying strut cables to break (the nicopress
> held). He recommended 1/8" cable for these.
>
> Rick H
>
> On 3/23/06, Graham Hansen <grhans@cable-lynx.net> wrote:
> grhans@cable-lynx.net>
>
> Hans,
>
> The original plans specify 3/32" cable for the drag/antidrag bracing. I
> have
> never heard of any breaking during normal operations.
>
> About 15 years ago two Pietenpols met head-on, at a grass airstrip near
> here, and each wound up with smashed right wings. The pilots were
> uninjured,
> but substantial damage to both aircraft resulted. An expensive lesson,
> for
> sure. Both a/c were soon repaired and are still in service.
>
> No.1 Piet had 1/8" cable bracing and No.2 had 3/32" cable bracing. The
> wing
> of No.2 was virtually destroyed and the 3/32" inboard drag cable broke.
> The
> 1/8" cable of the No.1 did not break, but did stretch somewhat, and its
> wing
> required a leading edge section repair, a new front spar (due to evidence
> of
> a tiny compression failure) and many rib repairs. The leading edge is
> much
> over-strength and this resulted in damage to most of the rib nose
> sections
> of both machines. While extensive, the damage to No.1's wing was light
> compared to the wing of the other Pietenpol, which had to be totally
> rebuilt
> with new spars, ribs, etc. The leading edge "bone" of No.2 only required
> a
> new section about three feet long, and was the largest surviving wooden
> part!
>
> One could conclude from this episode that the 3/32" cable is adequate.
> However, being of a suspicious nature, I had used 1/8" 7 x 19 galvanized
> cable bracing on my Pietenpol for all internal and external wing bracing
> long before the above incident happened. If I were to build another Piet
>
> (which I won't), I would use 1/8" cable inboard and 3/32" cable for the
> outboard bay in order to save a bit of weight--and I would use a sheet
> aluminum, or 1/16" plywood, leading edge instead of the over-strength,
> overweight "bone" for the same reason.
>
> BTW, my own Pietenpol was not involved in this incident, and it still has
> "no damage history" after 35 years (Touch wood!).
>
> Graham Hansen (Pietenpol CF-AUN in Alberta, Canada)
> ========================= - The Pietenpol-List Email = the many
> List utilities such as the Subscriptions page,
>
> www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
> ========================= - List Contribution Web Sip;
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
> ================================================
>
>
> --
> Rick Holland
>
> "Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hans Vander Voort <hans.vander.voort(at)alfalaval.com> |
Mark,
You are correct in that you can design in survivability for the pilot
and/or other parts of the airplane.
Military airplanes are another example.
But these modifications weigh more and need lots of power to fly.
To make the whole airplane survive a crash it would weigh so much it would
never leave the runway.
Or you install a BRS system.
Hans.
"Mark Blackwell"
To
Sent by:
owner-pietenpol-l cc
ist-server@matron
ics.com Subject
Re: Pietenpol-List: Drag wires
03/24/2006 11:54
AM
Please respond to
pietenpol-list@ma
tronics.com
Hans lots of airplanes are effectively designed to crash and they fly just
fine. Just look at most of the crop dusters working. They have heavy roll
cages built into a structure, and yes they weigh a lot more but they fly
well for what they do. The trick is to find the right balance for the type
of flying that one plans to do.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hans Vander Voort" <hans.vander.voort(at)alfalaval.com>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 8:15 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Drag wires
>
>
> Guys,
>
> We engineer airplanes to be safe for flying.
>
> Looking at points of the airframe that break during a crash is not
> necessarily relevant.
> During a crash impact, loads are distributed on the airframe are
> completely
> different.
>
> But more importantly: if engineered to handle crash impacts, it will
also
> be to heavy to fly.
>
> By the way, on my Pietenpol I used 3/32" stainless steel wire on all but
> two places.
> The cross bracing between the Lift struts is 1/8" and tail bracing wires
> are 1/16".
>
> Hans
>
>
> "Rick Holland"
> om> To
> Sent by: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> owner-pietenpol-l cc
> ist-server@matron
> ics.com Subject
> Re: Pietenpol-List: Drag wires
>
> 03/23/2006 11:58
> PM
>
>
> Please respond to
> pietenpol-list@ma
> tronics.com
>
>
> Graham
>
> When I was talking to William Wayne about his Piet crash he mentioned
that
> the impact caused his 3/32" flying strut cables to break (the nicopress
> held). He recommended 1/8" cable for these.
>
> Rick H
>
> On 3/23/06, Graham Hansen <grhans@cable-lynx.net> wrote:
> grhans@cable-lynx.net>
>
> Hans,
>
> The original plans specify 3/32" cable for the drag/antidrag bracing. I
> have
> never heard of any breaking during normal operations.
>
> About 15 years ago two Pietenpols met head-on, at a grass airstrip near
> here, and each wound up with smashed right wings. The pilots were
> uninjured,
> but substantial damage to both aircraft resulted. An expensive lesson,
> for
> sure. Both a/c were soon repaired and are still in service.
>
> No.1 Piet had 1/8" cable bracing and No.2 had 3/32" cable bracing. The
> wing
> of No.2 was virtually destroyed and the 3/32" inboard drag cable broke.
> The
> 1/8" cable of the No.1 did not break, but did stretch somewhat, and its
> wing
> required a leading edge section repair, a new front spar (due to
evidence
> of
> a tiny compression failure) and many rib repairs. The leading edge is
> much
> over-strength and this resulted in damage to most of the rib nose
> sections
> of both machines. While extensive, the damage to No.1's wing was light
> compared to the wing of the other Pietenpol, which had to be totally
> rebuilt
> with new spars, ribs, etc. The leading edge "bone" of No.2 only required
> a
> new section about three feet long, and was the largest surviving wooden
> part!
>
> One could conclude from this episode that the 3/32" cable is adequate.
> However, being of a suspicious nature, I had used 1/8" 7 x 19 galvanized
> cable bracing on my Pietenpol for all internal and external wing bracing
> long before the above incident happened. If I were to build another
Piet
>
> (which I won't), I would use 1/8" cable inboard and 3/32" cable for the
> outboard bay in order to save a bit of weight--and I would use a sheet
> aluminum, or 1/16" plywood, leading edge instead of the over-strength,
> overweight "bone" for the same reason.
>
> BTW, my own Pietenpol was not involved in this incident, and it still
has
> "no damage history" after 35 years (Touch wood!).
>
> Graham Hansen (Pietenpol CF-AUN in Alberta, Canada)
> ========================= - The Pietenpol-List Email = the many
> List utilities such as the Subscriptions page,
>
>
www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
> ========================= - List Contribution Web Sip;
> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
> ================================================
>
>
> --
> Rick Holland
>
> "Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Drag wires/ stuctural integrity/ weight... |
Hans,
Of course you are correct when you say, "Looking at points of the airframe
that break during a crash is not necessarily relevant." The only place where
it is relevant is in the structure protecting the occupants. People have
survived some bad crashes with Pietenpols (BHP himself told me this when I
visited him in 1982), attesting to its toughness in this respect.
The Pietenpol design has demonstrated, for over 75 years, that it is amply
strong for normal operations and really doesn't need to be "beefed up"
anywhere. In the 1932 FLYING AND GLIDER MANUAL, P.31, engineering professor
Joseph Wise said of the wing, "No need to go through any analysis on that
job, unless you want to save weight."
Having said this, when I built mine (1959 - 1970), I had to compromise by
substituting Douglas Fir for Sitka Spruce in the wing spars and using
Aeronca and Taylorcraft strut material for the lift struts. I simply could
not afford the Sitka Spruce and proper sized streamline tubing at that time,
and scrounging was the name of the game. The availability of 1/8" cable "at
the right price" dictated its use instead of the 3/32" stuff specified for
the drag/antidrag bracing, etc. Poverty does circumscribe one's options!
Of course, this added some weight to an already adequate structure, so I
tried hard to save weight in non-critical areas to compensate for this. I
think I was reasonably successful because, at the last weighing, the dry
empty weight with a C85-8 engine was 630 lbs. Mine is the lightest of four
Piets in our area; the others are at least 30 lbs. heavier. Frankly, I don't
know where their extra weight came from.
Today, I feel confident that I could get the empty weight down to around 600
lbs.,should I build another Pietenpol. (That won't happen.) The lightest
Pietenpol I know of is Brian Kenney's CF-AUK in southern Ontario. Its empty
weight is significantly less than 600 lbs.! Obviously, he didn't "beef up"
anything--but he is a professional engineer and likely analysed the
structure, probably finding it more than adequate as designed.
Graham Hansen (Pietenpol CF-AUN)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Blackwell" <markb1958(at)verizon.net> |
Hans did you know in the new I think its the Cirrus that when you pull the
handle for the chute, you total the airplane. The landing impact is such
that the airplane is sacrificed to protect you. Airplane is scrapped.
Ballastic chute landings are not soft landings, but they are ones you can
walk away from
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hans Vander Voort" <hans.vander.voort(at)alfalaval.com>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 2:29 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Drag wires
>
>
> Mark,
>
> You are correct in that you can design in survivability for the pilot
> and/or other parts of the airplane.
> Military airplanes are another example.
> But these modifications weigh more and need lots of power to fly.
>
> To make the whole airplane survive a crash it would weigh so much it would
> never leave the runway.
>
> Or you install a BRS system.
>
> Hans.
>
>
> "Mark Blackwell"
> n.net> To
> Sent by:
> owner-pietenpol-l cc
> ist-server@matron
> ics.com Subject
> Re: Pietenpol-List: Drag wires
>
> 03/24/2006 11:54
> AM
>
>
> Please respond to
> pietenpol-list@ma
> tronics.com
>
>
>
>
> Hans lots of airplanes are effectively designed to crash and they fly just
> fine. Just look at most of the crop dusters working. They have heavy
> roll
>
> cages built into a structure, and yes they weigh a lot more but they fly
> well for what they do. The trick is to find the right balance for the
> type
>
> of flying that one plans to do.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Hans Vander Voort" <hans.vander.voort(at)alfalaval.com>
> To:
> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 8:15 AM
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Drag wires
>
>
>>
>>
>> Guys,
>>
>> We engineer airplanes to be safe for flying.
>>
>> Looking at points of the airframe that break during a crash is not
>> necessarily relevant.
>> During a crash impact, loads are distributed on the airframe are
>> completely
>> different.
>>
>> But more importantly: if engineered to handle crash impacts, it will
> also
>> be to heavy to fly.
>>
>> By the way, on my Pietenpol I used 3/32" stainless steel wire on all but
>> two places.
>> The cross bracing between the Lift struts is 1/8" and tail bracing wires
>> are 1/16".
>>
>> Hans
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "Rick Holland"
>> > om> To
>> Sent by: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>> owner-pietenpol-l cc
>> ist-server@matron
>> ics.com Subject
>> Re: Pietenpol-List: Drag wires
>>
>> 03/23/2006 11:58
>> PM
>>
>>
>> Please respond to
>> pietenpol-list@ma
>> tronics.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Graham
>>
>> When I was talking to William Wayne about his Piet crash he mentioned
> that
>> the impact caused his 3/32" flying strut cables to break (the nicopress
>> held). He recommended 1/8" cable for these.
>>
>> Rick H
>>
>> On 3/23/06, Graham Hansen <grhans@cable-lynx.net> wrote:
>> grhans@cable-lynx.net>
>>
>> Hans,
>>
>> The original plans specify 3/32" cable for the drag/antidrag bracing. I
>> have
>> never heard of any breaking during normal operations.
>>
>> About 15 years ago two Pietenpols met head-on, at a grass airstrip near
>> here, and each wound up with smashed right wings. The pilots were
>> uninjured,
>> but substantial damage to both aircraft resulted. An expensive lesson,
>> for
>> sure. Both a/c were soon repaired and are still in service.
>>
>> No.1 Piet had 1/8" cable bracing and No.2 had 3/32" cable bracing. The
>> wing
>> of No.2 was virtually destroyed and the 3/32" inboard drag cable broke.
>> The
>> 1/8" cable of the No.1 did not break, but did stretch somewhat, and its
>> wing
>> required a leading edge section repair, a new front spar (due to
> evidence
>> of
>> a tiny compression failure) and many rib repairs. The leading edge is
>> much
>> over-strength and this resulted in damage to most of the rib nose
>> sections
>> of both machines. While extensive, the damage to No.1's wing was light
>> compared to the wing of the other Pietenpol, which had to be totally
>> rebuilt
>> with new spars, ribs, etc. The leading edge "bone" of No.2 only required
>> a
>> new section about three feet long, and was the largest surviving wooden
>> part!
>>
>> One could conclude from this episode that the 3/32" cable is adequate.
>> However, being of a suspicious nature, I had used 1/8" 7 x 19 galvanized
>> cable bracing on my Pietenpol for all internal and external wing bracing
>> long before the above incident happened. If I were to build another
> Piet
>>
>> (which I won't), I would use 1/8" cable inboard and 3/32" cable for the
>> outboard bay in order to save a bit of weight--and I would use a sheet
>> aluminum, or 1/16" plywood, leading edge instead of the over-strength,
>> overweight "bone" for the same reason.
>>
>> BTW, my own Pietenpol was not involved in this incident, and it still
> has
>> "no damage history" after 35 years (Touch wood!).
>>
>> Graham Hansen (Pietenpol CF-AUN in Alberta, Canada)
>> ========================= - The Pietenpol-List Email = the many
>> List utilities such as the Subscriptions page,
>>
>>
> www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
>
>> ========================= - List Contribution Web Sip;
>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>> ================================================
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Rick Holland
>>
>> "Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | harvey rule <harvey.rule(at)bell.ca> |
With regard to the Piet;could that mean a sliver up your ass?
Mark Blackwell wrote:
>
>
> Hans did you know in the new I think its the Cirrus that when you pull the
> handle for the chute, you total the airplane. The landing impact is such
> that the airplane is sacrificed to protect you. Airplane is scrapped.
>
> Ballastic chute landings are not soft landings, but they are ones you can
> walk away from
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Hans Vander Voort" <hans.vander.voort(at)alfalaval.com>
> To:
> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 2:29 PM
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Drag wires
>
> >
> >
> > Mark,
> >
> > You are correct in that you can design in survivability for the pilot
> > and/or other parts of the airplane.
> > Military airplanes are another example.
> > But these modifications weigh more and need lots of power to fly.
> >
> > To make the whole airplane survive a crash it would weigh so much it would
> > never leave the runway.
> >
> > Or you install a BRS system.
> >
> > Hans.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Mark Blackwell"
> > > n.net> To
> > Sent by:
> > owner-pietenpol-l cc
> > ist-server@matron
> > ics.com Subject
> > Re: Pietenpol-List: Drag wires
> >
> > 03/24/2006 11:54
> > AM
> >
> >
> > Please respond to
> > pietenpol-list@ma
> > tronics.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hans lots of airplanes are effectively designed to crash and they fly just
> > fine. Just look at most of the crop dusters working. They have heavy
> > roll
> >
> > cages built into a structure, and yes they weigh a lot more but they fly
> > well for what they do. The trick is to find the right balance for the
> > type
> >
> > of flying that one plans to do.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Hans Vander Voort" <hans.vander.voort(at)alfalaval.com>
> > To:
> > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 8:15 AM
> > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Drag wires
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Guys,
> >>
> >> We engineer airplanes to be safe for flying.
> >>
> >> Looking at points of the airframe that break during a crash is not
> >> necessarily relevant.
> >> During a crash impact, loads are distributed on the airframe are
> >> completely
> >> different.
> >>
> >> But more importantly: if engineered to handle crash impacts, it will
> > also
> >> be to heavy to fly.
> >>
> >> By the way, on my Pietenpol I used 3/32" stainless steel wire on all but
> >> two places.
> >> The cross bracing between the Lift struts is 1/8" and tail bracing wires
> >> are 1/16".
> >>
> >> Hans
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> "Rick Holland"
> >> >> om> To
> >> Sent by: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> >> owner-pietenpol-l cc
> >> ist-server@matron
> >> ics.com Subject
> >> Re: Pietenpol-List: Drag wires
> >>
> >> 03/23/2006 11:58
> >> PM
> >>
> >>
> >> Please respond to
> >> pietenpol-list@ma
> >> tronics.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Graham
> >>
> >> When I was talking to William Wayne about his Piet crash he mentioned
> > that
> >> the impact caused his 3/32" flying strut cables to break (the nicopress
> >> held). He recommended 1/8" cable for these.
> >>
> >> Rick H
> >>
> >> On 3/23/06, Graham Hansen <grhans@cable-lynx.net> wrote:
> >> grhans@cable-lynx.net>
> >>
> >> Hans,
> >>
> >> The original plans specify 3/32" cable for the drag/antidrag bracing. I
> >> have
> >> never heard of any breaking during normal operations.
> >>
> >> About 15 years ago two Pietenpols met head-on, at a grass airstrip near
> >> here, and each wound up with smashed right wings. The pilots were
> >> uninjured,
> >> but substantial damage to both aircraft resulted. An expensive lesson,
> >> for
> >> sure. Both a/c were soon repaired and are still in service.
> >>
> >> No.1 Piet had 1/8" cable bracing and No.2 had 3/32" cable bracing. The
> >> wing
> >> of No.2 was virtually destroyed and the 3/32" inboard drag cable broke.
> >> The
> >> 1/8" cable of the No.1 did not break, but did stretch somewhat, and its
> >> wing
> >> required a leading edge section repair, a new front spar (due to
> > evidence
> >> of
> >> a tiny compression failure) and many rib repairs. The leading edge is
> >> much
> >> over-strength and this resulted in damage to most of the rib nose
> >> sections
> >> of both machines. While extensive, the damage to No.1's wing was light
> >> compared to the wing of the other Pietenpol, which had to be totally
> >> rebuilt
> >> with new spars, ribs, etc. The leading edge "bone" of No.2 only required
> >> a
> >> new section about three feet long, and was the largest surviving wooden
> >> part!
> >>
> >> One could conclude from this episode that the 3/32" cable is adequate.
> >> However, being of a suspicious nature, I had used 1/8" 7 x 19 galvanized
> >> cable bracing on my Pietenpol for all internal and external wing bracing
> >> long before the above incident happened. If I were to build another
> > Piet
> >>
> >> (which I won't), I would use 1/8" cable inboard and 3/32" cable for the
> >> outboard bay in order to save a bit of weight--and I would use a sheet
> >> aluminum, or 1/16" plywood, leading edge instead of the over-strength,
> >> overweight "bone" for the same reason.
> >>
> >> BTW, my own Pietenpol was not involved in this incident, and it still
> > has
> >> "no damage history" after 35 years (Touch wood!).
> >>
> >> Graham Hansen (Pietenpol CF-AUN in Alberta, Canada)
> >> ========================= - The Pietenpol-List Email = the many
> >> List utilities such as the Subscriptions page,
> >>
> >>
> > www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
> >
> >> ========================= - List Contribution Web Sip;
> >> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
> >> ================================================
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Rick Holland
> >>
> >> "Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "bike.mike" <bike.mike(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Drag wires and other sacrificial parts |
With regard to a Pietenpol, the airplane IS a BRS, in constant usage.
----- Original Message -----
[snip]
[snip]
> > >
> > > Or you install a BRS system.
[snip]
[snip]
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | harvey rule <harvey.rule(at)bell.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Drag wires and other sacrificial parts |
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo that sounds like a slight against our
aircraft!
"bike.mike" wrote:
>
>
> With regard to a Pietenpol, the airplane IS a BRS, in constant usage.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> [snip]
> [snip]
> > > >
> > > > Or you install a BRS system.
>
> [snip]
> [snip]
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Catdesign" <catdesign(at)intergate.com> |
| Subject: | Lower Cabain Fitting |
I'm ready to drill the holes for the rear lower cabain fittings (called
the center strut fittings on the plans). When I line them up with the
vertical brace on the fuselage it seems I only have 3/4" between the center
of 1/4" hole and the back of the front headrest (see photo). Is this enough
room for a strut to fit in there or should I slope the fitting back to give
myself something like 1-1/4". I don't like the way it will pull if I slope
it back to much. I need some help on this. Jack , Mike, Corky, Hans, Walt,
Chuck, Jim and everyone else did you move your fittings back or did your
struts fit?
Thanks
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cory Emberson <bootless(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Feedback Request (Alternative Engines) Kitplanes Magazine |
Hello all,
I would like to hear from you if you're a builder who has successfully
installed and flown an alternative engine in your plane. I'm compiling a
builder's roundup for Kitplanes magazine, and am looking for an
installation that's flown for a minimum of 300 hours, and is currently
flying. Also, we will not address any rotary engines, since a separate
article will cover those engines.
For the builders that we profile, the magazine will also be able to pay
you $100 for the write-up. I'll be at Sun 'n Fun until late morning on
Friday (April 7), so if you fly in, I'd be happy to take the photos
there. If not, we would also need at least 2-3 good photos, including a
close-up of the engine and an overall shot of the aircraft. Additional
photos would be great, and all photos will be returned. If you have
digital photos, it is very important that they be high-resolution, at
least 300 dpi. I have a list of specific areas to address if you'd like
to participate, but we can handle that off-line. Please feel free to
contact me off-line at: bootless (at) earthlink (dot) net (my despammed
email address).
Thank you so much!
best,
Cory Emberson
Contributing Editor
Kitplanes Magazine
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jimboyer(at)direcway.com |
| Subject: | Re: Lower Cabain Fitting |
HI Chris,
I have my fittings made just like you but was waiting until I got the cabane strut
material before figuring out their exact location. Thanks for presenting this
problem first, like many things on this list it will benefit me and I'm sure
others.
cheers, Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: Catdesign <catdesign(at)intergate.com>
Date: Saturday, March 25, 2006 2:21 pm
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Lower Cabain Fitting
> I'm ready to drill the holes for the rear lower cabain fittings
> (calledthe center strut fittings on the plans). When I line them
> up with the
> vertical brace on the fuselage it seems I only have 3/4" between
> the center
> of 1/4" hole and the back of the front headrest (see photo). Is
> this enough
> room for a strut to fit in there or should I slope the fitting
> back to give
> myself something like 1-1/4". I don't like the way it will pull
> if I slope
> it back to much. I need some help on this. Jack , Mike, Corky,
> Hans, Walt,
> Chuck, Jim and everyone else did you move your fittings back or
> did your
> struts fit?
>
> Thanks
>
> Chris Tracy
> Sacramento, Ca
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Catdesign" <catdesign(at)intergate.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Lower Cabain Fitting |
Ya, I would do that too but I have a lot of , well I'll wait until.........
I need to get something done so I can make some progress.
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
----- Original Message -----
From: <jimboyer(at)direcway.com>
Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 3:30 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Lower Cabain Fitting
>
> HI Chris,
> I have my fittings made just like you but was waiting until I got the
> cabane strut material before figuring out their exact location. Thanks for
> presenting this problem first, like many things on this list it will
> benefit me and I'm sure others.
> cheers, Jim
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Catdesign <catdesign(at)intergate.com>
> Date: Saturday, March 25, 2006 2:21 pm
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Lower Cabain Fitting
>
>> I'm ready to drill the holes for the rear lower cabain fittings
>> (calledthe center strut fittings on the plans). When I line them
>> up with the
>> vertical brace on the fuselage it seems I only have 3/4" between
>> the center
>> of 1/4" hole and the back of the front headrest (see photo). Is
>> this enough
>> room for a strut to fit in there or should I slope the fitting
>> back to give
>> myself something like 1-1/4". I don't like the way it will pull
>> if I slope
>> it back to much. I need some help on this. Jack , Mike, Corky,
>> Hans, Walt,
>> Chuck, Jim and everyone else did you move your fittings back or
>> did your
>> struts fit?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Chris Tracy
>> Sacramento, Ca
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Lower Cabain Fitting |
If you are building to the Improved plans you may need to cut off the edges
of the headrest to fit in the cabanes. The long fuselage specifies an extra
piece of 1" x 3/4" glued to the upright. If the fitting is bolted to that
then you don't have to cut off the headrest (see attached picture). Of
course their is an ongoing debate about whether the fitting should be bolted
to this.
Rick H.
On 3/25/06, Catdesign wrote:
>
> I'm ready to drill the holes for the rear lower cabain fittings (called
> the center strut fittings on the plans). When I line them up with the
> vertical brace on the fuselage it seems I only have 3/4" between the
> center
> of 1/4" hole and the back of the front headrest (see photo). Is this
> enough
> room for a strut to fit in there or should I slope the fitting back to
> give
> myself something like 1-1/4". I don't like the way it will pull if I
> slope
> it back to much. I need some help on this. Jack , Mike, Corky, Hans,
> Walt,
> Chuck, Jim and everyone else did you move your fittings back or did your
> struts fit?
>
> Thanks
>
> Chris Tracy
> Sacramento, Ca
>
>
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
Not scrapped.....but they are damaged, and are repaired/rebuilt.
Del
Mark Blackwell wrote:
Hans did you know in the new I think its the Cirrus that when you pull the
handle for the chute, you total the airplane. The landing impact is such
that the airplane is sacrificed to protect you. Airplane is scrapped.
Ballastic chute landings are not soft landings, but they are ones you can
walk away from
Del-New Richmond, Wi
"farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com"
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Catdesign" <catdesign(at)intergate.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Lower Cabain Fitting |
Ahh, Yes that would work. What's wrong with putting it there? I put a larger doubler
under the gusset back when I built the fuselage (long fuse). Maybe Mr.
Pietenpol was looking over my shoulder. Just wish he would smack me upside
the head before I make a stupid mistake.
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
----- Original Message -----
From: Rick Holland
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 4:56 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Lower Cabain Fitting
If you are building to the Improved plans you may need to cut off the edges of
the headrest to fit in the cabanes. The long fuselage specifies an extra piece
of 1" x 3/4" glued to the upright. If the fitting is bolted to that then you
don't have to cut off the headrest (see attached picture). Of course their is
an ongoing debate about whether the fitting should be bolted to this.
Rick H.
On 3/25/06, Catdesign wrote:
I'm ready to drill the holes for the rear lower cabain fittings (called
the center strut fittings on the plans). When I line them up with the
vertical brace on the fuselage it seems I only have 3/4" between the center
of 1/4" hole and the back of the front headrest (see photo). Is this enough
room for a strut to fit in there or should I slope the fitting back to give
myself something like 1-1/4". I don't like the way it will pull if I slope
it back to much. I need some help on this. Jack , Mike, Corky, Hans, Walt,
Chuck, Jim and everyone else did you move your fittings back or did your
struts fit?
Thanks
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | lshutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan) |
| Subject: | Cable brace wires |
In one of the old Buckeye News letters, Frank Pavaglia(?) wrote that he
was removing the 3/32 "X" brace wires (roll wires?) from between the
front and rear cabanes, and replacing them with 1/8 cable as the 3/32
cable was stretching. ( don't ask, I'm just reporting what he said )Hans
is using 1/8 there, I guess I will too. On the problem with the cabane
fitting being only 3/4 behind the former, I don't recall having a
problem there. Remember that the widest part of the streamline tube
where you will drill and put the bushing and bolt is closer to the front
of the tube than from the trailing edge of the streamline cabane strut
tube. this will locate the cabane farther back inside the fittings
(away from that former). I'm sure thats clear as mud, but I don't
remember having a problem there. Also when I bought tubing, I wanted to
buy .032 or something like that, and no one had it, so I used .049.
Since using stronger tubing I went with a smaller size. That made that
fit a lesser problem also, Also the thicker tubing made it easier to
weld the bushing stock in. Leon S.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Lower Cabain Fitting |
Chris,
It appears your finger is on the right rear cabane strut fitting, and you
don't have any holes located for your instrument panel. Keep the holes of the
fitting in the center, and aligned with, the vertical # 5 strut. The panel you
call the passenger's headrest needs to be cleared, or notched if you will, to
clear that attachment fitting. That 3/4" dimension you point out is not part
of that structure, and doesn't really have any bearing on the cabane strut,
but in the plans drawing No. 1, it appears the fitting is more aft than what
you have.
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | HVandervoo(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Lower Cabain Fitting |
As Rick already stated the long fuselage has the extra 1" x 3/4" piece.
This is where I bolted my fitting.
Hans
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jimboyer(at)direcway.com |
| Subject: | Re: Lower Cabain Fitting |
For sure, this last year has been a lost one as I got married last April 16th and
we have been spending the year consolidating two hourses instead of working
on my Piet, but starting to go work on it again. Going to Sun-n-Fun next week
so that will get me going again.
----- Original Message -----
From: Catdesign <catdesign(at)intergate.com>
Date: Saturday, March 25, 2006 4:17 pm
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Lower Cabain Fitting
>
> Ya, I would do that too but I have a lot of , well I'll wait
> until.........
> I need to get something done so I can make some progress.
>
> Chris Tracy
> Sacramento, Ca
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <jimboyer(at)direcway.com>
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 3:30 PM
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Lower Cabain Fitting
>
>
> >
> > HI Chris,
> > I have my fittings made just like you but was waiting until I
> got the
> > cabane strut material before figuring out their exact location.
> Thanks for
> > presenting this problem first, like many things on this list it
> will
> > benefit me and I'm sure others.
> > cheers, Jim
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Catdesign <catdesign(at)intergate.com>
> > Date: Saturday, March 25, 2006 2:21 pm
> > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Lower Cabain Fitting
> >
> >> I'm ready to drill the holes for the rear lower cabain fittings
> >> (calledthe center strut fittings on the plans). When I line them
> >> up with the
> >> vertical brace on the fuselage it seems I only have 3/4" between
> >> the center
> >> of 1/4" hole and the back of the front headrest (see photo). Is
> >> this enough
> >> room for a strut to fit in there or should I slope the fitting
> >> back to give
> >> myself something like 1-1/4". I don't like the way it will pull
> >> if I slope
> >> it back to much. I need some help on this. Jack , Mike, Corky,
> >> Hans, Walt,
> >> Chuck, Jim and everyone else did you move your fittings back or
> >> did your
> >> struts fit?
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> Chris Tracy
> >> Sacramento, Ca
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | HVandervoo(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Cable brace wires |
Leon,
I have 1/8" cable in the cross brace of the lift struts (the one that
attaches mid wing at about 30 degrees)
I have no cables between cabanes (length wise) , but instead the tubing to
the front engine mount. Spanwise cable I have 3/32"
The main reason I use 1/8" between lift struts is I wanted redundancy, if
all my welding failed on the lift strut I know the cable would hold the wing.
Yes, I know drag wires standard 3/32 but lift struts one up.
I too over engineer in places it all comes down what you feel comfortable
with.
It is your butt in the plane after all.
Coming to that point; Today was a gorgeous day here in the Houston area,
spend 2 hours in the air flying ....Flying .... My butt....ah well........
Hans
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | HVandervoo(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Drag wires, now BRS |
Mark,
Yes, I knew about the Cirrus case and wondered how that would holdup in
"court".
The point is this, if you have an in-flight emergency say an engine out or
prop failure.
You could make a safe emergency landing.
Or pull the cord and damage the plane.
Would an insurance company payout?
You could make a case that the damage was cause intentionally.
I am not a lawyer, don't want to be one, but some lawyer will make that case
I guess time will tell.
Hans
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Lower Cabain Fitting |
Chris,
This pic shows the fuselage pointing the other direction, but the space for
the bracket is obvious. Mine seems to be farther from the panel. Just don't
remember it being a problem. I'll check more into my old photos. Did you
do short or long fuse?? Mine is long, right to the plans.
This is my argument to not change the plans. You change one little thing,
and four other things down the line are affected.
I'll see what I can find.
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: "Catdesign" <catdesign(at)intergate.com>
Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:21 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Lower Cabain Fitting
> I'm ready to drill the holes for the rear lower cabain fittings (called
> the center strut fittings on the plans). When I line them up with the
> vertical brace on the fuselage it seems I only have 3/4" between the
> center
> of 1/4" hole and the back of the front headrest (see photo). Is this
> enough
> room for a strut to fit in there or should I slope the fitting back to
> give
> myself something like 1-1/4". I don't like the way it will pull if I
> slope
> it back to much. I need some help on this. Jack , Mike, Corky, Hans,
> Walt,
> Chuck, Jim and everyone else did you move your fittings back or did your
> struts fit?
>
> Thanks
>
> Chris Tracy
> Sacramento, Ca
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Catdesign" <catdesign(at)intergate.com> |
| Subject: | Update Lower Cabain Fitting |
Ok, so I went and looked at the plans for the long fuselage, which I am
building, and it clearly states to put the fitting on the 3/4"x3" block
behind the upright. Note to self, look at the plans don't just assume. I'm
ok with putting it there. I guess. The question is why doesn't the front
one also move back too? The lower ends will now be something like 29-1/2"
apart when the wing spars are 28-3/4" apart. I know not much of a
difference but it's killing me that I must be missing something here. I
would think any one installing it on upright would have to trim the front
headrest.
Ok so now I know where to install the fitting how the heck do I drill the
hole perpendicular to the side of the fuselage. I have tried to drill a
strait hole through a block of wood to use as a guide but all I accomplished
all day was to find out I cant do it on my small drill press accurately
enough.
The only good thing to come from today's labor was a net way to collect the
dust off my table saw.
Man am I stressing out or what. I hate drilling holes. There so final.
Can't wait to start stressing out about drilling holes for the landing gear
fittings.
AAArrrrrrrggggggggg going to bed.
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Catdesign" <catdesign(at)intergate.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Lower Cabain Fitting |
Hey Rick, Can you give me the dimensions of that tubing (X,. Y and wall thickness).
Thanks for the help.
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
----- Original Message -----
From: Rick Holland
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 4:56 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Lower Cabain Fitting
If you are building to the Improved plans you may need to cut off the edges of
the headrest to fit in the cabanes. The long fuselage specifies an extra piece
of 1" x 3/4" glued to the upright. If the fitting is bolted to that then you
don't have to cut off the headrest (see attached picture). Of course their is
an ongoing debate about whether the fitting should be bolted to this.
Rick H.
On 3/25/06, Catdesign wrote:
I'm ready to drill the holes for the rear lower cabain fittings (called
the center strut fittings on the plans). When I line them up with the
vertical brace on the fuselage it seems I only have 3/4" between the center
of 1/4" hole and the back of the front headrest (see photo). Is this enough
room for a strut to fit in there or should I slope the fitting back to give
myself something like 1-1/4". I don't like the way it will pull if I slope
it back to much. I need some help on this. Jack , Mike, Corky, Hans, Walt,
Chuck, Jim and everyone else did you move your fittings back or did your
struts fit?
Thanks
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Catdesign" <catdesign(at)intergate.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Cable brace wires |
Actually it's quite clear and your right it will push it back, so what size
tubing did you use?
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
----- Original Message -----
From: "Leon Stefan" <lshutks(at)webtv.net>
Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Cable brace wires
>
> In one of the old Buckeye News letters, Frank Pavaglia(?) wrote that he
> was removing the 3/32 "X" brace wires (roll wires?) from between the
> front and rear cabanes, and replacing them with 1/8 cable as the 3/32
> cable was stretching. ( don't ask, I'm just reporting what he said )Hans
> is using 1/8 there, I guess I will too. On the problem with the cabane
> fitting being only 3/4 behind the former, I don't recall having a
> problem there. Remember that the widest part of the streamline tube
> where you will drill and put the bushing and bolt is closer to the front
> of the tube than from the trailing edge of the streamline cabane strut
> tube. this will locate the cabane farther back inside the fittings
> (away from that former). I'm sure thats clear as mud, but I don't
> remember having a problem there. Also when I bought tubing, I wanted to
> buy .032 or something like that, and no one had it, so I used .049.
> Since using stronger tubing I went with a smaller size. That made that
> fit a lesser problem also, Also the thicker tubing made it easier to
> weld the bushing stock in. Leon S.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Catdesign" <catdesign(at)intergate.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Lower Cabain Fitting |
Walt,
I had to laugh at the cat. I grew up with cats around the house and they
would get into every thing. My mom loves them, so much so that my initials
spell CAT.
Do you happen to remember what tubing you used for the struts? I honestly
don't think I changed the plans, well at least not here.
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
----- Original Message -----
From: "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 9:10 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Lower Cabain Fitting
> Chris,
> This pic shows the fuselage pointing the other direction, but the space
> for
> the bracket is obvious. Mine seems to be farther from the panel. Just
> don't
> remember it being a problem. I'll check more into my old photos. Did you
> do short or long fuse?? Mine is long, right to the plans.
> This is my argument to not change the plans. You change one little thing,
> and four other things down the line are affected.
> I'll see what I can find.
> walt evans
> NX140DL
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Catdesign" <catdesign(at)intergate.com>
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:21 PM
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Lower Cabain Fitting
>
>
>> I'm ready to drill the holes for the rear lower cabain fittings (called
>> the center strut fittings on the plans). When I line them up with the
>> vertical brace on the fuselage it seems I only have 3/4" between the
>> center
>> of 1/4" hole and the back of the front headrest (see photo). Is this
>> enough
>> room for a strut to fit in there or should I slope the fitting back to
>> give
>> myself something like 1-1/4". I don't like the way it will pull if I
>> slope
>> it back to much. I need some help on this. Jack , Mike, Corky, Hans,
>> Walt,
>> Chuck, Jim and everyone else did you move your fittings back or did your
>> struts fit?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Chris Tracy
>> Sacramento, Ca
>>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Update Lower Cabain Fitting |
Chris,
Get a piece of something 1" to 1 1/2" thick,,,Like a block of
aluminum,steel, even an Ash block. Use the drill press to drill 3/16" and
1/4" holes in the block, nice and straight. Now this is your guide. Put
the bit thats in your hand drill, all the way thru the block up to the
chuck, put the bit tip right on the hole mark, slide the block down to the
work, by pressing the block lightly to the work, you can feel that you are
drilling a nice hole.
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: "Catdesign" <catdesign(at)intergate.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2006 2:29 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Update Lower Cabain Fitting
>
>
> snip...>>>
> Ok so now I know where to install the fitting how the heck do I drill the
> hole perpendicular to the side of the fuselage. I have tried to drill a
> strait hole through a block of wood to use as a guide but all I
> accomplished all day was to find out I cant do it on my small drill press
> accurately enough.
>
>>
> Chris Tracy
> Sacramento, Ca
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Blackwell" <markb1958(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Drag wires, now BRS |
----- Original Message -----
From: HVandervoo(at)aol.com
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 11:06 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Drag wires, now BRS
Mark,
Yes, I knew about the Cirrus case and wondered how that would holdup in "court".
The point is this, if you have an in-flight emergency say an engine out or prop
failure.
You could make a safe emergency landing.
Or pull the cord and damage the plane.
Would an insurance company payout?
You could make a case that the damage was cause intentionally.
I am not a lawyer, don't want to be one, but some lawyer will make that case
I guess time will tell.
Hans
Well that's one of the problems. People tend to pull the handle for times when
the manurfacturer really didn't call for it in the manual. Engine failure
the airplane is still flyable and in such a case the last I heard the recommendation
was to still fly the airplane. To take that to an extreme, an engine that
sheared the mounts to the airplane and left the airplane would so upset the
weight and balance that it would likely not be flyable and the chute would be
the only out.
The last I heard, they were paying the claims, but the insurance was very expensive.
The last number I heard was a couple of years ago and was about $9-10,000
per year for coverage.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Crash Survivability |
We should just build airplanes out of whatever they make those black boxes
out of -- problem solved! ; )
Fred B.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sealion330(at)cs.com |
Fellow pieters. I have seen on the list that a lot of you are going to sun n
fun. Is there a place where we can all meet? If not, then ,I am camping under
my C140 at the vintage camping area. My plane is silver-N3533V. Come visit. I
plan to arrive Monday AM. See you there- Gardiner Mason
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sealion330(at)cs.com |
Fellow Pieters. I forgot to mention that I will have a red USMC VMA324 cap on
and I will probably be in or near the wood shop, welding shop, fabric shop,
or sheet metal shop. Gardiner Mason.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Ash <ashcan(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: meeting place |
--- MIME Errors - No Plain-Text Section Found ---
A message with no text/plain MIME section was received.
The entire body of the message was removed. Please
resend the email using Plain Text formatting.
HOTMAIL is notorious for only including an HTML section
in their client's default configuration. If you're using
HOTMAIL, please see your email application's settings
and switch to a default mail option that uses "Plain Text".
--- MIME Errors No Plain-Text Section Found ---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Update Lower Cabain Fitting |
Chris
I was in the same place as you about a year ago. You see this notation right
at the top of long fuse plans "3/4" x 3" Filler For Strut Fitting". No
problem I will just bolt my strut fittings there just like the instructions
say. Then, like usual, I start thinking too much. The long fuselage is
identical to the improved fuselage in that area so why don't all the Piet
builders need this filler? Especially since several other items from the
long fuse plans are adapted to all Piets like the longer, more angled flying
strut fitting and the upper motor mount fitting.
So I posted a message on this newgroup about this and like most things I got
mixed opinions. One person said the the key word in the notation was the
word 'For', that it is filler FOR the vertical that you attach the strut
fitting too, not filler to attach the struct fitting too (kind of like
Clinton's definition of the word 'AT', or was that the word 'TO'). My
question was, if the long fuse vertical needs 'filler' why don't all Piets
need 'filler'? The qeometry is identical in this area, wings, cabanes, and
fuselage.
Bernard must be sitting up in heaven laughing his ass off listening to us.
Kind of like the da Vinchi Code, he left all these clues around for us to
figure out. But if it makes him happy I am glad to do it.
As you can see from my picture yesterday I bolted my fitting to the
'filler', it allows you to fit your cabane in there without cutting off the
ends of the headrest. As you mentioned your cabanes will not be parallel to
each other. You get a trapezoid instead of a parallelogram. I hope this
doesn't start another online debate about the strength of parallelograms
compared to trapezoids (although I am sure that a trapezoid is superior, its
a square with one or two triangles added, an we all know how strong
triangles are, your entire fueslage is just a bunch of them). But I digress.
Now, as far as drilling the perpendicular hole in something I use a solid
metal cylinder that is a part of a unit I bought at Home Depot (see pic)
just clamp it to the side of something and drill. It came with holes for
several drill sizes and when I needed a couple other sizes I just put it on
the drill press and drill a couple more.
Good luck making your 'strut filler' decision.
Rick H.
On 3/26/06, Catdesign wrote:
>
> >
>
> Ok, so I went and looked at the plans for the long fuselage, which I am
> building, and it clearly states to put the fitting on the 3/4"x3" block
> behind the upright. Note to self, look at the plans don't just assume. I'm
> ok with putting it there. I guess. The question is why doesn't the front
> one also move back too? The lower ends will now be something like 29-1/2"
> apart when the wing spars are 28-3/4" apart. I know not much of a
> difference but it's killing me that I must be missing something here. I
> would think any one installing it on upright would have to trim the front
> headrest.
>
> Ok so now I know where to install the fitting how the heck do I drill the
> hole perpendicular to the side of the fuselage. I have tried to drill a
> strait hole through a block of wood to use as a guide but all I
> accomplished
> all day was to find out I cant do it on my small drill press accurately
> enough.
>
> The only good thing to come from today's labor was a net way to collect
> the
> dust off my table saw.
>
> Man am I stressing out or what. I hate drilling holes. There so final.
> Can't wait to start stressing out about drilling holes for the landing
> gear
> fittings.
>
> AAArrrrrrrggggggggg going to bed.
>
>
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Cable brace wires |
Concerning the diagonal brace tube, one other thing William Wayne mentioned
to me based on experience from his Piet crash was to ensure sufficient
strength for that tube as it can prevent the entire wing/cabane structure
from collapsing (on your head) in a rollover. The GN-1 plans call for 1/2" x
.035 which seems thin . William recommended 7/8" x .058 which seems heavy
(but what do I know? I have never flow a Piet much less survived a crash in
one). Many people use streamline tubing for the diagonal, some even add a
threaded fork at the top to allow wing position adjustment.
Rick H.
On 3/26/06, Catdesign wrote:
>
> >
>
> Actually it's quite clear and your right it will push it back, so what
> size
> tubing did you use?
>
> Chris Tracy
> Sacramento, Ca
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Leon Stefan" <lshutks(at)webtv.net>
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:14 PM
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Cable brace wires
>
>
> >
> > In one of the old Buckeye News letters, Frank Pavaglia(?) wrote that he
> > was removing the 3/32 "X" brace wires (roll wires?) from between the
> > front and rear cabanes, and replacing them with 1/8 cable as the 3/32
> > cable was stretching. ( don't ask, I'm just reporting what he said )Hans
> > is using 1/8 there, I guess I will too. On the problem with the cabane
> > fitting being only 3/4 behind the former, I don't recall having a
> > problem there. Remember that the widest part of the streamline tube
> > where you will drill and put the bushing and bolt is closer to the front
> > of the tube than from the trailing edge of the streamline cabane strut
> > tube. this will locate the cabane farther back inside the fittings
> > (away from that former). I'm sure thats clear as mud, but I don't
> > remember having a problem there. Also when I bought tubing, I wanted to
> > buy .032 or something like that, and no one had it, so I used .049.
> > Since using stronger tubing I went with a smaller size. That made that
> > fit a lesser problem also, Also the thicker tubing made it easier to
> > weld the bushing stock in. Leon S.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
>
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gene Hubbard <enhubbard(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo |
Jack,
Sorry I missed you when you were out here. I've been spending all of my
spare time on the Piet so I'm not saying much on the list. .The engine
started on the first blade (after several years not running) and I did
my first low-speed taxi last weekend. I finished the carb heat muff
today, and it's pretty much down to nits now. Getting to be time for
registering it and scheduling an inspection.
I've been following your tailwheel discussion--mine is built to the
plans too. Did your tailwheel break on landing or taxiing? Do you
think differential braking had anything to do with it (I have a single
brake handle and no breakaway tailwheel). Let me know when you're in
the area again.
Gene
Phillips, Jack wrote:
> Hi Chris,
>
>
>
> When I had the forced landing and broke the axle, the subsequent
> groundloop destroyed the leaf spring tailwheel, and cracked the lower
> longeron. I elected to change to the BHP design thinking it would be
> lighter and stronger. No, Ken didn't build it. I built it, then
> built another, stronger one as I described to Walt after the first one
> built to the plans proved unsatisfactory.
>
>
>
> I'm in California on business, but I'll try to find some pics and send
> them to you.
>
>
>
> Jack Phillips, PE
> Sr. Manager, Disposables Product Development
> Clinical Technologies and Services
> Cardinal Health
> Creedmoor, NC
> (919) 528-5212
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Catdesign
> Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 8:39 PM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo
>
>
>
> Hey Jack, I have pictures of your plane with a leaf spring tail wheel
> and the Pietenpol designed A-arm style. What are you running now and
> when did you switch. The A-arm looks like the one Ken Perkins builds.
> Is this one of them? Got any good pictures of you reinforced A-Arm?
>
>
>
> Chris Tracy
> Sacramento, Ca
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: walt evans <mailto:waltdak(at)verizon.net>
>
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
> Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 3:01 PM
>
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo
>
>
>
> Jack,
>
> Yeah, I thought all was OK, till someone said that the wheel was
> laying over. Then it made perfect sense. The height of the wheel
> is a lever that can twist those tubes with not much pressure. So
> I discussed it with my mentor, and he gave me the general Idea,
> and where the loads were. I came up with this which was added to
> the original tubes. He approved, so I painted it and put it on.
> No problems with it except for the fact that it added a smidge to
> the already heavy tail.
>
> AIN"T LIFE GRAND!! :
)
>
> walt evans
> NX140DL
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: Phillips, Jack <mailto:Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal.com>
>
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
> Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 4:40 PM
>
> Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo
>
>
>
> Walt, looking at your tailwheel setup it is obvious you
> discovered the same problem with the BHP design I did - the
> darn thing wants to twist when the tailwheel is turned. I
> ended up making my A-arm of 5/8" x .049 wall tubing, and added
> cross pieces to prevent twisting (after breaking the one I
> made per the plans after only 3 hours of flying). Of course
> Bernard designed this mount for a tailskid which by its nature
> can't force the kind of twisting loads that a swiveling
> tailwheel can. The coil spring does nothing to resist the
> A-arm twisting and the whole assembly can go through some
> alarming gyrations, which make for some interesting
> ground-handling characteristics.
>
>
>
> Jack Phillips
>
> NX899JP
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf
> Of walt evans
> Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 4:26 PM
> To: piet list
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo
>
>
>
> Pardon the grass.
>
>
>
> http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/joepiet/album?.dir=5f03
>
>
>
>
>
> walt evans
> NX140DL
>
>Working together. For life.(sm)
>
>_________________________________________________
>
>
>
proprietary, or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error,
please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use
of the email by you is prohibited.
>
>
>
>
>Working together. For life.(sm)
>_________________________________________________
>
proprietary, or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error,
please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use
of the email by you is prohibited.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo |
| From: | "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal.com> |
Hi Gene,
I figured you were pretty busy. I was only in San Diego for a couple of
days and really didn't have enough free time to try to get together.
Good to hear you've got the engine running, and are down to the final
few details.
I broke my original tailwheel on the forced landing, after the axle
broke and the plane groundlooped in a ditch. I built the BHP design
without any provisions to resist torsion and flew it for about 4 hours,
with pretty poor ground handling (tailwheel steering inputs mostly went
into torsion of the assembly, rather than turning the tailwheel).
Finally as I was taxiing for takeoff one day, I hit a small rut in the
taxiway and broke the tailwheel off the A-Arm, continuing to taxi on the
skid that remained and wondering why my tailwheel steering seemed even
less effective than usual. Fortunately I looked behind me before taking
off and saw the tailwheel being dragged along by the steering cables
behind the airplane!
The current re-designed BHP type works fine, with good steering. I
currently have about 75 hours on it.
Let me know how your project progresses, and good luck with your first
flight! I'll be in SD again the first week in May. If you are going to
fly it then I would love to be there.
Jack Phillips, PE
Sr. Manager, Disposables Product Development
Clinical Technologies and Services
Cardinal Health
Creedmoor, NC
(919) 528-5212
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gene
Hubbard
Sent: Monday, March 27, 2006 1:11 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo
Jack,
Sorry I missed you when you were out here. I've been spending all of my
spare time on the Piet so I'm not saying much on the list. .The engine
started on the first blade (after several years not running) and I did
my first low-speed taxi last weekend. I finished the carb heat muff
today, and it's pretty much down to nits now. Getting to be time for
registering it and scheduling an inspection.
I've been following your tailwheel discussion--mine is built to the
plans too. Did your tailwheel break on landing or taxiing? Do you
think differential braking had anything to do with it (I have a single
brake handle and no breakaway tailwheel). Let me know when you're in
the area again.
Gene
Phillips, Jack wrote:
Hi Chris,
When I had the forced landing and broke the axle, the subsequent
groundloop destroyed the leaf spring tailwheel, and cracked the lower
longeron. I elected to change to the BHP design thinking it would be
lighter and stronger. No, Ken didn't build it. I built it, then built
another, stronger one as I described to Walt after the first one built
to the plans proved unsatisfactory.
I'm in California on business, but I'll try to find some pics and send
them to you.
Jack Phillips, PE
Sr. Manager, Disposables Product Development
Clinical Technologies and Services
Cardinal Health
Creedmoor, NC
(919) 528-5212
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Catdesign
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 8:39 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo
Hey Jack, I have pictures of your plane with a leaf spring tail wheel
and the Pietenpol designed A-arm style. What are you running now and
when did you switch. The A-arm looks like the one Ken Perkins builds.
Is this one of them? Got any good pictures of you reinforced A-Arm?
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
----- Original Message -----
From: walt evans <mailto:waltdak(at)verizon.net>
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 3:01 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo
Jack,
Yeah, I thought all was OK, till someone said that the wheel was
laying over. Then it made perfect sense. The height of the wheel is a
lever that can twist those tubes with not much pressure. So I
discussed it with my mentor, and he gave me the general Idea, and where
the loads were. I came up with this which was added to the original
tubes. He approved, so I painted it and put it on. No problems with it
except for the fact that it added a smidge to the already heavy tail.
AIN"T LIFE GRAND!! :
)
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: Phillips, Jack <mailto:Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal.com>
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 4:40 PM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Added tailwheel pics to my
Yahoo
Walt, looking at your tailwheel setup it is obvious you
discovered the same problem with the BHP design I did - the darn thing
wants to twist when the tailwheel is turned. I ended up making my A-arm
of 5/8" x .049 wall tubing, and added cross pieces to prevent twisting
(after breaking the one I made per the plans after only 3 hours of
flying). Of course Bernard designed this mount for a tailskid which by
its nature can't force the kind of twisting loads that a swiveling
tailwheel can. The coil spring does nothing to resist the A-arm
twisting and the whole assembly can go through some alarming gyrations,
which make for some interesting ground-handling characteristics.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of walt
evans
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 4:26 PM
To: piet list
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Added tailwheel pics to my
Yahoo
Pardon the grass.
http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/joepiet/album?.dir=3D5f03
walt evans
NX140DL
Working together. For life.(sm)
_________________________________________________
This message is for the designated recipient only and
may contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information.
If you have received it in error, please notify the sender immediately
and delete the original. Any other use of the email by you is
prohibited.
Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano -
Japanese - Nederlands - Norsk - Portuguese - Svenska:
Working together. For life.(sm)
This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain
privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information. If you have
received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete
Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese - Nederlands
Working together. For life.(sm)
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error,
please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use
of the email by you is prohibited.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo |
| From: | "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal.com> |
Oops! Sorry guys - I meant for this to go privately to Gene Hubbard.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Phillips, Jack
Sent: Monday, March 27, 2006 8:34 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo
Hi Gene,
I figured you were pretty busy. I was only in San Diego for a couple of
days and really didn't have enough free time to try to get together.
Good to hear you've got the engine running, and are down to the final
few details.
I broke my original tailwheel on the forced landing, after the axle
broke and the plane groundlooped in a ditch. I built the BHP design
without any provisions to resist torsion and flew it for about 4 hours,
with pretty poor ground handling (tailwheel steering inputs mostly went
into torsion of the assembly, rather than turning the tailwheel).
Finally as I was taxiing for takeoff one day, I hit a small rut in the
taxiway and broke the tailwheel off the A-Arm, continuing to taxi on the
skid that remained and wondering why my tailwheel steering seemed even
less effective than usual. Fortunately I looked behind me before taking
off and saw the tailwheel being dragged along by the steering cables
behind the airplane!
The current re-designed BHP type works fine, with good steering. I
currently have about 75 hours on it.
Let me know how your project progresses, and good luck with your first
flight! I'll be in SD again the first week in May. If you are going to
fly it then I would love to be there.
Jack Phillips, PE
Sr. Manager, Disposables Product Development
Clinical Technologies and Services
Cardinal Health
Creedmoor, NC
(919) 528-5212
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gene
Hubbard
Sent: Monday, March 27, 2006 1:11 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo
Jack,
Sorry I missed you when you were out here. I've been spending all of my
spare time on the Piet so I'm not saying much on the list. .The engine
started on the first blade (after several years not running) and I did
my first low-speed taxi last weekend. I finished the carb heat muff
today, and it's pretty much down to nits now. Getting to be time for
registering it and scheduling an inspection.
I've been following your tailwheel discussion--mine is built to the
plans too. Did your tailwheel break on landing or taxiing? Do you
think differential braking had anything to do with it (I have a single
brake handle and no breakaway tailwheel). Let me know when you're in
the area again.
Gene
Phillips, Jack wrote:
Hi Chris,
When I had the forced landing and broke the axle, the subsequent
groundloop destroyed the leaf spring tailwheel, and cracked the lower
longeron. I elected to change to the BHP design thinking it would be
lighter and stronger. No, Ken didn't build it. I built it, then built
another, stronger one as I described to Walt after the first one built
to the plans proved unsatisfactory.
I'm in California on business, but I'll try to find some pics and send
them to you.
Jack Phillips, PE
Sr. Manager, Disposables Product Development
Clinical Technologies and Services
Cardinal Health
Creedmoor, NC
(919) 528-5212
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Catdesign
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 8:39 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo
Hey Jack, I have pictures of your plane with a leaf spring tail wheel
and the Pietenpol designed A-arm style. What are you running now and
when did you switch. The A-arm looks like the one Ken Perkins builds.
Is this one of them? Got any good pictures of you reinforced A-Arm?
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
----- Original Message -----
From: walt evans <mailto:waltdak(at)verizon.net>
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 3:01 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Added tailwheel pics to my Yahoo
Jack,
Yeah, I thought all was OK, till someone said that the wheel was
laying over. Then it made perfect sense. The height of the wheel is a
lever that can twist those tubes with not much pressure. So I
discussed it with my mentor, and he gave me the general Idea, and where
the loads were. I came up with this which was added to the original
tubes. He approved, so I painted it and put it on. No problems with it
except for the fact that it added a smidge to the already heavy tail.
AIN"T LIFE GRAND!! :
)
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: Phillips, Jack <mailto:Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal.com>
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 4:40 PM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Added tailwheel pics to my
Yahoo
Walt, looking at your tailwheel setup it is obvious you
discovered the same problem with the BHP design I did - the darn thing
wants to twist when the tailwheel is turned. I ended up making my A-arm
of 5/8" x .049 wall tubing, and added cross pieces to prevent twisting
(after breaking the one I made per the plans after only 3 hours of
flying). Of course Bernard designed this mount for a tailskid which by
its nature can't force the kind of twisting loads that a swiveling
tailwheel can. The coil spring does nothing to resist the A-arm
twisting and the whole assembly can go through some alarming gyrations,
which make for some interesting ground-handling characteristics.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of walt
evans
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 4:26 PM
To: piet list
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Added tailwheel pics to my
Yahoo
Pardon the grass.
http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/joepiet/album?.dir=3D5f03
walt evans
NX140DL
Working together. For life.(sm)
_________________________________________________
This message is for the designated recipient only and
may contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information.
If you have received it in error, please notify the sender immediately
and delete the original. Any other use of the email by you is
prohibited.
Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano -
Japanese - Nederlands - Norsk - Portuguese - Svenska:
Working together. For life.(sm)
This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain
privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information. If you have
received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete
Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese - Nederlands
Working together. For life.(sm)
This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain
privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information. If you have
received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete
Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese - Nederlands
Working together. For life.(sm)
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error,
please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use
of the email by you is prohibited.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | cabane struts and braces |
Howdy, low 'n' slow fliers;
Thought I'd pitch in my two cents on the matter of the cabane struts and
their braces. NX41CC has the brace tubing forward to the motor mount attach
points (no X-brace wiring between cabanes), parallel cabanes, slightly
canted (aft) wing. I believe one of the advantages to having the cabanes
parallel to each other is the ability to cant them forward or aft to tweak
the CG relative to the wing chord (or center of lift, if you will), despite
the cautions from everyone that you should NOT rely on this to correct lousy
construction or CG calculation.
You should try to get the geometry as close as possible by building your
engine mount to balance the CG, or maybe move things that can be moved, but
as a last resort the cabanes can be angled to tweak the wing and improve CG
location if the tail is heavy. 41CC has its cabanes that way and I would
encourage you to study the possibility of mounting your cabanes in a
parallelogram, rather than a trapezoid, fashion for this advantage. For
more on this subject, Doc Mosher posted an excellent and clear email that is
in the archives and is worth reading if you're working on your CG or
cabanes.
As far as strength, 41CC went over on its nose and flipped onto its back in
the landing gear collapse. The forward cabanes failed in compression
buckling, and the forward cabane brace tubes were damaged as a result. You
can make the cabanes stiffer to form a "roll cage", but I believe they are
plenty strong as they are and they did their job in this case. Certainly
the rear cabanes held up until the tip of the vertical stabilizer hit the
ground and the dust stopped. You can see photos of the cabane damage at
http://www.flysquirrel.net/piets/incident/incident.html .
Oscar Zuniga
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: cabane struts and braces |
Oscar
What size were these cabane brace tubes?
>
>
> As far as strength, 41CC went over on its nose and flipped onto its back
> in
> the landing gear collapse. The forward cabanes failed in compression
> buckling, and the forward cabane brace tubes were damaged as a
> result. You
> can make the cabanes stiffer to form a "roll cage", but I believe they are
> plenty strong as they are and they did their job in this case. Certainly
> the rear cabanes held up until the tip of the vertical stabilizer hit the
> ground and the dust stopped. You can see photos of the cabane damage at
> http://www.flysquirrel.net/piets/incident/incident.html .
>
>
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roman Bukolt" <conceptmodels(at)mailbag.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Cable brace wires |
William Wynne pointed out to me at EAA last summer, DO NOT put that adjustable
fitting on the diagonal brace.
That's what failed in his crash resulting in a ruptured fuel line, dousing him
and causing severe burns He felt that if that diagonal brace was solid at both
ends the wing would not have shifted forward. He also said the rest of the
plane, structurally was really built tough and held up well in the crash until
ir burnt to a crisp.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kenneth M. Heide" <kmheidecpo(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Update Lower Cabain Fitting |
Say Chris.....
I fell your pain......but remember we are not building a Lear Jet.... I found
the best way to make sure you have the hole in the right place is to hang the
plans on the back of the door, turn and walk 12 steps from door, right face and
begin throwing darts....After the four darts have landed.....drill like there
is no tomorrow! tee-hee-hee
I too read to much into the plans to the point where I have to sleep on it for
a day or so!
Villiage Idiot
Catdesign wrote:
Ok, so I went and looked at the plans for the long fuselage, which I am
building, and it clearly states to put the fitting on the 3/4"x3" block
behind the upright. Note to self, look at the plans don't just assume. I'm
ok with putting it there. I guess. The question is why doesn't the front
one also move back too? The lower ends will now be something like 29-1/2"
apart when the wing spars are 28-3/4" apart. I know not much of a
difference but it's killing me that I must be missing something here. I
would think any one installing it on upright would have to trim the front
headrest.
Ok so now I know where to install the fitting how the heck do I drill the
hole perpendicular to the side of the fuselage. I have tried to drill a
strait hole through a block of wood to use as a guide but all I accomplished
all day was to find out I cant do it on my small drill press accurately
enough.
The only good thing to come from today's labor was a net way to collect the
dust off my table saw.
Man am I stressing out or what. I hate drilling holes. There so final.
Can't wait to start stressing out about drilling holes for the landing gear
fittings.
AAArrrrrrrggggggggg going to bed.
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: It's........SMOKING SEASON ! |
It will hit 74 in SHV today. Got a drivers lic but no Pietenpol.
CMC
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: It's........SMOKING SEASON ! |
In a message dated 3/27/2006 10:10:21 AM Central Standard Time,
Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov writes:
Common Chuck----- the weather here is going to be hitting the 60's by
Thursday so I feel the need for......well, er,
not much speed, but to do some Pietenpol SMOKING !!!!
Over the weekend I installed my re-worked prop, pulled all inspection covers
off the wing and had a good close look at everything, and buttoned it all up.
I bored a 1" hole in the back of the eyebrow panels to bypass some of the
cooling air, because I just don't think the engine is coming up to a hot enough
temperature. I have tin plugs that snap in, if I'm in a hot summer condition.
Working on a new seat cushion, too. This evening I finished the Condition
Inspection, after I tightened the turnbuckle 1 1/2 turns on the bottom of the
bellcrank, that goes up to the stick. The past 3 days have had wind gusts close
to 40 mph, and I thought about trying a vertical take-off and / or landing !!
Except for a couple more little details, and cleaning 'er up, she's all
ready to go for tomorrow evening, if the winds are a little calmer. I haven't
had
'er in the air since late last year...and I'm getting real ansey !! I'll be
staying in the pattern and shoot some landings, stop and check the prop, take
off and do some more landings, and of course...make sure the Smoke System is
working properly !!
YEEE HAAWWW !! Smoking Season is finally here !!
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | cabane struts and braces |
Rick asks-
>What size were these cabane brace tubes?
I'll have to check next time I'm out at the hangar. From the pictures, they
are at least 1/2" OD and probably more than that. I checked my plans and
manual and all they say is that a brace tube is used to replace the x-brace
wiring. The plans just say "strut to wing".
Oscar Zuniga
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Greg Bacon <gbacon67(at)direcway.com> |
Does anyone have contact info for Larry Williams?
Thanks,
Greg Bacon
Prairie Home, MO
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Vought" <carbarvo(at)knology.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Larry Williams |
My address book shows him at lnawms(at)msn.com Carl Vought
----- Original Message -----
From: Greg Bacon
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 9:02 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Larry Williams
Does anyone have contact info for Larry Williams?
Thanks,
Greg Bacon
Prairie Home, MO
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Larry's new e-mail address....... |
Just a note to let you know of our email address change. It's
lnawms(at)fuse.net
Please just "reply" back, no message needed, so we can keep your address in
our address book.
You might receive double messages and I'm sorry for that.
Thanks a bunch!
Adriana and Larry
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Newbie (sorry long) |
| From: | "panhandler1956" <bowens2(at)insight.rr.com> |
Hi all,
I am a new "lurker" on the Pietenpol List and I am interested in building (or buying)
a Pietenpol in the not so distant future.
I just wanted to say that the passion you guys (and gals) have for this little
airplane is contagious. I will likely order my plans in the next few months. My
initial thoughts are to go with a C-90 or 0-200 because I would like to operate
out a my farm strip which is a rather short, one-way-in-one-way-out affair.
A little about me;
I am 35, married with 3 kids, and have been flying for over 20 years in various
types, currently I fly a corporate Beechjet. About 10 years ago I rebuilt a Bucker
Jungster I, so I have some concept at wood airplanes and fabric work, but
I am far from experienced when it comes to building an airplane from scratch.
My son is 10 and I was excited by the notion of a father-&-son-team with the
veritable Piet.
Any words of wisdom before I take the plunge???
Thanks in advance,
--------
Brent O.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=24815#24815
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | harvey rule <harvey.rule(at)bell.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Newbie (sorry long) |
get jeto's for her if the field is really short!
panhandler1956 wrote:
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> I am a new "lurker" on the Pietenpol List and I am interested in building (or
buying) a Pietenpol in the not so distant future.
>
> I just wanted to say that the passion you guys (and gals) have for this little
airplane is contagious. I will likely order my plans in the next few months.
My initial thoughts are to go with a C-90 or 0-200 because I would like to operate
out a my farm strip which is a rather short, one-way-in-one-way-out affair.
>
> A little about me;
> I am 35, married with 3 kids, and have been flying for over 20 years in various
types, currently I fly a corporate Beechjet. About 10 years ago I rebuilt a
Bucker Jungster I, so I have some concept at wood airplanes and fabric work,
but I am far from experienced when it comes to building an airplane from scratch.
My son is 10 and I was excited by the notion of a father-&-son-team with the
veritable Piet.
>
> Any words of wisdom before I take the plunge???
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> --------
> Brent O.
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=24815#24815
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Newbie (sorry long) |
| From: | "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal.com> |
Hi Brent,
The standard words of wisdom to any new builder are the following:
1. Buy the 4 Tony Bingelis books. They will tell you 98% of what you
need to know to build a plane from scratch.
2. Try to work on the project some every day, even if only to look over
the plans and think about what you've got to do next.
3. Don't worry about mistakes. You will make plenty of them. Just
assess each one and determine if the mistake will affect flight safety.
If it does - make it over. If it doesn't, then decide if you can
personally live with the flaw and decide whether to re-make it, or let
it be.
4. There are a number of common decisions every Pietenpol builder must
make for themselves, with several good choices. Those include:
a. Engine type. Model A Ford, Corvair, Continental, other auto
engines, etc.
b. Landing gear type - split axle "Cub" style or straight axle
"Jenny" style
c. Wood selection - Sitka Spruce, Douglas Fir or other choices
d. Glue selection - T-88 Epoxy, Resorcinol, Aerolite, others
e. One piece wing or 3 piece
The list goes on and on, and is one of the things that makes every
Pietenpol unique. Just make intelligent choices and try to have good
reasons for every choice you make
5. Don't worry about the "Purists". There are those who will say that
only a model A Ford or Corvair powered plane is a true Pietenpol. BHP
built many airplanes, with everything from a Continental to a Velie
radial. One of the beauties of this design is the ease with which it
can accept a different engine. Bernard Pietenpol was the ultimate
experimenter and all such experimentation should be accepted by the
Purists.
6. Remember that the purpose of the project is to have fun. Don't
worry about rushing through the building process to get to the flying.
Building is fun. Take your time and enjoy it. Try to get your family
involved so they feel some ownership and pride in the project.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
panhandler1956
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 12:38 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Newbie (sorry long)
Hi all,
I am a new "lurker" on the Pietenpol List and I am interested in
building (or buying) a Pietenpol in the not so distant future.
I just wanted to say that the passion you guys (and gals) have for this
little airplane is contagious. I will likely order my plans in the next
few months. My initial thoughts are to go with a C-90 or 0-200 because I
would like to operate out a my farm strip which is a rather short,
one-way-in-one-way-out affair.
A little about me;
I am 35, married with 3 kids, and have been flying for over 20 years in
various types, currently I fly a corporate Beechjet. About 10 years ago
I rebuilt a Bucker Jungster I, so I have some concept at wood airplanes
and fabric work, but I am far from experienced when it comes to building
an airplane from scratch. My son is 10 and I was excited by the notion
of a father-&-son-team with the veritable Piet.
Any words of wisdom before I take the plunge???
Thanks in advance,
--------
Brent O.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=24815#24815
Working together. For life.(sm)
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error,
please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use
of the email by you is prohibited.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Newbie (sorry long) |
Jack covered the basic things real well, I would say order the plans today.
The cost is peanuts and you will be able to more understand all the issues
we rant about every day on this newsgroup. One other excellent thing to do
would be to come to the Broadhead gathering the weekend before Oshkosh, see
lots of Piets and many other vintange aircraft (maybe even get a ride in
one).
Rick H.
On 3/28/06, panhandler1956 wrote:
>
> bowens2(at)insight.rr.com>
>
> Hi all,
>
> I am a new "lurker" on the Pietenpol List and I am interested in building
> (or buying) a Pietenpol in the not so distant future.
>
> I just wanted to say that the passion you guys (and gals) have for this
> little airplane is contagious. I will likely order my plans in the next few
> months. My initial thoughts are to go with a C-90 or 0-200 because I would
> like to operate out a my farm strip which is a rather short,
> one-way-in-one-way-out affair.
>
> A little about me;
> I am 35, married with 3 kids, and have been flying for over 20 years in
> various types, currently I fly a corporate Beechjet. About 10 years ago I
> rebuilt a Bucker Jungster I, so I have some concept at wood airplanes and
> fabric work, but I am far from experienced when it comes to building an
> airplane from scratch. My son is 10 and I was excited by the notion of a
> father-&-son-team with the veritable Piet.
>
> Any words of wisdom before I take the plunge???
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> --------
> Brent O.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=3D24815#24815
>
>
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
>
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Newbie (sorry long) |
Brent,
This is so cool , that a corporate jet pilot wants to get into the Pietenpol
thing. Nothing like going up on a weekend morning with the wind and smells
in your hair, and your kids will love it.
As far as taking the plunge,,,,,Dive in!
Go here and see where the Piet builders/hopefuls are. Feel free to add your
stats.
http://www.frappr.com/pietenpol
And any other builders who haven't gotton on Frapper, you should. You can
see at a glance.
AIN'T LIFE GRAND!
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: "panhandler1956" <bowens2(at)insight.rr.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 12:38 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Newbie (sorry long)
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> I am a new "lurker" on the Pietenpol List and I am interested in building
> (or buying) a Pietenpol in the not so distant future.
>
> I just wanted to say that the passion you guys (and gals) have for this
> little airplane is contagious. I will likely order my plans in the next
> few months. My initial thoughts are to go with a C-90 or 0-200 because I
> would like to operate out a my farm strip which is a rather short,
> one-way-in-one-way-out affair.
>
> A little about me;
> I am 35, married with 3 kids, and have been flying for over 20 years in
> various types, currently I fly a corporate Beechjet. About 10 years ago I
> rebuilt a Bucker Jungster I, so I have some concept at wood airplanes and
> fabric work, but I am far from experienced when it comes to building an
> airplane from scratch. My son is 10 and I was excited by the notion of a
> father-&-son-team with the veritable Piet.
>
> Any words of wisdom before I take the plunge???
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> --------
> Brent O.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=24815#24815
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Newbie (sorry long) |
| From: | "panhandler1956" <bowens2(at)insight.rr.com> |
Guys,
Thanks for the great advise. I will be asking many "dumb" questions in the future,
although I'll try to search the archives first.
I just ordered Chuck Gantzer's video, I can't wait to see that.
Regards,
--------
Brent O.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=24880#24880
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "bike.mike" <bike.mike(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Newbie (sorry long) |
No different than a race car driver who likes his bicycle or a computer
draftsman who likes to sketch with pencil. Most of us on this list have
flown, and continue to fly, other, faster, newer, airplanes.
Pietenpols are not "less" than other airplanes; they are merely different.
And they are different in so many beautiful ways.
> This is so cool , that a corporate jet pilot wants to get into the
Pietenpol
> thing. [snip]
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Newbie (sorry long) |
| From: | "panhandler1956" <bowens2(at)insight.rr.com> |
Walt,
I signed up on the frappr. Thanks!
Brent O.
waltdak(at)verizon.net wrote:
> Brent,
> This is so cool , that a corporate jet pilot wants to get into the Pietenpol
> thing. Nothing like going up on a weekend morning with the wind and smells
> in your hair, and your kids will love it.
> As far as taking the plunge,,,,,Dive in!
> Go here and see where the Piet builders/hopefuls are. Feel free to add your
> stats.
> http://www.frappr.com/pietenpol
> And any other builders who haven't gotton on Frapper, you should. You can
> see at a glance.
>
> AIN'T LIFE GRAND!
> walt evans
> NX140DL
>
>
>
> ---
--------
Brent O.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=24881#24881
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Newbie (sorry long) |
| From: | "panhandler1956" <bowens2(at)insight.rr.com> |
First dumb question. I searched the archives, I promise.
I would like to go ahead and get a set of plans and I realise that the "family"
is the place to go.
Should I order the package deal - includes plans, 3 piece wing plans, & supplemental
drawings? I was also going to grab the full size rib drawing and the builders
manual - basically everything they sell except for the scout plans.
Also is there a complete list of other folks who have plans/drawings of subsystems, etc? I noticed the name Keri-Ann Price among others who offer (offered) additional info. Looks like I missed out as the website "www.aircamper.org" was mentioned often, but the link is dead.
Thanks in advance!
--------
Brent O.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=24888#24888
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | harvey rule <harvey.rule(at)bell.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Newbie (sorry long) |
No such thing as a dumb question;the dumbness comes when the questions
arn't asked!Ask away man your in good hands!These guys are the greatest!
panhandler1956 wrote:
>
>
> Guys,
> Thanks for the great advise. I will be asking many "dumb" questions in the future,
although I'll try to search the archives first.
>
> I just ordered Chuck Gantzer's video, I can't wait to see that.
>
> Regards,
>
> --------
> Brent O.
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=24880#24880
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "The Schuerrs" <schuerrs(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Newbie (sorry long) |
Brent,
My sons and I are also new to the scene and looking to build. What a great
way to spend time with your kids. And you also get to fly it when its done.
Where do you live? Good luck!
Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: "panhandler1956" <bowens2(at)insight.rr.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 11:38 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Newbie (sorry long)
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> I am a new "lurker" on the Pietenpol List and I am interested in building
> (or buying) a Pietenpol in the not so distant future.
>
> I just wanted to say that the passion you guys (and gals) have for this
> little airplane is contagious. I will likely order my plans in the next
> few months. My initial thoughts are to go with a C-90 or 0-200 because I
> would like to operate out a my farm strip which is a rather short,
> one-way-in-one-way-out affair.
>
> A little about me;
> I am 35, married with 3 kids, and have been flying for over 20 years in
> various types, currently I fly a corporate Beechjet. About 10 years ago I
> rebuilt a Bucker Jungster I, so I have some concept at wood airplanes and
> fabric work, but I am far from experienced when it comes to building an
> airplane from scratch. My son is 10 and I was excited by the notion of a
> father-&-son-team with the veritable Piet.
>
> Any words of wisdom before I take the plunge???
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> --------
> Brent O.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=24815#24815
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
So -- what's the best way to mortise in or countersink the Vi Kapler aluminum
hinges in the horizontal stab and elevator? Can it be done with careful use
of a good, sharp wood chisel? I have a router, but I'm afraid I'd slip and ruin
the main beam of the stab or elevator...would appreciate any tips.
Fred B.
La Crosse, WI
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Newbie (sorry long) |
| From: | "panhandler1956" <bowens2(at)insight.rr.com> |
Yeah we are really looking forward to it. I promised the wife I wouldn't build
an airplane till my youngest is 4 yrs old (2 more years), but that won't keep
me and my son from stamping out a few ribs [Laughing] . I live just outside of
Columbus, Oh in Blacklick.
Brent O.
schuerrs(at)charter.net wrote:
> Brent,
>
> My sons and I are also new to the scene and looking to build. What a great
> way to spend time with your kids. And you also get to fly it when its done.
> Where do you live? Good luck!
>
> Steve
> ---
--------
Brent O.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=24911#24911
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Markle" <jim_markle(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator hinges |
Here's a "non slip" method for cutting those recesses (and hinge mortices, and
a LOT of other stuff!)....
http://www.mykitplane.com/Planes/buildLogReportDetail.cfm?BuildLogID=3D271&PlaneID=3D52&FName=3DJim&LName=3DMarkle&PlaneName=3DAir%20Camper
If the link fails, go to mykitplane.com and look at my 11.18.2002 entry.
jm
----- Original Message -----
From: TBYH(at)aol.com
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 7:33 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Elevator hinges
So -- what's the best way to mortise in or countersink the Vi Kapler aluminum
hinges in the horizontal stab and elevator? Can it be done with careful use of
a good, sharp wood chisel? I have a router, but I'm afraid I'd slip and ruin
the main beam of the stab or elevator...would appreciate any tips.
Fred B.
La Crosse, WI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Catdesign" <catdesign(at)intergate.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator hinges |
I did it like this after I built the whole tail structure. http://www.hal-pc.org/~hjkr/hingeslots.htm
Alignment was easier this way. Worked great and was easy. The chisel did not
work well enough.
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
----- Original Message -----
From: TBYH(at)aol.com
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 5:33 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Elevator hinges
So -- what's the best way to mortise in or countersink the Vi Kapler aluminum
hinges in the horizontal stab and elevator? Can it be done with careful use of
a good, sharp wood chisel? I have a router, but I'm afraid I'd slip and ruin
the main beam of the stab or elevator...would appreciate any tips.
Fred B.
La Crosse, WI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Catdesign" <catdesign(at)intergate.com> |
| Subject: | Lower Cabain Fitting Problem Solved |
All,
Thanks for all the help and advice about the lower cabain fitting (labeled
inside strut fitting on the plans). I now know why no one has mentioned this
before.
As luck would have it, I happen to have a piece of streamlined tubing in my
4130 scrap box of I got from Aircraft Spruce (I also like their barging bag
of spruce cutoffs, something like $20, see their catalog). This tubing is
just about, if not exactly, the correct size for the vertical struts. As
you can see from the picture, even though there appeared to be no room for
the strut to fit between the front seat back and the fitting, it fits quite
easily. As someone pointed out in response to my original question, the fat
part of the tubing is towards the front 1/3rd thus making it fit in this
small space. So, once again the plans are correct and the builder is wrong.
Now repeat after me, follow the plans, follow the plans, follow the plans.
I have no idea why the long fuselage plans added the " brace with the note
"3/4"x3 Filler For Strut Fitting". It seems to be split 50-50 as to whether
or not to put your fitting on this filler piece. I thought it was for
clearance but that seems wrong now. I'm tempted to put my fitting on the
filler because I would like to build a metal frame right behind the headrest
to mount shoulder straps on to. But, and here is my problem, I would also
want to move the front one back the same amount. This would keep the
vertical struts parallel with the added benefit of moving the wing back
about 1" as I'm sure I will need to slant the struts back later to correct a
rearward CG. I'm thinking too much. This is how projects get stalled, like
mine is right now. I think the best thing to do is just move the back one
and deal with it. It works, so don't change it. Right? Ouch, my brain
hurts.
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Lynn Knoll" <dknoll(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator hinges |
Fred,
Jim & Criss did a beautiful job with a router. Using a good sharp chisel works
also, just take your time. If you get a little wide, long, or deep wood filler
can come to the rescue. Remember, eventually they will be covered.
Lynn Knoll
Piet/Vair
Wichita
----- Original Message -----
From: TBYH(at)aol.com
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 7:33 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Elevator hinges
So -- what's the best way to mortise in or countersink the Vi Kapler aluminum
hinges in the horizontal stab and elevator? Can it be done with careful use of
a good, sharp wood chisel? I have a router, but I'm afraid I'd slip and ruin
the main beam of the stab or elevator...would appreciate any tips.
Fred B.
La Crosse, WI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Greg Bacon <gbacon67(at)direcway.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Larry's new e-mail address....... |
Michael,
Thanks for updating me on Larry's new email address.
Greg Bacon
Prairie Home, MO
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael D Cuy
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 10:56 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Larry's new e-mail address.......
Just a note to let you know of our email address change. It's lnawms(at)fuse.net
Please just "reply" back, no message needed, so we can keep your address in our
address book.
You might receive double messages and I'm sorry for that.
Thanks a bunch!
Adriana and Larry
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Newbie (sorry long) |
| From: | "Glenn Thomas" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com> |
The plans from the family are what I got, from Don Pietenpol himself. I bought
the bundle like you were talking about doing. ...and also the full size rib
plan. The printing process can alter the dimensions slightly and humidity can
change the size of the paper and for that reason I plotted the dimensions on
the wing drawings directly onto the rib jig. What the full size plan WAS helpful
for was positioning the bracing structure between the upper and lower capstrips.
Dimensions are not given in the plans so I was pleased to be able to refer
to the rib plan for that. I think it was an additional $16 for that sheet.
The Flying and Glider manual is also nice to have.
I see you got Chuck's video. Michael Cuy also has a video. They are both great
resources to have and I've seen them both MULTIPLE times.
Enjoy!
--------
Glenn Thomas
N?????
http://www.flyingwood.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=24942#24942
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Newbie (sorry long) |
| From: | "panhandler1956" <bowens2(at)insight.rr.com> |
Thanks Glenn.
Seems like I'm on track. I will have to look up Michael Cuy for his video too.
Regards,
--------
Brent O.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=24993#24993
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Test - Trying this forum |
| From: | "Terry Bowden" <barnstmr(at)aol.com> |
I have been on the Piet email list for a long time. Just decded to try this forum
thing out... perhaps will get fewer emails now.
--------
Pietenpol C-75 NX133H HopGrasser
Taylorcdraft BC12-D N95598
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=25016#25016
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator hinges |
Fred
I bought a cheap router table at Grizzly for around $40 that I mounted my
router in. It comes with a fence like a table saw that you can brace your
work against as you router out a slot or channel. Used it a bunch to cut the
channels in the all the tail pieces in addition to the hinge slots.
Rick H.
On 3/28/06, TBYH(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> So -- what's the best way to mortise in or countersink the Vi Kapler
> aluminum hinges in the horizontal stab and elevator? Can it be done with
> careful use of a good, sharp wood chisel? I have a router, but I'm afraid
> I'd slip and ruin the main beam of the stab or elevator...would appreciate
> any tips.
>
> Fred B.
> La Crosse, WI
>
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Blackwell" <markb1958(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Newbie (sorry long) |
I haven't started mine yet but that's what I did. I called and found out
the Don is one of the nicest men you would ever want to talk to. The extra
resource alone was in my opinion worth any extra I might have spent for
plans.
----- Original Message -----
From: "panhandler1956" <bowens2(at)insight.rr.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 7:38 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Newbie (sorry long)
>
>
> First dumb question. I searched the archives, I promise.
>
> I would like to go ahead and get a set of plans and I realise that the
> "family" is the place to go.
>
> Should I order the package deal - includes plans, 3 piece wing plans, &
> supplemental drawings? I was also going to grab the full size rib drawing
> and the builders manual - basically everything they sell except for the
> scout plans.
>
> Also is there a complete list of other folks who have plans/drawings of
> subsystems, etc? I noticed the name Keri-Ann Price among others who offer
> (offered) additional info. Looks like I missed out as the website
> "www.aircamper.org" was mentioned often, but the link is dead.
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> --------
> Brent O.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=24888#24888
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Lower Cabain Fitting Problem Solved |
Chris
I am sorry to do this to you, just when you had this issue figured out and
were ready to proceed, but putting the fitting on the 'filler' doesn't
prevent the wing from moving forward or backward. I just measured mine and I
can move the wing back 5" and forward 2" from vertical. The only reason it
stops is the bottom ends of the cabane struts hit the plywood, nothing to do
with the cabanes not being parallel (if I ground some metal off the cabane
ends the wing would move even further).
My advise is to pretend you never read this and proceed the way you were
going to.
Rick H.
On 3/28/06, Catdesign wrote:
>
> All,
>
> Thanks for all the help and advice about the lower cabain fitting (labeled
> inside strut fitting on the plans). I now know why no one has mentioned
> this
> before.
>
> As luck would have it, I happen to have a piece of streamlined tubing in
> my
> 4130 scrap box of I got from Aircraft Spruce (I also like their barging
> bag
> of spruce cutoffs, something like $20, see their catalog). This tubing is
> just about, if not exactly, the correct size for the vertical struts. As
> you can see from the picture, even though there appeared to be no room for
> the strut to fit between the front seat back and the fitting, it fits
> quite
> easily. As someone pointed out in response to my original question, the
> fat
> part of the tubing is towards the front 1/3rd thus making it fit in this
> small space. So, once again the plans are correct and the builder is
> wrong.
> Now repeat after me, follow the plans, follow the plans, follow the plans.
>
> I have no idea why the long fuselage plans added the =BE" brace with the
> note
> "3/4"x3 Filler For Strut Fitting". It seems to be split 50-50 as to
> whether
> or not to put your fitting on this filler piece. I thought it was for
> clearance but that seems wrong now. I'm tempted to put my fitting on the
> filler because I would like to build a metal frame right behind the
> headrest
> to mount shoulder straps on to. But, and here is my problem, I would also
> want to move the front one back the same amount. This would keep the
> vertical struts parallel with the added benefit of moving the wing back
> about 1" as I'm sure I will need to slant the struts back later to correct
> a
> rearward CG. I'm thinking too much. This is how projects get stalled,
> like
> mine is right now. I think the best thing to do is just move the back one
> and deal with it. It works, so don't change it. Right? Ouch, my brain
> hurts.
>
> Chris Tracy
> Sacramento, Ca
>
>
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "pietflyr" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Newbie (sorry long) |
I should have mentioned Mike Cuy's and Chuck Gantzer's videos in my "Must
Have" list. His and Chuck's are both very good, with different subject
matters. Good inspiration, too.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
panhandler1956
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 9:59 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Newbie (sorry long)
Thanks Glenn.
Seems like I'm on track. I will have to look up Michael Cuy for his video
too.
Regards,
--------
Brent O.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=24993#24993
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Newbie (sorry long) |
| From: | "Glenn Thomas" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com> |
Mike's video can be obtained through this link:
http://users.aol.com/bpabpabpa/cuyvideo.html
I just got one a couple of weeks ago. Makes you aware of all the ways you can
customize your plane.
--------
Glenn Thomas
N?????
http://www.flyingwood.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=25050#25050
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Barry Davis" <bed(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Sun & Fun.....YeHAAAA |
Hope to see everyone at Sun & Fun next week.
Some of the Big Piet Builders are flying down to Key West this weekend as a pre-runner
to our flying the Piets to the Bahamas, then back to SNF for the week.
Looks like we are having a Southern Piet Fly-in this fall. Looks like the 2nd Saturday/Sun
in July.
Airport will be Carrollton, Ga, CTJ. More info to follow after Sun n Fun. PLEASE
give us some feedback on this.
Barry Davis
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Newbie (sorry long) |
| From: | "panhandler1956" <bowens2(at)insight.rr.com> |
Guys,
I am floored by the warm welcome and hospitality of the folks on this list. In
addition to the great replies, I have recieved a dozen emails, which were all
EXTREMELY helpful.
Thanks again and I hope I can contribute back.
--------
Brent O.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=25133#25133
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dick Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator hinges |
I have a set of small hobby chisels. I tapped them out with a small hammer. I
did them all in a couple of hours.
Dick N
----- Original Message -----
From: Rick Holland
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 10:45 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Elevator hinges
Fred
I bought a cheap router table at Grizzly for around $40 that I mounted my router
in. It comes with a fence like a table saw that you can brace your work against
as you router out a slot or channel. Used it a bunch to cut the channels
in the all the tail pieces in addition to the hinge slots.
Rick H.
On 3/28/06, TBYH(at)aol.com wrote:
So -- what's the best way to mortise in or countersink the Vi Kapler aluminum
hinges in the horizontal stab and elevator? Can it be done with careful use
of a good, sharp wood chisel? I have a router, but I'm afraid I'd slip and ruin
the main beam of the stab or elevator...would appreciate any tips.
Fred B.
La Crosse, WI
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kenneth M. Heide" <kmheidecpo(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Newbie (sorry long) |
Newbie......
Just another thought.....
When we stgarted our project I ran the blue prints done to Kinkos and had them
laminated before we made our jigs. This way we could glue over them and never
have to worry about the wood sticking to the plans or ruining the copies. Yes,
we did have to transfer them into a pdf. file before Kinkos could print them
on their plotter. It makes gluing and messy clean up much easier and will not
leave your paper tracing stuck to your parts.......
Out to pasture....
panhandler1956 wrote:
Thanks Glenn.
Seems like I'm on track. I will have to look up Michael Cuy for his video too.
Regards,
--------
Brent O.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=24993#24993
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Vought" <carbarvo(at)knology.net> |
| Subject: | Model A engine question |
I'm completing the work on my Model A engine and I'd like to get some help on the
head. I've checked the archives . I bought the Dan Price head and as some of
you know, consideration must be given to clearance between the head and the
pistons. At TDC, my pistons are .045 above the deck. if I cut too much clearance
in the head, the compression ratio will be lowered. If I cut too little, the
piston will strike the head. Sufficient clearance must be allowed for carbon
buildup and thermal expansion of the rod. Can anybody out there give me some
guidance on a procedure for determining optimum cllearance? I would appreciat
that very much........Carl Vought
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kenneth M. Heide" <kmheidecpo(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Newbie (sorry long) |
Brent,
AS a matter of fact.....you can. I'll take a ride in the jet for a $100.00 hambuger
anytime........
Ken
Fargo, ND
panhandler1956 wrote:
Guys,
I am floored by the warm welcome and hospitality of the folks on this list. In
addition to the great replies, I have recieved a dozen emails, which were all
EXTREMELY helpful.
Thanks again and I hope I can contribute back.
--------
Brent O.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=25133#25133
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Sun & Fun.....YeHAAAA |
| From: | "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal.com> |
I'd love to come to CTJ for the Sosuthen Pietenpol fly-in, but I will be
returning from my honeymoon the second weekend in July. Any chance of
changing that date?
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh, NC
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Barry
Davis
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 3:45 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Sun & Fun.....YeHAAAA
Hope to see everyone at Sun & Fun next week.
Some of the Big Piet Builders are flying down to Key West this weekend
as a pre-runner to our flying the Piets to the Bahamas, then back to SNF
for the week.
Looks like we are having a Southern Piet Fly-in this fall. Looks like
the 2nd Saturday/Sun in July.
Airport will be Carrollton, Ga, CTJ. More info to follow after Sun n
Fun. PLEASE give us some feedback on this.
Barry Davis
Working together. For life.(sm)
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error,
please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use
of the email by you is prohibited.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Barry Davis" <bed(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Sun & Fun.....YeHAAAA |
Jack
That date is not in stone as yet. After seeing your Piet at Brodhead, it is important
that you can attend. Will keep you posted. Are you going to SNF?
----- Original Message -----
From: Phillips, Jack
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 7:49 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Sun & Fun.....YeHAAAA
I'd love to come to CTJ for the Sosuthen Pietenpol fly-in, but I will be returning
from my honeymoon the second weekend in July. Any chance of changing that
date?
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh, NC
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Barry Davis
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 3:45 PM
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Sun & Fun.....YeHAAAA
Hope to see everyone at Sun & Fun next week.
Some of the Big Piet Builders are flying down to Key West this weekend as a pre-runner
to our flying the Piets to the Bahamas, then back to SNF for the week.
Looks like we are having a Southern Piet Fly-in this fall. Looks like the 2nd
Saturday/Sun in July.
Airport will be Carrollton, Ga, CTJ. More info to follow after Sun n Fun. PLEASE
give us some feedback on this.
Barry Davis
Working together. For life.(sm)
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error,
please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use
of the email by you is prohibited.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Sun & Fun.....YeHAAAA |
| From: | "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal.com> |
Wish I could, but just don't have the time this year. I had originally
planned to fly formation down there with PF Beck from South Carolina. I
would definitely try to come to a southern Pietenpol fly-in. I can't
make Brodhead or Oshkosh either this year. Thanks for the compliment
about my plane.
Jack
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Barry
Davis
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 11:15 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Sun & Fun.....YeHAAAA
Jack
That date is not in stone as yet. After seeing your Piet at Brodhead, it
is important that you can attend. Will keep you posted. Are you going to
SNF?
----- Original Message -----
From: Phillips, Jack <mailto:Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal.com>
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 7:49 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Sun & Fun.....YeHAAAA
I'd love to come to CTJ for the Sosuthen Pietenpol fly-in, but I
will be returning from my honeymoon the second weekend in July. Any
chance of changing that date?
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh, NC
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Barry
Davis
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 3:45 PM
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Sun & Fun.....YeHAAAA
Hope to see everyone at Sun & Fun next week.
Some of the Big Piet Builders are flying down to Key West this
weekend as a pre-runner to our flying the Piets to the Bahamas, then
back to SNF for the week.
Looks like we are having a Southern Piet Fly-in this fall. Looks
like the 2nd Saturday/Sun in July.
Airport will be Carrollton, Ga, CTJ. More info to follow after
Sun n Fun. PLEASE give us some feedback on this.
Barry Davis
Working together. For life.(sm)
_________________________________________________
This message is for the designated recipient only and may
contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information. If
you have received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and
Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese -
Nederlands - Norsk - Portuguese - Svenska:
Working together. For life.(sm)
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error,
please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use
of the email by you is prohibited.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Ash <ashcan(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Sun & Fun.....YeHAAAA |
--- MIME Errors - No Plain-Text Section Found ---
A message with no text/plain MIME section was received.
The entire body of the message was removed. Please
resend the email using Plain Text formatting.
HOTMAIL is notorious for only including an HTML section
in their client's default configuration. If you're using
HOTMAIL, please see your email application's settings
and switch to a default mail option that uses "Plain Text".
--- MIME Errors No Plain-Text Section Found ---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | wider, standard....longer, shorter |
In all fairness to Jack on our Cleveland-to-Brodhead trip last July, he was
carrying a heavy load of baggage and the OAT was pushing
90 F as I recall so his extra weight did cost some climb, but head-to-head
he'd do just fine if equally loaded.
Jack is right though--making things wider, longer, will cost some penalty
(had not even thought about the plywood utilization issues ! )
Besides....Jack doesn't know I was using my human compressed gas thrust
augmentor during climbout......:))
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | wider, standard....longer, shorter |
| From: | "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal.com> |
And I thought that smell was the barnyards we were flying over!
Jack
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael
D Cuy
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 4:45 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: wider, standard....longer, shorter
In all fairness to Jack on our Cleveland-to-Brodhead trip last July, he
was carrying a heavy load of baggage and the OAT was pushing
90 F as I recall so his extra weight did cost some climb, but
head-to-head he'd do just fine if equally loaded.
Jack is right though--making things wider, longer, will cost some
penalty (had not even thought about the plywood utilization issues ! )
Besides....Jack doesn't know I was using my human compressed gas thrust
augmentor during climbout......:))
Mike C.
Working together. For life.(sm)
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error,
please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use
of the email by you is prohibited.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: wider, standard....longer, shorter |
| From: | John Hofmann <jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc.com> |
Mikee, if I recall, you used that augmenter most of the weekend....
-john-
>
> In all fairness to Jack on our Cleveland-to-Brodhead trip last July, he was
> carrying a heavy load of baggage and the OAT was pushing
>
> 90 F as I recall so his extra weight did cost some climb, but head-to-head
> he'd do just fine if equally loaded.
>
> Jack is right though--making things wider, longer, will cost some penalty (had
> not even thought about the plywood utilization issues ! )
>
> Besides....Jack doesn't know I was using my human compressed gas thrust
> augmentor during climbout......:))
>
> Mike C.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Lou Wither <nav8799h(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Sun & Fun.....YeHAAAA |
I guess that I can fit into this conversation at 6'-0 and 235 lbs. I have no problem
with the width of the fuselage. I moved the rudder pedals (steering bar
is in the front cockpit) ahead slightly.
The biggest thing that I have found is that the plane as designed is tail heavy
and I am fighting with an aft CG. I moved the engine out 5" from the drawing
plans and moved the wing back 2" and I still have to put in about 30 lbs of
ballast to maintain CG with my oversized butt. The numbers work out perfectly
for the atypical 170 lb pilot.
Lou
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Ash <ashcan(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Sun & Fun.....YeHAAAA |
--- MIME Errors - No Plain-Text Section Found ---
A message with no text/plain MIME section was received.
The entire body of the message was removed. Please
resend the email using Plain Text formatting.
HOTMAIL is notorious for only including an HTML section
in their client's default configuration. If you're using
HOTMAIL, please see your email application's settings
and switch to a default mail option that uses "Plain Text".
--- MIME Errors No Plain-Text Section Found ---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Conkling" <hpvs(at)southwind.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Model A engine question |
Ken Perkins does a .060 flycut (matching cylinder bores in a Model "B" head gasket)
in his Alum. heads so the pistons won't get cracked due to carbon build up.
He is in www.mykitplane.com in the Pietenpol listings -- he'd be the one to talk to on the heads (& etc.) -- His engine did it's stuff in 2004 for my Piet ride at Brodhead!! ;-)
Mike C.
Pretty Prairie, KS
----- Original Message -----
From: Carl Vought
To: Pietenpol- List
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 9:30 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Model A engine question
I'm completing the work on my Model A engine and I'd like to get some help on
the head. I've checked the archives . I bought the Dan Price head and as some
of you know, consideration must be given to clearance between the head and the
pistons. At TDC, my pistons are .045 above the deck. if I cut too much clearance
in the head, the compression ratio will be lowered. If I cut too little,
the piston will strike the head. Sufficient clearance must be allowed for carbon
buildup and thermal expansion of the rod. Can anybody out there give me some
guidance on a procedure for determining optimum cllearance? I would appreciat
that very much........Carl Vought
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Vought" <carbarvo(at)knology.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Model A engine question |
Nice recommendation from a position of knowlege...thank you. I didn't get in touch
with Ken because he makes his liveliehood from what he knows. He may not mind
giving out a freebe....I'll check....Carl
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Conkling
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 5:40 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Model A engine question
Ken Perkins does a .060 flycut (matching cylinder bores in a Model "B" head gasket)
in his Alum. heads so the pistons won't get cracked due to carbon build
up.
He is in www.mykitplane.com in the Pietenpol listings -- he'd be the one to talk to on the heads (& etc.) -- His engine did it's stuff in 2004 for my Piet ride at Brodhead!! ;-)
Mike C.
Pretty Prairie, KS
----- Original Message -----
From: Carl Vought
To: Pietenpol- List
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 9:30 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Model A engine question
I'm completing the work on my Model A engine and I'd like to get some help
on the head. I've checked the archives . I bought the Dan Price head and as some
of you know, consideration must be given to clearance between the head and
the pistons. At TDC, my pistons are .045 above the deck. if I cut too much clearance
in the head, the compression ratio will be lowered. If I cut too little,
the piston will strike the head. Sufficient clearance must be allowed for carbon
buildup and thermal expansion of the rod. Can anybody out there give me some
guidance on a procedure for determining optimum cllearance? I would appreciat
that very much........Carl Vought
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | gas thrust augmentor |
Mike Cuy wrote-
>Jack doesn't know I was using my human compressed gas thrust augmentor
>during climbout......:))
Mike, you were briefed about the classified nature of that information for
TACOs only. I am going to have you before the full investigative board the
next time they convene at Lupita's Mexican Restaurant and Cantina. You were
not supposed to divulge details of deployment of the TACO BRS system
(Beans-Rice-Salsa)...
Oscar Zuniga
Comandante, San Geronimo Wing, TACO
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Nick Harris" <nharris25(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Sun & Fun.....YeHAAAA |
Do I hear right that there will be a few PIETS flying to the Bahamas? If so when?
That sounds very interesting. I suppose you would have to have a radio to
do that?
Nick Harris
nharris25(at)yahoo.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Barry Davis
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 2:44 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Sun & Fun.....YeHAAAA
Hope to see everyone at Sun & Fun next week.
Some of the Big Piet Builders are flying down to Key West this weekend as a pre-runner
to our flying the Piets to the Bahamas, then back to SNF for the week.
Looks like we are having a Southern Piet Fly-in this fall. Looks like the 2nd
Saturday/Sun in July.
Airport will be Carrollton, Ga, CTJ. More info to follow after Sun n Fun. PLEASE
give us some feedback on this.
Barry Davis
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Carden <flywrite(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Email address changes |
Please make the following email address changes:
Delete:
flywrite(at)erols.com
and
flywrite(at)direcway.com
Add;
flywrite@hughes,com
Thanks,
Dick Carden
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve" <redsglass(at)hotmail.com> |
Hi everybody
Just a note to say how much I enjoy this group. Have not started my
building yet but building my reference file.
"Cranium Rectal Inversion" I have decided to shorten that to CRI a great
term, probably could apply to all of us at sometime or another.
Anybody close to Boise ID.
Best regards
Steve G
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Charvet <bcharvet(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator hinges |
Thanks, Chris.
This is the best explaination I've seen yet, and I've got it bookmarked
for when I need it!
Ben Charvet
Mims, Fl
Catdesign wrote:
> I did it like this after I built the whole tail
> structure. http://www.hal-pc.org/~hjkr/hingeslots.htm
> <http://www.hal-pc.org/%7Ehjkr/hingeslots.htm>
>
> Alignment was easier this way. Worked great and was easy. The
> chisel did not work well enough.
>
> Chris Tracy
> Sacramento, Ca
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Sun 'n' Fun update on FlyCorvair.com |
William has posted a pre-SNF update on his website, at
http://www.flycorvair.com/hangar.html
That Wag-A-Bond sure looks nice!
Oscar Zuniga
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net> |
Check out this site,,,
http://skyvector.com/
sectional charts on the web.
If it's been already posted, sorry
walt evans
NX140DL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Clif Dawson <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: TACO Security Breach |
No, Harvey. He's just full of beans.
Clif
PS- AND he may soon want a reference to a
REALLY good Colorectal surgeon!
PS again- Those funny brown tubes I'm sure
you noticed falling from the plane were the
spent JATO's.
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: TACO Security Breach
>
> I thought I was nuts!
>
> Michael D Cuy wrote:
>>
>> Dear Commandante Zuniga of the San Geronimo TACO Wing......
>>
>> I confess to divulging sensitive information regarding the TACO thrust
>> augmentor system to the general Pietenpol audience,
________________________________________________________________________________
Many thanks to the group for the tips on setting the elevator hinges in
place. I do have a router/router table and so will use that method after practicing
on scrap lumber. The horizontal stab and elevators are virtually finished and
will next get the vertical stab and rudder framed up...then the landing
gear...and then... and then... The fuselage is hanging from the basement ceiling
joists over the workbench (next to my treasured set of Charlie Rubeck wing
ribs)-- giving me space to build the tailfeathers.
I'll try to post some pics of my project one of these days. I was able to get
a good, working altimeter on e-Bay a few months ago -- a 1938 Kollsman. I
tested it out by driving up the 600-foot bluffs here at La Crosse -- worked fine
up and down. It also indicates correct field elevation with current barometric
pressure dialed in. Should be just fine for a low and slow Piet. Funny thing
is I sent Kollsman an e-mail asking if they could still send me some
literature on the particular altimeter I have. They quickly and very politely responded
that yes, they could do that -- except that since my (68-year-old) altimeter
had been built to a military contract, they could only release the info to
military personnel! That figures... : )
Again, many thanks to the group for great info and tips...
Fred B.
La Crosse, WI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | Matronics Email List Wiki! |
Dear Listers,
I have added a new feature to the Email List Forums at Matronics called a Wiki. What's "Wiki" you ask? A Wiki is a website. You go to it and browse just like you would any other web site. The difference is, you can change it. You can put anything you want on this web site without having to be a web designer or even being the owner. You can write a new page just like writing an email message on the BBS. You don't need to send it off to anyone to install on the site. It is kind of like a Blog (weblog) in which anyone can post. Here is a great page on where the term Wiki came from and what it means in the context of a website: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiki
So on to the new Matronics Email List Wiki... I've created this site for anyone
from any of the Email Lists to use. I envision that there are a great many
things that can be added to this new Wiki since there are always new and interesting
tidbits of useful information traversing the Lists.
Off the main Matronics Email List Wiki page, you will find a link called "Community
Portal". Here you will find more links to stubs for all the various Lists
found at Matronics (and a few other links). Brian Lloyd and others from the
Yak-List have already begun adding content in a number of areas. Bob Nuckolls
of AeroElectric fame has added a great article on "Ageing Aircraft".
I have discussed the new Matronics Email List Wiki with Tedd McHenry and Dwight Frye of the RV Wiki Site and they have decided to merge their site over onto the new Matronics Wiki server giving everyone a single source for information on RV building and flying! This migration will begin today and you should be able to find all of the content currently found at www.rvwiki.org moved over to the Matronics Wiki within a few days.
To make edits to the Matronics Wiki, you will need to have a login account on the
Matronics Wiki and I have disabled anonymous edits. This protects the Wiki
site from automated spam engines and other nuisances that could compromise the
data at the site.
Signing up for an account is fast and easy and begins by clicking on the "create
an account or log in" link in the upper right hand corner of any page. Note
that you do not have to have a login or be logged in to view any of the content.
The Matronics Email List Wiki is YOUR Wiki! It is only as useful as the content
found within. The concept of the Wiki is that the people the use it and update
it. If you've got an interesting procedure for doing something, MAKE A WIKI
PAGE ON IT! You can even upload pictures. Saw something interesting at a
flyin? MAKE A WIKI PAGE ON IT! Don't be shy, this is YOUR site to share information
with others with similar interests.
Here is a users guide on using the Wiki implemented at Matronics: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Contents This gives a lot of great information on how to get started editing pages.
And finally, here is the URL for the Matronics Email List Wiki:
http://wiki.matronics.com
Brian Lloyd has written an excellent introduction to Wikis on the front page.
I encourage you to read it over, then drill into the "Community Portal" and HAVE
FUN!!
Best regards,
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu> |
| Subject: | Speedos front and rear? |
No, not some reference to swimwear on the Riviera...
For those who have airspeed indicators in both cockpits, how did you
plumb them? I just put one into the front cockpit, plumbing it into
the original system for the rear cockpit. Where the pitot line (a
copper tube) comes out of the wing root, I plumbed in some tygon
tubing with a Y fitting. One outlet goes to the front cockpit and the
other to the rear.
The system now has about twice as much tygon tubing as before. Will
this alter the airspeed indicator performance?
Thanks,
Jeff
--
Jeffrey H. Boatright, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Department of Ophthalmology
Emory University School of Medicine
Atlanta, GA 30322
Editor-in-Chief
Molecular Vision
http://www.molvis.org/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Speedos front and rear? |
Jeff,
No, the thing that works the airspeed indicators is only static pressure,
not like there is air flowing. To split the tubing and go to both is fine.
My two units read slightly different because,,,
1. rear one's static port goes to a static fitting.
2. front one's static port goes only to the front cowling (no fitting on it)
3. Calibration is off on one or both. Even tho the rear one seems to go
along true with GPS calculations, and the front reads about 4 MPH slow
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Boatright" <jboatri(at)emory.edu>
Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2006 7:40 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Speedos front and rear?
>
> No, not some reference to swimwear on the Riviera...
>
> For those who have airspeed indicators in both cockpits, how did you plumb
> them? I just put one into the front cockpit, plumbing it into the original
> system for the rear cockpit. Where the pitot line (a copper tube) comes
> out of the wing root, I plumbed in some tygon tubing with a Y fitting. One
> outlet goes to the front cockpit and the other to the rear.
>
> The system now has about twice as much tygon tubing as before. Will this
> alter the airspeed indicator performance?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jeff
> --
> Jeffrey H. Boatright, Ph.D.
> Associate Professor
> Department of Ophthalmology
> Emory University School of Medicine
> Atlanta, GA 30322
> Editor-in-Chief
> Molecular Vision
> http://www.molvis.org/
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
> http://wiki.matronics.com
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Speedos front and rear? |
Walt,
Thanks for the info. Do you think that using tygon versus solid
copper will make a difference?
Thanks,
Jeff
>
>Jeff,
>No, the thing that works the airspeed indicators is only static
>pressure, not like there is air flowing. To split the tubing and go
>to both is fine.
>My two units read slightly different because,,,
>1. rear one's static port goes to a static fitting.
>2. front one's static port goes only to the front cowling (no fitting on it)
>3. Calibration is off on one or both. Even tho the rear one seems
>to go along true with GPS calculations, and the front reads about 4
>MPH slow
>walt evans
>NX140DL
>----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Boatright" <jboatri(at)emory.edu>
>To:
>Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2006 7:40 PM
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: Speedos front and rear?
--
Jeffrey H. Boatright, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Department of Ophthalmology
Emory University School of Medicine
Atlanta, GA 30322
Editor-in-Chief
Molecular Vision
http://www.molvis.org/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Catdesign" <catdesign(at)intergate.com> |
Anyone, if you go to Sun & Fun. Can you look for planes that are using the aluminum
struts, such as the Rans highwing planes and others. Take some good notes
and pictures of how they did the upper and lower fittings. Anyone going from
aluminum to steel like on our planes? I'd love to see and hear how others are
doing them.
Thanks, and have fun
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Speedos front and rear? |
Jeff,
No, not at all
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Boatright" <jboatri(at)emory.edu>
Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2006 9:55 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Speedos front and rear?
>
> Walt,
>
> Thanks for the info. Do you think that using tygon versus solid copper
> will make a difference?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jeff
>
>
>>
>>Jeff,
>>No, the thing that works the airspeed indicators is only static pressure,
>>not like there is air flowing. To split the tubing and go to both is fine.
>>My two units read slightly different because,,,
>>1. rear one's static port goes to a static fitting.
>>2. front one's static port goes only to the front cowling (no fitting on
>>it)
>>3. Calibration is off on one or both. Even tho the rear one seems to go
>>along true with GPS calculations, and the front reads about 4 MPH slow
>>walt evans
>>NX140DL
>>----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Boatright" <jboatri(at)emory.edu>
>>To:
>>Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2006 7:40 PM
>>Subject: Pietenpol-List: Speedos front and rear?
>
>
> --
> Jeffrey H. Boatright, Ph.D.
> Associate Professor
> Department of Ophthalmology
> Emory University School of Medicine
> Atlanta, GA 30322
> Editor-in-Chief
> Molecular Vision
> http://www.molvis.org/
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
> http://wiki.matronics.com
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Speedos front and rear? |
Thanks again, Walt. If the weather cooperates today, I'll be able to
test it all.
Jeff
>
>Jeff,
>No, not at all
>walt evans
>NX140DL
>----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Boatright" <jboatri(at)emory.edu>
>To:
>Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2006 9:55 PM
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Speedos front and rear?
>
>>
>>Walt,
>>
>>Thanks for the info. Do you think that using tygon versus solid
>>copper will make a difference?
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>Jeff
>>
--
Jeffrey H. Boatright, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Department of Ophthalmology
Emory University School of Medicine
Atlanta, GA 30322
Editor-in-Chief
Molecular Vision
http://www.molvis.org/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "panhandler1956" <bowens2(at)insight.rr.com> |
All,
As I make preparations to start my Pietenpol in the next month or so, I find myself
wondering what tools would be useful. I did a search of the archives and
the answer is very broad and since most of those posts are 5 years or older, I
was wondering if anyone has any recent or updated advice on what would be needed
and what would be desirable?
I am already planning to get a wood cutting bandsaw, a new drill press (mine is
worn out), router, and miter saw. I currently have a henrob torch setup, metal
cutting band saw, sanders, visers, hand tools, clamps, etc.
Specifically, some of the stumping points on the big ticket items are;
Planer or no planer?
Tablesaw or no tablesaw?
Any advice is appreciated, big ticket item or not!
Thanks in advance,
--------
Brent O.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=26132#26132
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Galen Hutcheson <wacopitts(at)yahoo.com> |
Hey Gang,
Here is another cool site: www.airdromeaeroplanes.com
They offer costom built wire wheels, with wider hubs
than motorcycle hubs, for a reasonable price. The
site also has some great flying videos too. Enjoy.
Doc (H)
--- walt evans wrote:
> Check out this site,,,
>
> http://skyvector.com/
>
> sectional charts on the web.
> If it's been already posted, sorry
> walt evans
> NX140DL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: tools revisted |
Brent,
To me the most important was Wood band saw, and a drill press, and a torch
set .
I bought a 10" Delta band saw, and drill press from home depot. And sprung
for an oxy/ascet. set from the local weld supply.
All the rest was gravy.
Never needed a planer.
Never used a tablesaw on the plane. (Only used to cut plywood for things
like engine mount)
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: "panhandler1956" <bowens2(at)insight.rr.com>
Sent: Sunday, April 02, 2006 1:08 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: tools revisted
>
>
> All,
> As I make preparations to start my Pietenpol in the next month or so, I
> find myself wondering what tools would be useful. I did a search of the
> archives and the answer is very broad and since most of those posts are 5
> years or older, I was wondering if anyone has any recent or updated advice
> on what would be needed and what would be desirable?
>
> I am already planning to get a wood cutting bandsaw, a new drill press
> (mine is worn out), router, and miter saw. I currently have a henrob torch
> setup, metal cutting band saw, sanders, visers, hand tools, clamps, etc.
>
> Specifically, some of the stumping points on the big ticket items are;
> Planer or no planer?
> Tablesaw or no tablesaw?
>
> Any advice is appreciated, big ticket item or not!
> Thanks in advance,
>
> --------
> Brent O.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=26132#26132
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Galen Hutcheson <wacopitts(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: tools revisted |
Hi Brent,
I cut my own lumber to make the longerones, capstrips
etc., so a table saw was very helpful. A power miter
saw is almost a must. A welding table (homebuilt is
fine) is helpful. Wood shaping tools such as rasps
etc. is also helpful as is a 4 inch angle sander. I
did not need a planner. Some would probably disagree,
and it would probably be helpful from time to time,
but my workshop was getting too cluttered the was it
was. A combo disc and belt sander is very helpful.
Besides a floor bandsaw, I have a small table-top
bandsaw which made small cuts quick and simple. A
metal chop saw is helpful as well as a table grinder.
When constructing (gluing) your longerones and ribs, I
heated up some wax in a can and painted the areas on
my jugs that were going to be exposed to the glue
joints. This prevented the glue from sticking to the
jigs and was easier to use than wax paper or
cellophane. A very thin coat is all you need. Hope
this helps.
Doc (H)
--- panhandler1956 wrote:
> "panhandler1956"
>
> All,
> As I make preparations to start my Pietenpol in the
> next month or so, I find myself wondering what tools
> would be useful. I did a search of the archives and
> the answer is very broad and since most of those
> posts are 5 years or older, I was wondering if
> anyone has any recent or updated advice on what
> would be needed and what would be desirable?
>
> I am already planning to get a wood cutting bandsaw,
> a new drill press (mine is worn out), router, and
> miter saw. I currently have a henrob torch setup,
> metal cutting band saw, sanders, visers, hand tools,
> clamps, etc.
>
> Specifically, some of the stumping points on the big
> ticket items are;
> Planer or no planer?
> Tablesaw or no tablesaw?
>
> Any advice is appreciated, big ticket item or not!
> Thanks in advance,
>
> --------
> Brent O.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
>
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=26132#26132
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> browse
> Subscriptions page,
> FAQ,
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
>
>
> Admin.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "gbowen(at)ptialaska.net" <gbowen(at)ptialaska.net> |
To quote Tim on Tool Time-----it's impossible to have too few power tools
and impossible to have tools too underpowered. Use whatever flimsy excuse
you can to add to your useless and useful tool collection, if your wifey
understands the "need" to build a Piete then she'll understand the need for
quality plentiful tools. At least in the beginning of the project, lie if
necessary--- "Dear, you cannot do a proper job with the wrong tool, besides
they'll be useful around the house"
Gordon Bowen
Original Message:
-----------------
From: panhandler1956 bowens2(at)insight.rr.com
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 10:08:21 -0700
Subject: Pietenpol-List: tools revisted
All,
As I make preparations to start my Pietenpol in the next month or so, I
find myself wondering what tools would be useful. I did a search of the
archives and the answer is very broad and since most of those posts are 5
years or older, I was wondering if anyone has any recent or updated advice
on what would be needed and what would be desirable?
I am already planning to get a wood cutting bandsaw, a new drill press
(mine is worn out), router, and miter saw. I currently have a henrob torch
setup, metal cutting band saw, sanders, visers, hand tools, clamps, etc.
Specifically, some of the stumping points on the big ticket items are;
Planer or no planer?
Tablesaw or no tablesaw?
Any advice is appreciated, big ticket item or not!
Thanks in advance,
--------
Brent O.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=26132#26132
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "gcardinal" <gcardinal(at)mn.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: tools revisted |
1. 4" angle grinder with thin cut-off wheels.
2. Belt sander.
3. Bench grinder.
4. Plywood and wood scraps for making jigs.
5. Steel plate and bars for making bending forms.
6. Hydraulic press.
7. Drill press
8. Miter saw
Owning these is LESS important than having good access to them.
Greg Cardinal
----- Original Message -----
From: "panhandler1956" <bowens2(at)insight.rr.com>
Sent: Sunday, April 02, 2006 12:08 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: tools revisted
>
>
> All,
> As I make preparations to start my Pietenpol in the next month or so, I
> find myself wondering what tools would be useful. I did a search of the
> archives and the answer is very broad and since most of those posts are 5
> years or older, I was wondering if anyone has any recent or updated advice
> on what would be needed and what would be desirable?
>
> I am already planning to get a wood cutting bandsaw, a new drill press
> (mine is worn out), router, and miter saw. I currently have a henrob torch
> setup, metal cutting band saw, sanders, visers, hand tools, clamps, etc.
>
> Specifically, some of the stumping points on the big ticket items are;
> Planer or no planer?
> Tablesaw or no tablesaw?
>
> Any advice is appreciated, big ticket item or not!
> Thanks in advance,
>
> --------
> Brent O.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=26132#26132
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: tools revisted |
| From: | "panhandler1956" <bowens2(at)insight.rr.com> |
Gordon,
I agree with your line of thought, why just today I was putting a tile floor in
our bathroom (browny points in the bank) and I mentioned to my wife that we really
"need" a nice miter saw to install new quarter-round properly - she didn't
bite, but I'll keep trying.
gbowen(at)ptialaska.net wrote:
> Use whatever flimsy excuse
> you can to add to your useless and useful tool collection, if your wifey
> understands the "need" to build a Piete then she'll understand the need for
> quality plentiful tools. At least in the beginning of the project, lie if
> necessary--- "Dear, you cannot do a proper job with the wrong tool, besides
> they'll be useful around the house"
> Gordon Bowen
>
> Original Message:
> -----------------
> From: panhandler1956 bowens2(at)insight.rr.com
> Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 10:08:21 -0700
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: tools revisted
>
>
>
>
>
> All,
> As I make preparations to start my Pietenpol in the next month or so, I
> find myself wondering what tools would be useful. I did a search of the
> archives and the answer is very broad and since most of those posts are 5
> years or older, I was wondering if anyone has any recent or updated advice
> on what would be needed and what would be desirable?
>
> I am already planning to get a wood cutting bandsaw, a new drill press
> (mine is worn out), router, and miter saw. I currently have a henrob torch
> setup, metal cutting band saw, sanders, visers, hand tools, clamps, etc.
>
> Specifically, some of the stumping points on the big ticket items are;
> Planer or no planer?
> Tablesaw or no tablesaw?
>
> Any advice is appreciated, big ticket item or not!
> Thanks in advance,
>
> --------
> Brent O.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=26132#26132
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--------
Brent O.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=26161#26161
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Blackwell" <markb1958(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: tools revisted |
----- Original Message -----
From: <gbowen(at)ptialaska.net>
Sent: Sunday, April 02, 2006 2:51 PM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: tools revisted
>
>
> To quote Tim on Tool Time-----it's impossible to have too few power tools
> and impossible to have tools too underpowered. Use whatever flimsy excuse
> you can to add to your useless and useful tool collection, if your wifey
> understands the "need" to build a Piete then she'll understand the need
> for
> quality plentiful tools. At least in the beginning of the project, lie if
> necessary--- "Dear, you cannot do a proper job with the wrong tool,
> besides
> they'll be useful around the house"
> Gordon Bowen
Gordon you have it backwards. With this nice new tool dear, I can redo that
kitchen cabinet you have wanted fixed for a long time and forget to mention
that it would work well on the Piet too. Kitchens, bathrooms, bedrooms and
for the welder if you really want to push it plumbing. I hate plumbing so I
might just go ahead and cash in either a few brownie points when it comes to
that or just take the heat and not worry about it. After all I have been
married long enough that there are not too many new ways to make her mad at
me anymore. grin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "MICHAEL SILVIUS" <M.Silvius(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: tools revisted |
warning this should go under the heading of tool porn.
www.lie-nielsen.com
www.japanwoodworker.com
www.levalley.com
order the catalogs, and drool.
:-)
michael silvius
in sacrborough, maine
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Glenn Thomas" <glennthomas(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: tools revisted |
Hi,
So far I've just worked on ribs but found the following tools good for the
stated reasons.
Tablesaw - I bought precut wood but you have to make a rib jig and
eventually a table to build the larger parts on. Based on how this project
seems to be unfolding, half the building is building tools, jigs, etc. and a
tablesaw is really handy for that. You can find them cheap too. I'm not
suggesting you get a cheap tablesaw, watch classifieds, ebay and those kinds
of resources. I picked up an older tablesaw with a milled steel table and a
powerful motor for 25 bucks. It's very accurate and cuts through oak like
butter (..no, not building an oak Piet)
Router table. My plan when I build ribs is to use a flush laminate trimmer
bit in my router to trim off the overhanging gussets. With a table it's a
piece of cake. So if you get a router, also get or build a router table.
The other posts cover everything pretty well.
----- Original Message -----
From: "panhandler1956" <bowens2(at)insight.rr.com>
Sent: Sunday, April 02, 2006 1:08 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: tools revisted
>
> All,
> As I make preparations to start my Pietenpol in the next month or so, I
find myself wondering what tools would be useful. I did a search of the
archives and the answer is very broad and since most of those posts are 5
years or older, I was wondering if anyone has any recent or updated advice
on what would be needed and what would be desirable?
>
> I am already planning to get a wood cutting bandsaw, a new drill press
(mine is worn out), router, and miter saw. I currently have a henrob torch
setup, metal cutting band saw, sanders, visers, hand tools, clamps, etc.
>
> Specifically, some of the stumping points on the big ticket items are;
> Planer or no planer?
> Tablesaw or no tablesaw?
>
> Any advice is appreciated, big ticket item or not!
> Thanks in advance,
>
> --------
> Brent O.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=26132#26132
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: tools revisted |
| From: | "panhandler1956" <bowens2(at)insight.rr.com> |
M.Silvius(at)worldnet.att wrote:
> warning this should go under the heading of tool porn.
>
> www.lie-nielsen.com
> www.japanwoodworker.com
> www.levalley.com
>
> order the catalogs, and drool.
>
> :-)
> michael silvius
> in sacrborough, maine
Michael,
I ordered the catalogs, but the last link was for a GMC dealer. I do want a new
truck, but I'll have to wait till the Piet is built and I'm partial to Fords!
:)
Thanks,
--------
Brent O.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=26194#26194
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Clif Dawson <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: tools revisted |
What you want is;
http://www.leevalley.com/home.aspx
The little plane below sees more use in my shop than
just about anything else. I have three of them. One set
course, one fine and the other I cut the front off to
make a bullnose plane.
http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.aspx?c=1&p=32700&cat=1,41182
For sharpening nothing beats Japanese water stones.
I've used a LOT of stones over the past 60+ years
and I have no desire to go back to oil stones!
I use an 800, 1200 and 8000 for my anal retentive
sharpening. One might get away with the 800 and
1200 but for softwood, the sharper the better!
http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.aspx?c=1&p=43071&cat=1,43072
If you're limited for shop space a radial arm saw
might be a better alternative to a tablesaw. Mine is
built into a special table 8' long mounted on 3"
locking castors.
Funny thing. I use that table for almost everything
except when I need the vises on the "official"
workbench. That bench is set to "cabinet making"
hieght and the saw table is higher.
Ah, tools, what an exquisite addiction!!! :-)
Clif
>
> M.Silvius(at)worldnet.att wrote:
>> warning this should go under the heading of tool porn.
>>
>> www.lie-nielsen.com
>> www.japanwoodworker.com
>> www.levalley.com
>>
>> order the catalogs, and drool.
>>
>> :-)
>> michael silvius
>> in sacrborough, maine
>
> Michael,
> I ordered the catalogs, but the last link was for a GMC dealer. I do want
> a new truck, but I'll have to wait till the Piet is built and I'm partial
> to Fords! :)
> Thanks,
>
> --------
> Brent O.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Catdesign" <catdesign(at)intergate.com> |
| Subject: | Re: tools revisted |
This is what I think I use to build the fuselage. I'm sure it can be done
differently and with other tools.
This is assuming you buy your wood already dimensioned, i.e. 1x1 1x3/4 ect.
Must have:
-Good steel/aluminum 6", 12" and 36" ruler
-4" - 6" square for laying out parts (I also use a plastic 8" T square all
the time)
-" to1" Chisels, cheap set from Lows, sharpen with 320 sandpaper on a flat
surface. Good for chipping off glue squeeze out.
-Calipers and or Micrometer, 0.001 accuracy works well
-Wood cutting Band saw (in a pinch a scroll saw)
-Hack saw and a strong arm or die grinder with cutoff wheels.
-Drill press
-Stationary Belt sander or Disk sander
-Hand Drill
-Reamers for perfect sized holes (I think you only need 3 sizes)
-Good Drill bits
-Sharpie pens, pencils, band aids
-One of the angle measuring thingies. (proper name is sliding bevel).
-Good Miter box and saw
-C-Clamps, Bar clamps, large binder clips, home made PVC pipe kind ect.
-Cut the plywood sides by hand with a smooth hand saw and 8' strait edge
made form angle aluminum
-Sandpaper
-6" bench vice
-Books on building planes
-Aircraft Spruce catalog, get to know it well.
-This list
Good to buy if you have the funds:
Gas Welder (This is almost a must for most people)
Metal Band saw (Buy one, it will be the best $150 bucks you'll ever spend at
Harbor Freight, toss the blade it comes with and get a bi-metal blade from
Home Depot)
Power Miter saw with a good blade, used it a lot but not really necessary
Barrow / use someone else's/ buy one it you really want to (I didn't use it
that much)
Table saw
Router
Gas Welder
If your buying raw lumber, i.e. 2x4 1x2 ect:
You will, at least, need a table saw. With a good blade and using feather
boards you probably don't need a planer and jointer but they would be nice
to have.
or
you can rip with your band saw but I think you will need to run them through
a jointer and planer pr table saw as above.
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: tools revisted |
| From: | "Glenn Thomas" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com> |
Clif,
I found a picture of the tool I was looking for when doing the landing gear legs.
It was your site after all.
http://www.clifdawson.ca/Pietenpol4.html
What is that tool called and how hard is it to develop dexterity with it? I looked
for one on Lee Valley and didn't see it but don't know what they're called.
Nice pictures on the site!
--------
Glenn Thomas
N?????
http://www.flyingwood.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=26385#26385
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Clif Dawson <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: tools revisted |
Glen, It's called a draw knife or draw shave. It's primarily
a coarse tool for removing wood quickly but with some
practice can do some fairly close work.
Our ancestors made pretty much everything with a draw
knife, broad hatchet ( one side flat, like a very wide chisel )
and a brace with bits as a basic set of tools. I watched a
documentary once of a Norwegian boat builder who made
his living building much sought after seaworthy lapstrake
boats with nothing but a broad hatchet and a brace and bit.
Spokeshaves and planes are essentially drawknives with
bodies designed to control the cut to a finer and finer degree.
To take it a bit further, all cutting tools are refined wedges.
So now we're a little closer to your question about planes.
Suppose you have a 1/4" strip you want to use for your turtledeck
but one end is 1" and the other is 1 1/8". Draw your line
that will make it 1" down the whole length and zip away with
your little plane. you could use a large plane or chisel or even
that fast moving disk sander but that little plane will give you
much better control and when you stop it stops. Power tools
don't do that, oops!
I also rounded off the tail leading and trailing edges with it.
Here's one more tool good for fine work, glue cleanup, preparing
surfaces for gluing and painting, taking out sanding marks etc.
http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.aspx?c=1&p=32672&cat=1,310,41069&ap=1
As with all tools, if you have it you'll find uses for it. When you find a
new use for a particular tool suddenly it becomes indispensable for that
use and a big sense of wonder and satisfaction washes over you with a;
" Wow! Look at that! Gimme another piece of wood, I want to try that
again!"
IMPORTANT NOTICE!!!
If you want to get on your wife's good side, make a nice little jewelry
box out of some nice hardwood like cherry, walnut, rosewood.
Find other nice little things to make. Not only will you build your
skills but there will be that " You made this yourself? For me?" wow
factor. Every time a new tool turns up she'll be wondering what
wonderful little thing is going to turn up next. Oh yeah, make her a
simple shoe rack so she can organize that 40 pair dumped in
the bottom of her closet. A few things like that and she'll be buying
YOU tools. :-) Besides, where do you want to be at Christmas?
Out in that crowd of rushing frantic people, in all that blowing snow,
ice and freezing rain?? Or in your own quiet warm and peaceful
Santa's workshop???
http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.aspx?c=1&p=44179&cat=1,250,43217
Thanks for the compliment. One of these days I'm going to have to
organize that part like the rest of it. It just sort of crept up on me,
one picture at a time. :-)
Clif
Good luck boys.
> Clif,
> I found a picture of the tool I was looking for when doing the landing
> gear legs. It was your site after all.
>
> http://www.clifdawson.ca/Pietenpol4.html
>
> What is that tool called and how hard is it to develop dexterity with it?
> I looked for one on Lee Valley and didn't see it but don't know what
> they're called. Nice pictures on the site!
>
> --------
> Glenn Thomas
> N?????
> http://www.flyingwood.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack T. Textor" <jtextor(at)thepalmergroup.com> |
Are there any Pieter's out there using Skype (voice over Internet)? Was
wondering if there would be any interest for a weekly or monthly
conference call to assist other builders. I discovered it last weekend
and it's pretty neat stuff and free!
Jack Textor
Des Moines
________________________________________________________________________________
I used my great-grandfather's draw knife for shaping the landing gear struts
for my Piet. My dad gave it to me about a year ago -- I noticed it has 1836
stamped/engraved in the blade. It is in excellent condition although obviously
used quite a bit. While working with it I wondered what g-grampa would think
about building an airplane! And I wondered what he would think about airplanes
period! Was very satisfying to use that tool. Anyway, a good sharp draw knife
works very nicely, even on white ash landing gear struts -- practice on some
scrap lumber -- you have to be aware of the direction of the grain and you must
have your work secured tightly. Be very careful!
While I was working on the elevators last night I was thinking that another
tool that I consider indispensable is a good shop vac. You have to keep your
work area clean -- and you do not want sawdust getting into glue joints. I use
my vac every time I'm getting ready to glue parts together -- I literally
vacuum the pieces to make sure there's no dust on the surfaces.
Fred B.
La Crosse, WI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Clif Dawson's wood gear leg sequence photos |
Cliff--your web pages are just great and I enjoyed seeing how you developed
your teardrop/streamlined shape
on your wood landing gear legs. Excellent workmanship from what you show
in your photos as well along with
the personal touches of the leather stick grips and rudder bar
wraps. Gives a new meaning to the word wrap.
I really enjoy seeing the new generation of Pietenpol builders and how
every successive few batches of planes have
better workmanship and more innovative ideas. Looks great, less filling.
Mike C.
http://www.clifdawson.ca/Pietenpol4.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Gussets and Sanding |
| From: | "Glenn Thomas" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com> |
I was talking with someone the other day who said not to sand members being joined
by gussets because the dust clogs the pores of the woods and prevents glue
from penetrating. Tony Bingelis says you MUST file everything being joined to
level all members in the joint. OK to sand/file and use a tack cloth to extract
sawdust? Clean with mineral spirits and let dry? Do either leave a residue
that would inhibit a good strong joint?
--------
Glenn Thomas
N?????
http://www.flyingwood.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=26417#26417
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Gussets and Sanding |
| From: | Hans Vander Voort <hans.vander.voort(at)alfalaval.com> |
Glenn,
I was told a lot of the same.
But I suggest you find a method that works for you and just try it.
Make some test pieces out of scrap, let the glue cure and then break it.
I did, and all cases the wood broke not the glue joint.
I used T 88 epoxy.
It is great confidence builder.
Keep building
Hans
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Gussets and Sanding |
| From: | "Bill Church" <eng(at)canadianrogers.com> |
Glenn,
I think what you want to avoid are two things:
1. Sawdust on the surface of the wood being bonded, which has the
potential to reduce the strength of the bond.
2. Glazed wood surface caused by sanding with worn-out fine sandpaper.
Wood in the as-sawn (or planed) condition is excellent for bonding, but
if two surfaces are uneven sometimes a bit of sanding is necessary to
level the playing field. In those situations, use a medium to coarse
sandpaper, and as you say, wipe with a tack rag or mineral spirits (same
thing).
One other thing to do in your preparation for glue-up is to sand the
face of the plywood that will be bonded (using a medium grit sandpaper).
I used a cross-the-grain sanding direction for maximum scratch-up
potential. The manufacturing process for plywood uses heat and pressure,
which results in a sort of glaze on the face of the plywood, which
inhibits absorption of the glue into the fibers of the plywood. Of
course, it's much easier to sand the entire back side of the sheet of
plywood before you cut it into hundreds and hundreds of little tiny hard
to handle gussets. Or you could do what I did, and cut out all those
hundreds of tiny little gussets before sanding the back of the sheet,
even though you knew that you were supposed to sand the %$#&@* back of
the $#%&@ plywood!
Bill C.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Glenn
Thomas
Sent: April 4, 2006 10:16 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Gussets and Sanding
-->
I was talking with someone the other day who said not to sand members
being joined by gussets because the dust clogs the pores of the woods
and prevents glue from penetrating. Tony Bingelis says you MUST file
everything being joined to level all members in the joint. OK to
sand/file and use a tack cloth to extract sawdust? Clean with mineral
spirits and let dry? Do either leave a residue that would inhibit a
good strong joint?
--------
Glenn Thomas
N?????
http://www.flyingwood.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=26417#26417
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "gcardinal" <gcardinal(at)mn.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Gussets and Sanding |
Use a scraper instead of sanding.
I did some glue tests using Aerolite and birch ply that had been neither
scraped nor sanded. None of them failed at the Aerolite glue joint.
Greg Cardinal
----- Original Message -----
From: "Glenn Thomas" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 8:46 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Gussets and Sanding
>
>
> I was talking with someone the other day who said not to sand members
> being joined by gussets because the dust clogs the pores of the woods and
> prevents glue from penetrating. Tony Bingelis says you MUST file
> everything being joined to level all members in the joint. OK to
> sand/file and use a tack cloth to extract sawdust? Clean with mineral
> spirits and let dry? Do either leave a residue that would inhibit a good
> strong joint?
>
> --------
> Glenn Thomas
> N?????
> http://www.flyingwood.com
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=26417#26417
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Galen Hutcheson <wacopitts(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Gussets and Sanding |
I sanded my joints and in all of test pieces, the wood
broke and not the glue/wood interface. I tested them
against joints that had been sawn and not sanded and
found that they all broke about the same. I used T-88
glue and all the test pieces were subjected to the
same evironmental conditions. Others may have found
different results, so take this for what it is worth.
Doc (H)
--- Glenn Thomas wrote:
>
>
> I was talking with someone the other day who said
> not to sand members being joined by gussets because
> the dust clogs the pores of the woods and prevents
> glue from penetrating. Tony Bingelis says you MUST
> file everything being joined to level all members in
> the joint. OK to sand/file and use a tack cloth to
> extract sawdust? Clean with mineral spirits and let
> dry? Do either leave a residue that would inhibit a
> good strong joint?
>
> --------
> Glenn Thomas
> N?????
> http://www.flyingwood.com
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
>
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=26417#26417
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> browse
> Subscriptions page,
> FAQ,
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
>
>
> Admin.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Gussets and Sanding |
| From: | "Glenn Thomas" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com> |
Good info. I wondered about the gussets too. They get handled quite a bit during
the cutting and edge-sanding process and thought they could benefit from cleaning/roughening
due to their smoothness and picking up oils from skin during
handling. I think I'll break a couple to see how they hold up. That IS a good
confidence builder. The build and break approach should teach me something
about strength.
I noticed (building models) that if you apply too much force with the tack rag
that stickiness from the rag can end up on the surface you're cleaning. I've
used mineral spirits on a hardwood floor I put in and it didn't seem to leave
anything behind and you could see traces of sawdust on the rag even though the
floor seemed clean to the naked eye and to the touch. Was curious if mineral
spirits completely evaporates or leaves any kind of oil behind.
Thanks
--------
Glenn Thomas
N?????
http://www.flyingwood.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=26440#26440
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | a test for glue joints and sanding |
Glenn-- I sanded nearly 100% of my glue joints--generally a rougher paper
too and then just blew or vacummed off the dust
before gluing with T-88. After 450 hours of flying no joint that I'm
aware of has come undone.
Whatever method you use just do some test pieces now and then (the astute
FAA inspector or DAR might ask to see some test
pieces during your inspection) by gluing some spruce to plywood with some
ply overlapping by an inch or two then smash in a vise.
If the wood fails your glue joints are just fine. (this works for any
type of wood glued to any other or same kind of wood)
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | aluminum-to-aluminum gluing with T-88 |
As a side note, I found that if you need to glue alum. sheet to alum sheet.
that if you sand the glue surfaces with 80 or 100 grit, clean with
a solvent and glue, you get a fantastic glue joint.
When I bent up my Lexan windshields (bowed them into position) and secured
them to my three brackets they distorted the 2024-T3 aluminum
instrument panel covers !!! I removed the windshields and glued three
discs of aluminum sheet (about 2.5" dia) to the underside of the curved
alum. cockpit/inst. panel covers, let cure and wha-la, no more distortion
of the surface when I re-attached the windshields.
This saved some riveting where I normally would have had some unwanted rivets.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <av8orken(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: aluminum-to-aluminum gluing with T-88 |
What type/brand glue did you use?
Ken
Michael D Cuy wrote:
>
> As a side note, I found that if you need to glue alum. sheet to alum
> sheet. that if you sand the glue surfaces with 80 or 100 grit, clean with
>
> a solvent and glue, you get a fantastic glue joint.
>
> When I bent up my Lexan windshields (bowed them into position) and
> secured them to my three brackets they distorted the 2024-T3 aluminum
>
> instrument panel covers !!! I removed the windshields and glued three
> discs of aluminum sheet (about 2.5" dia) to the /underside /of the curved
>
> alum. cockpit/inst. panel covers, let cure and wha-la, no more
> distortion of the surface when I re-attached the windshields.
>
> This saved some riveting where I normally would have had some unwanted
> rivets.
>
> Mike C.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
Question for you folks. What do you think would be the cost/value of a
clean A-65 with a couple of hundred hours SMOH, good compression, newer
Slick mags and harnesses, Stromberg carb, exhaust stacks, wood prop, and
hub? Not the one on 41CC; this is another engine that is for sale, well
stored, taken off a flying Champ, and I'm wondering what it might be worth.
Thanks for any ideas.
Oscar Zuniga
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: aluminum-to-aluminum gluing with T-88 |
opps...sorry Ken....I used T-88 on the wood and aluminum.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal.com> |
Good question, Oscar.
Just looking at the accessories that go along with this engine, if you
had to buy them separately, the costs would be something like:
Magnetos $800
Prop Hub $500
Propeller $1,200 (assuming certified, since it came off a Champ)
Exhaust stacks $400
You're up to close to $3,000 right there
I paid $1500 for my A65 as a run-out core, and then put another $5500 in
new parts into it. I ended up with a zero SMOH engine with new
cylinders, pistons, camshaft, magnetos, valve lifters, an overhauled
crankshaft and gears, and an overhauled crankcase. Total price $7,000
so that should probably be your top-end price. That price did NOT
include the prop or the prop hub, or the exhaust system.
Jack Phillips
Hoping to fly NX899JP this evening if the wind will calm some
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Oscar
Zuniga
Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 12:58 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: A-65 value
Question for you folks. What do you think would be the cost/value of a
clean A-65 with a couple of hundred hours SMOH, good compression, newer
Slick mags and harnesses, Stromberg carb, exhaust stacks, wood prop, and
hub? Not the one on 41CC; this is another engine that is for sale, well
stored, taken off a flying Champ, and I'm wondering what it might be
worth.
Thanks for any ideas.
Oscar Zuniga
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
Working together. For life.(sm)
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error,
please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use
of the email by you is prohibited.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Catdesign" <catdesign(at)intergate.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Gussets and Sanding |
I've used both birch and Mahogany plywood and I feel there is no need to
sand either, especially the Mahogany. If there was a glazed surface, ive
necer seen one on anything thicker then 1/32 ply,I would scuff it very very
lightly with 150 sandpaper. I recall reading an
article about testing sanded joints vs. non-sanded joints in plywood.
But I cant find this article. Anyone else remember this? All my test
samples on glued plywood the wood ripped in half. Not the T-88 glue
joint.
I sand my spruce joints with 50 to 80 grit sandpaper then vacuumed the
joint to suck out any dust. T-88 Glue samples tested to destruction
have proved this method to fail the wood not the glue joint. I think
sanding with fine sandpaper is the problem. Epoxy by nature needs some
tooth to grab hold of and does not penetrate deeply into the pores.
Remember epoxy can glue metal to metal, as long as it has some tooth to
grab hold of.
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dick Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net> |
| Subject: | Re: aluminum-to-aluminum gluing with T-88 |
Hi Mike
I just want to add to your windshield point. If you have a large enough oven and
an understanding wife, you can heat the lexan and bend it to shape. Heat at
about 250 F for about 10-15 min and it becomes soft. Lay it on template the
shape of your bridge deck and let cool. Of course, run test pieces for time
and lay piece on good, clean, flat surface while baking. I didn't notice much
smell.
Dick N.
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael D Cuy
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 11:02 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: aluminum-to-aluminum gluing with T-88
As a side note, I found that if you need to glue alum. sheet to alum sheet. that
if you sand the glue surfaces with 80 or 100 grit, clean with
a solvent and glue, you get a fantastic glue joint.
When I bent up my Lexan windshields (bowed them into position) and secured them
to my three brackets they distorted the 2024-T3 aluminum
instrument panel covers !!! I removed the windshields and glued three discs
of aluminum sheet (about 2.5" dia) to the underside of the curved
alum. cockpit/inst. panel covers, let cure and wha-la, no more distortion of
the surface when I re-attached the windshields.
This saved some riveting where I normally would have had some unwanted rivets.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve" <redsglass(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | aluminum-to-aluminum gluing with T-88 |
Hi
The Gougeon book on boat construction "West Epoxy Guys" recommends sanding
the aluminium while it is covered with epoxy as a final step to bond
aluminium fittings to wood. I understand this doesn't happen in a Pietenpol
but it tells you how quick the metal can oxide. It is a great book with a
lot of information on epoxy and various additives. There is also a full
chapter on safety.
Steve G
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dick
Navratil
Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 8:18 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: aluminum-to-aluminum gluing with T-88
Hi Mike
I just want to add to your windshield point. If you have a large enough
oven and an understanding wife, you can heat the lexan and bend it to shape.
Heat at about 250 F for about 10-15 min and it becomes soft. Lay it on
template the shape of your bridge deck and let cool. Of course, run test
pieces for time and lay piece on good, clean, flat surface while baking. I
didn't notice much smell.
Dick N.
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael <mailto:Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> D Cuy
Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 11:02 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: aluminum-to-aluminum gluing with T-88
As a side note, I found that if you need to glue alum. sheet to alum sheet.
that if you sand the glue surfaces with 80 or 100 grit, clean with
a solvent and glue, you get a fantastic glue joint.
When I bent up my Lexan windshields (bowed them into position) and secured
them to my three brackets they distorted the 2024-T3 aluminum
instrument panel covers !!! I removed the windshields and glued three
discs of aluminum sheet (about 2.5" dia) to the underside of the curved
alum. cockpit/inst. panel covers, let cure and wha-la, no more distortion of
the surface when I re-attached the windshields.
This saved some riveting where I normally would have had some unwanted
rivets.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gene Beenenga <kgbunltd(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: aluminum-to-aluminum gluing with T-88 |
Michael, I am not quite clearn on whether you pre-formed your lexan windscreen
prior to affixing it to the cowl or did you just bend it cold and then bolt it
to the cowling. what thickness lexan? Ken B
-----Original Message-----
>From: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov>
>Sent: Apr 4, 2006 11:02 AM
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: aluminum-to-aluminum gluing with T-88
>
>
>As a side note, I found that if you need to glue alum. sheet to alum sheet.
>that if you sand the glue surfaces with 80 or 100 grit, clean with
>
>a solvent and glue, you get a fantastic glue joint.
>
>When I bent up my Lexan windshields (bowed them into position) and secured
>them to my three brackets they distorted the 2024-T3 aluminum
>
>instrument panel covers !!! I removed the windshields and glued three
>discs of aluminum sheet (about 2.5" dia) to the underside of the curved
>
>alum. cockpit/inst. panel covers, let cure and wha-la, no more distortion
>of the surface when I re-attached the windshields.
>
>This saved some riveting where I normally would have had some unwanted rivets.
>
>Mike C.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | 1/8" Lexan----no heating req'd |
Ken-- In the Tony Bingelis books he describes the differences between
Plexiglas and Lexan.
Lexan can be DRILLED......cut with a SABRE saw or band saw.....and bent all
over the place without breaking. Lexan can also be filed and sanded on
the edges
without fear of cracking it. So to answer, I simply made posterboard
patterns for my windshields, transferred them to the Lexan sheet (1/8"
thick) and cut with a sabre saw, drilled with normal drill bits, sanded the
edges and bent cold to install. The Lexan of course wants to spring flat
so this puts quite a strain on your brackets and that put a strain on my
alum. cockpit/inst. panel covers which were are .025" alum. That is why I
installed the T-88 glued-in reinforcing patches under each bracket bolt
hole on the underside of my curved alum. covers.
Plexiglass is very touchy with regard to all of these operations and must
be heated to be formed.
Mike C.
PS-- Lexan scratches easier...so you have to be kind to it.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Dick N. is right-- you can heat form Lexan too |
Dick is right about his point that you can heat form Lexan as well as
Plexiglass, I just didn't know it at the time !
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dick Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net> |
One more small point on lexan. It wil crack badly with the use of alchohol based
window cleaners, Windex and such.
Dick N.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "tmbrant1(at)netzero.com" <tmbrant1(at)netzero.net> |
| Subject: | off subject - experimental ladder plane |
Anyone ever see a website devoted to an experimental airplane constructed out of
extension ladders? I'm not making this up! I can't seem to find the site any
more.
Tom B.
________________________________________________________________________________
March 19, 2006 - April 05, 2006
Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-ez