Pietenpol-List Archive Browser

Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-fo
December 23, 2006 - January 11, 2007

-- 3:22 PM ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 23, 2006
From: Clif Dawson <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: goggles
If youn want the real thing it will cost you. :-) http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/pspages/goggles.php I got a pair I picked up years ago in a second hand shop. They have silver painted frames and take the lenses from the above goggles. I couldn't believe it! I was taking some pics in the backyard and guess what flew over! Clif ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Chet's Mail" <Chethartley1(at)mchsi.com>
Subject: Model A Eng Timming
Date: Dec 23, 2006
Hello: I'm having trouble timing my model A engine. With a slick mag that has a 25 degree inpulse. I have set the mag so the points will open at 25 degrees BTDC. AIso I have set the timing with out the inpulse engaged. But when I turn the prop over to check the inpulse it will snap about 45 degrees after TDC. Any and all ideas will be greatly appreciated. Chet ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 23, 2006
From: Gene Beenenga <kgbunltd(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol's and Corvairs.
javier, is there any chance you could post or send me (email) a photo of that mixture set up you have? Ken -----Original Message----- >From: Javier Cruz <javcr(at)prodigy.net.mx> >Sent: Dec 22, 2006 11:52 PM >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Pietenpol's and Corvairs. > > >Hi again Piets, sorry i forget something that can be usefull >On the first runnings, i have problems whit the mixture control (maybe the >altitud here) i was using a lever for adjust it (like yours Peter), i >change it for a Vernier mixturecontrol and the engine perform much better, >the mixture needs a fine adjust and i think that whit the lever it's very >hard to get a good mixture.. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Roman Bukolt" <conceptmodels(at)tds.net>
Subject: Re: Funk piet and Riblett airfoil
Date: Dec 23, 2006
I'll email them when I get some time. ----- Original Message ----- From: <johnwoods(at)westnet.com.au> Sent: Monday, December 18, 2006 6:11 PM Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Funk piet and Riblett airfoil > > Hi Roman, > > I am just starting my Piet in Australia and am about to lay up the > wing ribs. > I would be interested in these Riblett airfoils. > Would you be able to post the co-ordinates for these airfoils? > > Regards, > JohnW > > ---- Original Message ---- > From: conceptmodels(at)tds.net > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Funk piet and Riblett airfoil > Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 08:31:53 -0600 > >> >> >>Hi People! >>Talking about the Red Piet which has the Funk engine and the louvred >>radiator inside the cowl on the side of the engine, Lowell told me he >> >>thoiught it was for sale. Last summer I talked to the husband of the >>owner >>and he said it was. Lowell and I met with the owner at her hangar in >> >>Sullivan, Wi. >>The plane had not been touched in two yrs. >>Lowell spent about 2 hrs. and about 150 prop flips to finally get it >>running. Jo Beth Barrett, who incidently also own a Stearman and a >>military Taylorcraft, then taxied it around on the runway. It geve >>her a >>renewed interest in the plane and she decided not to sell it. >>This turned out to be a good thing for me because I ended up buying a >>really >>well crafted Piet from Ray Hill, Baxter, IA. You'll see it next >>summer at >>Brodhead. >>About the airfoil! >>Lowell Frank currently has a Pietenpol with a radial engine. He did >>not >>build this plane but he did build a new wing with the better >>performing >>airfoil. The airfoil was designed by Harry Riblett who also did >>airfoil >>designs for NASA and Burt Rutan. It is called a GA-30U-612. >>It has a deeper chord, rounder leading edge and almost no >>undercamber. It >>far outperforms the Pietenpol airfoil. >>Riblett did an analysis of the Piet airfoil and gave it a poor >>rating. >>Riblett said, even better than the GA-30U-612 is an airfoil with even >>a >>thicker chord called the GA-30U-613.5. >>The 12 defines the 12% thickness and the 13.5 defines the 13.5% chord >> >>thickness. >>Lowell chose to build the 612 because when looking at his Piet from >>the >>front one doesn't notice the difference in airfoil thickness from the >>Piet >>airfoil but he was afraid that buildingt the 13.5 airfoil, it would >>show. >>At any rate the 612 airfoil demonstrates much better climb, higher >>speed, >>greater lift, slower and more gentle stall characteristics. I saw >>his plane >>climb out at Brodhead in half the distance and double the altitude >>than any >>of the other Piets and the engine, 90hp wasn't even running at full >>throttle. >>These airfoils caught the interest of both Bill Rewey and myself. We >> >>evaluated them, Bill had conversations with Harry Riblett and we >>plotted >>them out. >>The next issue of the Brodhead Newsletter will have an article by >>Bill Rewey >>about these airfoils. >>I have plotted out both airfoils full size and either one is >>available to >>anyone who's interested for $10 including shipping. I definitely >>will build >>one of the two for my Piet. I understand that the 613.5 airfoil has >>not >>been tried on a Piet yet. I have a full set of the Piet ribs all >>built and >>they'll be available for sale at Brodhead next summer. Fortunately I >>hadn't >>started assembling the wing yet. >> >>Roman Bukolt NX20795 and (NX88XN reserved) >> >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Jeff Boatright" <jboatri(at)emory.edu> >>To: >>Sent: Monday, December 18, 2006 6:55 AM >>Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: radiators low? >> >> >> >>> >>> Lowell was talking about a new airfoil that he's been testing on >>his Piet. >>> I'd like to hear more about that, too. Maybe Doc Mosher will get >>him to >>> write more articles for the newsletter. >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>Jeff, >>>>I did talk to Lowell Frank about the plane last year at Brodhead. >>He said >>>>the performance is better than the normal Ford Piet. I don't think >>it has >>>>any cooling issues. >>>>If someone on the list knows how to contact Loewll, I'm sure he >>would be >>>>real happy to talk to you about it. He is very knowledgeable about >>>>airplanes and engines, he was the antique airplane technical expert >>for >>>>the >>>>movie Red Betsy, and loves to talk about airplanes. >>>>Skip >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Do you know anything about how it cooled and >>>>> performed otherwise? >>>> >>>> > Jeff >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> _____________________________________________________________ >>> Jeffrey H. Boatright, PhD >>> Associate Professor, Emory Eye Center, Atlanta, GA, USA >>> Senior Editor, Molecular Vision, http://www.molvis.org/molvis >>> mailto:jboatri(at)emory.edu >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Roman Bukolt" <conceptmodels(at)tds.net>
Subject: Airfoil plots
Date: Dec 23, 2006
Hey Guys, Re: the Riblett full size drawings, I guess I didn't make myself clear. The plots are $10.00 for each drawing. I received several checks but some of the senders did not specify which plot they wanted, the 612 or the 613.5. I'm guessing they assumed they would be getting both. You know who you are. Let me know. Otherwise I'll send you the 612 drawing. Roman B. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ed G." <flyboy_120(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Lift strut vibration
Date: Dec 23, 2006
Those fittings are so short and stiff that I would think the wood would absorb and dampen any destructive vibrations. Not a good place for armchair engineering though. Have a great holiday season and a prosperous New Year...Ed ----- Original Message ----- From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com<mailto:Rcaprd(at)aol.com> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Friday, December 22, 2006 9:19 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Lift strut vibration In a message dated 12/22/2006 9:07:15 AM Central Standard Time, flyboy_120(at)hotmail.com writes: There is a notation on the plans. Drawing #6, at the bottom of the upper left section, right a the lower end of the lift strut diagram from BHP. It says " Lower end of strut is given a little play to avoid chances of crystalizing fuselage fitting". Wishing everyone a great holiday season.....Ed G. I'm keeping my lower struts tight. There's a thing called 'Modules of Elasticity', which means the metal will return to it's original dimension, as long as it does not exceed it's Modules of Elasticity. >From what I understand, Steel will NOT fatigue, as long as it is not bent beyond it's Modules of Elasticity. Aluminum is a whole different animal. It will eventually fatigue, even if it does not exceed it's modules of elasticity. Chuck G. NX770CG www.aeroelectric.com<http://www.aeroelectric.com/> www.buildersbooks.com<http://www.buildersbooks.com/> www.homebuilthelp.com<http://www.homebuilthelp.com/> http://www.matronics.com/contribution on> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List m/Navigator?Pietenpol-List> ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Lift strut vibration
Date: Dec 23, 2006
From: <harvey.rule(at)bell.ca>
Would this also apply to GN-1's and three piece wing set up? ________________________________ From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ed G. Sent: December 22, 2006 10:04 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Lift strut vibration There is a notation on the plans. Drawing #6, at the bottom of the upper left section, right a the lower end of the lift strut diagram from BHP. It says " Lower end of strut is given a little play to avoid chances of crystalizing fuselage fitting". Wishing everyone a great holiday season.....Ed G. ----- Original Message ----- From: Leon Stefan <mailto:lshutks(at)webtv.net> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2006 4:28 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Lift strut vibration Stefan) " Does this apply to the lower right strut as well?" Harvy: "leave a little slack" (words of BHP in the old news letter) applied to the lower end of all 4 lift struts. No problem up top because those"lolly pop" fittings are actually a hinge. I don't recall if the guy he was talking to used jury struts or no jurys. BHP as you know didn't so I'm sure he had vibration even though the streamline tubing he used was formed with the 4 stiffener ribs made into them. None of this may even be a problem with vibration dampening jury struts. It was interesting to look at Alan Rudolphs lift struts at Brodhead. If you get a chance to see these struts check them out. Interesting note on vibration--It's fun to watch the radio antenna on my pickup as I drive. Its made of thin wire and sometimes I see 3 waves of vibration in it as I drive. Dave Abramson--Sorry I couldn't read your question. Yours and many others have started showing up on my screen as dark blue text on a slightly darker blue back ground. Maybe Santa will bring me a new computer and a Hooters babe to show to use it. Rick--Your winter pictures kind of make us long for those mild Ohio winters don't it. Leon nbsp; -- Please Support Your Lists This Month (And Get the Annual link Free * * Site you for http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List =========== ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "DJ Vegh" <dj(at)veghdesign.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol's and Corvairs.
Date: Dec 23, 2006
not flying yet but I static at around 2900 with a 66x29 Tennessee prop. DJ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter W Johnson" <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au> Sent: Friday, December 22, 2006 4:38 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Pietenpol's and Corvairs. > > > Hi Guys, > > I am trying to find out information on rpm levels and wooden prop sizes > for > the Piet/Corvair combination. > > Could people flying with this combination let me know the following:- > > 1 Size of prop > 2 Static RPM > 3 Typical cruise speed and rpm > 4 Full throttle speed and rpm > 5 Empty weight of aircraft > > I have some information from Hans and also from Al Schuberts book, "How I > make Wood Propellers". I would appreciate some more. > > Also, does anybody know if there is any correlation between Warp Drive > pitch > angles and Wooden Props? > > Thanks > > Peter > Wonthaggi, Australia > http://www.cpc-world.com > > > -- > 6:45 PM > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 23, 2006
From: Kip and Beth Gardner <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Lift strut vibration
Chuck, I understand what you are saying & maybe it's not relevant, but there used to be an article on the FlyBaby web site that went into great detail about the dangers of using hardwire instead of cables to rig and secure the wings. As I recall, the article was an analysis based on a crash of a hardwired FlyBaby, where the cause of the crash was determined to be metal fatigueand failure in a wing-root attachment fitting, caused by vibration transmitted through the hard wire. The point of the article was that, in the FlyBaby design, the use of flexible cable (Pete Bower's original design specification) prevented vibration, whereas the hardwire didn't. If I recall the article correctly, there was nothing about the design that would have stressed the failed fitting beyond it's modulus of elasticity, just constant, unrelieved vibration. I'm no expert & my memory may be faulty, but I'm sure the article is still posted on the FlyBaby web site for those who want to check for themselves. Merry Christamas (or whatever Holiday you celebrate) to everyone. Kip Gardner >In a message dated 12/22/2006 9:07:15 AM Central Standard Time, >flyboy_120(at)hotmail.com writes: > >There is a notation on the plans. Drawing #6, at the bottom of the >upper left section, right a the lower end of the lift strut diagram >from BHP. It says " Lower end of strut is given a little play to >avoid chances of crystalizing fuselage fitting". Wishing everyone a >great holiday season.....Ed G. > >I'm keeping my lower struts tight. There's a thing called 'Modules >of Elasticity', which means the metal will return to it's original >dimension, as long as it does not exceed it's Modules of Elasticity. >From what I understand, Steel will NOT fatigue, as long as it is not >bent beyond it's Modules of Elasticity. Aluminum is a whole >different animal. It will eventually fatigue, even if it does not >exceed it's modules of elasticity. > >Chuck G. >NX770CG -- North Canton, OH ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 23, 2006
From: Darrel Jones <wd6bor(at)vom.com>
Subject: Re: goggles
Clif Dawson wrote: > > If youn want the real thing it will cost you. :-) > > http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/pspages/goggles.php > > I got a pair I picked up years ago in a second hand shop. > They have silver painted frames and take the lenses from > the above goggles. > > I couldn't believe it! I was taking some pics in the backyard > and guess what flew over! > > Clif > You can get a light-weight but usable pair of foam-lined goggles from Enco Tools, at use-enco.com. Look online at the Uvex Fury protective goggles, part number 891-4717. They list for $11.36, but sell for less than $10 when on sale. Understand that they are NOT regular flying goggles with a metal frame and leather trim, but they seem to work fine for slow flying. Good luck, and hope to see some at Brodhead next year. Darrel Jones N154JP ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Alan Lyscars" <alyscars(at)maine.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Airfoil plots
Date: Dec 23, 2006
Roman, Just the 612 for me. Al Lyscars Portland, Maine ----- Original Message ----- From: Roman Bukolt To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Saturday, December 23, 2006 9:38 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Airfoil plots Hey Guys, Re: the Riblett full size drawings, I guess I didn't make myself clear. The plots are $10.00 for each drawing. I received several checks but some of the senders did not specify which plot they wanted, the 612 or the 613.5. I'm guessing they assumed they would be getting both. You know who you are. Let me know. Otherwise I'll send you the 612 drawing. Roman B. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Peter W Johnson" <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au>
Subject: Pietenpol's and Corvairs.
Date: Dec 24, 2006
Thanks DJ. Peter. -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of DJ Vegh Sent: Sunday, 24 December 2006 2:38 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Pietenpol's and Corvairs. not flying yet but I static at around 2900 with a 66x29 Tennessee prop. DJ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter W Johnson" <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au> Sent: Friday, December 22, 2006 4:38 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Pietenpol's and Corvairs. > > > Hi Guys, > > I am trying to find out information on rpm levels and wooden prop sizes > for > the Piet/Corvair combination. > > Could people flying with this combination let me know the following:- > > 1 Size of prop > 2 Static RPM > 3 Typical cruise speed and rpm > 4 Full throttle speed and rpm > 5 Empty weight of aircraft > > I have some information from Hans and also from Al Schuberts book, "How I > make Wood Propellers". I would appreciate some more. > > Also, does anybody know if there is any correlation between Warp Drive > pitch > angles and Wooden Props? > > Thanks > > Peter > Wonthaggi, Australia > http://www.cpc-world.com > > > -- > 6:45 PM > > > -- 3:22 PM -- 3:22 PM ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 25, 2006
From: shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Pietenpol's and Corvairs.
With 66-30 Hegy get 3100-3300 rpm static, cruise at 75mph at 2900rpm and 80mph at 3000rpm. Empty wt 730lbs.And about 4 gal per hour on 100LL. Shad __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 25, 2006
From: shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: pirep on goggles
As far as goggles I went to the Iron Pony store. They deal in motorcycle gear and apparal. They have a good selection of goggles at reasonable prices. I got a pair of "Bobbster" goggles for about $30 and they came with 3 sets of lenses, clear, smoked, and yellow tint. They are of good quality and do not inhibit your periphrial vision. Look them up at ironpony.com and they will probably send you a free catalog. Shad __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: together again
Date: Dec 26, 2006
Had a pretty nice Christmas day, assembling wings back onto the fuselage of 41CC. Dusted off all the parts and pieces and it went together fairly smoothly. Struts and brace cables, wing gap covers, nuts and bolts, everything but inspection covers (waiting for A&P to do the annual). Interesting to see how it rigged out without adjusting anything or moving anything. The wing has about 3" of dihedral and about 2 degrees of washout. I believe that the dihedral is exactly per Corky's original rigging, but not sure about the washout. I'll keep it as-is for test flights and see how it flies. We checked dihedral by stretching a cord from wingtip to wingtip right at the front spar, then measuring the dihedral at the wing center section. We checked washout using a 3/4" plywood template that I cut out, leaving the top edge square and the bottom following the curve of the wing top surface from nose (leading edge) to about the aft spar station. We put this template on top of the ribs at root and out near the tip, with a digital level on top of the template, to determine angles at root and tip, obtaining washout by difference. Pretty accurate. With the stick centered, the ailerons (piano hinged) rig out with their trailing edges just a tad below the TE of the wing on both sides. My test pilot Charlie says he remembers it flying this way originally; I'll have to look through the in-flight photos to see if that's so. I can take out the droop and bring the TEs of the ailerons into perfect trail with the wing TE if need be, but I wanted to put it all back together the way it originally was before tweaking anything. Wing gap covers went back on with all holes lining up perfectly, so that's a good sign. Winds were gusting over 35 kts at Zapata County Airport yesterday as a strong cold front blew through, so no taxi testing yet! Sure was good to see the airplane looking like an airplane again. Oscar Zuniga San Antonio, TX mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com website at http://www.flysquirrel.net _________________________________________________________________ Your Hotmail address already works to sign into Windows Live Messenger! Get it now ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Isablcorky(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 26, 2006
Subject: Re: together again
The aileron drop, relative to the rest of the wing is correct. I based this rigging on the L-16 from Liaison Piot School ( Aeronca ). Don't make them even. The elevators will drop slightly also in level flight. Note the air to air pics I have posted. Happy and Safe flying Corky ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: aileron droop okay
Date: Dec 26, 2006
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
Oscar-- my IA and friend 78 year old Don Helmick said they used to rig the ailerons on planes like DC-3's, Aeronca's, and Cubs with a little droop in each aileron so that in flight the aero forces would make them align nicely with the trailing edge. I think mine droop about 3/16" to 1/4" on the ground and in flight, nice and true w/ the wing trailing edge. Mike C. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 26, 2006
Subject: Re: together again
Oscar, 41CC got a great Christmas present when you got all her parts back on !! I keep my ailerons rigged even with the trailing edge, and there is no difference in flight. Washout is not really necessary in a Hershey Bar Wing, because this planform inherently begins to stall inboard, and progresses to the outboard. However, it would be best to err toward washout. On a perfectly straight wing, rigging the trailing edge of the ailerons UP will (by reducing the angle of attack) cause washout. The drooped trailing edge of the flippers seems to be a Pietenpol characteristic. Chuck G. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Steve Singleton" <slsingleton(at)cvalley.net>
Subject: Elevators
Date: Dec 26, 2006
Hi everyone-hope everyone had a safe and Merry Christmas. I'm fitting togeather the elevators and am curious to know if I should start the taper on the end pieces from the main beam to the trailing edge from the main beam or should I start the taper at or just behind the center beam. Thanks. Steve Singleton ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Elevators
From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com>
Date: Dec 26, 2006
I think I kept mine the same thickness until the last few inches and then tried to taper it down to nicely match the trailing edge piece. It probably doesn't matter much, but I guess I tried to err on the side of holding that thickness for rigidity. The elevators and rudders are fairly flexible when they are complete. In flight, however I'm sure there isn't much flexing. Don Emch NX899DE P.S. Definitely the time of year that I miss building! Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=83681#83681 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Steve Singleton" <slsingleton(at)cvalley.net>
Subject: Re: Elevators
Date: Dec 26, 2006
Thanks Don. I fitted one together tapering from the center beam but like the idea of holding the thickness until farther back. Another question-is there any structural difference between Birch plywood and mahogany. I had in mind to use mahogany but may go with birch if there is a big price difference. I know this must be an age old question but is there any where else other than Wicks or spruce to buy plywood? Thanks. Steve Singleton ----- Original Message ----- From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2006 8:41 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Elevators > > I think I kept mine the same thickness until the last few inches and then > tried to taper it down to nicely match the trailing edge piece. It > probably doesn't matter much, but I guess I tried to err on the side of > holding that thickness for rigidity. The elevators and rudders are fairly > flexible when they are complete. In flight, however I'm sure there isn't > much flexing. > Don Emch > NX899DE > P.S. Definitely the time of year that I miss building! > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=83681#83681 > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Elevators
From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com>
Date: Dec 27, 2006
Hello Steve, I really don't think there should be any difference in where you start the taper. I'll bet the plane won't know the difference! Birch plywood is slightly heavier, slightly stiffer, and I think slightly less expensive. I used mahogany throughout with the exception of the wing rib gussets. No real reason to use one versus the other, I guess. I made the ribs first and afterwards realized I liked the look of the mahogany for the rest of the airframe. Preference, I guess. There is other plywood out there but be careful and know what you're looking for. I used all Wick's and Aircraft Spruce but only because I didn't know what to look for. Other guys on the list have used other materials with great success, just be careful and research it if you decide on that route. Don't know about others, but I get a good feeling in flying along and knowing that the nuts, bolts, and chunks of wood are "aircraft quality". Passengers probably appreciate it too!! Don Emch NX899DE Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=83727#83727 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ed G." <flyboy_120(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Elevators
Date: Dec 27, 2006
A lot of builders use marine grade mahogany plywoood which is less expensive than aircraft grade and depending on your location might be locally available. Just be sure to sand off the sealer coating before glueing, especially with the birch plywood. It helps let the glue penetrate the grain of the wood. I've heard that tests say it doesn't make any difference with T-88 but I find that hard to believe so I always sand it. Ed G. ----- Original Message ----- From: Don Emch<mailto:EmchAir(at)aol.com> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 8:40 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Elevators > Hello Steve, I really don't think there should be any difference in where you start the taper. I'll bet the plane won't know the difference! Birch plywood is slightly heavier, slightly stiffer, and I think slightly less expensive. I used mahogany throughout with the exception of the wing rib gussets. No real reason to use one versus the other, I guess. I made the ribs first and afterwards realized I liked the look of the mahogany for the rest of the airframe. Preference, I guess. There is other plywood out there but be careful and know what you're looking for. I used all Wick's and Aircraft Spruce but only because I didn't know what to look for. Other guys on the list have used other materials with great success, just be careful and research it if you decide on that route. Don't know about others, but I get a good feeling in flying along and knowing that the nuts, bolts, and chunks of wood are "aircraft quality". Passengers probably appreciate it too!! Don Emch NX899DE Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=83727#83727 atronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=83727#83727> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List m/Navigator?Pietenpol-List> ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Aircamper Valve Covers
From: "PatrickW" <pwhoyt(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Dec 27, 2006
ggower_99(at)yahoo.com wrote: > We do aluminum castings in our factory... > > Could be with "Aircamper" and another ones later with "FlyCorvair"..... > As a Zodiac/Corvair builder (considering a Piet for a 2nd plane), this idea really appeals to me... - PatrickW Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=83757#83757 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dick Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net>
Subject: Re: Elevators
Date: Dec 27, 2006
Steve Many of us have used Okume plywood, available from Wicks or ACS. Okume is much lighter and cheaper but not quite as strong as aircraft grade. ACS cataloug has a good description of the properties of plywoods. Dick N. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Singleton" <slsingleton(at)cvalley.net> Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2006 9:54 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Elevators > > > Thanks Don. I fitted one together tapering from the center beam but like > the idea of holding the thickness until farther back. Another question-is > there any structural difference between Birch plywood and mahogany. I had > in mind to use mahogany but may go with birch if there is a big price > difference. I know this must be an age old question but is there any where > else other than Wicks or spruce to buy plywood? Thanks. Steve Singleton > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com> > To: > Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2006 8:41 PM > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Elevators > > >> >> I think I kept mine the same thickness until the last few inches and then >> tried to taper it down to nicely match the trailing edge piece. It >> probably doesn't matter much, but I guess I tried to err on the side of >> holding that thickness for rigidity. The elevators and rudders are >> fairly flexible when they are complete. In flight, however I'm sure >> there isn't much flexing. >> Don Emch >> NX899DE >> P.S. Definitely the time of year that I miss building! >> >> >> >> >> Read this topic online here: >> >> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=83681#83681 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 27, 2006
From: Dave and Connie <dmatt(at)frontiernet.net>
Subject: Re: Elevators
At 12:12 PM 12/27/2006, Dick Navratil wrote: One source for Okume is places that cater to stitch and glue boat builders. I purchased from Noah's Marine in Toronto when I built my Chesapeake 17 kayak. Bringing it back into the US was no problem. Dave > >Steve >Many of us have used Okume plywood, available from Wicks or ACS. Okume is >much lighter and cheaper but not quite as strong as aircraft grade. ACS >cataloug has a good description of the properties of plywoods. >Dick N. >----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Singleton" <slsingleton(at)cvalley.net> >To: >Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2006 9:54 PM >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Elevators ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Barry Davis" <bed(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: aileron droop okay
Date: Dec 27, 2006
On an L2 Taylorcraft I bought my son when he turned 16, the ailerons were trimmed to have a droop of about a 1/4". After listening to an old mechanic and Cleveland Air Racer, he said to put in 1/4" up trim in both ailerons. We did and our cruise picked up around 5 MPH. We could not tell any difference in takeoff ground run, but I suspect it increased it some. Our grass strip is 2350' and the Taylorcraft only used a fraction of it anyway. Barry ----- Original Message ----- From: Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC] To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2006 1:17 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: aileron droop okay Oscar-- my IA and friend 78 year old Don ....... ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "DJ Vegh" <dj(at)veghdesign.com>
Subject: Re: aileron droop okay
Date: Dec 27, 2006
rigging ailerons up slightly will also reduce the tendancy for tip stalling. DJ ----- Original Message ----- From: Barry Davis To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 1:36 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: aileron droop okay On an L2 Taylorcraft I bought my son when he turned 16, the ailerons were trimmed to have a droop of about a 1/4". After listening to an old mechanic and Cleveland Air Racer, he said to put in 1/4" up trim in both ailerons. We did and our cruise picked up around 5 MPH. We could not tell any difference in takeoff ground run, but I suspect it increased it some. Our grass strip is 2350' and the Taylorcraft only used a fraction of it anyway. Barry ----- Original Message ----- From: Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC] To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2006 1:17 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: aileron droop okay Oscar-- my IA and friend 78 year old Don ....... href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.mat ronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 27, 2006
Subject: Re: aileron droop okay
In a message dated 12/27/2006 4:10:13 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, dj(at)veghdesign.com writes: rigging ailerons up slightly will also reduce the tendancy for tip stalling. DJ Yep, it's kinda like artificial Washout. Chuck G. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Steve Singleton" <slsingleton(at)cvalley.net>
Subject: Re: Elevators
Date: Dec 27, 2006
I'll look into the Okume and also see if I can find a Marine supply house. Worked most of today on the tail and have it all ready to glue togeather except the rudder and hopefully will get that done tomorrow. I know i'm just a beginer at this but it's sure neat to see all this layed out and ready to glue up. Steve S ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave and Connie" <dmatt(at)frontiernet.net> Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 12:12 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Elevators > > > At 12:12 PM 12/27/2006, Dick Navratil wrote: > One source for Okume is places that cater to stitch and glue boat > builders. I purchased from Noah's Marine in Toronto when I built my > Chesapeake 17 kayak. Bringing it back into the US was no problem. > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Torch Tips
From: "Glenn Thomas" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com>
Date: Dec 28, 2006
Just got the Harris Aviator package (torch Model 15) and it came with 0, 1 & 2 tips. Will I need a larger tip to possible do some bending etc? If so, what other sizes come in handy. Didn't get a cutting torch, is that something you use much? Only welding I've done was at OshKosh. Any good non-throwaway projects to practice with? I have a couple in mind but I know a lot of you have probably been where I am now and might have some tips that I or others getting started with welding might benefit from. Thanks! -------- Glenn Thomas N????? http://www.flyingwood.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=84117#84117 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dick Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net>
Subject: Re: Elevators
Date: Dec 28, 2006
Steve When posting this type of thing, it would be helpful to include where you live. Somebody may well have a local source for you. Dick N. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Singleton" <slsingleton(at)cvalley.net> Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 9:19 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Elevators > > > I'll look into the Okume and also see if I can find a Marine supply house. > Worked most of today on the tail and have it all ready to glue togeather > except the rudder and hopefully will get that done tomorrow. I know i'm > just a beginer at this but it's sure neat to see all this layed out and > ready to glue up. Steve S > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dave and Connie" <dmatt(at)frontiernet.net> > To: ; > Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 12:12 PM > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Elevators > > >> >> >> At 12:12 PM 12/27/2006, Dick Navratil wrote: >> One source for Okume is places that cater to stitch and glue boat >> builders. I purchased from Noah's Marine in Toronto when I built my >> Chesapeake 17 kayak. Bringing it back into the US was no problem. >> > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Pietenpol as babe magnet?
Date: Dec 29, 2006
I don't know what it is about the Pietenpol, but women do seem to like them. I get the same comment from just about every lady that has seen 41CC: it's cute and they want a ride in it. Must be the romance of flying in an open cockpit with hair and scarf waving in the wind. Most of the men who look at the airplane seem to be, how shall I say this, "gravitationally challenged" as well as "showing the experience of many years"... not old and fat ;o) I do wish more youngsters realized the beauty of these older designs and could just unhook themselves from the electronics and glass panels for a minute or two. One look in the cockpit and most of the kid types seem to wander on to something more exciting. And almost without exception, every non-pilot that looks at the Pietenpol asks where the radio is. When told that it has no radio and not even an electrical system, they go white with horror that I could fly it without "permission from the tower" or without being "in radar contact with somebody". My A&P should be back in the saddle by Wednesday after New Year's, so it shouldn't be long now before we'll be able to taxi test and flight test after he pulls the annual on it. Oscar Zuniga San Antonio, TX mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com website at http://www.flysquirrel.net _________________________________________________________________ Get FREE Web site and company branded e-mail from Microsoft Office Live ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: babe magnet?
Date: Dec 29, 2006
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
Get used to it, Oscar ! Those RV guys don't have all the chicks yet:) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 29, 2006
From: "Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol as babe magnet?
Thank you Oscar, you just gave me a way to justify to my fellow Piet builders adding electronic elevator trim (with an LED position sensor) and an I-K AIM Lite engine monitor to my Piet (Corvair engine). Now I can just say that I am attempting to bridge the generation gap by getting all these video game playing kids interested in aviation. Rick I do wish more youngsters realized the beauty > of these older designs and could just unhook themselves from the > electronics > and glass panels for a minute or two. One look in the cockpit and most of > the kid types seem to wander on to something more exciting. And almost > without exception, every non-pilot that looks at the Pietenpol asks where > the radio is. When told that it has no radio and not even an electrical > system, they go white with horror that I could fly it without "permission > from the tower" or without being "in radar contact with somebody". > > My A&P should be back in the saddle by Wednesday after New Year's, so it > shouldn't be long now before we'll be able to taxi test and flight test > after he pulls the annual on it. > > Oscar Zuniga > San Antonio, TX > mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com > website at http://www.flysquirrel.net > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get FREE Web site and company branded e-mail from Microsoft Office Live > > -- Rick Holland "Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad" ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "gcardinal" <gcardinal(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol as babe magnet?
Date: Dec 29, 2006
----- Original Message ----- From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Pietenpol as babe magnet? > > I don't know what it is about the Pietenpol, but women do seem to like > them. I get the same comment from just about every lady that has seen > 41CC: it's cute and they want a ride in it. Must be the romance of flying > in an open cockpit with hair and scarf waving in the wind. > Confirmed! ; ) ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: what do they say ?
Date: Dec 29, 2006
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
but what to the babes say when they see that fat old guy climb out of the cockpit ? Say Rick, I can tell you first-hand what the babes say when an old fat guy gets out of the cockpit: "what a cute little plane you have, sir " I learned quickly that the women are really not interested in the pilot at all, unless he is a soap-look-alike, but tis the airplane that attracts them. Mike C. Happy New Year, guys ! ________________________________________________________________________________
From: TGSTONE236(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 29, 2006
Subject: corvair motor mount rubber bushings
I am wondering where you guys with the Corvair motors are getting your motor mount bushings. Any information will be appreciated. Thanks Ted Stone Wilmington NC ________________________________________________________________________________
From: lshutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan)
Date: Dec 29, 2006
Subject: Re: Torch Tips
I got a cutting torch with my Smith torch kit. It doesn't work well on thin material. 1/8 or thicker it works good. I wish I could afford a plasma cutter for fittings made of thin material. I used the cutting torch to cut some landing gear ( lower and upper shock strut lugs ) fittings from 1/4" material. I have also used it a lot for other things here on the farm. I learned not to use too small a tip on welding. The gas/ox works as a coolant for the tip. Using too small a tip allowed the tip to get to hot and the gas-ox will ignite inside the tip causing that annoying POP that blows your puddle away in a shower of sparks. (and could burn your house down.) Leon S. in Ks. dodging another Col. blizzard. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 29, 2006
From: Ben Charvet <bcharvet(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: corvair motor mount rubber bushings
I ordered mine from Advance Auto Parts. I believe the part specified in William Wynn's book is the same one that fits a 96 Ford Explorer's sway bar. I was ordering some other stuff and just added that to my order so the shipping was free. :-) Ben Charvet Mims, Fl > I am wondering where you guys with the Corvair motors are getting your > motor mount bushings. Any information will be appreciated. > > Thanks > // ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Barry Davis" <bed(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: corvair motor mount rubber bushings
Date: Dec 29, 2006
The part # is 9.8105R AutoZone stocks them. Barry ----- Original Message ----- From: TGSTONE236(at)aol.com To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 4:39 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: corvair motor mount rubber bushings I am wondering where you guys with the Corvair motors are getting your motor mount bushings. Any information will be appreciated. Thanks Ted Stone Wilmington NC ________________________________________________________________________________
From: TGSTONE236(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 29, 2006
Subject: motor mount bushings
Thanks for the info on the bushings.I just picked them up for $15.00. You couldn't ask for a better price than that for a complete set. Ted Stone ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 29, 2006
Subject: Re: what do they say ?
In a message dated 12/29/2006 4:34:44 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov writes: I learned quickly that the women are really not interested in the pilot at all, unless he is a soap-look-alike, but tis the airplane that attracts them. Yeah, but I still like to get a picture of them, as they are climbing in !! :) he, he, he Chuck G. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 29, 2006
From: "Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: corvair motor mount rubber bushings
Believe it or not, even Amazon has them, got mine with my last book. Rick On 12/29/06, TGSTONE236(at)aol.com wrote: > > I am wondering where you guys with the Corvair motors are getting your > motor mount bushings. Any information will be appreciated. > > Thanks > ** > *Ted Stone* > *Wilmington NC* > > * > > > * > > -- Rick Holland "Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad" ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Weir" <billweir(at)lon.imag.net>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 2 Msgs - 12/28/06
Date: Dec 29, 2006
Re plywood, A friend who had a small used car lot built a KR-2 a few years ago that is still flying. He used "door skin" that he bought at the local lumberyard for plywood to make those pieces that cover the joints. To test, he put a piece on the floor of his car wash bay and left it for a year or so. It did not deteriorate ate and he felt free to use the material in his aircraft project. But! Don't take my word. Do your own test! Bill weir ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Steve Singleton" <slsingleton(at)cvalley.net>
Subject: Re: Elevators
Date: Dec 29, 2006
----- Dick-I live near Hale MO. about two hr drive North east of KC MO. I'd sure like to hear from somebody that has used the marine plywood. If there is anybody within a 2 or 3 hour drive of me that has any sruce to sell to make the longerons i'd sure be interested in buying it. I believe i have enough for the rest of the fuseledge. If i have to make the 4 1/2 hour drive to Wicks fore my longeron material then I'l probable get the plywood there also. > > > Steve > When posting this type of thing, it would be helpful to include where you > live. Somebody may well have a local source for you. > Dick N. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Steve Singleton" <slsingleton(at)cvalley.net> > To: > Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 9:19 PM > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Elevators > > >> --> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Remote tie-down
Date: Dec 30, 2006
Has any of you had experience with "Jeb's remote tie-down for hand-propping"? There is one on e-bay and if it works, it might make hand propping a bit safer. What is everyone else using to make your plane stay in one place while your getting in after hand propping? Gene N502R Tennessee ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "gcardinal" <gcardinal(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Remote tie-down
Date: Dec 30, 2006
I simply wrap a nylon strap around the tailskid and tie it to any convenient anchor such as a tie down. With no one in the pilot seat the plane wants to roll at any rpm above 700. After hand propping I throttle back to 700 and untie the strap. I always ensure the area in front of the plane is clear. Once I am sitting in the pilot seat it takes about 1200 rpm to get moving. Greg Cardinal ----- Original Message ----- From: Gene & Tammy To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2006 7:51 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Remote tie-down Has any of you had experience with "Jeb's remote tie-down for hand-propping"? There is one on e-bay and if it works, it might make hand propping a bit safer. What is everyone else using to make your plane stay in one place while your getting in after hand propping? Gene N502R Tennessee ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Remote tie-down
Date: Dec 30, 2006
Thanks Greg, That's how I do it except I block the left wheel and remove before I get in, however on very smooth pavement the plane still wants to roll at 700 rpm. It would be nice to have somehow to secure the plane until I'm seated with the brakes on. As a side note I received my winter flying hat that Shawn sent me from Canada. I would highly recommend it to anyone looking for one. Well made, very warm and good looking. Their less than $20.00. A great find. Thanks Shawn! Gene N502R Tennessee ----- Original Message ----- From: gcardinal To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2006 9:59 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Remote tie-down I simply wrap a nylon strap around the tailskid and tie it to any convenient anchor such as a tie down. With no one in the pilot seat the plane wants to roll at any rpm above 700. After hand propping I throttle back to 700 and untie the strap. I always ensure the area in front of the plane is clear. Once I am sitting in the pilot seat it takes about 1200 rpm to get moving. Greg Cardinal ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dick Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net>
Subject: Re: Remote tie-down
Date: Dec 30, 2006
I have wire wheels and run a piece of flat strap from the rear cabane strut, thru the spokes and back again to the cabane and tied off. I do this on both wheels. When the engine is running, I can one hand untie the half hitches and the strap stores in a bag next to me. Dick N. ----- Original Message ----- From: Gene & Tammy To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2006 7:51 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Remote tie-down Has any of you had experience with "Jeb's remote tie-down for hand-propping"? There is one on e-bay and if it works, it might make hand propping a bit safer. What is everyone else using to make your plane stay in one place while your getting in after hand propping? Gene N502R Tennessee ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Remote tie-down
Date: Dec 30, 2006
Great idea Dick! I don't have wire wheels so it won't work for me but I'm sure others will be interested in your method. Sounds like a good safe method to me. Gene ----- Original Message ----- From: Dick Navratil To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2006 5:35 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Remote tie-down I have wire wheels and run a piece of flat strap from the rear cabane strut, thru the spokes and back again to the cabane and tied off. I do this on both wheels. When the engine is running, I can one hand untie the half hitches and the strap stores in a bag next to me. Dick N. ----- Original Message ----- From: Gene & Tammy To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2006 7:51 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Remote tie-down Has any of you had experience with "Jeb's remote tie-down for hand-propping"? There is one on e-bay and if it works, it might make hand propping a bit safer. What is everyone else using to make your plane stay in one place while your getting in after hand propping? Gene N502R Tennessee href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.mat ronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "GlennThomas(at)flyingwood.com" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com>
Subject: Re: Torch Tips
Date: Dec 30, 2006
Thanks Leon, I guess I'll start out with the #2 tip and see how that goes. Will hold off on the cutting torch since most of the cutting will be done on a band saw. Heard it was going to snow a bit up north of me but so far I only saw snow 1 time this year and it didn't amount to much. It's been cold a few times but no snow. That's fine with me. Glenn W. Thomas Storrs, CT http://www.flyingwood.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 30, 2006
From: Clif Dawson <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: next year
Happy New Year to you all!! I'll see you next year. :-) It's off to Victoria( Vancouver Island) for me at first light. Clif ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 31, 2006
From: Ben Ramler <ben_ramler2002(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: rib construction
Hello Group, Hopefully everyone had great christmas! My question is on the rib costruction. I've got my first rib almost done however my question is on the gusset plate that sits on the sides of the rib in front. does 2 1/8" x 3/4: sound right? then what about this 1/2x1/2" block that the plans talk about does that somehow get nothced out and gets glued in? If anyone wants see pictures I can post some. Thanks, Ben Ramler St. Cloud, MN __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 31, 2006
From: "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: rib construction
Ben, Not sure which print that you are working from, but the 1/2x1/2 block connects the top and bottom cap pieces, angled to fit without gaps, and the front edge of the 1/2x1/2 piece is even with the front of the gussets. Mentally remove the rounded leading edge for a moment,,,everything from there back is a solid surface to attach leading edge to later. After you clean up excess glue, and sand the front of the rib, you should be able to point the rib at you like looking at a fishes mouth, and see a solid closed in end. You can see in the pic of my ribs #058, not completely cleaned up, but you can see that the ends are solid, the 1/2x1/2 pieces are in there flush with the front of the gussets. Now in #055 , if you attach the leading edge with the screws and nut like in the plans, the heads will be countersunk in the leading edge, and the nuts will be in that recessed area down between the gussets going thru the 1/2x1/2 thats sandwiched between the gussets. (look in the 2nd rib from closest in #055) Hope this makes sense walt evans NX140DL "Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you" Ben Franklin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ben Ramler" <ben_ramler2002(at)yahoo.com> Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2006 2:59 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: rib construction > > > Hello Group, > > Hopefully everyone had great christmas! My question is on the rib > costruction. I've got my first rib almost done however my question is on > the gusset plate that sits on the sides of the rib in front. does 2 1/8" x > 3/4: sound right? then what about this 1/2x1/2" block that the plans talk > about does that somehow get nothced out and gets glued in? If anyone wants > see pictures I can post some. > > > Thanks, > > Ben Ramler > St. Cloud, MN > > __________________________________________________ > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 31, 2006
From: Ben Ramler <ben_ramler2002(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: rib construction
I am working from the Full size rib plan. =0A=0A=0A----- Original Message - ---=0AFrom: walt evans <waltdak(at)verizon.net>=0ATo: pietenpol-list@matronics .com=0ASent: Sunday, December 31, 2006 2:45:09 PM=0ASubject: Re: Pietenpol- List: rib construction=0A=0A=0ABen,=0ANot sure which print that you are wor king from, but the 1/2x1/2 block =0Aconnects the top and bottom cap pieces, angled to fit without gaps, and the =0Afront edge of the 1/2x1/2 piece is even with the front of the gussets. =0AMentally remove the rounded leading edge for a moment,,,everything from =0Athere back is a solid surface to att ach leading edge to later.=0AAfter you clean up excess glue, and sand the f ront of the rib, you should be =0Aable to point the rib at you like looking at a fishes mouth, and see a solid =0Aclosed in end.=0AYou can see in the pic of my ribs #058, not completely cleaned up, but you =0Acan see that the ends are solid, the 1/2x1/2 pieces are in there flush with =0Athe front of the gussets.=0ANow in #055 , if you attach the leading edge with the screw s and nut like in =0Athe plans, the heads will be countersunk in the leadin g edge, and the nuts =0Awill be in that recessed area down between the guss ets going thru the =0A1/2x1/2 thats sandwiched between the gussets. (look i n the 2nd rib from =0Aclosest in #055)=0AHope this makes sense=0A=0Awalt ev ans=0ANX140DL=0A=0A"Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you"=0ABen Franklin=0A----- Original Message ----- =0AFrom: "Ben Ra mler" =0ATo: =0ASen t: Sunday, December 31, 2006 2:59 PM=0ASubject: Pietenpol-List: rib constru ramler2002(at)yahoo.com>=0A>=0A> Hello Group,=0A>=0A> Hopefully everyone had g reat christmas! My question is on the rib =0A> costruction. I've got my fir st rib almost done however my question is on =0A> the gusset plate that sit s on the sides of the rib in front. does 2 1/8" x =0A> 3/4: sound right? th en what about this 1/2x1/2" block that the plans talk =0A> about does that somehow get nothced out and gets glued in? If anyone wants =0A> see picture s I can post some.=0A>=0A>=0A> Thanks,=0A>=0A> Ben Ramler=0A> St. Cloud, MN =0A>=0A> __________________________________________________=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A> =0A>=0A>=0A=0A__________________________________________________=0ADo You Y ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: rib construction
From: "Glenn Thomas" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com>
Date: Dec 31, 2006
Ben, I'm still making ribs myself and spent today making sure that I at least finished the first half of them in 2006. I'm at the half-way mark now. I made rib #17 to be glued tomorrow so I can start the year on the right note. I saw your post and took some pictures while I was building and put them on my website if you're interested. I'm no pro but my EAA tech counselor said he'd "give me an A+" on my first interim review. Those are the only credentials I can provide [Laughing] -------- Glenn Thomas N????? http://www.flyingwood.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=84744#84744 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 01, 2007
From: Tim Verthein <minoxphotographer(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Pedal Pietenpol!
I'm guessing most of you are familier with these? http://shop.eaa.org/html/04_pedalplanes.html?cart_id Scroll to the bottom! Didn't discover it in time to build one for my Grandson this Christmas, but he'll be just about 3 next year so that should be perfect. Santa (also known as th' Wife) was pretty good to me this year, got a copy of "Stick and Rudder" and a Craftsman horizontal/vertical belt sander. Which of course now requires me to clean up the workbench to make room, and now I'm extending the bench 4 feet too. One thing always leads to another. Happy New Year! Tim in Bovey == You *can* repair a flip-flop with a capacitor! == __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: rib construction
Date: Jan 01, 2007
Glenn, Hats off to you for an outstanding site! Gene N502R ----- Original Message ----- From: "Glenn Thomas" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com> Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2006 8:30 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: rib construction > > > Ben, > I'm still making ribs myself and spent today making sure that I at least > finished the first half of them in 2006. I'm at the half-way mark now. I > made rib #17 to be glued tomorrow so I can start the year on the right > note. I saw your post and took some pictures while I was building and put > them on my website if you're interested. I'm no pro but my EAA tech > counselor said he'd "give me an A+" on my first interim review. Those are > the only credentials I can provide [Laughing] > > -------- > Glenn Thomas > N????? > http://www.flyingwood.com > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=84744#84744 > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 01, 2007
Subject: Re: Remote tie-down
In a message dated 12/30/2006 7:54:33 AM Central Standard Time, zharvey(at)bellsouth.net writes: What is everyone else using to make your plane stay in one place while your getting in after hand propping? I chalk both wheels, engine idle, tie the stick back in the lap belt. After pulling 6 or 8 blades through, go back to the cockpit, and say out loud "Contact, Stick's back, Engine Idle, it's in the Chalks". Once she fires up, hustle back around to the cockpit to verify oil pressure, and bring the throttle up to just above idle, and then stabilize the idle. Pull right chalk first. I only launch from grass, so after the chalks are pulled it doesn't creep. Chuck G. NX770CG ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 01, 2007
From: Tim Willis <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: rib construction
Glenn, Great site and excellent work. thanks. Tim in central TX -----Original Message----- >From: Glenn Thomas <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com> >Sent: Dec 31, 2006 8:30 PM >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: rib construction > > >Ben, >I'm still making ribs myself and spent today making sure that I at least finished the first half of them in 2006. I'm at the half-way mark now. I made rib #17 to be glued tomorrow so I can start the year on the right note. I saw your post and took some pictures while I was building and put them on my website if you're interested. I'm no pro but my EAA tech counselor said he'd "give me an A+" on my first interim review. Those are the only credentials I can provide [Laughing] > >-------- >Glenn Thomas >N????? >http://www.flyingwood.com > > >Read this topic online here: > >http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=84744#84744 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Remote tie-down
Date: Jan 01, 2007
Thanks Chuck. Sounds like we pretty much do it the same way except most of the time I have to start on pavement and once I pull the chalk she starts creeping, even at low idle. As soon as I put my weight on her she will come to a stop. I'm going to try to come up with a method where by I can use a tie down and be able to release it from the cockpit once my feet are on the brakes. Maybe something like a sailplane tow release. I fly behind a A65 and the best way I have found to start her is to pull the prop thru backwards 6 to 8 blades and then forwards 2 blades, crack the throttle, make the mags hot and she will fire on the first blade 95% of the time, even hot (not my idea but the suggestion from the previous owner). I like your idea of securing the stick back with the lap belt. I hadn't thought of doing that but will do so from now on. Should save her from ever going up on her nose if some how the throttle was open too far. Thank you Gene N502R Tennessee I chalk both wheels, engine idle, tie the stick back in the lap belt. After pulling 6 or 8 blades through, go back to the cockpit, and say out loud "Contact, Stick's back, Engine Idle, it's in the Chalks". Once she fires up, hustle back around to the cockpit to verify oil pressure, and bring the throttle up to just above idle, and then stabilize the idle. Pull right chalk first. I only launch from grass, so after the chalks are pulled it doesn't creep. Chuck G. NX770CG ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Graham Hansen" <ghans@cable-lynx.net>
Subject: Preventing runaways when starting engine...
Date: Jan 01, 2007
This should be somewhere in the archives, but I'll send it along anyway since the topic has surfaced again. ----- Original Message ----- From: Graham Hansen Sent: Saturday, September 04, 2004 9:58 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: tailhooks Years ago, I installed auxiliary ignition switches on the right side of the fuselage near the firewall where I can keep my left hand on them while swinging the propeller from behind it. With this arrangement, I can "kill" the engine should things threaten to get out of hand. (These auxiliary switches are connected in parallel with those in the cockpit.) I used to carry an "insurance policy" in the form of a 1/4 inch nylon rope about 35 feet long if I intended to travel where there may be nobody available, or qualified, to swing the prop. Simply tie one end to the left rear center section strut (I enter the cockpit from the right with my Pietenpol), run the free end back and around a tree, fencepost, etc. and back to the same c/s strut where it is securely tied. Once in the cockpit, the two knots are easily untied allowing one to pull in the rope and stow it. This was prior to installing the auxiliary switches described above. Since my flying is of a local nature nowadays, I don't carry the rope anymore but rely on the switches and being darned careful. Nevertheless, this "rope trick" worked well and I recommend it for safety and peace of mind---especially when flying cross country to different airports. Graham Hansen (Pietenpol CF-AUN in Alberta, Canada) ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: rib construction
From: "Glenn Thomas" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com>
Date: Jan 01, 2007
Thanks guys. My site is a reflection of the ideas that flow on this forum. We are truly lucky to have such a network of resources and encouraging friends in this fine community. Happy New Year from warm and rainy CT! -------- Glenn Thomas N????? http://www.flyingwood.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=84868#84868 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Preventing runaways when starting engine...
Date: Jan 01, 2007
Graham, Thanks for the "rope trick". I'll try it out the next time I fly. Just may be what I've been looking for. Thanks Gene N502R Tennesse ----- Original Message ----- From: Graham Hansen To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Saturday, September 04, 2004 9:58 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: tailhooks Years ago, I installed auxiliary ignition switches on the right side of the fuselage near the firewall where I can keep my left hand on them while swinging the propeller from behind it. With this arrangement, I can "kill" the engine should things threaten to get out of hand. (These auxiliary switches are connected in parallel with those in the cockpit.) I used to carry an "insurance policy" in the form of a 1/4 inch nylon rope about 35 feet long if I intended to travel where there may be nobody available, or qualified, to swing the prop. Simply tie one end to the left rear center section strut (I enter the cockpit from the right with my Pietenpol), run the free end back and around a tree, fencepost, etc. and back to the same c/s strut where it is securely tied. Once in the cockpit, the two knots are easily untied allowing one to pull in the rope and stow it. This was prior to installing the auxiliary switches described above. Since my flying is of a local nature nowadays, I don't carry the rope anymore but rely on the switches and being darned careful. Nevertheless, this "rope trick" worked well and I recommend it for safety and peace of mind---especially when flying cross country to different airports. Graham Hansen (Pietenpol CF-AUN in Alberta, Canada) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: johnwoods(at)westnet.com.au
Subject: Preventing runaways when starting engine...
Date: Jan 02, 2007
Graham, I'm a bit concerned about your statement "(These auxiliary switches are connected in parallel with those in the cockpit.)". Surely these switches should be in series and both sets would have to be switched ON to make mags live? Please correct me if I'm seeing this the wrong way. JohnW ---- Original Message ---- From: ghans@cable-lynx.net Subject: Pietenpol-List: Preventing runaways when starting engine... Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2007 14:03:17 -0700 >This should be somewhere in the archives, but I'll send it along >anyway since the topic has surfaced again. > >----- Original Message ----- >From: Graham Hansen >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >Sent: Saturday, September 04, 2004 9:58 PM >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: tailhooks > > >Years ago, I installed auxiliary ignition switches on the right side >of the fuselage near the firewall where I can keep my left hand on >them while swinging the propeller from behind it. With this >arrangement, I can "kill" the engine should things threaten to get >out of hand. (These auxiliary switches are connected in parallel with >those in the cockpit.) > >I used to carry an "insurance policy" in the form of a 1/4 inch nylon >rope about 35 feet long if I intended to travel where there may be >nobody available, or qualified, to swing the prop. Simply tie one end >to the left rear center section strut (I enter the cockpit from the >right with my Pietenpol), run the free end back and around a tree, >fencepost, etc. and back to the same c/s strut where it is securely >tied. Once in the cockpit, the two knots are easily untied allowing >one to pull in the rope and stow it. > >This was prior to installing the auxiliary switches described above. >Since my flying is of a local nature nowadays, I don't carry the rope >anymore but rely on the switches and being darned careful. >Nevertheless, this "rope trick" worked well and I recommend it for >safety and peace of mind---especially when flying cross country to >different airports. > >Graham Hansen (Pietenpol CF-AUN in Alberta, Canada) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "bike.mike" <bike.mike(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: Preventing runaways when starting engine...
Date: Jan 01, 2007
Mag switches short the mags to ground. They are turned ON by opening the switch contacts. By having them in parallel, either switch can be used to kill the engine. ----- Original Message ----- From: <johnwoods(at)westnet.com.au> Sent: Monday, January 01, 2007 4:59 PM Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Preventing runaways when starting engine... > > Graham, > > I'm a bit concerned about your statement "(These auxiliary switches > are connected in parallel with those in the cockpit.)". Surely these > switches should be in series and both sets would have to be switched > ON to make mags live? > > Please correct me if I'm seeing this the wrong way. > > JohnW > > ---- Original Message ---- > From: ghans@cable-lynx.net > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Preventing runaways when starting engine... > Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2007 14:03:17 -0700 > > >This should be somewhere in the archives, but I'll send it along > >anyway since the topic has surfaced again. > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: Graham Hansen > >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > >Sent: Saturday, September 04, 2004 9:58 PM > >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: tailhooks > > > > > >Years ago, I installed auxiliary ignition switches on the right side > >of the fuselage near the firewall where I can keep my left hand on > >them while swinging the propeller from behind it. With this > >arrangement, I can "kill" the engine should things threaten to get > >out of hand. (These auxiliary switches are connected in parallel with > >those in the cockpit.) > > > >I used to carry an "insurance policy" in the form of a 1/4 inch nylon > >rope about 35 feet long if I intended to travel where there may be > >nobody available, or qualified, to swing the prop. Simply tie one end > >to the left rear center section strut (I enter the cockpit from the > >right with my Pietenpol), run the free end back and around a tree, > >fencepost, etc. and back to the same c/s strut where it is securely > >tied. Once in the cockpit, the two knots are easily untied allowing > >one to pull in the rope and stow it. > > > >This was prior to installing the auxiliary switches described above. > >Since my flying is of a local nature nowadays, I don't carry the rope > >anymore but rely on the switches and being darned careful. > >Nevertheless, this "rope trick" worked well and I recommend it for > >safety and peace of mind---especially when flying cross country to > >different airports. > > > >Graham Hansen (Pietenpol CF-AUN in Alberta, Canada) > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: johnwoods(at)westnet.com.au
Subject: Re: Preventing runaways when starting engine...
Date: Jan 02, 2007
Interesting. I didn't realise that. Thanks Mike. JohnW ---- Original Message ---- From: bike.mike(at)charter.net Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Preventing runaways when starting engine... Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2007 18:05:53 -0800 > > >Mag switches short the mags to ground. They are turned ON by opening >the >switch contacts. By having them in parallel, either switch can be >used to >kill the engine. > >----- Original Message ----- >From: <johnwoods(at)westnet.com.au> >To: >Sent: Monday, January 01, 2007 4:59 PM >Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Preventing runaways when starting >engine... > > >> >> Graham, >> >> I'm a bit concerned about your statement "(These auxiliary switches >> are connected in parallel with those in the cockpit.)". Surely >these >> switches should be in series and both sets would have to be >switched >> ON to make mags live? >> >> Please correct me if I'm seeing this the wrong way. >> >> JohnW >> >> ---- Original Message ---- >> From: ghans@cable-lynx.net >> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Preventing runaways when starting >engine... >> Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2007 14:03:17 -0700 >> >> >This should be somewhere in the archives, but I'll send it along >> >anyway since the topic has surfaced again. >> > >> >----- Original Message ----- >> >From: Graham Hansen >> >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >> >Sent: Saturday, September 04, 2004 9:58 PM >> >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: tailhooks >> > >> > >> >Years ago, I installed auxiliary ignition switches on the right >side >> >of the fuselage near the firewall where I can keep my left hand on >> >them while swinging the propeller from behind it. With this >> >arrangement, I can "kill" the engine should things threaten to get >> >out of hand. (These auxiliary switches are connected in parallel >with >> >those in the cockpit.) >> > >> >I used to carry an "insurance policy" in the form of a 1/4 inch >nylon >> >rope about 35 feet long if I intended to travel where there may be >> >nobody available, or qualified, to swing the prop. Simply tie one >end >> >to the left rear center section strut (I enter the cockpit from >the >> >right with my Pietenpol), run the free end back and around a tree, >> >fencepost, etc. and back to the same c/s strut where it is >securely >> >tied. Once in the cockpit, the two knots are easily untied >allowing >> >one to pull in the rope and stow it. >> > >> >This was prior to installing the auxiliary switches described >above. >> >Since my flying is of a local nature nowadays, I don't carry the >rope >> >anymore but rely on the switches and being darned careful. >> >Nevertheless, this "rope trick" worked well and I recommend it for >> >safety and peace of mind---especially when flying cross country to >> >different airports. >> > >> >Graham Hansen (Pietenpol CF-AUN in Alberta, Canada) >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 02, 2007
From: Clif Dawson <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: Preventing runaways when starting engine...
Here's a pic of the Tigermoth at Delta Airpark. You can see the two sets of switches, each set just ahead of each cockpit. This particular plane has the all-weather canopy used in WW11 training command. Unfortunately the front set of switches is inside the windscreen, but still reachable. Clif Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: tailhooks Years ago, I installed auxiliary ignition switches on the right side of the fuselage near the firewall where I can keep my left hand on them while swinging the propeller from behind it. With this arrangement, I can "kill" the engine should things threaten to get out of hand. (These auxiliary switches are connected in parallel with those in the cockpit.) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: preventing runaways when starting engine...
Date: Jan 02, 2007
There are some good photos and ideas for a tailhook release on the Fly Baby site, at http://www.bowersflybaby.com/tech/tailhook.html The top one is a standard "off-the-shelf" tailhook release that you've all seen. The center one is the most interesting homebuilt one, and the bottom one has the clever (if tricky) feature of not needing a separate release control... it's hooked to the rudder horn such that when you kick left rudder, it releases the tail tiedown. Nifty, but I'd worry a bit about kicking rudder while climbing into the cockpit, thus starting the airplane rolling when the pilot isn't even settled into the cockpit yet. Or, worse, an unknowing passenger punching the rudder pedal while the pilot is still out front propping. Oscar Zuniga San Antonio, TX mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com website at http://www.flysquirrel.net _________________________________________________________________ Experience the magic of the holidays. Talk to Santa on Messenger. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Roman Bukolt" <conceptmodels(at)tds.net>
Subject: Tail anchors
Date: Jan 02, 2007
About securing the tail while using the "Armstrong Starter": I'll try to decsribe my method without drawings. I have a 10ft. length of 3/16" braided nylon line, holding strength 1200 lbs. tensile. Each end has a loop with about a 1" inside diameter. About 1 ft. from one end I have a large spike about 1/4" dia. and 4" long tied to the 3/16 line with a light 3/32" line about 1" long. Also attached to the head of the spike I have another 15 ft. of that same light line with a small hook made from a coat hanger attached to the other end. OK, this is how ti works. The 10 ft. x 3/16 line is wrapped around a post or other secure anchor and around the tail wheel leaf spring. One loop is threaded through the other loop and the spike is then inserted half way through that same loop and pulled snug so that the loop cannot pull out. Move the plane forward until all is tight. Run the 15ft. length of light line up to the cockpit and secure it with the hook to the cabane or whatever is convenient. Start trhe engine, climb in the plane, get yourself all strapped in and ready to go. Now, unhook the light line, pull on it and the spike will slip out of the loop allowing the loop disengage. Because the spike is tied to the 3/16 line and to the 15 ft. light line, you simply reel in the whole assembly and tuck it in your cockpit.. Simple, cheap, works every time, weighs little and takes about 15 minute to "mnanufacture". Roman Bukolt NX20795 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Joe Krzes" <jkrzes(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Preventing runaways when starting engine...
Date: Jan 02, 2007
I found an article on the net a few years back that shows a simple device. I have a copy of the article here: <http://www.hal-pc.org/~hjkr/tiedn.htm> or <http://www.hal-pc.org/~hjkr/tiednqwkrel.jpg> If the link doesn't work, I can email a copy of the jpg file. Looks like it loops around the tail wheel and a tie down and incorporates a quick release. Joe _________________________________________________________________ Experience the magic of the holidays. Talk to Santa on Messenger. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Steve Glass" <redsglass(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Preventing runaways when starting engine...
Date: Jan 02, 2007
Hi Everybody and Happy New Year Has anybody tried a "snapshackle" for this. A snap shackle is a small piece of sailing hardmare made of stainless steel and designed to be opened underload. A 1000 pound swl snapshackle would be about $15-20 at a marine store. Steve in Maine >From: "Joe Krzes" <jkrzes(at)hotmail.com> >Reply-To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Preventing runaways when starting engine... >Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2007 12:06:07 -0600 > > >I found an article on the net a few years back that shows a simple device. >I have a copy of the article here: > ><http://www.hal-pc.org/~hjkr/tiedn.htm> > >or > ><http://www.hal-pc.org/~hjkr/tiednqwkrel.jpg> > >If the link doesn't work, I can email a copy of the jpg file. >Looks like it loops around the tail wheel and a tie down and incorporates a >quick release. > >Joe > >_________________________________________________________________ >Experience the magic of the holidays. Talk to Santa on Messenger. > > _________________________________________________________________ The MSN Entertainment Guide to Golden Globes is here. Get all the scoop. http://tv.msn.com/tv/globes2007/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Irwin Fust <ifust(at)digitalpath.net>
Subject: Lift Struts
Date: Jan 02, 2007
Happy New Year to all the Pietenpol folks! I have a question to start out the new year. I am still working on my Piet and have gotten to the point where I want to mate the wing to the fuselage. I will be building lift struts for the occasion. I have available two rear lift struts from a J-3 and don't know if they would work as rear struts on the Piet. They are 1-3/4 X 1 and I would like to know if they would be strong enough to do the job? My plan is to use 2-38 X 1 struts for the front. What is the prevailing opinion? I know you guys are not shy about sharing your knowledge so, thanks in advance. Irwin ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 02, 2007
From: "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Lift Struts
I used 4 rear struts from a Cub for my struts. They were discarded due to an AD years ago about the size of the thread fork on the bottom. It was like a 3/8 thread and had to go to 1/2 or something like that. So they had to take all these struts off. So human nature as it is, everyone takes them off and sticks them up in the hanger rafters. I got permission and went into the hangers and there were LOADS of them. they are long enough where you cut off about 1 foot on each end so you can eyeball the inside for condition. All the ones I happen to pick, still had the preserving oil inside. Good to go walt evans NX140DL "Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you" Ben Franklin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Irwin Fust" <ifust(at)digitalpath.net> Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 4:07 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Lift Struts > > Happy New Year to all the Pietenpol folks! I have a question to start out > the new year. > I am still working on my Piet and have gotten to the point where I want to > mate the wing to the fuselage. I will be building lift struts for the > occasion. I have available two rear lift struts from a J-3 and don't know > if they would work as rear struts on the Piet. They are > 1-3/4 X 1 and I would like to know if they would be strong enough to do > the job? My plan is to use 2-38 X 1 struts for the front. > What is the prevailing opinion? > I know you guys are not shy about sharing your knowledge so, thanks in > advance. > Irwin > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Lift Struts
From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com>
Date: Jan 02, 2007
I did the same as Walt. I know of several others that have also done the same. I did not use adjustable barrels at the end as many do. I just flattened the ends somewhat and welded teardrop reinforcing patches at the bolt locations. They work out really well. I have a very slight left wing heaviness and it would be nice to be able to adjust a barrel to get rid of it. Eventually I may make another fitting for the top of the strut to adjust this some but until then it isn't noticeable enough to bother with. Do you guys with cub type eyebrows on Continental engines have trouble getting the oil temp. up in cooler weather. I stopped on the way home from work tonight and got about half an hour or so in and never saw above 110 deg. oil temp. Outside air temp. was 38 deg. A couple of days ago it was upper 40's, flew for over an hour and never saw more than 115 deg. The thing I really don't like about this is the condensation that forms and comes out the oil breather at these temps. Can't imagine what the water condensation is doing to the inside of the engine. Don Emch NX899DE Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=85073#85073 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 02, 2007
From: Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu>
Subject: Re: Lift Struts
Don, We had to put a "diaper" on the oil tank to get temps up in cooler weather. Works fine. Jeff > >I did the same as Walt. I know of several others that have also >done the same. I did not use adjustable barrels at the end as many >do. I just flattened the ends somewhat and welded teardrop >reinforcing patches at the bolt locations. They work out really >well. I have a very slight left wing heaviness and it would be nice >to be able to adjust a barrel to get rid of it. Eventually I may >make another fitting for the top of the strut to adjust this some >but until then it isn't noticeable enough to bother with. > >Do you guys with cub type eyebrows on Continental engines have >trouble getting the oil temp. up in cooler weather. I stopped on >the way home from work tonight and got about half an hour or so in >and never saw above 110 deg. oil temp. Outside air temp. was 38 >deg. A couple of days ago it was upper 40's, flew for over an hour >and never saw more than 115 deg. The thing I really don't like >about this is the condensation that forms and comes out the oil >breather at these temps. Can't imagine what the water condensation >is doing to the inside of the engine. > >Don Emch >NX899DE > -- 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/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Root Rib - 3 Piece Wing
From: "Glenn Thomas" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com>
Date: Jan 02, 2007
I know this was mentioned not too long ago. I attempted to find it in the archives but couldn't... Do you make the whole side one big gusset for the rib where the wing connects to the center section? Also, do you also make the outside of the center section one big gusset as well? Seems like you would want to do this in order to have a place to end the fabric at covering time. Do you make lightening holes (access holes?) or leave it as a solid piece? Thanks in advance -------- Glenn Thomas N????? http://www.flyingwood.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=85110#85110 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dick Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net>
Subject: Re: Lift Struts
Date: Jan 02, 2007
Don That temp is what I get at that temp range. I have been thinking of making a insulated blanket to cover the oil tank. You don't want to think about restricting the airflow over the cylinders though. Dick N. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 7:46 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Lift Struts > > I did the same as Walt. I know of several others that have also done the > same. I did not use adjustable barrels at the end as many do. I just > flattened the ends somewhat and welded teardrop reinforcing patches at the > bolt locations. They work out really well. I have a very slight left > wing heaviness and it would be nice to be able to adjust a barrel to get > rid of it. Eventually I may make another fitting for the top of the strut > to adjust this some but until then it isn't noticeable enough to bother > with. > > Do you guys with cub type eyebrows on Continental engines have trouble > getting the oil temp. up in cooler weather. I stopped on the way home > from work tonight and got about half an hour or so in and never saw above > 110 deg. oil temp. Outside air temp. was 38 deg. A couple of days ago it > was upper 40's, flew for over an hour and never saw more than 115 deg. > The thing I really don't like about this is the condensation that forms > and comes out the oil breather at these temps. Can't imagine what the > water condensation is doing to the inside of the engine. > > Don Emch > NX899DE > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=85073#85073 > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dick Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net>
Subject: Re: Lift Struts
Date: Jan 02, 2007
My opinion is, save the weight and use all rear struts if available. They are plenty strong. Dick N. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Irwin Fust" <ifust(at)digitalpath.net> Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 3:07 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Lift Struts > > Happy New Year to all the Pietenpol folks! I have a question to start out > the new year. > I am still working on my Piet and have gotten to the point where I want to > mate the wing to the fuselage. I will be building lift struts for the > occasion. I have available two rear lift struts from a J-3 and don't know > if they would work as rear struts on the Piet. They are > 1-3/4 X 1 and I would like to know if they would be strong enough to do > the job? My plan is to use 2-38 X 1 struts for the front. > What is the prevailing opinion? > I know you guys are not shy about sharing your knowledge so, thanks in > advance. > Irwin > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Peter W Johnson" <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au>
Subject: Root Rib - 3 Piece Wing
Date: Jan 03, 2007
Glenn, I did, check out http://www.cpc-world.com Go to Airframe Construction > Wings > Wing Ribs. Photo is third from the bottom. I left space at each spar to get a spanner in to tighten the wing attach bolts. Cheers Peter Wonthaggi Australia http://www.cpc-world.com -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Glenn Thomas Sent: Wednesday, 3 January 2007 3:36 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Root Rib - 3 Piece Wing I know this was mentioned not too long ago. I attempted to find it in the archives but couldn't... Do you make the whole side one big gusset for the rib where the wing connects to the center section? Also, do you also make the outside of the center section one big gusset as well? Seems like you would want to do this in order to have a place to end the fabric at covering time. Do you make lightening holes (access holes?) or leave it as a solid piece? Thanks in advance -------- Glenn Thomas N????? http://www.flyingwood.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=85110#85110 -- 2:58 PM -- 2:58 PM ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 03, 2007
Subject: Re: Lift Struts
In a message dated 1/2/2007 7:48:46 PM Central Standard Time, EmchAir(at)aol.com writes: Do you guys with cub type eyebrows on Continental engines have trouble getting the oil temp. up in cooler weather. I stopped on the way home from work tonight and got about half an hour or so in and never saw above 110 deg. oil temp. Outside air temp. was 38 deg. A couple of days ago it was upper 40's, flew for over an hour and never saw more than 115 deg. The thing I really don't like about this is the condensation that forms and comes out the oil breather at these temps. Can't imagine what the water condensation is doing to the inside of the engine. Don Emch NX899DE Don, I see similar temps with my engine, and have similar concerns with the condensation, although I've never seen any milky residue in the breather tube. I made a 1" hole at the aft end of each eyebrow, and have a tin plug to use, if it was too much. Really couldn't see much difference in temps. I'm going to resort to the blanket for the kidney oil tank, and maybe even an additional 1" hole. Chuck G. NX770CG ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 02, 2007
From: Clif Dawson <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: airplane songs
http://www.oscarbrand.com/ Go to "catalogue orders" Go down to "special order tapes" Go down to "Up in the Air" Clif ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Shawn Wolk" <shawnwolk(at)can.rogers.com>
Subject: Low oil temps in winter
Date: Jan 03, 2007
I've been battling the low oil temperature issue for a few years. I have been able to get 185F at 38F outside. 176F at 30-32 and 167F at 18 - 20F on my A-65. The current setup hasn't been tested any cooler this year yet as I recently changed a baffle design and we have had unseasonally mild weather here. I have a J-3 style cowling with original J-3 eyebrows. I'm assuming you already have the lower cylinder baffles installed as these are left on year round. The following is a list of modifications that I complete for winter operations. materials required: Some standard grade aluminium sheet...say .032-.040. No need for fancy stuff here. A roll of the aluminium tape. The very soft shiny stuff. A roll of the insulated duct wrap that has a sticky sided foam about 1/4" thick with an aluminium foil outside. -Wrap the oil tank with the insulated duct wrap. leave an open area at the back (say 25% of it) without the insulation. I then use a insulated hood from from an old parka and also wrap this around the oil tank. And again I leave the back area open. The back area open allows the oil to get warmed up when I am preheating the engine. -Wrap all the intake tubes with the insulated duct wrap. I then safety wire the wrap around the tubes to secure it even though it does stick to the tubes. -I also stick the insulated wrap to the front of the engine case, and the top of the engine case. (I'm trying to retain as much heat as possible. The aluminium tape can be used to assist retaining some of this wrap. As well as securing with safety wire when possible. -I install baffle plates that block off the airflow from the top of the eyebrow downward over the barrel portion of the cylinder to the height of the exhaust flange then outward to the valve cover and downward to the lower cowling. Now in the area from a line at the exhaust flange upward to the top of the cylinder in the head portion of the cylinder the baffle here has 10 holes in it. (this is my latest mod., prior I tried blocking it off but I believe it was causing the front cylinders to run too hot) So far up to 18-20F I can run w/o closing up any holes. When the temps drop, my plan is to partially block the holes with some tape. Thus still allowing airflow...but limiting it. -Either with tape or with some sheet aluminium. Block off the top of the eyebrow about 2" from the highest point of the eyebrow. -Tape over the hole in the front of the cowling above the air intake that blows on the lower engine case above the carburetor. -Tape over gap (if any) between cowling and air filter assembly. If anyone wants further info...I can email a picture. Currently I don't have any pics but could easily provide some. I have also made some other winter mods for improved carb heat and cabin heat. (very little...mostly directed at my feet) I have made cylindrical heat muffs that mount on the exposed exhaust manifolds. I have wrapped springs around the manifold first before these are installed to increase heat exchange. On one side the heat muff has a series of restrictor holes facing forward. The muff is then ducted into the J-3 style dual heat muff and then through a heat box to two hoses directed at my feet. On the other side the opening on the heat muff is around the back of the muff. And then is ducted to the carb heat side of the J-3 style dual heat muff. Normally the carb heat and cabin heat muffs get there air from the front of the cowling. The cabin heat side still gets some ram, but the carb heat side doesn't need ram effect as the engine will suck the air in. Both of these additional muffs work as preheaters for the original style systems. Shawn Wolk Winnipeg. MB C-FRAZ 1933 Pietenpol Aircamper. 'already 25 hours on skis this season...yippee' ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Douwe Blumberg" <douweblumberg(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: rib stiching advice
Date: Jan 03, 2007
Mike, I havn't been keeping current, so if this has been suggested already, oops! Once you're stood the wing on it's leading edge, and gotten your multiple needles (however many you get comfortable with, I used three) mark where your holes will go on the entire wing, then get a sharp pointed soldering iron and burn a hole at each mark. This makes the stiching go SO much easier, and I found I could look through the hole next to it and actuall see through the wing much of the time. You'll also find that you'll develop a good feel for finding the other hole. And yes, do get a buddy. Bright lights are also helpful. Douwe ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Root Rib - 3 Piece Wing
From: "Glenn Thomas" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com>
Date: Jan 03, 2007
Peter, Thanks for the response. Picture shows me exactly what I was wondering about. Question: Do the ribs with the vertical members go on the wing tip end AND the root? I see them in your picture on the root ribs. I've got 15 ribs to go and I'm trying to figure out how many of them are of the non-standard type (different gussets, vertical truss members, etc.) since once the standard ones are done changes will need to be made to the jig. Great site, thanks! -------- Glenn Thomas N????? http://www.flyingwood.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=85154#85154 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Root Rib - 3 Piece Wing
Date: Jan 03, 2007
From: "Bill Church" <eng(at)canadianrogers.com>
Glenn, Per the official BHP (Vi Kapler 3 piece wing) plans, there is NO big side gusset on the butt ribs at the center section. These ribs DO have the additional vertical truss pieces, PLUS there is a 2" wide strip of 1/16" plywood glued to the top and bottom cap strips of the butt ribs. The 2" wide strip should provide plenty of area to firmly attach the fabric (it's actually there to provide lateral bracing when the fabric shrinks). I haven't got to the point of constructing my center-section yet, but I think you would want the butt ribs to be as open as possible for inspection purposes and when it comes time to route and attach the aileron cables etc. - closing off the ribs with a solid gusset would restrict access (holes would need to be cut). On the other hand, I have seen quite a few pictures that show a big full-rib gusset. I believe the UK plans have a big gusset, but those plans also incorporate a quick-disconnect for the aileron controls. I also think that the Grega GN-1 plans have a solid plywood butt-rib (but I could be wrong on that one - I haven't actually seen the GN-1 plans). In short, I don't think the big gusset is really necessary - but some builders seem to opt for it. Bill C. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Root Rib - 3 Piece Wing
From: "Glenn Thomas" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com>
Date: Jan 03, 2007
Bill, I guess that neither way poses a problem but may take the route of less wood/weight and leave the end open. Just wondered if closing in the end was helpful in keeping out moisture that sneaks through that seal at the wing joint. Thanks! -------- Glenn Thomas N????? http://www.flyingwood.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=85223#85223 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 03, 2007
From: Mike Luther <luther(at)gci.net>
Subject: Re: rib stiching advice
Douwe, Thanks for the additional advice, I finished lacing both wings last Monday "New Years Day". I worked alone and used four needles. I stood the wing up and had plenty of light on both sides of the wing to help look through the wing to see the hole on the other side. Mike ----- Original Message ----- From: Douwe Blumberg <douweblumberg(at)earthlink.net> Date: Wednesday, January 3, 2007 3:10 am Subject: Pietenpol-List: rib stiching advice > Mike, > > I havn't been keeping current, so if this has been suggested > already, oops! > > Once you're stood the wing on it's leading edge, and gotten your > multiple needles (however many you get comfortable with, I used > three) mark where your holes will go on the entire wing, then get > a sharp pointed soldering iron and burn a hole at each mark. This > makes the stiching go SO much easier, and I found I could look > through the hole next to it and actuall see through the wing much > of the time. > > You'll also find that you'll develop a good feel for finding the > other hole. And yes, do get a buddy. Bright lights are also helpful. > > Douwe ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Peter W Johnson" <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au>
Subject: Re: Root Rib - 3 Piece Wing
Date: Jan 04, 2007
Glenn As far as I can remember they were only on the root rib ends, two on the center section and two on the wing roots. I built my Piet to the UK plans with the aileron quick connect. Cheers Peter -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Glenn Thomas Sent: Thursday, 4 January 2007 12:54 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Root Rib - 3 Piece Wing Peter, Thanks for the response. Picture shows me exactly what I was wondering about. Question: Do the ribs with the vertical members go on the wing tip end AND the root? I see them in your picture on the root ribs. I've got 15 ribs to go and I'm trying to figure out how many of them are of the non-standard type (different gussets, vertical truss members, etc.) since once the standard ones are done changes will need to be made to the jig. Great site, thanks! -------- Glenn Thomas N????? http://www.flyingwood.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=85154#85154 -- 2:58 PM -- 2:58 PM ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 03, 2007
Subject: Re: rib stiching advice
In a message dated 1/3/2007 2:57:00 PM Central Standard Time, luther(at)gci.net writes: Douwe, Thanks for the additional advice, I finished lacing both wings last Monday "New Years Day". I worked alone and used four needles. I stood the wing up and had plenty of light on both sides of the wing to help look through the wing to see the hole on the other side. Mike Mike, Did you happen to count how many stiches you put in ? I seem to remember I put almost 500 stiches in my one piece wing. Chuck G. NX770CG ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 03, 2007
From: "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Root Rib - 3 Piece Wing
Glen, The ribs with the vertical sticks go both on the tip and the root ribs. The root ribs also get the 2" wide ply,(very important) this stops the root rib from distorting sideways, and pulling toward the tip. This stops the fabric that changes direction, not to distort the rib. (the fabric has GREAT strength,) and when you taughten the fabric, you'll hear creaks and groans. You need a nice straight root rib to match up to your center section, so you can fit the alum. seal between the two. (I used roof flashing from Home Depot, on a roll.) walt evans NX140DL "Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you" Ben Franklin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Glenn Thomas" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com> Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 8:54 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Root Rib - 3 Piece Wing > > > Peter, > Thanks for the response. Picture shows me exactly what I was wondering > about. > > Question: Do the ribs with the vertical members go on the wing tip end AND > the root? I see them in your picture on the root ribs. I've got 15 ribs > to go and I'm trying to figure out how many of them are of the > non-standard type (different gussets, vertical truss members, etc.) since > once the standard ones are done changes will need to be made to the jig. > > Great site, thanks! > > -------- > Glenn Thomas > N????? > http://www.flyingwood.com > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=85154#85154 > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Oil Temperature
From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com>
Date: Jan 03, 2007
Thanks guys for the advice on the oil temperatures. I suppose it's better to have low temps. rather than high temps. But it is strange to be flying around and see relatively low temperatures. These recent flights have been my first flights with the cooler weather. For the time of year though we have had fantastic flying weather. I think I'm going to try the blanket idea too. I'll look into the different suppliers and see what I can find. Thanks again guys! Don Emch NX899DE Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=85274#85274 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Low oil temps in winter
From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com>
Date: Jan 03, 2007
Shawn, I missed your posting before I posted the last message. I'm going to print off your suggestions and try to use some of them. I think you have some great ideas. I plan to continue flying right on through the winter. In my opinion it is some of the nicest flying weather. I have a firewall mount heat box that I thought about making up a muff for it. It would be nice to have 'not as cold' air blowing up my pant leg! Thinking about some homemade wooden skis now! Just need that snow. Don Emch NX899DE Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=85277#85277 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: rib stiching advice
From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com>
Date: Jan 03, 2007
Hello Douwe, I remember meeting and talking with you at Brodhead. How is your project coming along? If I remember correctly you were in contact with Larry Williams. I seemed to have lost his current email address. Would you happen to have it? My email is EmchAir(at)aol.com, if you happen to have it could you send it to me? Thanks! Don Emch NX899DE Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=85279#85279 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dale Johnson" <ddjohn(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: rib construction
Date: Jan 03, 2007
Hi Ben I am trying to figure out what you are doing wrong.No notching required. Send pictures or send phone # . Or send me your address I have some spare rib sections. Dale Mpls > [Original Message] > From: Ben Ramler <ben_ramler2002(at)yahoo.com> > To: > Date: 12/31/2006 2:06:36 PM > Subject: Pietenpol-List: rib construction > > > Hello Group, > > Hopefully everyone had great christmas! My question is on the rib costruction. I've got my first rib almost done however my question is on the gusset plate that sits on the sides of the rib in front. does 2 1/8" x 3/4: sound right? then what about this 1/2x1/2" block that the plans talk about does that somehow get nothced out and gets glued in? If anyone wants see pictures I can post some. > > > Thanks, > > Ben Ramler > St. Cloud, MN > > __________________________________________________ > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 03, 2007
From: shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Oil breather condensation and cold weather flying
Don, you may already know this but, One thing to consider about that condensation, If it is cold enough your breather tube can freeze. On a most certified aircraft the breather tube will have a hole cut in the front side about 6-12 inches from the end. The hole is usually kept inside the cowling so the warm air exiting at the bottom will keep the breather tube above freezing, and would let the crankcase breath if the end out in the slipstream freezes. Shad Don Emch wrote: Do you guys with cub type eyebrows on Continental engines have trouble getting the oil temp. up in cooler weather. I stopped on the way home from work tonight and got about half an hour or so in and never saw above 110 deg. oil temp. Outside air temp. was 38 deg. A couple of days ago it was upper 40's, flew for over an hour and never saw more than 115 deg. The thing I really don't like about this is the condensation that forms and comes out the oil breather at these temps. Can't imagine what the water condensation is doing to the inside of the engine. Don Emch NX899DE Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=85073#85073 __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Oil breather condensation and cold weather flying
From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com>
Date: Jan 03, 2007
Thanks Shad, I did not know that. I will keep an eye on it and may even add a hole. Thanks again, Don Emch Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=85288#85288 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: skis
Date: Jan 03, 2007
Don wrote- >Thinking about some homemade wooden skis now! Just need that snow. When I lived in Oregon, I thought about skis to extend the year and to open up some possibilities for flying off of areas that are beautiful in winter but impossible to get to in a car or truck. Skis came to mind. A lot of my "stuff" has been purchased at flea markets and pawn shops, such as my ski boots, ski poles, skis, camp stove, tents, tools, and lots of other stuff. What I saw in the pawn shop that intrigued me were snowboards that are several years old, nobody wants to be caught dead on the slopes with them, cost less than $50 apiece but seem like they would be perfect for skis for a light plane. I could be wrong, but it would seem like a pair of snowboards (matched pair) with some fabricated mounts could work for a light plane. Never got around to experimenting with the idea, and Texas doesn't seem to have much snow ;o) Maybe over on the Monahans sand dunes-? Oscar Zuniga San Antonio, TX mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com website at http://www.flysquirrel.net _________________________________________________________________ Fixing up the home? Live Search can help ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 04, 2007
From: "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: skis
I had made skiis for a Kolb U/L years ago out of old wood water skiis. Fabricating the mount from 4130 tubing. They worked really well. walt evans NX140DL "Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you" Ben Franklin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 11:41 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: skis > > > Don wrote- > >>Thinking about some homemade wooden skis now! Just need that snow. > > When I lived in Oregon, I thought about skis to extend the year and to > open up some possibilities for flying off of areas that are beautiful in > winter but impossible to get to in a car or truck. Skis came to mind. A > lot of my "stuff" has been purchased at flea markets and pawn shops, such > as my ski boots, ski poles, skis, camp stove, tents, tools, and lots of > other stuff. What I saw in the pawn shop that intrigued me were > snowboards that are several years old, nobody wants to be caught dead on > the slopes with them, cost less than $50 apiece but seem like they would > be perfect for skis for a light plane. I could be wrong, but it would > seem like a pair of snowboards (matched pair) with some fabricated mounts > could work for a light plane. > > Never got around to experimenting with the idea, and Texas doesn't seem to > have much snow ;o) Maybe over on the Monahans sand dunes-? > > Oscar Zuniga > San Antonio, TX > mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com > website at http://www.flysquirrel.net > > _________________________________________________________________ > Fixing up the home? Live Search can help > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Securing plane and J3 eyebrows
Date: Jan 04, 2007
Thanks to all for the great Ideas on how to secure your plane while hand proping. Having been a sailor for many years and even having some on hand, I'm going to try the snapshackle idea first. Don't know why I hadn't thought of it my self. Now on to my next question. Does anyone have any ideas on the best place to get the J3 eyebrows that are used on the A65? Has anyone made their own J3 eyebrows? If so, please share how you formed them. Aircraft Spruce has them but they want about $500 for a pair. Thanks Gene N502R Tennessee ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Robert Gow" <rgow(at)avionicsdesign.ca>
Subject: Importing an unfinished homebuilt into Canada.
Date: Jan 04, 2007
I`m interested in Cart`s Pietenpol but there are some issues importing it to Canada. My first contact with the inspectors here was not as good as I had hoped. The tell me I'll need a pre-cover inspection if I want to import it and finish the project in Canada. That means removing the fabric. I do not want to rip the fabric off this airplane to get it inspected. Or, as a finished aircraft, the aircraft must have a 100 hours on it before it can be imported. Does anyone have an idea how to avoid this? Perhaps I could complete it or have it completed as a US aircraft and fly it under US registry for the first 100 hours. But can you register a US aircraft to a non-citizen/ non-resident? Or perhaps I can get the pre-cover inspection waived if there is evidence of an FAA pre-cover inspection. Is there a precedent for this? Or I can look into ultra-light classification but I do not believe I could carry a passenger which is not acceptable to me. Bob ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Importing an unfinished homebuilt into Canada.
From: Hans Vander Voort <hans.vander.voort(at)alfalaval.com>
Date: Jan 04, 2007
Robert, You can register a US aircraft to a noncitizen, but he or she must be a resident of the US (aircraft can be outside US) Most builders in the US use EAA Tech counselors during the building process. These Tech counselors do at least three inspections (two of them pre-cover) and file a form with the EAA of this inspection. The builder usually gets a copy of this form. If you can't find it in the builders logs/receipts , perhaps the EAA or the Tech counselor that did the inspection can help. This form recording the inspection might not be sufficient to import in to Canada, but is worth a try. Hans "Robert Gow" To Sent by: owner-pietenpol-l cc ist-server@matron ics.com Subject Pietenpol-List: Importing an unfinished homebuilt into Canada. 01/04/2007 09:42 AM Please respond to pietenpol-list@ma tronics.com I`m interested in Cart`s Pietenpol but there are some issues importing it to Canada. My first contact with the inspectors here was not as good as I had hoped. The tell me I'll need a pre-cover inspection if I want to import it and finish the project in Canada. That means removing the fabric. I do not want to rip the fabric off this airplane to get it inspected. Or, as a finished aircraft, the aircraft must have a 100 hours on it before it can be imported. Does anyone have an idea how to avoid this? Perhaps I could complete it or have it completed as a US aircraft and fly it under US registry for the first 100 hours. But can you register a US aircraft to a non-citizen/ non-resident? Or perhaps I can get the pre-cover inspection waived if there is evidence of an FAA pre-cover inspection. Is there a precedent for this? Or I can look into ultra-light classification but I do not believe I could carry a passenger which is not acceptable to me. Bob ________________________________________________________________________________
From: HelsperSew(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 04, 2007
Subject: What paint to use?
Hi Guys, I am wondering what type of paint (final color) to use on the many steel fittings on the Piet. I am worried about the glues and thinners that are used during the Polyfiber covering process. I would appreciate any suggestions based on experience. Thanks. Dan Helsper Poplar Grove, IL. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Root Rib - 3 Piece Wing
Date: Jan 04, 2007
From: "Steve Eldredge" <steve(at)byu.edu>
Speaking of the 2" wide ply, I did mine per plans, and it buckled after a while right at the spars. The constant pull of the fabric loosened the joint between the rib and the spar and the 2" wide ply didn't have enough rigidity to keep things straight. The fix was to add a block of wood to the top and bottom of each spar to increase the gluing surface area so the rib would not slip toward the wing-tip. I had an elaborate fixture to pull things back into place during the re-gluing. If I were to build another, I would just put a 1/4" wide, strip between the root-most and second rib, top and bottom front and rear to prevent this in the future. It is much more difficult retrofitting with the fabric on. Steve E -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of walt evans Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 4:24 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Root Rib - 3 Piece Wing Glen, The ribs with the vertical sticks go both on the tip and the root ribs. The root ribs also get the 2" wide ply,(very important) this stops the root rib from distorting sideways, and pulling toward the tip. This stops the fabric that changes direction, not to distort the rib. (the fabric has GREAT strength,) and when you taughten the fabric, you'll hear creaks and groans. You need a nice straight root rib to match up to your center section, so you can fit the alum. seal between the two. (I used roof flashing from Home Depot, on a roll.) walt evans NX140DL "Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you" Ben Franklin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Glenn Thomas" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com> Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 8:54 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Root Rib - 3 Piece Wing > > > Peter, > Thanks for the response. Picture shows me exactly what I was wondering > about. > > Question: Do the ribs with the vertical members go on the wing tip end AND > the root? I see them in your picture on the root ribs. I've got 15 ribs > to go and I'm trying to figure out how many of them are of the > non-standard type (different gussets, vertical truss members, etc.) since > once the standard ones are done changes will need to be made to the jig. > > Great site, thanks! > > -------- > Glenn Thomas > N????? > http://www.flyingwood.com > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=85154#85154 > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 04, 2007
From: Steve Ruse <steve(at)wotelectronics.com>
Subject: Re: Securing plane and J3 eyebrows
Someone on Barnstormers sells new eyebrows for $350/pair. They look pretty good to me. You might check with Legend Aircraft Company too, makers of the Legend Cub. Their cub has an O-200, but I bet the eyebrows are the same as those on the A-65. I've never heard of them selling parts, but they are really nice guys, and might be willing to do it. If you hear anything from them let us know, I've got one of my eyebrows off right now to be welded. I have no idea how well a weld will hold, but I'm giving it a shot. http://www.legend.aero/ Steve Ruse Norman, OK Quoting Gene & Tammy : > Thanks to all for the great Ideas on how to secure your plane while > hand proping. Having been a sailor for many years and even having > some on hand, I'm going to try the snapshackle idea first. Don't > know why I hadn't thought of it my self. > Now on to my next question. Does anyone have any ideas on the best > place to get the J3 eyebrows that are used on the A65? Has anyone > made their own J3 eyebrows? If so, please share how you formed > them. Aircraft Spruce has them but they want about $500 for a pair. > Thanks > Gene > N502R > Tennessee ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: What paint to use?
From: Hans Vander Voort <hans.vander.voort(at)alfalaval.com>
Date: Jan 04, 2007
Dan, Smart Alec answer : black paint, least amount of pigments and thus the lightest. All kidding aside: Polyfiber recommends to use there (high $$) epoxy primer, the final color will be what you spray on the covering. I used Home depot Krylon spray can stuff , no negative effects with the Polyfiber products. Just remember not to clean the Krylon painted parts excessively with MEK. (paint will come of again) Hans HelsperSew(at)aol.co m Sent by: To owner-pietenpol-l pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com ist-server@matron cc ics.com Subject Pietenpol-List: What paint to use? 01/04/2007 11:07 AM Please respond to pietenpol-list@ma tronics.com Hi Guys, I am wondering what type of paint (final color) to use on the many steel fittings on the Piet. I am worried about the glues and thinners that are used during the Polyfiber covering process. I would appreciate any suggestions based on experience. Thanks. Dan Helsper Poplar Grove, IL. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dick Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net>
Subject: Re: Securing plane and J3 eyebrows
Date: Jan 04, 2007
Gene I made them myself, they really aren't very hard. I made them from .024 6061 T6 aluminum. That wasn't the most ideal stock, but I had extra laying around. I used #10 copper wire to roll in the leading edge, that also helped in forming the hump. You will need to form the rear section and bend to shape. The rear section gets rivited to the upper housing. I also doubled the thickness on the section that attaches to the cylinders. This will make more sense if you see a close up pic. I will be going back to the hangar tomorrow and will take a couple. Contact me direct so I can send them off list. Dick N. ----- Original Message ----- From: Gene & Tammy To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 7:53 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Securing plane and J3 eyebrows Thanks to all for the great Ideas on how to secure your plane while hand proping. Having been a sailor for many years and even having some on hand, I'm going to try the snapshackle idea first. Don't know why I hadn't thought of it my self. Now on to my next question. Does anyone have any ideas on the best place to get the J3 eyebrows that are used on the A65? Has anyone made their own J3 eyebrows? If so, please share how you formed them. Aircraft Spruce has them but they want about $500 for a pair. Thanks Gene N502R Tennessee ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Robert Gow" <rgow(at)avionicsdesign.ca>
Subject: Importing an unfinished homebuilt into Canada.
Date: Jan 04, 2007
Thanks I'll try that approach. It's rather annoying when you have two regulatory bodies in adjacent 1st world countries which cannot seem to recognize each others paperwork. Bob -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Hans Vander Voort Sent: January 4, 2007 11:05 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Importing an unfinished homebuilt into Canada. Robert, You can register a US aircraft to a noncitizen, but he or she must be a resident of the US (aircraft can be outside US) Most builders in the US use EAA Tech counselors during the building process. These Tech counselors do at least three inspections (two of them pre-cover) and file a form with the EAA of this inspection. The builder usually gets a copy of this form. If you can't find it in the builders logs/receipts , perhaps the EAA or the Tech counselor that did the inspection can help. This form recording the inspection might not be sufficient to import in to Canada, but is worth a try. Hans "Robert Gow" To Sent by: owner-pietenpol-l cc ist-server@matron ics.com Subject Pietenpol-List: Importing an unfinished homebuilt into Canada. 01/04/2007 09:42 AM Please respond to pietenpol-list@ma tronics.com I`m interested in Cart`s Pietenpol but there are some issues importing it to Canada. My first contact with the inspectors here was not as good as I had hoped. The tell me I'll need a pre-cover inspection if I want to import it and finish the project in Canada. That means removing the fabric. I do not want to rip the fabric off this airplane to get it inspected. Or, as a finished aircraft, the aircraft must have a 100 hours on it before it can be imported. Does anyone have an idea how to avoid this? Perhaps I could complete it or have it completed as a US aircraft and fly it under US registry for the first 100 hours. But can you register a US aircraft to a non-citizen/ non-resident? Or perhaps I can get the pre-cover inspection waived if there is evidence of an FAA pre-cover inspection. Is there a precedent for this? Or I can look into ultra-light classification but I do not believe I could carry a passenger which is not acceptable to me. Bob ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Securing plane and J3 eyebrows
From: Hans Vander Voort <hans.vander.voort(at)alfalaval.com>
Date: Jan 04, 2007
Gene, Expand your search Aeronca Champ, Taylorcraft and J3 all have the same type of "eyebrow" $500 seems excessive for something you can easily make yourself for a lot less. I made my own for my Corvair ( I call them Cooling ears) http://www.mykitplane.com/Planes/fileslist2.cfm?AlbumID=74 Different dimension but same concept. Most important is the "scoop" dimension, measure a J3's and make a card board prototype template. Transfer this to Aluminum sheet, cut, drill, bend and pop rivet and your done. Hans ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Securing plane and J3 eyebrows
Date: Jan 04, 2007
Thanks Steve, I'll give that a try. Mine have so many stress cracks that I don't think I'll try welding them (They are home made). Gene ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Ruse" <steve(at)wotelectronics.com> Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 11:26 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Securing plane and J3 eyebrows > > > Someone on Barnstormers sells new eyebrows for $350/pair. They look > pretty good to me. > > You might check with Legend Aircraft Company too, makers of the Legend > Cub. Their cub has an O-200, but I bet the eyebrows are the same as > those on the A-65. I've never heard of them selling parts, but they are > really nice guys, and might be willing to do it. If you hear anything > from them let us know, I've got one of my eyebrows off right now to be > welded. I have no idea how well a weld will hold, but I'm giving it a > shot. > http://www.legend.aero/ > > Steve Ruse > Norman, OK > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Maximum prop diameter
From: "GeneWeber" <em2(at)vzavenue.net>
Date: Jan 04, 2007
Hi Folks, Can anyone give me some insight as to a safe maximum prop diameter for a Piet? Safe is sometimes in the eye of the beholder, so if you can give me an idea of the prop clearance with flat tires and suspension bottomed out that would help. Ive never flown a FW, so that needs to be considered (I.E. I could certainly do something bone headed before I gain experience). Im giving some serious consideration to building a Pietenpol. I built a gyroplane, and would now like to do a two place aircraft in wood. I prefer woodworking, and the Pietenpol looks like a good beginner project. The biggest expense item is the engine, so to get a decent cost estimate Id like to first figure out which engine. Largest diameter prop where the tips can be kept in the sonic region is the most efficient. Hence my question as a starting point. Then I can figure out what engine has the desired HP at the appropriate RPM (and wont exceed my limited budget). In just poking around so far the Corvair seems like a light & cost effective choice, but limits prop length due to direct drive. Subaru seems like a cost effective choice and reduction units are used, but its on the heavy side. If I win some money Im buying a Rotec radial [Mr. Green] Thanks & Regards, Gene Weber Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=85430#85430 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: cooling eyebrows
Date: Jan 04, 2007
There was a set of cardboard templates of the J-3 cooling eyebrows making the rounds about a year ago. I think they were taken from the templates that Mike Cuy used to make his from. Anybody know where they are now? Sounds like it could save somebody a few $$ and plenty of time not having to reverse-engineer them. I have plenty of photographs of the eyebrows on 41CC thanks to Corky's documentation of the construction process. Oscar Zuniga San Antonio, TX mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com website at http://www.flysquirrel.net _________________________________________________________________ The MSN Entertainment Guide to Golden Globes is here. Get all the scoop. http://tv.msn.com/tv/globes2007/?icid=nctagline2 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: skis
Date: Jan 04, 2007
For a couple of photos of some very simple wooden skis taken off an Avid Flyer, check out the last two photos on this page: http://www.flysquirrel.net/M19float.html Oscar Zuniga San Antonio, TX mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com website at http://www.flysquirrel.net _________________________________________________________________ Your Hotmail address already works to sign into Windows Live Messenger! Get it now ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 04, 2007
From: Tim Willis <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Securing plane and J3 eyebrows
Hans, I like your drawings. Thanks. Tim in central TX -----Original Message----- >From: Hans Vander Voort <hans.vander.voort(at)alfalaval.com> >Sent: Jan 4, 2007 12:44 PM >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Securing plane and J3 eyebrows > > >Gene, > >Expand your search Aeronca Champ, Taylorcraft and J3 all have the same type >of "eyebrow" > >$500 seems excessive for something you can easily make yourself for a lot >less. > >I made my own for my Corvair ( I call them Cooling ears) >http://www.mykitplane.com/Planes/fileslist2.cfm?AlbumID=74 >Different dimension but same concept. > >Most important is the "scoop" dimension, measure a J3's and make a card >board prototype template. >Transfer this to Aluminum sheet, cut, drill, bend and pop rivet and your >done. > >Hans > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "MICHAEL SILVIUS" <M.Silvius(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: skis
Date: Jan 04, 2007
Oscar: This is a drawing that came with my Jodel project. The idea of using a snow board had crossed my mind. Michael in Maine ----- Original Message ----- From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 1:37 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: skis > > For a couple of photos of some very simple wooden skis taken off an Avid > Flyer, check out the last two photos on this page: > http://www.flysquirrel.net/M19float.html ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Securing plane and J3 eyebrows
Date: Jan 04, 2007
Thanks for your efforts Dick. Looking forward to the photo's. Gene zharvey(at)bellsouth.net ----- Original Message ----- From: Dick Navratil To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 11:35 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Securing plane and J3 eyebrows Gene I made them myself, they really aren't very hard. I made them from .024 6061 T6 aluminum. That wasn't the most ideal stock, but I had extra laying around. I used #10 copper wire to roll in the leading edge, that also helped in forming the hump. You will need to form the rear section and bend to shape. The rear section gets rivited to the upper housing. I also doubled the thickness on the section that attaches to the cylinders. This will make more sense if you see a close up pic. I will be going back to the hangar tomorrow and will take a couple. Contact me direct so I can send them off list. Dick N. ----- Original Message ----- From: Gene & Tammy To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 7:53 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Securing plane and J3 eyebrows Thanks to all for the great Ideas on how to secure your plane while hand proping. Having been a sailor for many years and even having some on hand, I'm going to try the snapshackle idea first. Don't know why I hadn't thought of it my self. Now on to my next question. Does anyone have any ideas on the best place to get the J3 eyebrows that are used on the A65? Has anyone made their own J3 eyebrows? If so, please share how you formed them. Aircraft Spruce has them but they want about $500 for a pair. Thanks Gene N502R Tennessee href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.mat ronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Securing plane and J3 eyebrows
Date: Jan 04, 2007
Thank you Hans, that helps a lot. Gene N502lR ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hans Vander Voort" <hans.vander.voort(at)alfalaval.com> Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 11:44 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Securing plane and J3 eyebrows > > > Gene, > > Expand your search Aeronca Champ, Taylorcraft and J3 all have the same > type > of "eyebrow" > > $500 seems excessive for something you can easily make yourself for a lot > less. > > I made my own for my Corvair ( I call them Cooling ears) > http://www.mykitplane.com/Planes/fileslist2.cfm?AlbumID=74 > Different dimension but same concept. > > Most important is the "scoop" dimension, measure a J3's and make a card > board prototype template. > Transfer this to Aluminum sheet, cut, drill, bend and pop rivet and your > done. > > Hans > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: skis
From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com>
Date: Jan 04, 2007
Hi Michael, The Jodel ski drawing looks very interesting. Do you think I could bother you for another larger picture emailed to me. I unfortunately can't make it out very good. Thanks in advance! Don Emch EmchAir(at)aol.com NX899DE Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=85491#85491 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 04, 2007
From: "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Subject: thinking ahead when flying with skiis
Learned one amazing thing when flying with skiis on a Kolb U/L. Got talking with the old timers at the airport, and found out some basic things about flying on skiis, that I never would have thought of. You know how you pick up the tail and spin it around to go out for another flight? If you do that to a plane on skiis, you'll twist the landing gear off, destroy it. Think of it,,,all the leverage of you on the tail, twisting, and the skiis don't move. A pilot flying on skiis must taxi into an area and figure in advance what big looping circle he can make to get out. Just remember "you can drive it on the skiis, you can't turn the plane on the skiis" Also when you get in the plane that has been sitting on the snow for awhile, will freeze to the ground. When you are ready to go, you work the rudder, to break the skiis lose. While wiggling the tail, soon you'll feel one ski break, then the other. Now keep moving. And you must wax them too. walt evans NX140DL "Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you" Ben Franklin ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 04, 2007
From: Mike Luther <luther(at)gci.net>
Subject: Re: rib stiching advice
Chuck G. 500 stitches in the 3 piece wing plus the ( Optional ?) ones that I am doing in the Tail-feathers. Mike ----- Original Message ----- From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com Date: Wednesday, January 3, 2007 2:04 pm Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: rib stiching advice > In a message dated 1/3/2007 2:57:00 PM Central Standard Time, > luther(at)gci.net > writes: > Douwe, > Thanks for the additional advice, I finished lacing both wings > last Monday > "New Years Day". I worked alone and used four needles. I stood > the wing up > and had plenty of light on both sides of the wing to help look > through the wing > to see the hole on the other side. > Mike > Mike, > Did you happen to count how many stiches you put in ? I seem to > remember I > put almost 500 stiches in my one piece wing. > > Chuck G. > NX770CG > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 04, 2007
From: Mike Luther <luther(at)gci.net>
Subject: Re: Securing plane and J3 eyebrows
Gene, I got a used set of eyebrows off of E-bay about 4 years ago for $75.00. Mike ----- Original Message ----- From: Gene & Tammy <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net> Date: Thursday, January 4, 2007 4:58 am Subject: Pietenpol-List: Securing plane and J3 eyebrows > Thanks to all for the great Ideas on how to secure your plane > while hand proping. Having been a sailor for many years and even > having some on hand, I'm going to try the snapshackle idea first. > Don't know why I hadn't thought of it my self. > Now on to my next question. Does anyone have any ideas on the > best place to get the J3 eyebrows that are used on the A65? Has > anyone made their own J3 eyebrows? If so, please share how you > formed them. Aircraft Spruce has them but they want about $500 > for a pair. > Thanks > Gene > N502R > Tennessee ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 04, 2007
From: Mike Luther <luther(at)gci.net>
Subject: Re: What paint to use?
Hi Dan, Poly -Fiber two part catalyzed Epoxy is white and after a 7 day cure time is extremely durable, $o, my $teel fitting$, landing gear, $trut$, and motor mount is white. Any cracking will show up really well if the metal is a light color. The primary solvent in the Poly-Fiber process ,MEK, won't damage this finish at all. Mike Luther ----- Original Message ----- From: HelsperSew(at)aol.com Date: Thursday, January 4, 2007 8:15 am Subject: Pietenpol-List: What paint to use? > Hi Guys, > > I am wondering what type of paint (final color) to use on the many > steel > fittings on the Piet. I am worried about the glues and thinners > that are used > during the Polyfiber covering process. I would appreciate any > suggestions > based on experience. Thanks. > > Dan Helsper > Poplar Grove, IL. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Isablcorky(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 04, 2007
Subject: Eyebrows
Pieters, I promised sometimes back that I would never add or subtract to this list but after reading those messages concerning "eyebrows" I just couldn't restrain myself. I cannot believe that a man would endeavor to build a Piet or any other airplane who did not posess the abilities to fabricate such simple parts as the eyebrows. He should maybe try making footstools or magazine holders. That is such a simple task. Believe me when I say, if I can do it anyone can. Don't expect a finish product on the first try but boy you will really learn each time you try. Aluminum and rivets are really cheap, your pride and dignity are expensive. Haven't tried to accuse, embass or otherwise. But I hope I have encouraged you to try Corky, an old Pieter ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 04, 2007
From: Clif Dawson <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: thinking ahead when flying with skiis
Once you've stopped, lay 10 mil poly down in front of plane and push skiis onto that. ----- Original Message ----- From: walt evans To: piet list Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 3:31 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: thinking ahead when flying with skiis Also when you get in the plane that has been sitting on the snow for awhile, will freeze to the ground. When you are ready to go, you work the rudder, to break the skiis lose. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 04, 2007
Subject: J3 eyebrows
In a message dated 1/4/2007 7:55:55 AM Central Standard Time, zharvey(at)bellsouth.net writes: Does anyone have any ideas on the best place to get the J3 eyebrows that are used on the A65? Has anyone made their own J3 eyebrows? If so, please share how you formed them. Gene, I made my eyebrows from a traced drawing I made of the eyebrows from a J3 Cub, that was apart for annual. Rivet locations, cutouts, small deflectors inside the eyebrows, and spark plug holes are on the tracings. I rolled an aluminum welding rod in for the leading edge of the eyebrows. I made copies of these tracings at Kinko's. Flip the drawing over to make the other side. There are some pictures at the bottom of the page of my web site: http://nx770cg.com/EngProp.html For $5 for shipping and copying costs, and I'll send it to you in a business size envelope. Chuck G. NX770CG ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 04, 2007
From: Mike Luther <luther(at)gci.net>
Subject: Re: Eyebrows
I hear you loud and clear. I think that I will read it again so that I don't miss anything important. Can't wait to see you in person and check out your airplane. Mike Luther ----- Original Message ----- From: Isablcorky(at)aol.com Date: Thursday, January 4, 2007 4:58 pm Subject: Pietenpol-List: Eyebrows > Pieters, I promised sometimes back that I would never add or > subtract to > this list but I lied and after reading those messages concerning "eyebrows" I > just did not even try to > restrain myself. > > I cannot believe that a man or an idiot would endeavor to build a Piet or any > other > airplane who did not possess an oppossing thumb and forefinger and the abilities to fabricate such simple > parts as the > eyebrows. He should maybe try making footstools or magazine > holders or go back to finger painting. That is > such a simple task. Believe me when I say, if you don't understand I can't help you. Don't > expect a finish product on the first try but boy you will really > learn each time you find a really good deal and are one step closer to flying what > you try. Aluminum and rivets and your feelings are really cheap, your pride and > dignity are > expensive and easy enough to step on. > > Haven't tried to accuse, embass or otherwise spell correctly. But I hope I have > encouraged > you to try > > Corky, an old Pieter > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Weir" <billweir(at)lon.imag.net>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 28 Msgs - 01/04/07
Date: Jan 05, 2007
To Robert Gow, To importing amateur built a/c into Canada. If the plane has 100 hours then it comes in without difficulty. I think the process has been given to MDRA at 1-519-457-2909. To be sure give RAA CANADA a call it 1-905-638-1359 Tues, Wed, or Thurs and they will lead you to the process. If you care to contact me I can lead you to someone who has recently imported a Kitfox. Bill Weir > From: "Robert Gow" <rgow(at)avionicsdesign.ca> > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Importing an unfinished homebuilt into Canada. > > I`m interested in Cart`s Pietenpol but there are some issues importing it > to > Canada. My first contact with the inspectors here was not as good as I > had > hoped. The tell me I'll need a pre-cover inspection if I want to import > it > and finish the project in Canada. That means removing the fabric. I do > not want to rip the fabric off this airplane to get it inspected. > > Or, as a finished aircraft, the aircraft must have a 100 hours on it > before > it can be imported. > > Does anyone have an idea how to avoid this? > > Perhaps I could complete it or have it completed as a US aircraft and fly > it > under US registry for the first 100 hours. But can you register a US > aircraft to a non-citizen/ non-resident? > > Or perhaps I can get the pre-cover inspection waived if there is evidence > of > an FAA pre-cover inspection. Is there a precedent for this? > > Or I can look into ultra-light classification but I do not believe I could > carry a passenger which is not acceptable to me. > > Bob > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: painting metal fittings
Date: Jan 05, 2007
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
Dan-- the IA/ A&P guys who helped me paint my airplane suggested cleaning with MEK, spray can zinc chromate followed by an enamel that matches your fabric color. We protected the protruding metal fittings during fabric treatment/paint with masking tape then painted them after all the fabric work was complete. In my case we used Randolph dopes for the fabric and matching Randolph enamels for the metal parts. Etching was done on all the aluminum sheet parts, cowl, cockpit area covers, etc. prior to zinc chromate and painting. Mike C. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Robert Gow" <rgow(at)avionicsdesign.ca>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 28 Msgs - 01/04/07
Date: Jan 05, 2007
Thanks. But of course this on is mostly done and mostly covered but has never flown. So the best way is to find away around cutting the fabric off for a pre-cover inspection. I've asked for any FAA or EAA inspection forms. Bob -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Bill Weir Sent: January 5, 2007 8:01 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 28 Msgs - 01/04/07 To Robert Gow, To importing amateur built a/c into Canada. If the plane has 100 hours then it comes in without difficulty. I think the process has been given to MDRA at 1-519-457-2909. To be sure give RAA CANADA a call it 1-905-638-1359 Tues, Wed, or Thurs and they will lead you to the process. If you care to contact me I can lead you to someone who has recently imported a Kitfox. Bill Weir > From: "Robert Gow" <rgow(at)avionicsdesign.ca> > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Importing an unfinished homebuilt into Canada. > > I`m interested in Cart`s Pietenpol but there are some issues importing it > to > Canada. My first contact with the inspectors here was not as good as I > had > hoped. The tell me I'll need a pre-cover inspection if I want to import > it > and finish the project in Canada. That means removing the fabric. I do > not want to rip the fabric off this airplane to get it inspected. > > Or, as a finished aircraft, the aircraft must have a 100 hours on it > before > it can be imported. > > Does anyone have an idea how to avoid this? > > Perhaps I could complete it or have it completed as a US aircraft and fly > it > under US registry for the first 100 hours. But can you register a US > aircraft to a non-citizen/ non-resident? > > Or perhaps I can get the pre-cover inspection waived if there is evidence > of > an FAA pre-cover inspection. Is there a precedent for this? > > Or I can look into ultra-light classification but I do not believe I could > carry a passenger which is not acceptable to me. > > Bob > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Robert Gow" <rgow(at)avionicsdesign.ca>
Subject: thinking ahead when flying with skis
Date: Jan 05, 2007
Ran a Chief on skis for years. They are not that hard to turn on skis. I've even landed on wet grass in the spring when the sun burned off the light snow covering. As for sticking to the snow; if you land in the bush just rip off a couple of pine branches and stick them under the skis. Since the lakes were great for doing touch and goes and chasing sleds you would need to carry a couple of pieces of firewood with you to prop the airplane up on so it didn't stick to the snow if it was parked for a while (like when you taxied up to a winter fair in Barrie or Penatang) One other point to consider. If it's one of those dead cold (-40) sunny days and you shut down in the middle on no place miles from another human being, make sure you know how to get it started in that kind of temperature. It can be disconcerting to watch the sun setting while you are desperately propping an old plane in the middle of a frozen lake. It would be a damn cold night. Bob -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of walt evans Sent: January 4, 2007 6:32 PM To: piet list Subject: Pietenpol-List: thinking ahead when flying with skiis Learned one amazing thing when flying with skiis on a Kolb U/L. Got talking with the old timers at the airport, and found out some basic things about flying on skiis, that I never would have thought of. You know how you pick up the tail and spin it around to go out for another flight? If you do that to a plane on skiis, you'll twist the landing gear off, destroy it. Think of it,,,all the leverage of you on the tail, twisting, and the skiis don't move. A pilot flying on skiis must taxi into an area and figure in advance what big looping circle he can make to get out. Just remember "you can drive it on the skiis, you can't turn the plane on the skiis" Also when you get in the plane that has been sitting on the snow for awhile, will freeze to the ground. When you are ready to go, you work the rudder, to break the skiis lose. While wiggling the tail, soon you'll feel one ski break, then the other. Now keep moving. And you must wax them too. walt evans NX140DL "Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you" Ben Franklin ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Cooper" <blugoos1(at)hughes.net>
Subject: eyebrow patterns
Date: Jan 05, 2007
I have the eyebrow patterns you all are talking about. I got them through Corky. It might take a while to find them. We're leaving tomorrow for California and won't be back until Jan.20. It might take a while to reach Tom Schildt, my partner, by email. His home 'phone is 337-989-8148, and he may be able to find them if you need them before I get back. Jim Cooper 337-937-6116 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Cooper" <blugoos1(at)hughes.net>
Subject: eyebrow patterns
Date: Jan 05, 2007
I have the eyebrow patterns you all are talking about. I got them through Corky. It might take a while to find them. We're leaving tomorrow for California and won't be back until Jan.20. It might take a while to reach Tom Schildt, my partner, by email. His home 'phone is 337-989-8148, and he may be able to find them if you need them before I get back. Jim Cooper 337-937-6116 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 05, 2007
From: Ben Ramler <ben_ramler2002(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: rib construction
Hi Dale Sorry for not getting back to you sooner! I will send a photo to you tonight! Also, my numbers are below. Take Care, Ben Ramler 320-656-5377 ----- Original Message ---- From: Dale Johnson <ddjohn(at)earthlink.net> Sent: Wednesday, January 3, 2007 6:45:57 PM Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: rib construction Hi Ben I am trying to figure out what you are doing wrong.No notching required. Send pictures or send phone # . Or send me your address I have some spare rib sections. Dale Mpls > [Original Message] > From: Ben Ramler <ben_ramler2002(at)yahoo.com> > To: > Date: 12/31/2006 2:06:36 PM > Subject: Pietenpol-List: rib construction > > > Hello Group, > > Hopefully everyone had great christmas! My question is on the rib costruction. I've got my first rib almost done however my question is on the gusset plate that sits on the sides of the rib in front. does 2 1/8" x 3/4: sound right? then what about this 1/2x1/2" block that the plans talk about does that somehow get nothced out and gets glued in? If anyone wants see pictures I can post some. > > > Thanks, > > Ben Ramler > St. Cloud, MN > > __________________________________________________ > > __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Isablcorky(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 05, 2007
Subject: Fwd: Eyebrows
-----------------------------1167961897-- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Isablcorky(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 05, 2007
Subject: Re: Eyebrows
Luther, A reply to your last. I'm not offended by the changes. Guess I did use improper grammer skills and spellings but whoever signs these messages are responsible for the contents. Remember, these damn things circle the globe. However; I will in the future send all my Piet messages BEFORE my " old charter" delights. I would be very happy to meet you but as of now I don't have an airplane. But I will as soon as I get the nerve to haul a trailer behind my 89 Olds to Hawley, Minn. and bring back my new (old) 42 AeroncaTAC Defender/L-3. to warm, delightful, beautiful and politically correct Louisiana. Corky the ole Pieter and Knocker ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Eyebrows
Date: Jan 05, 2007
Corky, I find it interesting that so many Piet builders and owners have become such wonderful mentors to those of us less skillful and knowledgeable, while you appear to spend your time trying to put down those of us that are trying to learn. True, I'm not highly skilled or knowledgeable but that doesn't make me stupid or fit to only make footstools or magazine holders. You may be a good (?) airplane builder but you really need to spend more time working on your people skills. The message you were trying to deliver really lost something in the tellling. The mentors I talk with tell me that they really get a lot of joy out of helping and teaching others. Probably even more that you get out of speading putdowns and discouragement. You might want to try mentoring, you just might like it. Haven't tried to accuse, embass or otherwise. But I hope I have encouraged you to try. Gene, an new Pieter ----- Original Message ----- From: Isablcorky(at)aol.com To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 7:51 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Eyebrows Pieters, I promised sometimes back that I would never add or subtract to this list but after reading those messages concerning "eyebrows" I just couldn't restrain myself. I cannot believe that a man would endeavor to build a Piet or any other airplane who did not posess the abilities to fabricate such simple parts as the eyebrows. He should maybe try making footstools or magazine holders. That is such a simple task. Believe me when I say, if I can do it anyone can. Don't expect a finish product on the first try but boy you will really learn each time you try. Aluminum and rivets are really cheap, your pride and dignity are expensive. Haven't tried to accuse, embass or otherwise. But I hope I have encouraged you to try Corky, an old Pieter ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Eyebrows
Date: Jan 05, 2007
From: "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal.com>
Gene, I've never met Corky in person, but we've certainly swapped a lot of emails. I don't think his comments were meant to inflame. In fact, as one of those who made just about every last piece of my Pietenpol, I tend to agree with him. He was trying to encourage you to try making your own eyebrows (as he did, and I did, and Gene Hubbard, and Mike Cuy and Chuck Gantzer and many others have done). I'll be glad to send you photos (offline) of my eyebrow manufacturing process. Chuck Gantzer gave good advice - just trace a set of Cub eyebrows (or your old ones) to get a flat pattern. I made mine from softer aluminum than 2024 - I think I used 5052 or something like that. I rolled the leading edge around a piece of stainless steel welding rod. I can show you in the photos. As one who has gotten many a hearty laugh from the old curmudgeon from Louisiana, I will stand up and say, "Don't worry about ol' Corky. He's one of the Good'uns". Jack Phillips Raleigh, NC -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gene & Tammy Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 2:04 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Eyebrows Corky, I find it interesting that so many Piet builders and owners have become such wonderful mentors to those of us less skillful and knowledgeable, while you appear to spend your time trying to put down those of us that are trying to learn. True, I'm not highly skilled or knowledgeable but that doesn't make me stupid or fit to only make footstools or magazine holders. You may be a good (?) airplane builder but you really need to spend more time working on your people skills. The message you were trying to deliver really lost something in the tellling. The mentors I talk with tell me that they really get a lot of joy out of helping and teaching others. Probably even more that you get out of speading putdowns and discouragement. You might want to try mentoring, you just might like it. Haven't tried to accuse, embass or otherwise. But I hope I have encouraged you to try. Gene, an new Pieter ----- Original Message ----- From: Isablcorky(at)aol.com To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 7:51 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Eyebrows Pieters, I promised sometimes back that I would never add or subtract to this list but after reading those messages concerning "eyebrows" I just couldn't restrain myself. I cannot believe that a man would endeavor to build a Piet or any other airplane who did not posess the abilities to fabricate such simple parts as the eyebrows. He should maybe try making footstools or magazine holders. That is such a simple task. Believe me when I say, if I can do it anyone can. Don't expect a finish product on the first try but boy you will really learn each time you try. Aluminum and rivets are really cheap, your pride and dignity are expensive. Haven't tried to accuse, embass or otherwise. But I hope I have encouraged you to try Corky, an old Pieter href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.matr onics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com _________________________________________________ This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privilege d, proprietary, or otherwise private information. If you have received it i n 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 - N ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Eyebrows
Date: Jan 05, 2007
Thanks Jack, What set my teeth on edge was that I had asked for advice on both where to "buy" and also how to "make" them. My thinking was that if someone on the list was making and selling them I may want to buy but then on the other hand if I could get instructions I might try my hand at making them. I noticed that when someone on the list was asking another to build a brass radiator for them, no one called him an idot. The message Corky was trying to send is correct, however, the way he presented it was really poor. His kind of comments are more likely to discourage someone from building, rather than encourage. As you know, I didn't build my Piet and I have a lot of catching up to do to be on the level of thoes that did build theirs and I will need a lot of mentoring. Thank you for your imput and I'm looking forward to any assistance you can provide. Gene PS Corky's off my bad list, he called me a "Young Man" (and who said he didn't have any people skills?) ----- Original Message ----- From: Phillips, Jack To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 1:15 PM Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Eyebrows Gene, I've never met Corky in person, but we've certainly swapped a lot of emails. I don't think his comments were meant to inflame. In fact, as one of those who made just about every last piece of my Pietenpol, I tend to agree with him. He was trying to encourage you to try making your own eyebrows (as he did, and I did, and Gene Hubbard, and Mike Cuy and Chuck Gantzer and many others have done).. I'll be glad to send you photos (offline) of my eyebrow manufacturing process. Chuck Gantzer gave good advice - just trace a set of Cub eyebrows (or your old ones) to get a flat pattern. I made mine from softer aluminum than 2024 - I think I used 5052 or something like that. I rolled the leading edge around a piece of stainless steel welding rod. I can show you in the photos. As one who has gotten many a hearty laugh from the old curmudgeon from Louisiana, I will stand up and say, "Don't worry about ol' Corky. He's one of the Good'uns". Jack Phillips Raleigh, NC -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gene & Tammy Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 2:04 PM To: pietenpol-list@matronics..com Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Eyebrows Corky, I find it interesting that so many Piet builders and owners have become such wonderful mentors to those of us less skillful and knowledgeable, while you appear to spend your time trying to put down those of us that are trying to learn. True, I'm not highly skilled or knowledgeable but that doesn't make me stupid or fit to only make footstools or magazine holders. You may be a good (?) airplane builder but you really need to spend more time working on your people skills. The message you were trying to deliver really lost something in the tellling. The mentors I talk with tell me that they really get a lot of joy out of helping and teaching others. Probably even more that you get out of speading putdowns and discouragement. You might want to try mentoring, you just might like it. Haven't tried to accuse, embass or otherwise. But I hope I have encouraged you to try. Gene, an new Pieter ----- Original Message ----- From: Isablcorky(at)aol.com To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 7:51 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Eyebrows Pieters, I promised sometimes back that I would never add or subtract to this list but after reading those messages concerning "eyebrows" I just couldn't restrain myself. I cannot believe that a man would endeavor to build a Piet or any other airplane who did not posess the abilities to fabricate such simple parts as the eyebrows. He should maybe try making footstools or magazine holders. That is such a simple task. Believe me when I say, if I can do it anyone can. Don't expect a finish product on the first try but boy you will really learn each time you try. Aluminum and rivets are really cheap, your pride and dignity are expensive. Haven't tried to accuse, embass or otherwise. But I hope I have encouraged you to try Corky, an old Pieter href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.mat ronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-Listhref="http://forums.matronics.com">h ttp://forums.matronics.com http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-Listhttp://forums.matronics. com _________________________________________________ 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 - N ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: eyebrows and tough love
Date: Jan 05, 2007
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
I'd have to agree w/ Jack Phillips 100% on ole Corky and his comments. They are meant to inspire and kick you in the butt rather than discourage. Back in his day and in most of mine (being brought up by a WWII Vet Dad) there was encouragement by saying 'git your butt out there and learn this stuff then try it then try it again til you git it right and no bitchin' or you can go cry to yer Mommy. I'm not endorsing that kind of tough love (oh who the heck am I kidding--- I am) but that is Corky's way as he was taught and it helped me along the way too I'd say. Mike C. PS- watch a few old episodes of Gomer Pyle and note that many WWII guys and vets from that era are similar to Sergeant Carter on that series. That was the way they taught. No kisses and hugs and telling you that they love you---just get out there, learn it at do it. Had a lady flight instructor early on who was like that. Mean as a snake but she got me to keep the ball in the center during steep turns and maintain altitude. She'd say if you don't hit your prop wake you didn't do it good enough. I can still hit my prop wake most times today still. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: eyebrows and tough love
Date: Jan 05, 2007
Mike, Thank you for your input. I too was raised with the "kick in the butt to inspire" method (I'm 62) if it was needed. I was also raised with the belief that you don't tell a person what he can't do, you tell him he can do anything he wants to, if he wants to do it bad enough. None of this putdown tellling him he's only good enough to do such & such. I grew up in a very poor small mountain town where the High School teachers were telling you what you couldn't do in life unless you got all A's in their class, rather than telling you what you can do in life. If it hadn't been for my dad telling me I could do anything I wanted, I'd still be back there like all the rest of my class mates, doing nothing with their lives. They learned it from their teachers and no one told them otherwise. For me, because of my dad's advise and mentoring, I was able to retire at 41, take my family on a sailing adventure on the Pacific for 12 years and then spend the last 5 years as a Marine Captain in the Arctic. In writing Corky, my mission was to let him know that this is one person that doesn't like to be talked down to and I suspect I'm not alone. I don't expect to be coddled and burped, just pointed in the right direction with as many traveling instructions as possible (that's what a mentor does). I'm sure Corky is a nice guy but I can tell you that the other Piet builders/flyers that responded to my questions motivated me many times more than Corky has. Boy, you can sure tell it's a rainy day here in Tennessee. I have way too much time on my hands. Hell with it, I'm going to the hanger. Gene N502R Tennessee ----- Original Message ----- From: Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC] To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 1:56 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: eyebrows and tough love I'd have to agree w/ Jack Phillips 100% on ole Corky and his comments. They are meant to inspire and kick you in the butt rather than discourage. Back in his day and in most of mine (being brought up by a WWII Vet Dad) there was encouragement by saying 'git your butt out there and learn this stuff then try it then try it again til you git it right and no bitchin' or you can go cry to yer Mommy. I'm not endorsing that kind of tough love (oh who the heck am I kidding--- I am) but that is Corky's way as he was taught and it helped me along the way too I'd say. Mike C. PS- watch a few old episodes of Gomer Pyle and note that many WWII guys and vets from that era are similar to Sergeant Carter on that series. That was the way they taught. No kisses and hugs and telling you that they love you---just get out there, learn it at do it. Had a lady flight instructor early on who was like that. Mean as a snake but she got me to keep the ball in the center during steep turns and maintain altitude. She'd say if you don't hit your prop wake you didn't do it good enough. I can still hit my prop wake most times today still. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: here pretty horsey
Date: Jan 05, 2007
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
I was just trying to get to the end of this work week sitting here thinking "why wouldn't sulky wheels and hubs work on a Piet ?" http://www.parkerwheelsandhubs.com/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: here pretty horsey
Date: Jan 05, 2007
From: "Jack T. Textor" <jtextor(at)thepalmergroup.com>
Now you tell me Mike...what a great idea.... Although maybe a little narrow.... Jack Textor www.textors.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 05, 2007
From: "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: here pretty horsey
Think you're onto something , Mike! walt evans NX140DL "Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you" Ben Franklin ----- Original Message ----- From: Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC] To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 3:57 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: here pretty horsey I was just trying to get to the end of this work week sitting here thinking "why wouldn't sulky wheels and hubs work on a Piet ?" http://www.parkerwheelsandhubs.com/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 05, 2007
From: Ben Charvet <bcharvet(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: what about OSU ?
How bout them Gators? Ben Charvet, UF '77, 04 Mims, Fl ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: eyebrow patterns
Date: Jan 05, 2007
Jim, Thank you for your offer. Mike C. is sending me a pattern so probably won't need you to search for yours. Gene ----- Original Message ----- From: Jim Cooper To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com ; Pietenpol-List Digest Server Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 11:14 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: eyebrow patterns I have the eyebrow patterns you all are talking about. I got them through Corky. It might take a while to find them. We're leaving tomorrow for California and won't be back until Jan.20. It might take a while to reach Tom Schildt, my partner, by email. His home 'phone is 337-989-8148, and he may be able to find them if you need them before I get back. Jim Cooper 337-937-6116 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 05, 2007
From: KMHeide <kmheidecpo(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: eyebrow patterns
PLease post the patterns or scan them so we's Yankees can have a look see... KM Heide Fargo, ND Jim Cooper wrote: I have the eyebrow patterns you all are talking about. I got them through Corky. It might take a while to find them. We're leaving tomorrow for California and won't be back until Jan.20. It might take a while to reach Tom Schildt, my partner, by email. His home 'phone is 337-989-8148, and he may be able to find them if you need them before I get back. Jim Cooper 337-937-6116 __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 05, 2007
From: KMHeide <kmheidecpo(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: eyebrow patterns
Hey Mike......Where is my pattern? Not fair!.....everyone should have a copy! Ken H Fargo, ND Gene & Tammy wrote: Jim, Thank you for your offer. Mike C. is sending me a pattern so probably won't need you to search for yours. Gene ----- Original Message ----- From: Jim Cooper To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com ; Pietenpol-List Digest Server Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 11:14 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: eyebrow patterns I have the eyebrow patterns you all are talking about. I got them through Corky. It might take a while to find them. We're leaving tomorrow for California and won't be back until Jan.20. It might take a while to reach Tom Schildt, my partner, by email. His home 'phone is 337-989-8148, and he may be able to find them if you need them before I get back. Jim Cooper 337-937-6116 href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Steve Glass" <redsglass(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: CAD versus cardboard
Date: Jan 06, 2007
Hi I have been on the list for about a year gathering info but not yet started building. It would be intersting to know the average age of the people on the list. I would guess around mid 50's. Assuming that I would guess only a portion are up on Cad. I'm 59 CAD would be great for documenting patterns such as the eyebrow currently in cardboard. The eyebrow question will surface again in a year or so but the patterns might not. If we had a cad file they could be reproduced again and again. These files could live on the Matronics site to be accessed by all. I have seen mention of some of people putting the Piet into CAD perhaps somebody would document the pieces that we all seem to need every once in a while. It will take some time but we could build a good library of important bits. Interested to hear your thoughts. Steve in Maine _________________________________________________________________ The MSN Entertainment Guide to Golden Globes is here. Get all the scoop. http://tv.msn.com/tv/globes2007/?icid=nctagline2 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bill Weir" <billweir(at)lon.imag.net>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 29 Msgs - 01/05/07
Date: Jan 06, 2007
Bob Gow, I didn't catch that it was a partially built Piet that you were considering importing ino Canada. don't take this one to Transport Canada but lean on you local MDRA inspector to inspect look inside the wings etc. with a video camera on a stick. Acording to our local ispector he was able to make good inspection as he watched the screen and I don't think they did, but it would have been possible to record and save the images. Bill Weir >> From: "Robert Gow" <rgow(at)avionicsdesign.ca> >> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Importing an unfinished homebuilt into Canada. >> >> I`m interested in Cart`s Pietenpol but there are some issues importing it >> to >> Canada. My first contact with the inspectors here was not as good as I >> had >> hoped. The tell me I'll need a pre-cover inspection if I want to import >> it >> and finish the project in Canada. That means removing the fabric. I do >> not want to rip the fabric off this airplane to get it inspected. >> >> Or, as a finished aircraft, the aircraft must have a 100 hours on it >> before >> it can be imported. >> >> Does anyone have an idea how to avoid this? >> >> Perhaps I could complete it or have it completed as a US aircraft and fly >> it >> under US registry for the first 100 hours. But can you register a US >> aircraft to a non-citizen/ non-resident? >> >> Or perhaps I can get the pre-cover inspection waived if there is evidence >> of >> an FAA pre-cover inspection. Is there a precedent for this? >> >> Or I can look into ultra-light classification but I do not believe I >> could >> carry a passenger which is not acceptable to me. >> >> Bob > .ca> >> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Importing an unfinished homebuilt into Canada. >> >> I`m interested in Cart`s Pietenpol but there are some issues importing it >> to >> Canada. My first contact with the inspectors here was not as good as I >> had >> hoped. The tell me I'll need a pre-cover inspection if I want to import >> it >> and finish the project in Canada. That means removing the fabric. I do >> not want to rip the fabric off this airplane to get it inspected. >> >> Or, as a finished aircraft, the aircraft must have a 100 hours on it >> before >> it can be imported. >> >> Does anyone have an idea how to avoid this? >> >> Perhaps I could complete it or have it completed as a US aircraft and fly >> it >> under US registry for the first 100 hours. But can you register a US >> aircraft to a non-citizen/ non-resident? >> >> Or perhaps I can get the pre-cover inspection waived if there is evidence >> of >> an FAA pre-cover inspection. Is there a precedent for this? >> >> Or I can look into ultra-light classification but I do not believe I >> could >> carry a passenger which is not acceptable to me. >> >> Bob ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: CAD versus cardboard[Scanned]
Date: Jan 06, 2007
From: "Rob Hart" <rob_hart(at)aiondiagnostics.com>
Hi Steve 39 years old, 3 kids (all 13 and under), and have been planning the Piet since 1992. In my field (radiology), CAD = Computer Assisted Diagnosis. I suspect computer aided design might be more useful in present endeavours! I am now around 50% through the mockup fuselage; still yet to order the timber for the real one. Have set aside the next decade to finish the project, although this may be expedited by recent friendships with local builders (thanks Peter, John and Graham!). "Low and slow" doesn't just apply to the aircraft! Best regards Rob & Co Perth, Western Australia. -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Steve Glass Sent: Saturday, 6 January 2007 9:47 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: CAD versus cardboard[Scanned] Hi I have been on the list for about a year gathering info but not yet started building. It would be intersting to know the average age of the people on the list. I would guess around mid 50's. Assuming that I would guess only a portion are up on Cad. I'm 59 CAD would be great for documenting patterns such as the eyebrow currently in cardboard. The eyebrow question will surface again in a year or so but the patterns might not. If we had a cad file they could be reproduced again and again. These files could live on the Matronics site to be accessed by all. I have seen mention of some of people putting the Piet into CAD perhaps somebody would document the pieces that we all seem to need every once in a while. It will take some time but we could build a good library of important bits. Interested to hear your thoughts. Steve in Maine This message, including any attachments, may contain confidential information and is transmitted for the sole use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not use, disseminate, copy or retain this e-mail or the information contained in it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by telephone or reply e-mail, and permanently delete this e-mail from your computer system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message. Finally, the recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses. The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email. AION Diagnostics, Level 2, 40-48 Subiaco Square Road, Subiaco 6008, Australia, Phone: +61 (8) 6461 9400, Fax: +61 (8) 6461 9499 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: CAD versus cardboard
From: Amsafetyc(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 06, 2007
Hi, john here age 55 builder wanna be! Got many of the essentials: prints, desire, love of flying and the low and slow idea of open cockpit. Still lacking fundimental elements: place to build, tools, time and skill. The more I read the less confidence I have. I am better with wrenches and metal than I am with wood and glue. I have been hot for the piet since I learned about them and saw one. So its been a few years! The desire has not diminished, I have chased a few projects to buy with no success. Always something to prevent the deal! I have a cad program, don't know how to use it efficiently to create laser cut drawings for my metal parts, but have access to the metal and resources to get it cut. That's my story and I am sticking to it! John Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -----Original Message----- From: "Steve Glass" <redsglass(at)hotmail.com> Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2007 07:47:19 To:pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Subject: Pietenpol-List: CAD versus cardboard Hi I have been on the list for about a year gathering info but not yet started building. It would be intersting to know the average age of the people on the list. I would guess around mid 50's. Assuming that I would guess only a portion are up on Cad. I'm 59 CAD would be great for documenting patterns such as the eyebrow currently in cardboard. The eyebrow question will surface again in a year or so but the patterns might not. If we had a cad file they could be reproduced again and again. These files could live on the Matronics site to be accessed by all. I have seen mention of some of people putting the Piet into CAD perhaps somebody would document the pieces that we all seem to need every once in a while. It will take some time but we could build a good library of important bits. Interested to hear your thoughts. Steve in Maine _________________________________________________________________ The MSN Entertainment Guide to Golden Globes is here. Get all the scoop. http://tv.msn.com/tv/globes2007/?icid=nctagline2 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: CAD versus cardboard
Date: Jan 06, 2007
From: "Bill Rayfield" <bill.rayfield(at)optilogistics.com>
Howdy piet list First post, just been lurking for a while FYI - I'm 30, married, living in Newnan, Georgia In regards to parts being cad drawn, I would be willing to knock a few drawings out. I am a mechanical engineer and have access to AutoCAD and Inventor (3D modeling). I don't have experience with much of this stuff, so I couldn't design the parts, but I could generate electronic versions of paper patterns and the like. Let me know if there's interest Bill ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Robert Gow" <rgow(at)avionicsdesign.ca>
Subject: CAD versus cardboard
Date: Jan 06, 2007
Bob here. Like to think of myself as 35 (Hexadecimal). I've got thousands of hours drivin' tube, though mostly electrical. I can do some 2D in AutoCAD. -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Bill Rayfield Sent: January 6, 2007 10:11 AM Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: CAD versus cardboard Howdy piet list First post, just been lurking for a while FYI - I'm 30, married, living in Newnan, Georgia In regards to parts being cad drawn, I would be willing to knock a few drawings out. I am a mechanical engineer and have access to AutoCAD and Inventor (3D modeling). I don't have experience with much of this stuff, so I couldn't design the parts, but I could generate electronic versions of paper patterns and the like. Let me know if there's interest Bill ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 06, 2007
From: "Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Securing plane and J3 eyebrows
Nice drawings Hans, what software do you use to make them? Thanks Rick On 1/4/07, Hans Vander Voort wrote: > > hans.vander.voort(at)alfalaval.com> > > Gene, > > Expand your search Aeronca Champ, Taylorcraft and J3 all have the same > type > of "eyebrow" > > $500 seems excessive for something you can easily make yourself for a lot > less. > > I made my own for my Corvair ( I call them Cooling ears) > http://www.mykitplane.com/Planes/fileslist2.cfm?AlbumID=74 > Different dimension but same concept. > > Most important is the "scoop" dimension, measure a J3's and make a card > board prototype template. > Transfer this to Aluminum sheet, cut, drill, bend and pop rivet and your > done. > > Hans > > -- Rick Holland "Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad" ________________________________________________________________________________
From: HelsperSew(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 06, 2007
Subject: Re: CAD versus cardboard
John, You guys talking about these CAD drawings are making my eyes glaze over. Stop with the nonsence and just start making some ribs. At this rate you will never get going! You need to start with what you CAN do. Nobody needs any "place to build" to make a rib jig and start producing ribs. A few sticks of spruce and a hand saw and glue are all you need. There has been a lot of talk about tough love and kicks-in-the-butt's on this site as of late. Here's some more---GET STARTED! Dan Helsper Poplar Grove, IL. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 06, 2007
From: shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Tough love........
To All, QUIT YOUR CRYING AND GO DO SOME FLYING!!!!!! All this senimental stuff is making me sick. Shad PS Just kidding.....GO BUCKEYES!! __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 06, 2007
From: Clif Dawson <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 29 Msgs - 01/05/07
That reminds me! I'd completely forgotten. Last year sometime in June, the city works guys came here to check the drain system and they had a video snake. I'm not suggesting you contact your local city or plumber though. Who knows where their snakes have been! But there should be other inspection companies that have something similiar. Clif > > Bob Gow, > > I didn't catch that it was a partially built Piet that you were > considering importing ino Canada. don't take this one to Transport Canada > but lean on you local MDRA inspector to inspect look inside the wings etc. > with a video camera on a stick. Acording to our local ispector he was able > to make good inspection as he watched the screen and I don't think they > did, but it would have been possible to record and save the images. > > Bill Weir ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Johnwoods" <johnwoods(at)westnet.com.au>
Subject: CAD versus cardboard
Date: Jan 07, 2007
Dan, I agree with you. I'm an engineer and know AutoCAD and thought about redrawing the plans but asked "why?" and dropped the idea quick smart. The original drawings are all you need plus some help from this pool of practical knowledge. I second your motion....just get building. I know I am! Having said that, I will do drawings for the metal fittings, under cart and any to help get the geometry right. JohnW -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of HelsperSew(at)aol.com Sent: Sunday, 7 January 2007 10:53 AM To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: CAD versus cardboard John, You guys talking about these CAD drawings are making my eyes glaze over. Stop with the nonsence and just start making some ribs. At this rate you will never get going! You need to start with what you CAN do. Nobody needs any "place to build" to make a rib jig and start producing ribs. A few sticks of spruce and a hand saw and glue are all you need. There has been a lot of talk about tough love and kicks-in-the-butt's on this site as of late. Here's some more---GET STARTED! Dan Helsper Poplar Grove, IL. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: CAD versus cardboard
From: "Glenn Thomas" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com>
Date: Jan 06, 2007
Dan's right. I've got a rib building process going in an 8' x 12' shed. In that small space I have a table saw, 2 belt sanders a drill press, bandsaw, scroll saw, grinder and a router table ...and that's just the bench tools. I got the Tony Bingelis books and he gives some good tips on optimizing space. I got to where I knew if I continued "waiting for the day" it probably wouldn't come so I did what I had to and I feel like I've got plenty of room. When I wrap up the ribs soon I'll juggle things around so I can do the tail feathers. There's hidden advantages to small workspaces, they're easier (cheaper) to heat. Oh yeah, there's a kerosene heater in there too. If you really want to build this thing, just do it. You won't regret it! Most interesting and fun thing I've ever done. Decided to build it on 42nd birthday, completed first rib last April or May and just turned 43 a few months ago. Married 22 years with a kid in college. On a budget of about $2000 a year this is not something anybody with the interest couldn't learn to do or afford. Go for it! -------- Glenn Thomas N????? http://www.flyingwood.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=85990#85990 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 07, 2007
From: Clif Dawson <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Get Started! Do Something!
I've been building for seven years. I'll be 64 in Feb. I estimate that my outlay has been the equivalent of a dinner out for two every month. That includes the three Corvair engines as core parts and a few new parts for them. The fuselage and tail are complete with controls. The first thing I did was make the tail surfaces. Then I made the ribs. This year I should get most of the wing completed. You do what you can with the time, space and financial resources life affords you. Many years ago there was a series of 3 articles by a young Piet builder, mostly centered around his trials and tribulations with dope and fabric. He and his wife built the thing in a small, second story apartment. The fuselage went from the left front corner of the living room across to the fridge in the kitchen. There is a pic of them hoisting the finished fuselage out the window and down to the ground. Granted, many of us don't, or didn't, have such enthusiastic significant others but I'm sure you can see the moral to this story. Do something! Drill a hole even. An idea I've seen is a heavy table 4' square to which are mounted all the power tools and a vise or two. This table sits on four heavy castors with brakes on them. You can move and rotate this sucker all around the shop to access each tool as it's needed, even outside if you need the space. If you're worried that it will move while you're running something through the band or table saw, I'll tell you that my 28" by 96" rolling radial arm saw table doesn't budge an inch! It's on three inch, locking castors. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 07, 2007
From: Larry Rice <rice(at)iapdatacom.net>
Subject: Kerosene Heater
You may already know this, but when you get to fabric, no kerosene heat, and if you have to cover it for dust no plastic. An old friend of mine did that and the paint wouldn't stick. Hmmmm - any effect on glue or varnish? I ended up with a small catalytic heater on a propane bottle in my shop. Larry the micro mong guy -- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 07, 2007
From: "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Get Started! Do Something!
Cliff, That person was Jim Malley of this group. I still have the Kitplanes issue that featured his Pietenpol on the front cover. It was because of that, that I decided to build a Piet. For all who needs/wants a little inspiration, want to again share this picture, taken from the front seat, comming in over Stickle's Pond headed toward runway 24 on a beautiful summer morning At Newton (Jump) airport. walt evans NX140DL "Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you" Ben Franklin ----- Original Message ----- From: Clif Dawson To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 4:03 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Get Started! Do Something! I've been building for seven years. I'll be 64 in Feb. I estimate that my outlay has been the equivalent of a dinner out for two every month. That includes the three Corvair engines as core parts and a few new parts for them. The fuselage and tail are complete with controls. The first thing I did was make the tail surfaces. Then I made the ribs. This year I should get most of the wing completed. You do what you can with the time, space and financial resources life affords you. Many years ago there was a series of 3 articles by a young Piet builder, mostly centered around his trials and tribulations with dope and fabric. He and his wife built the thing in a small, second story apartment. The fuselage went from the left front corner of the living room across to the fridge in the kitchen. There is a pic of them hoisting the finished fuselage out the window and down to the ground. Granted, many of us don't, or didn't, have such enthusiastic significant others but I'm sure you can see the moral to this story. Do something! Drill a hole even. An idea I've seen is a heavy table 4' square to which are mounted all the power tools and a vise or two. This table sits on four heavy castors with brakes on them. You can move and rotate this sucker all around the shop to access each tool as it's needed, even outside if you need the space. If you're worried that it will move while you're running something through the band or table saw, I'll tell you that my 28" by 96" rolling radial arm saw table doesn't budge an inch! It's on three inch, locking castors. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Robert Gow" <rgow(at)avionicsdesign.ca>
Subject: CAD versus cardboard
Date: Jan 07, 2007
I hear you. If you are building one plane it's no too productive. But in the past I've found a lot of dimensional errors and fixed them by converting from paper to CAD because you draw to scale. You can also resolve many ambiguities as well because you have a fully detailed "model". But it would only be worth doing if the plans were shared with new builders. Bob -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of HelsperSew(at)aol.com Sent: January 6, 2007 8:53 PM To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: CAD versus cardboard John, You guys talking about these CAD drawings are making my eyes glaze over. Stop with the nonsence and just start making some ribs. At this rate you will never get going! You need to start with what you CAN do. Nobody needs any "place to build" to make a rib jig and start producing ribs. A few sticks of spruce and a hand saw and glue are all you need. There has been a lot of talk about tough love and kicks-in-the-butt's on this site as of late. Here's some more---GET STARTED! Dan Helsper Poplar Grove, IL. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ralph" <ralphhsd(at)itctel.com>
Subject: Re: thinking ahead when flying with skis
Date: Jan 07, 2007
I am also flying a Chief on skis in the snowy weather. I have a pair of wood Call-Air skis. You set the wheel into a metal tube frame on top of the ski and clamp it down.. It takes about ten minutes to change with the help of the wife. I hope to incorporate something similar for the Piet. (thirteen years down, about ready to cover the wings). If you land in snow in a field, always circle around and park in you own tracks. It really helps to not have to break trail when first starting to move. I always grab the ski tip and lift up before starting up the engine. That breaks loose any freeze down that might occur. Carol and Ralph Raymond ________________________________________________________________________________
From: HVandervoo(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 07, 2007
Subject: Re: Securing plane and J3 eyebrows
Rick, Program I use is Visio 2000, it is a simple draft program. By no means as good and versatile as AutoCAD but cheap and simple to use. Hans ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: CAD versus cardboard
From: "TJ" <mrclean9588(at)sbcglobal.net>
Date: Jan 07, 2007
Hi Guys I can tell you from a newbies point of view that I wish someone would redraw everything in CAD. I know when my plans first came I looked them over every which way and couldnt make much outta them. After I met a few guys like Jim Markle and Larry Williams and looked over what they have, then I started to understand them better. I lucked out and bumped into a guy named Frank Hiles that lives 45 minutes from me that has built 4 Piets and is on his 5th one now and hes showing how to build now. Razorbacks Rule!!! (Well maybe not this year but somtimes, maybe once in a while, I think I remember when they did, OK maybe not, but then whos cares anyway, thats why I like flying and not football) Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=86044#86044 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: builders ages
Date: Jan 07, 2007
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
Mike C. 47 and still keeping to my goal of keeping my waistline measurement under my age:) ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: builders ages
From: "dwilson" <marwilson(at)charter.net>
Date: Jan 07, 2007
Dan Wilson, age 50. Would like to finish my Piet while I can still pass the vision test. Just got my first pair of glasses! Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=86063#86063 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Catdesigns" <catdesigns(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: CAD versus cardboard
Date: Jan 07, 2007
Early on I drew up all the fittings in CAD and would advise against doing this. The fittings I have tried to make based on the CAD drawings are not always correct. Accurate to the plans yes but not correct for the job they are intended to do. Sometimes the holes are a bit off and sometimes the size of the fitting is a bit small. Plus you will want to lengthen the fittings in a few places to access the bolt heads. For instance, take a look at the front tailwheel mounting fitting, the one with the 3 fingers on it. Notice how the bolt holes for mounting it to the fuselage interfere with each other? If you were to blindly follow the plans you would be making these fittings again, hopefully before you drilled your holes in the lower longeron. Sorry, don't ask for the files because I think releasing them into the world would give a false sense of accuracy that I don't want to promote. One thing you will find as you build is the plans turn out to be better then you thought. They may look poor at first glance but after a while you start to get in the groove and they turn out to be just fine. You soon realize that you worry about some dimensions but others are whatever length is required to fit YOUR particular assembly. The best approach is to get the idea from the plans then fine tune the location and dimensions to make the part fit your assembly correctly and serve the intended purpose. The important thing is to make a strong well built plane. Don't waste your time trying to build to the exact 1/64th because that's what the plans said it had to be. By the way I'm now 39. Was 33 when I started. Probably be 45 when done :-( Chris Tracy Sacramento, Ca Website at http://www.Westcoastpiet.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Glass" <redsglass(at)hotmail.com> Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 4:47 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: CAD versus cardboard > > > Hi > > I have been on the list for about a year gathering info but not yet > started building. > > It would be intersting to know the average age of the people on the list. > I would guess around mid 50's. Assuming that I would guess only a > portion are up on Cad. I'm 59 > > CAD would be great for documenting patterns such as the eyebrow currently > in cardboard. The eyebrow question will surface again in a year or so but > the patterns might not. If we had a cad file they could be reproduced > again and again. These files could live on the Matronics site to be > accessed by all. > > I have seen mention of some of people putting the Piet into CAD perhaps > somebody would document the pieces that we all seem to need every once in > a while. It will take some time but we could build a good library of > important bits. > > Interested to hear your thoughts. > > Steve in Maine > > _________________________________________________________________ > The MSN Entertainment Guide to Golden Globes is here. Get all the scoop. > http://tv.msn.com/tv/globes2007/?icid=nctagline2 > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Alan Lyscars" <alyscars(at)maine.rr.com>
Subject: List: Builder's Ages
Date: Jan 07, 2007
Al Lyscars, 49, in Portland, Maine. Working the 4130 fittings and wing ribs. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "glich7(at)juno.com" <glich7(at)juno.com>
Date: Jan 07, 2007
Subject: average age
Hey gang, Thought I'd comment on the age thing. Tim Hansen, age 22, been planning, gathering, doing building-related-stuff since '99 (as long as it takes, small college student budget). Doing my part to hold down the average :) Hey Mike, good luck with yur age vs. waistline thing, I'd be happy to keep mine with in 50%:) By the way, O-H! (......wait for it...) I-O! Go Bucks!! Thinking about gettin' some gator steaks from kroger... Tim Hansen in "Overcast N' Rainy But Thank Goodness It Isn't Snow" Ohio ________________________________________________________________________ FREE Reminder Service - NEW from AmericanGreetings.com Click HERE and never forget a Birthday or Anniversary again! http://track.juno.com/s/lc?s=197335&u=http://www.americangreetings.com/products/online_calendar.pd ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 07, 2007
From: "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: average age
Tim, You lost me in a sea of acronyms, and misspellings. Help this old Piet guy out. Ebonics I know....."Word Up?" walt evans NX140DL "Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you" Ben Franklin ----- Original Message ----- From: <glich7(at)juno.com> Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 5:27 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: average age > > Hey gang, > Thought I'd comment on the age thing. Tim Hansen, age 22, been > planning, gathering, doing building-related-stuff since '99 (as long > as it takes, small college student budget). Doing my part to hold > down the average :) Hey Mike, good luck with yur age vs. waistline > thing, I'd be happy to keep mine with in 50%:) By the way, O-H! > (......wait for it...) I-O! > Go Bucks!! Thinking about gettin' some gator steaks from kroger... > > Tim Hansen in "Overcast N' Rainy But Thank Goodness It Isn't Snow" > Ohio > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > FREE Reminder Service - NEW from AmericanGreetings.com > Click HERE and never forget a Birthday or Anniversary again! > http://track.juno.com/s/lc?s=197335&u=http://www.americangreetings.com/products/online_calendar.pd > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: TGSTONE236(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 07, 2007
Subject: age
So far after you people posting your age it looks to me like all of you are spring chickens. This old goat will be having my 69th Jan 9th. I am still working on my Piet. If luck is with me maybe I can finish mine in 2 years.Also in the mean time I have to paint my Beech Musketeer so I can sell it and spent the money on the Piet The wife frowns on my spending on the Piet when the Mouse is just setting in the hanger.So I must be plane poor. Ted Stone Wilmington NC ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 07, 2007
From: Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu>
Subject: Re: average age
Walt, I understood it perfectly. But then, I've had a martini or two this evening. And I have several undergrads in the lab who keep me on my toes! ;) (Hint: Those aren't misspellings. Think text messaging. Just a new form of shorthand. Took me a while to understand the students' email messages, too. They're not stupid; it's efficient.) J > >Tim, >You lost me in a sea of acronyms, and misspellings. >Help this old Piet guy out. >Ebonics I know....."Word Up?" >walt evans >NX140DL > >"Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you" >Ben Franklin >----- Original Message ----- From: <glich7(at)juno.com> >To: >Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 5:27 PM >Subject: Pietenpol-List: average age > >> >>Hey gang, >>Thought I'd comment on the age thing. Tim Hansen, age 22, been >>planning, gathering, doing building-related-stuff since '99 (as long >>as it takes, small college student budget). Doing my part to hold >>down the average :) Hey Mike, good luck with yur age vs. waistline >>thing, I'd be happy to keep mine with in 50%:) By the way, O-H! >>(......wait for it...) I-O! >>Go Bucks!! Thinking about gettin' some gator steaks from kroger... >> >>Tim Hansen in "Overcast N' Rainy But Thank Goodness It Isn't Snow" >>Ohio >> >> >>________________________________________________________________________ >>FREE Reminder Service - NEW from AmericanGreetings.com >>Click HERE and never forget a Birthday or Anniversary again! >>http://track.juno.com/s/lc?s=197335&u=http://www.americangreetings.com/products/online_calendar.pd >> >> >> >> >> >> > > -- 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: "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Another dumb question
Date: Jan 07, 2007
Has anyone used a 72-44 prop with their A-65 Piet.? How has it worked out? I need a new prop and have seen one of the above for sale. In the past some have advised that they use a 72-43 with good results so was wondering what 1 more degree of pitch would do. Anyone know of a good prop for sale? Gene ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 07, 2007
From: Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu>
Subject: Duane Woolsey?
Duane, I just saw a photo of your plane at westcoastpiet.com. What engine and prop are you using? The prop seems huge. 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: Pietsrneat(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 07, 2007
Subject: Re: Duane Woolsey?
In a message dated 1/7/2007 9:10:14 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, jboatri(at)emory.edu writes: Duane, I just saw a photo of your plane at westcoastpiet.com. What engine and prop are you using? The prop seems huge. Thanks, Jeff Good eye (tee hee) , Jeff. I have seen that pic many times and wondered the same thing. What's the story, Duane? Ron ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Roman Bukolt" <conceptmodels(at)tds.net>
Subject: Re: List: Builder's Ages
Date: Jan 07, 2007
Roman Bukolt Madison, WI. age 71 ----- Original Message ----- From: Alan Lyscars To: Piet List Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 11:48 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: List: Builder's Ages Al Lyscars, 49, in Portland, Maine. Working the 4130 fittings and wing ribs. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: builders ages
From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com>
Date: Jan 07, 2007
Hey Mike I just realized I'm right at the waist line/age thing! Does that mean that from now on I might be okay, since last year I guess I was on the wrong side!? I started by saving my lunch money as a very poor college student at 20 and after 7 moves, 4 jobs, 1 marriage, 3 1/2 kids (one on the way), 3 dogs (separately), building one shop, building one house, and 12 trips to Brodhead I finally flew it at 32. I'm now 34, still married and more poor than when I started! :-) Sure is fun though!! Don Emch NX899DE Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=86204#86204 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Another dumb question
From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com>
Date: Jan 07, 2007
I'm running a Hegy 72 X 44 prop on my A-65. It does fairly well. The outside air temperature of course makes a big difference. I get 350- 400 fpm solo and full fuel at about 80 degrees. With the same at 40 degrees I get 500-550 fpm. I cruise around 80 mph. I suppose it's not the optimum prop but it does okay. Don Emch NX899DE Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=86205#86205 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Catdesigns" <catdesigns(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Duane Woolsey?
Date: Jan 07, 2007
Duane Woolsey is not on this list. He sold the plane back in 98 (?) or there about. It had a Subaru AE81. I don't know the current owner. Steve Eldredge in Utah might know how to get in touch with Duane. John Dilatush used an Turbo AE82 in his, by the way. Chris Tracy Sacramento, Ca Website at http://www.Westcoastpiet.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Boatright" <jboatri(at)emory.edu> Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 5:58 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Duane Woolsey? > > Duane, > > I just saw a photo of your plane at westcoastpiet.com. What engine and > prop are you using? The prop seems huge. > > 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: "Dick Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net>
Subject: prop
Date: Jan 07, 2007
I was just sitting in front of the t.v. paging thru the Wicks cataloug. I happened to spot on pages 283-284, items called a "Prop Kit". They are a Vortelator device that clain to add 20-50 rpm and increase speed. Has anyone tried one of these? Any power increase with an A-65 would help. Also, I just read the post by Don Emch. I run a Senenich 72-42. His numbers are much better than mine for climb and speed. Does anyone else have a similar prop? Don, do you get a full static run up with that prop? I don't care about the speed but your climb is better than my 200-250 fpm. Dick N. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 07, 2007
Subject: Re: builders ages
I was 42 when I started building with my good friend and mentor, Doug Bryant. 45 or 46 when I started flying it, and now have well over 300 very enjoyable hours on 'er. I had 'Builders Withdraw Symptoms', and now, at 51, I've been working on my 2nd homebuilt, a Wittman Tailwind, on and off for about 5 years. Building and flying airplanes have been an incredible journey for me !! Chuck Gantzer ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 08, 2007
Subject: Re: prop
In a message dated 1/7/2007 10:50:59 PM Central Standard Time, horzpool(at)goldengate.net writes: I was just sitting in front of the t.v. paging thru the Wicks cataloug. I happened to spot on pages 283-284, items called a "Prop Kit". They are a Vortelator device that clain to add 20-50 rpm and increase speed. Has anyone tried one of these? Any power increase with an A-65 would help. Also, I just read the post by Don Emch. I run a Senenich 72-42. His numbers are much better than mine for climb and speed. Does anyone else have a similar prop? Don, do you get a full static run up with that prop? I don't care about the speed but your climb is better than my 200-250 fpm. Dick N. Dick, Is that Vortelator device anything like Dimple Tape ? Bill Rewey has that on his prop, and I think he claims that it increased the rpm about 50 rpm. I have my homebuilt 72 / 42 and have similar performance as you do. Gene, Both numbers are in Inches. 72" diameter, and 42" pitch. The pitch is how far the prop will advance in one revolution, with a theoretical No Slip condition. Chuck G. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 07, 2007
From: Clif Dawson <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: Get Started! Do Something!
Oh, I don't think so. :-) Try Homebuilt Aircraft, June, 1978. Tom and Lee Baker. N8889? maybe X. I have that issue in my Piet stash too. Clif Cliff, That person was Jim Malley of this group. I still have the Kitplanes issue that featured his Pietenpol on the front cover. It was because of that, that I decided to build a Piet. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 07, 2007
From: Clif Dawson <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: tenpol-List:-CAD
I'm a pencil and ruler man but I ran across this one day. http://deltacad.com/index.html Clif Rick, Program I use is Visio 2000, it is a simple draft program. By no means as good and versatile as AutoCAD but cheap and simple to use. Hans ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- 1/7/2007 6:29 PM ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: builders ages
Date: Jan 08, 2007
From: <harvey.rule(at)bell.ca>
Riding in on this letter to say I'm 60 years young and flying,fliing,flizing.HAHAHA is that one still going round? ________________________________ From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC] Sent: January 7, 2007 10:51 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: builders ages Mike C. 47 and still keeping to my goal of keeping my waistline measurement under my age:) ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Kerosene Heater
From: "Glenn Thomas" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com>
Date: Jan 08, 2007
Larry, Thanks for letting me know about the heater. I'll stop using it and look for something like you mentioned. I'll have to go back and destroy one of my ribs to see how it fails. Was the kerosene heater going during building or your friends ribs? If so, what did he do? -------- Glenn Thomas N????? http://www.flyingwood.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=86277#86277 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: HelsperSew(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 08, 2007
Subject: Weld cracks found
Hi Piet'ers As of late I have been fabricating my straight axle landing gear. I elected to use .120" wall thick 1 1/2" O.D. 4130 tube for the axle. There has been a lot of debate on this subject, of what is sufficient wall thickness for this axle. After the misfortunate forced landing of Iccarus Plummet a couple of years ago there was substantial discussion on this site on the subject. The BHP Flying and Glider plans call for a 12 gauge tube, which equates to .109" wall thickness, so I figure I'm a little thicker, plus a stronger alloy. Anyway, I welded onto my axle two 1/2" dia. tubes to act as anti-rotate devices so the axle can't rotate when the brakes are applied (a-la-Mike Cuy). I then took it over to the local engine shop on the other side of the airport here in Poplar Grove, with instructions to Mag-na-flux (magnetic particle non-destructive test) the welds. To my surprise they found two cracks! It was explained to me that when the weld cools, sometimes the weld area shrinks and "pulls" away from the base metal, thus causing the crack. I had to go back and grind-out the cracks, and re-weld, then re-inspect. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dick Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net>
Subject: Re: prop
Date: Jan 08, 2007
Chuck >From what I can see from the pic in the catalog it appears to be a bubble tape. If it will give extra rpm on take off, for $25.00 I'll give it a try. Dick ----- Original Message ----- From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 11:00 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: prop In a message dated 1/7/2007 10:50:59 PM Central Standard Time, horzpool(at)goldengate.net writes: I was just sitting in front of the t.v. paging thru the Wicks cataloug. I happened to spot on pages 283-284, items called a "Prop Kit". They are a Vortelator device that clain to add 20-50 rpm and increase speed. Has anyone tried one of these? Any power increase with an A-65 would help. Also, I just read the post by Don Emch. I run a Senenich 72-42. His numbers are much better than mine for climb and speed. Does anyone else have a similar prop? Don, do you get a full static run up with that prop? I don't care about the speed but your climb is better than my 200-250 fpm. Dick N. Dick, Is that Vortelator device anything like Dimple Tape ? Bill Rewey has that on his prop, and I think he claims that it increased the rpm about 50 rpm. I have my homebuilt 72 / 42 and have similar performance as you do. Gene, Both numbers are in Inches. 72" diameter, and 42" pitch. The pitch is how far the prop will advance in one revolution, with a theoretical No Slip condition. Chuck G. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Weld cracks found
Date: Jan 08, 2007
From: "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal.com>
I probably had the same thing on my original axle on Icarus Plummet, hence the cracks (which, not surprisingly, originated at the same weld you are describing). When I built the new axle, I did a dye-penetrant inspection of the welds before and after sending it out for heat treating. No cracks this time, and so far, 75 hours (and many bad landings) of trouble free operation. Jack Phillips NX899JP "Icarus Plummet" Raleigh, NC, where it was clear and 72 degrees Saturday, so I put 1.5 hours on old Icarus, including another bad landing (not surprising in the 15 knot crosswind) -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of HelsperSew(at)aol.com Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 10:38 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Weld cracks found Hi Piet'ers As of late I have been fabricating my straight axle landing gear. I elected to use .120" wall thick 1 1/2" O.D. 4130 tube for the axle. There has been a lot of debate on this subject, of what is sufficient wall thickness for this axle. After the misfortunate forced landing of Iccarus Plummet a couple of years ago there was substantial discussion on this site on the subject. The BHP Flying and Glider plans call for a 12 gauge tube, which equates to .109" wall thickness, so I figure I'm a little thicker, plus a stronger alloy. Anyway, I welded onto my axle two 1/2" dia. tubes to act as anti-rotate devices so the axle can't rotate when the brakes are applied (a-la-Mike Cuy). I then took it over to the local engine shop on the other side of the airport here in Poplar Grove, with instructions to Mag-na-flux (magnetic particle non-destructive test) the welds. To my surprise they found two cracks! It was explained to me that when the weld cools, sometimes the weld area shrinks and "pulls" away from the base metal, thus causing the crack. I had to go back and grind-out the cracks, and re-weld, then re-inspect. _________________________________________________ This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privilege d, proprietary, or otherwise private information. If you have received it i n 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 - N ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 08, 2007
From: Ben Williams <benw(at)pdi.com>
Subject: Re: List: Builder's Ages
Ben Williams, 35. Ribs on one piece spars, tail feathers and corvair core. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Duane Woolsey?
Date: Jan 08, 2007
From: "Steve Eldredge" <steve(at)byu.edu>
Duane owns the hangar next to mine. He and I flew out to Brodhead and OSH in 99' he sold his plane during the show, and it went to Terre Haute Indiana. I heard that it was ground looped not long after and the prop was destroyed. The fellows contacted Duane and he carved another one himself. He only built those two props that I know of, unless he did one for John Dilatush. The prop was unique in shape, and in sound. It made a whistle sound at idle, which made for a cool sounding approach and landing. I'd be interested to know if his plane is still flying... Duane hasn't done much flying since 99', but he and a partner did buy a GN1 with an A-65, that is a bit on the heavy side. He has also had two partially completed Air-Bike projects in the hangar for years. Steve E steve(at)byu.edu -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Catdesigns Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 9:04 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Duane Woolsey? Duane Woolsey is not on this list. He sold the plane back in 98 (?) or there about. It had a Subaru AE81. I don't know the current owner. Steve Eldredge in Utah might know how to get in touch with Duane. John Dilatush used an Turbo AE82 in his, by the way. Chris Tracy Sacramento, Ca Website at http://www.Westcoastpiet.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Boatright" <jboatri(at)emory.edu> Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 5:58 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Duane Woolsey? > > Duane, > > I just saw a photo of your plane at westcoastpiet.com. What engine and > prop are you using? The prop seems huge. > > 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/ > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: builders ages
Date: Jan 08, 2007
From: "Steve Eldredge" <steve(at)byu.edu>
Steve E Started building at age 26. First flight at age 29. Now 330hrs at age 38. The Piet is the only way I've been able to stay in the air at all during the intense family phase of raising children... Thanks Bernard! Note to Mike C, waistline=age currently Steve Eldredge steve(at)byu.edu From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC] Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 8:51 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: builders ages Mike C. 47 and still keeping to my goal of keeping my waistline measurement under my age:) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: HelsperSew(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 08, 2007
Subject: Re: builders ages
Mike, You guys that have the waistlines progressing with your age.........Sorry to be the one to tell you this................at risk of stating the obvious......................................YOU ARE GETTING ABOUT 5 LBS CLOSER TO THE MAX GROSS WEIGHT WITH EACH PASSING YEAR! (INCH) Dan Helsper Poplar Grove, IL. 149 Lbs :) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 08, 2007
From: Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu>
Subject: Duane Woolsey?
Steve, Thanks for the information. Was the prop as long in real-life and it looks in the photo? Also, how did it perform? Thanks, Jeff > >Duane owns the hangar next to mine. He and I flew out to Brodhead and >OSH in 99' he sold his plane during the show, and it went to Terre >Haute Indiana. I heard that it was ground looped not long after and the >prop was destroyed. The fellows contacted Duane and he carved another >one himself. He only built those two props that I know of, unless he >did one for John Dilatush. The prop was unique in shape, and in sound. >It made a whistle sound at idle, which made for a cool sounding approach >and landing. I'd be interested to know if his plane is still flying... >Duane hasn't done much flying since 99', but he and a partner did buy a >GN1 with an A-65, that is a bit on the heavy side. He has also had two >partially completed Air-Bike projects in the hangar for years. > > >Steve E > >steve(at)byu.edu -- _____________________________________________________________ Jeffrey H. Boatright, PhD Associate Professor, Emory Eye Center, Atlanta, GA, USA Senior Editor, Molecular Vision, http://www.molvis.org/molvis mailto:jboatri(at)emory.edu ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: waistlines
Date: Jan 08, 2007
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
Great responses to the waistline vs. age stats ! ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Another dumb question
Date: Jan 08, 2007
From: "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal.com>
I've got a Sensenich 72 x 42 on mine. Performance is pretty good, but I can't quite hit redline RPM at full throttle in level flight. A 44" pitch might not allow the engine to develop full power for climb abd takeoff. Jack -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gene & Tammy Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 8:47 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Another dumb question Has anyone used a 72-44 prop with their A-65 Piet.? How has it worked out? I need a new prop and have seen one of the above for sale. In the past some have advised that they use a 72-43 with good results so was wondering what 1 more degree of pitch would do. Anyone know of a good prop for sale? Gene _________________________________________________ This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privilege d, proprietary, or otherwise private information. If you have received it i n 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 - N ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: John Dilatush's prop
Date: Jan 08, 2007
There's a pretty good picture of the interesting prop that John had on "Mountain Piet", the first picture at http://www.flysquirrel.net/piets/John2.html . I don't remember him saying anything about it having a whistling sound to it, but with the Subaru running at 1.2x the prop speed and running a turbocharger, there's no telling what kind of sounds that thing makes! What a beautiful airplane. Oscar Zuniga San Antonio, TX mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com website at http://www.flysquirrel.net _________________________________________________________________ Fixing up the home? Live Search can help ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: prop size 65 Continental
Date: Jan 08, 2007
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
I'm running the same prop size/pitch as Jack Phillips with a wood 72 x 42 but manufactured by Falcon. Climb about per Don E.'s figures with cruise about 72 mph. Mike C. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 08, 2007
From: Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu>
Subject: Re: waistlines
44x34: age by waist, or poor prop choice for a Piet? Enquiring minds... >Great responses to the waistline vs. age stats ! > > -- _____________________________________________________________ Jeffrey H. Boatright, PhD Associate Professor, Emory Eye Center, Atlanta, GA, USA Senior Editor, Molecular Vision, http://www.molvis.org/molvis mailto:jboatri(at)emory.edu ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 08, 2007
From: "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Kerosene Heater
Think the heater is when you are doing fabric. Saw a beautiful Cub with spots all over the back in the yellow. Said it was from kerosene heater walt evans NX140DL "Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you" Ben Franklin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Glenn Thomas" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com> Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 7:40 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Kerosene Heater > > > Larry, > Thanks for letting me know about the heater. I'll stop using it and look > for something like you mentioned. I'll have to go back and destroy one of > my ribs to see how it fails. > > Was the kerosene heater going during building or your friends ribs? If > so, what did he do? > > -------- > Glenn Thomas > N????? > http://www.flyingwood.com > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=86277#86277 > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 08, 2007
From: "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: builders ages
Know it's knot. :^) walt evans NX140DL "Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you" Ben Franklin ----- Original Message ----- From: harvey.rule(at)bell.ca To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 7:16 AM Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: builders ages Riding in on this letter to say I'm 60 years young and flying,fliing,flizing.HAHAHA is that one still going round? ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC] Sent: January 7, 2007 10:51 AM To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Subject: Pietenpol-List: builders ages Mike C. 47 and still keeping to my goal of keeping my waistline measurement under my age:) ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: waistlines
Date: Jan 08, 2007
From: "Steve Eldredge" <steve(at)byu.edu>
No, no, to get prop pitch it should be height x waist size Hence: 72x42 Steve E I thought everyone knew that. From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Boatright Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 1:30 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: waistlines 44x34: age by waist, or poor prop choice for a Piet? Enquiring minds... Great responses to the waistline vs. age stats ! -- _____________________________________________________________ Jeffrey H. Boatright, PhD Associate Professor, Emory Eye Center, Atlanta, GA, USA Senior Editor, Molecular Vision, http://www.molvis.org/molvis mailto:jboatri(at)emory.edu ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 08, 2007
From: "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Weld cracks found
I think if 4130 is welded with oxy/act with basic proper cooling, cracks can virtually never form. I would imagine that your axle was either TIG, ed, MIG,ed or stick welded. You stated that "when the weld cooled" that doesn't happen with torch welding, the whole thing is red like a cherry, and when left in still air cools to a normalized condition. As per my Mentor,,,"weld 4130 with common filler rod with oxy/act, cool in still air, and you'll never have a problem" Just walter's 2 cents walt evans NX140DL "Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you" Ben Franklin ----- Original Message ----- From: HelsperSew(at)aol.com To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 10:38 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Weld cracks found Hi Piet'ers As of late I have been fabricating my straight axle landing gear. I elected to use .120" wall thick 1 1/2" O.D. 4130 tube for the axle. There has been a lot of debate on this subject, of what is sufficient wall thickness for this axle. After the misfortunate forced landing of Iccarus Plummet a couple of years ago there was substantial discussion on this site on the subject. The BHP Flying and Glider plans call for a 12 gauge tube, which equates to .109" wall thickness, so I figure I'm a little thicker, plus a stronger alloy. Anyway, I welded onto my axle two 1/2" dia. tubes to act as anti-rotate devices so the axle can't rotate when the brakes are applied (a-la-Mike Cuy). I then took it over to the local engine shop on the other side of the airport here in Poplar Grove, with instructions to Mag-na-flux (magnetic particle non-destructive test) the welds. To my surprise they found two cracks! It was explained to me that when the weld cools, sometimes the weld area shrinks and "pulls" away from the base metal, thus causing the crack. I had to go back and grind-out the cracks, and re-weld, then re-inspect. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Weld cracks found
Date: Jan 08, 2007
From: "Jack T. Textor" <jtextor(at)thepalmergroup.com>
Walt, Can you expand on "common filler rod"? I've heard it's best NOT to use 4130 filler. Thanks! Jack www.textors.com I think if 4130 is welded with oxy/act with basic proper cooling, cracks can virtually never form. I would imagine that your axle was either TIG, ed, MIG,ed or stick welded. You stated that "when the weld cooled" that doesn't happen with torch welding, the whole thing is red like a cherry, and when left in still air cools to a normalized condition. As per my Mentor,,,"weld 4130 with common filler rod with oxy/act, cool in still air, and you'll never have a problem" Just walter's 2 cents walt evans NX140DL "Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you" Ben Franklin ----- Original Message ----- From: HelsperSew(at)aol.com To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 10:38 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Weld cracks found Hi Piet'ers As of late I have been fabricating my straight axle landing gear. I elected to use .120" wall thick 1 1/2" O.D. 4130 tube for the axle. There has been a lot of debate on this subject, of what is sufficient wall thickness for this axle. After the misfortunate forced landing of Iccarus Plummet a couple of years ago there was substantial discussion on this site on the subject. The BHP Flying and Glider plans call for a 12 gauge tube, which equates to .109" wall thickness, so I figure I'm a little thicker, plus a stronger alloy. Anyway, I welded onto my axle two 1/2" dia. tubes to act as anti-rotate devices so the axle can't rotate when the brakes are applied (a-la-Mike Cuy). I then took it over to the local engine shop on the other side of the airport here in Poplar Grove, with instructions to Mag-na-flux (magnetic particle non-destructive test) the welds. To my surprise they found two cracks! It was explained to me that when the weld cools, sometimes the weld area shrinks and "pulls" away from the base metal, thus causing the crack. I had to go back and grind-out the cracks, and re-weld, then re-inspect. href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.mat r onics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "glich7(at)juno.com" <glich7(at)juno.com>
Date: Jan 08, 2007
Subject: average age
Walt, Sorry if things were not clear before, although I'm not sure what didn't make sense. None of what I wrote was ebonics or even shorthand really. In the interest of true communication, I will "translate" what I think you are referring to. Here goes. > Hey gang- that's anyone on the list who reads what I write and doesn't hate it. >Planning, gathering, doing building-related-stuff- In other words reading, researching, daydreaming, and talking the ears off any builder who would listen to a 'spring chicken' like me. >Small college student budget- I attend a university whose purpose, it seems, is to build buildings, sell books, make commercials, sell merchandise, do research, and occasionally educate me. All of this is accomplished through student loans and a part-time job which leaves me with just enough money to buy excuses for why I'm not building fast enough. >Doing my part to hold down the average- This refers to the fact that my age (22) helps hold down the group average and make us all a little younger by association. Or something like that. >I'd be happy to keep mine within 50%- Basically I'm way behind the eight ball when it comes to reducing my own personal 'ballast' but I'm working on it and it's just as much a part of my project as not adding other excess weight to the plane. I would like to lose at least 33% of what I weigh now (i.e. I am 150% of my Goal) >O-H-I-O! Go Bucks!- If you need help with this one, turn on your tv around 8pm eastern tonight, observe the TENS of thousands of screaming Ohio State fans who flew across the country and INVADED Arizona, just to be CLOSER to a game they don't even have tickets for, to cheer on their beloved Buckeyes. Then note that for every 50 Scarlet or Gray fans you see, if your sharp, you might find 1 Florida Gator standing motionless with their orange and blue covered up mostly, hoping their team can pull a miracle from their tiny bag of tricks. > Tim Hansen in "Buckeye Country" - Ohio ________________________________________________________________________ FREE Reminder Service - NEW from AmericanGreetings.com Click HERE and never forget a Birthday or Anniversary again! http://track.juno.com/s/lc?s=197335&u=http://www.americangreetings.com/products/online_calendar.pd ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 08, 2007
From: "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Weld cracks found
Jack, At the moment the right name for the rod leaves my brain. I know that when I go to the weld shop, it's just the normal,,,Damn,,,I can't think of it. My Mentor said NOT to use 4130 filler rod. The filler rod is the same as Coathanger. Apparently this is the rod used for official repairs for an AP, this is what I fabricated my engine mount from, and the landing gear. ( and years ago if you saw me porpoising down the runway on this gear, you'd marvel at the weld strength) You buy it by the pound, in different diameters, depending on what thickness you are welding. Comes copper coated so it won't rust walt evans NX140DL "Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you" Ben Franklin ----- Original Message ----- From: Jack T. Textor To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 5:20 PM Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Weld cracks found Walt, Can you expand on "common filler rod"? I've heard it's best NOT to use 4130 filler. Thanks! Jack www.textors.com I think if 4130 is welded with oxy/act with basic proper cooling, cracks can virtually never form. I would imagine that your axle was either TIG, ed, MIG,ed or stick welded. You stated that "when the weld cooled" that doesn't happen with torch welding, the whole thing is red like a cherry, and when left in still air cools to a normalized condition. As per my Mentor,,,"weld 4130 with common filler rod with oxy/act, cool in still air, and you'll never have a problem" Just walter's 2 cents walt evans NX140DL "Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you" Ben Franklin ----- Original Message ----- From: HelsperSew(at)aol.com To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 10:38 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Weld cracks found Hi Piet'ers As of late I have been fabricating my straight axle landing gear. I elected to use .120" wall thick 1 1/2" O.D. 4130 tube for the axle. There has been a lot of debate on this subject, of what is sufficient wall thickness for this axle. After the misfortunate forced landing of Iccarus Plummet a couple of years ago there was substantial discussion on this site on the subject. The BHP Flying and Glider plans call for a 12 gauge tube, which equates to .109" wall thickness, so I figure I'm a little thicker, plus a stronger alloy. Anyway, I welded onto my axle two 1/2" dia. tubes to act as anti-rotate devices so the axle can't rotate when the brakes are applied (a-la-Mike Cuy). I then took it over to the local engine shop on the other side of the airport here in Poplar Grove, with instructions to Mag-na-flux (magnetic particle non-destructive test) the welds. To my surprise they found two cracks! It was explained to me that when the weld cools, sometimes the weld area shrinks and "pulls" away from the base metal, thus causing the crack. I had to go back and grind-out the cracks, and re-weld, then re-inspect. href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.mat ronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-Listhref="http://forums.matronics.com">h ttp://forums.matronics.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 08, 2007
From: "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: average age
Tim, Now I gotcha, but it's about sports. I've never been an Atheletic Supporter. :^) walt evans NX140DL "Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you" Ben Franklin ----- Original Message ----- From: <glich7(at)juno.com> Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 6:10 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: average age > > Walt, > Sorry if things were not clear before, although I'm not sure what > didn't make sense. None of what I wrote was ebonics or even shorthand > really. In the interest of true communication, I will "translate" what > I think you are referring to. Here goes. > >> Hey gang- that's anyone on the list who reads what I write and > doesn't hate it. > >>Planning, gathering, doing building-related-stuff- In other words > reading, researching, daydreaming, and talking the ears off any > builder who would listen to a 'spring chicken' like me. > >>Small college student budget- I attend a university whose purpose, it > seems, is to build buildings, sell books, make commercials, sell > merchandise, do research, and occasionally educate me. All of this is > accomplished through student loans and a part-time job which leaves me > with just enough money to buy excuses for why I'm not building fast > enough. > >>Doing my part to hold down the average- This refers to the fact that > my age (22) helps hold down the group average and make us all a little > younger by association. Or something like that. > >>I'd be happy to keep mine within 50%- Basically I'm way behind the > eight ball when it comes to reducing my own personal 'ballast' but I'm > working on it and it's just as much a part of my project as not adding > other excess weight to the plane. I would like to lose at least 33% of > what I weigh now (i.e. I am 150% of my Goal) > >>O-H-I-O! Go Bucks!- If you need help with this one, turn on your tv > around 8pm eastern tonight, observe the TENS of thousands of screaming > Ohio State fans who flew across the country and INVADED Arizona, just > to be CLOSER to a game they don't even have tickets for, to cheer on > their beloved Buckeyes. Then note that for every 50 Scarlet or Gray > fans you see, if your sharp, you might find 1 Florida Gator standing > motionless with their orange and blue covered up mostly, hoping their > team can pull a miracle from their tiny bag of tricks. > >> Tim Hansen in "Buckeye Country" - Ohio > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > FREE Reminder Service - NEW from AmericanGreetings.com > Click HERE and never forget a Birthday or Anniversary again! > http://track.juno.com/s/lc?s=197335&u=http://www.americangreetings.com/products/online_calendar.pd > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: prop
From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com>
Date: Jan 08, 2007
Hi Dick, I've been looking into the prop thing for a little while now. I know the Sensenich 72 x 42 is kinda the standard for the A-65, but I think just about all of the planes that use that engine/prop combination are cleaner than the Piet. I've talked to a few prop builders and I've had three of them say a 74 x 38 or 74 x 40 would be good. I know mine is going the other direction than yours but I also think each plane is different. Weight is obviously always against climb and I think other less noticeable things affect it too. Among other things I think the bluntness of the cowl matters because it affects the useful air that is entering the prop 'disk'. I pirated and copied an awful lot of things from Frank Pavliga's Sky Gypsy. Our empty weights are within a pound of each other! The only real difference is his has the straight axle gear and mine has the split axle. He is running a Falcon 72 x 44 (I think the Falcon must be one of the best props out there). I have the Hegy 72 x 44. Even though they are very very similar I cannot catch him in a climb! On one occasion he even had his son with him while I was by myself and he took off slightly behind me and I couldn't get away from him!! Go figure! Then there's that Mike Cuy guy, he just has to be packing more than 65 hp! Don Emch NX899DE Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=86430#86430 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: HelsperSew(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 08, 2007
Subject: Re: Weld cracks found
Walt, You are absolutely correct in your assumption. I TIG welded this axle. Dan Helsper Helsper Sewing Corp. 8186 Commerce Dr. Loves Park IL 61111 PH (815) 885-4365 FAX (815) 885-4366 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "gcardinal" <gcardinal(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: prop
Date: Jan 08, 2007
The prop on NX18235 is a home made copy of a Sensenich 72 - 42. Max static rpm is 2100, max cruise rpm is ~2250 (giving 80 mph) 200 fpm climb from a 900' field elevation on an 80 deg. F. day at about 1050 pounds. Did a climb test this past summer and the climb rate at 6000 msl was equal to the climb rate passing through 2000' msl. 35 minutes after launching I was passing through 8000' and getting too cold to continue. The low rpm might be due to the leading edge of the prop being too blunt. It has just been recarved. Greg Cardinal ----- Original Message ----- From: Dick Navratil To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 10:48 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: prop I was just sitting in front of the t.v. paging thru the Wicks cataloug. I happened to spot on pages 283-284, items called a "Prop Kit". They are a Vortelator device that clain to add 20-50 rpm and increase speed. Has anyone tried one of these? Any power increase with an A-65 would help. Also, I just read the post by Don Emch. I run a Senenich 72-42. His numbers are much better than mine for climb and speed. Does anyone else have a similar prop? Don, do you get a full static run up with that prop? I don't care about the speed but your climb is better than my 200-250 fpm. Dick N. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dick Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net>
Subject: Re: prop
Date: Jan 08, 2007
Don You climb rate is so much better than mine that I would consider switching props. Dick N. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com> Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 6:12 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: prop > > Hi Dick, > I've been looking into the prop thing for a little while now. I know the > Sensenich 72 x 42 is kinda the standard for the A-65, but I think just > about all of the planes that use that engine/prop combination are cleaner > than the Piet. I've talked to a few prop builders and I've had three of > them say a 74 x 38 or 74 x 40 would be good. I know mine is going the > other direction than yours but I also think each plane is different. > Weight is obviously always against climb and I think other less noticeable > things affect it too. Among other things I think the bluntness of the > cowl matters because it affects the useful air that is entering the prop > 'disk'. I pirated and copied an awful lot of things from Frank Pavliga's > Sky Gypsy. Our empty weights are within a pound of each other! The only > real difference is his has the straight axle gear and mine has the split > axle. He is running a Falcon 72 x 44 (I think the Falcon must be one of > the best props out there). I have the Hegy! > 72 x 44. Even though they are very very similar I cannot catch him in a > climb! On one occasion he even had his son with him while I was by myself > and he took off slightly behind me and I couldn't get away from him!! Go > figure! Then there's that Mike Cuy guy, he just has to be packing more > than 65 hp! > Don Emch > NX899DE > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=86430#86430 > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: prop
From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com>
Date: Jan 08, 2007
Hi Dick, I would try to borrow one before I bought. Theoretically you should get better climb with with a lower pitch. If you are very serious about buying I would talk to some custom prop builders and based on information that you give them they can tailor one to suit you. A few of these guys are; Culver Props St. Croix Props Sterba Props I don't have their info. close by but I know they all have websites and I have personally talked with them. Ed Sterba actually carves each one by hand and can make virtually make almost any profile. Another thing to pay attention to is that a 72 x 42 from one company is not necessarily a 72 x 42 from another company. Then there are different airfoils, shapes, chords, etc. It almost hurts when you start to think just how different one make of prop could be from another make! Good Luck! Don Emch Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=86474#86474 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 09, 2007
From: "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Weld cracks found
Yep, TIG and 4130 is a no, no. Without normalizing. walt evans NX140DL "Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you" Ben Franklin ----- Original Message ----- From: HelsperSew(at)aol.com To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 7:43 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Weld cracks found Walt, You are absolutely correct in your assumption. I TIG welded this axle. Dan Helsper Helsper Sewing Corp. 8186 Commerce Dr. Loves Park IL 61111 PH (815) 885-4365 FAX (815) 885-4366 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 08, 2007
From: Clif Dawson <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: Weld cracks found
When you weld you are eliminating all the heat treating that the steel went through to give it all that strength and reducing it back to 90'000 lb tensile. That's why you're supposed to splice two tubes with a fishmouth joint. Instead of the area of a circle you now have a much larger area of weld. And no, normalizing is not heat treating. So you want to use a rod that already has that softer material. It can't harden no matter how fast or slow the weld cools and thus won't crack. That doesn't give you permission to cool the weld with anything though, like water or a fan or even just a cool breeze. That will cause cracks in the rapidly cooling 4130 outside the weld. You can use a coat hanger for non life supporting stuff in a pinch but you don't know where it's been. :-) The normal everyday rod from your welding supplier is the stuff you want. Clif ----- Original Message ----- From: walt evans To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 3:15 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Weld cracks found Jack, At the moment the right name for the rod leaves my brain. I know that when I go to the weld shop, it's just the normal,,,Damn,,,I can't think of it. My Mentor said NOT to use 4130 filler rod. The filler rod is the same as Coathanger. Apparently this is the rod used for official repairs for an AP, this is what I fabricated my engine mount from, and the landing gear. ( and years ago if you saw me porpoising down the runway on this gear, you'd marvel at the weld strength) You buy it by the pound, in different diameters, depending on what thickness you are welding. Comes copper coated so it won't rust walt evans NX140DL "Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you" Ben Franklin ----- Original Message ----- From: Jack T. Textor To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 5:20 PM Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Weld cracks found Walt, Can you expand on "common filler rod"? I've heard it's best NOT to use 4130 filler. Thanks! Jack www.textors.com I think if 4130 is welded with oxy/act with basic proper cooling, cracks can virtually never form. I would imagine that your axle was either TIG, ed, MIG,ed or stick welded. You stated that "when the weld cooled" that doesn't happen with torch welding, the whole thing is red like a cherry, and when left in still air cools to a normalized condition. As per my Mentor,,,"weld 4130 with common filler rod with oxy/act, cool in still air, and you'll never have a problem" Just walter's 2 cents walt evans NX140DL "Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you" Ben Franklin ----- Original Message ----- From: HelsperSew(at)aol.com To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 10:38 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Weld cracks found Hi Piet'ers As of late I have been fabricating my straight axle landing gear. I elected to use .120" wall thick 1 1/2" O.D. 4130 tube for the axle. There has been a lot of debate on this subject, of what is sufficient wall thickness for this axle. After the misfortunate forced landing of Iccarus Plummet a couple of years ago there was substantial discussion on this site on the subject. The BHP Flying and Glider plans call for a 12 gauge tube, which equates to .109" wall thickness, so I figure I'm a little thicker, plus a stronger alloy. Anyway, I welded onto my axle two 1/2" dia. tubes to act as anti-rotate devices so the axle can't rotate when the brakes are applied (a-la-Mike Cuy). I then took it over to the local engine shop on the other side of the airport here in Poplar Grove, with instructions to Mag-na-flux (magnetic particle non-destructive test) the welds. To my surprise they found two cracks! It was explained to me that when the weld cools, sometimes the weld area shrinks and "pulls" away from the base metal, thus causing the crack. I had to go back and grind-out the cracks, and re-weld, then re-inspect. href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.mat ronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-Listhref="http://forums.matronics.com">h ttp://forums.matronics.com href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.mat ronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- 1/8/2007 4:12 PM ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: packing
Date: Jan 09, 2007
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
Well Don E., I wish I was packing more than a 65 Continental up front in my Pietenpol but what I'm packing on is the pounds so the old "reduce your takeoff weight" program goes into effect next Monday. (can't start multiple programs in the same week:)) What you gain with your x44 prop Don is a greater cruise speed than Frank and I since you mentioned 80 mph while if I'm not mistaken Frank has the x 42 prop which beats you in a climb but once in cruise you are the winner I'd imagine. (unless he's redlining it to make you feel bad and not telling you.....which is not out of the realm of possibility !) By the way, Don's airplane is one of the prettiest ponies out there and I hope he gets to bring it to Brodhead this summer---it is a real charmer. Mike C. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: pilot weight/was builders ages
Date: Jan 09, 2007
Rob wrote- >As a builder who is 55, I am far less by waistline than the previously >mentioned waistlines, but now I am curious about the useful load, and what >(lbs) is allowed in the back seat for proper CG. I'm about to do a new W&B on 41CC this weekend and I'll let you know how it turns out, but the biggest factor is what engine you have on the airplane. I've run many 'what-ifs' in the W&B spreadsheet on 41CC in its previous trim and can tell you a couple of things that the numbers show on this airplane. And it has a Continental A65-8, cabanes swung back 4", and split axle Cub-style gear. And I'm 55 and not "oversquare" in the waistline (32" on a good day, before dinner, without tucking in my shirt). One thing the numbers show is that my airplane should only be soloed from the rear seat, especially with full fuel (16 gal. in a header tank). Another thing is that there is a minimum pilot weight, solo with full fuel, of about 95 lbs. or the CG is too far forward. Another thing is that it's virtually impossible for the passenger's weight to affect the CG... I've tried passenger weights up to 350 lbs. with a 95 lb. pilot and I really don't believe that can physically be done by any 350 pounder I've ever seen. More realistic passenger weights do not change the CG to any appreciable extent. So... to your question. "Useful load" for 41CC is a pilot, passenger, full fuel, and a couple of headsets. There is essentially no place to put baggage, certainly not behind the pilot. On this airplane, that amounts to roughly 500 lbs. available for pilot and passenger. I've run scenarios (on paper) with large pilot and passenger and full fuel and you can put the airplane out of CG limits and over-gross, but I really don't believe it's physically possible to stuff two people that large into both cockpits, especially into the front. And more than that, my understanding is that the A65 won't pull the airplane up with any gusto in this configuration, especially on a warm day or at anything much above sea level. I'll let you know how the new W&B turns out. Oscar Zuniga San Antonio, TX mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com website at http://www.flysquirrel.net _________________________________________________________________ Fixing up the home? Live Search can help ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: pilot weight/was builders ages
Date: Jan 09, 2007
From: <harvey.rule(at)bell.ca>
As I've said in a few back emails; I'm using a Franklin 80 hp. I'm 200lbs.I was 222lb when I first flew her. The empty weight is 777lbs and she is well within her weight and balance .I still feel a lot of forward stick when I'm in a level cruise condition. So if I am too heavy for that back seat, the pull on that stick certainly is no indication of that. I attribute that pull to be from the power of the engine at this time, given no other reason for it. Since the engine is mounted in a slightly downward angle, this is the only thing that makes sense to me because when I back off from the throttle the pull correspondingly is less and less. When I am on final there is no pull at all. I think for long trips I will be installing a bungee cord arrangement much like I have on my N3 Pup to help hold that stick back or else I'm going to get fatigued early in the trip. Unfortunately I have no picture in my album of that arrangement or I would attach it. Perhaps in the future I could scan a photo I have of that and send it along. Is anyone else experiencing this problem or is it just me? ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: seeing Piets in person
Date: Jan 09, 2007
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
Com' on Ron, it would be faster for you to drive to Cleveland than to go to Brodhead (or stop on the way if I don't fly mine up) this spring and I'll give you an in-person tour. You might even be able to see Don E's and Frank P's on the way if they don't plan on flying up this summer to BH. I'll even let you buy me dinner:)) Mike C. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Roman Bukolt" <conceptmodels(at)tds.net>
Subject: Re: pilot weight/was builders ages
Date: Jan 09, 2007
Oscar, I know Bill Rewey has flown passengers weighing in the 230 Lb. range and he is 200. His Piet is powered by an A-65 and he carries 14 gal. fuel. I believe his gross fully loaded at take off is something over 1220lbs. The climb out is nothing to brag about but the A-65 can handle it. Last Friday he and I flew my A-65 powered Piet. Our gross was 1213 lb. yielding a wing loading of 8.09 lb/sf. The climb out was very acceptable but then it was only 49 degrees OAT. CG was at 32.2% The front seat is so close to the C.G. that it'll never affect the aircraft performance except for wing and power loading. My 2 cents for what it's worth. Roman Bukolt NX 20795 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 8:49 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: pilot weight/was builders ages > > > Rob wrote- > >>As a builder who is 55, I am far less by waistline than the previously >>mentioned waistlines, but now I am curious about the useful load, and what >>(lbs) is allowed in the back seat for proper CG. > > I'm about to do a new W&B on 41CC this weekend and I'll let you know how > it turns out, but the biggest factor is what engine you have on the > airplane. I've run many 'what-ifs' in the W&B spreadsheet on 41CC in its > previous trim and can tell you a couple of things that the numbers show on > this airplane. And it has a Continental A65-8, cabanes swung back 4", and > split axle Cub-style gear. And I'm 55 and not "oversquare" in the > waistline (32" on a good day, before dinner, without tucking in my shirt). > > One thing the numbers show is that my airplane should only be soloed from > the rear seat, especially with full fuel (16 gal. in a header tank). > Another thing is that there is a minimum pilot weight, solo with full > fuel, of about 95 lbs. or the CG is too far forward. Another thing is > that it's virtually impossible for the passenger's weight to affect the > CG... I've tried passenger weights up to 350 lbs. with a 95 lb. pilot and > I really don't believe that can physically be done by any 350 pounder I've > ever seen. More realistic passenger weights do not change the CG to any > appreciable extent. > > So... to your question. "Useful load" for 41CC is a pilot, passenger, > full fuel, and a couple of headsets. There is essentially no place to put > baggage, certainly not behind the pilot. On this airplane, that amounts > to roughly 500 lbs. available for pilot and passenger. I've run scenarios > (on paper) with large pilot and passenger and full fuel and you can put > the airplane out of CG limits and over-gross, but I really don't believe > it's physically possible to stuff two people that large into both > cockpits, especially into the front. And more than that, my understanding > is that the A65 won't pull the airplane up with any gusto in this > configuration, especially on a warm day or at anything much above sea > level. > > I'll let you know how the new W&B turns out. > > Oscar Zuniga > San Antonio, TX > mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com > website at http://www.flysquirrel.net > > _________________________________________________________________ > Fixing up the home? Live Search can help > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Pietsrneat(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 09, 2007
Subject: Re: seeing Piets in person
In a message dated 1/9/2007 10:54:52 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov writes: Com' on Ron, it would be faster for you to drive to Cleveland than to go to Brodhead (or stop on the way if I don't fly mine up) this spring and I'll give you an in-person tour. You might even be able to see Don E's and Frank P's on the way if they don't plan on flying up this summer to BH. I'll even let you buy me dinner:)) Mike C. You're on, my friend. Plan on my being there a day or so before Brodhead. You will feast on the best McNuggets someone else's money can buy. Ron Don not archive ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 09, 2007
From: Ben Ramler <ben_ramler2002(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: ribs
does anyone know what the dimensions of the gussetts are on the ribs? thanks? the only thing I have is 1" square gussetts, which will not work. take care, Ben __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dick Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net>
Subject: wings
Date: Jan 09, 2007
For all in the process of building and not yet done the wings, I just finished building a three piece wing. On my last Piet I built a one piece wing. In my opinion the three section was much harder to build. Yes, it is easier to move around in smaller sections and the one piece requires a larger work area, but if there is a next time, it'll be a one piece. Dick N ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dick Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net>
Subject: Re: ribs
Date: Jan 09, 2007
Ben Most all gussets are different sizes. You need a full size plan for the ribs to make them. Dick N. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ben Ramler" <ben_ramler2002(at)yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 10:46 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: ribs does anyone know what the dimensions of the gussetts are on the ribs? thanks? the only thing I have is 1" square gussetts, which will not work. take care, Ben __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: HelsperSew(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 09, 2007
Subject: Re: wings
Dick, Do you think the 3-piece wing is heavier than the 1-piece? Dan Helsper Poplar Grove, IL. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 09, 2007
From: Ben Ramler <ben_ramler2002(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: ribs
I have the full rib drawing but I do not the dimensions. ----- Original Message ---- From: Dick Navratil <horzpool(at)goldengate.net> Sent: Tuesday, January 9, 2007 11:01:07 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: ribs Ben Most all gussets are different sizes. You need a full size plan for the ribs to make them. Dick N. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ben Ramler" <ben_ramler2002(at)yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 10:46 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: ribs does anyone know what the dimensions of the gussetts are on the ribs? thanks? the only thing I have is 1" square gussetts, which will not work. take care, Ben __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Rob Stapleton" <foto(at)alaska.net>
Subject: pilot weight/was builders ages
Date: Jan 09, 2007
Oscar, Great, I am planning on using the Corvair engine conversion and have a longer fuselage. I weigh about 230 and am 6'-5" tall. Sounds like I have the right set up for my size. I will be interested in your data on the W&B Regards from chilly AK! Rob -----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, January 09, 2007 5:50 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: pilot weight/was builders ages Rob wrote- >As a builder who is 55, I am far less by waistline than the previously >mentioned waistlines, but now I am curious about the useful load, and what >(lbs) is allowed in the back seat for proper CG. I'm about to do a new W&B on 41CC this weekend and I'll let you know how it turns out, but the biggest factor is what engine you have on the airplane. I've run many 'what-ifs' in the W&B spreadsheet on 41CC in its previous trim and can tell you a couple of things that the numbers show on this airplane. And it has a Continental A65-8, cabanes swung back 4", and split axle Cub-style gear. And I'm 55 and not "oversquare" in the waistline (32" on a good day, before dinner, without tucking in my shirt). One thing the numbers show is that my airplane should only be soloed from the rear seat, especially with full fuel (16 gal. in a header tank). Another thing is that there is a minimum pilot weight, solo with full fuel, of about 95 lbs. or the CG is too far forward. Another thing is that it's virtually impossible for the passenger's weight to affect the CG... I've tried passenger weights up to 350 lbs. with a 95 lb. pilot and I really don't believe that can physically be done by any 350 pounder I've ever seen. More realistic passenger weights do not change the CG to any appreciable extent. So... to your question. "Useful load" for 41CC is a pilot, passenger, full fuel, and a couple of headsets. There is essentially no place to put baggage, certainly not behind the pilot. On this airplane, that amounts to roughly 500 lbs. available for pilot and passenger. I've run scenarios (on paper) with large pilot and passenger and full fuel and you can put the airplane out of CG limits and over-gross, but I really don't believe it's physically possible to stuff two people that large into both cockpits, especially into the front. And more than that, my understanding is that the A65 won't pull the airplane up with any gusto in this configuration, especially on a warm day or at anything much above sea level. I'll let you know how the new W&B turns out. Oscar Zuniga San Antonio, TX mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com website at http://www.flysquirrel.net _________________________________________________________________ Fixing up the home? Live Search can help ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 09, 2007
Subject: Operators Manual
In a message dated 1/9/2007 12:44:01 AM Central Standard Time, foto(at)alaska.net writes: Any comments or clues, or better yet graphs and operators manual info ..? Rob Stapleton, Anchorage, Alaska Rob, You might get some ideas of some of the various loading configurations, from my Weight & Ballance sheets on this page: http://nx770cg.com/OperationsManual.html Chuck G. NX770CG ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 09, 2007
Subject: Re: prop
In a message dated 1/8/2007 9:52:53 PM Central Standard Time, EmchAir(at)aol.com writes: Another thing to pay attention to is that a 72 x 42 from one company is not necessarily a 72 x 42 from another company. Then there are different airfoils, shapes, chords, etc. It almost hurts when you start to think just how different one make of prop could be from another make! Well said, Don. Chuck G. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 09, 2007
Subject: Re: Weld cracks found
In a message dated 1/8/2007 6:48:53 PM Central Standard Time, HelsperSew(at)aol.com writes: You are absolutely correct in your assumption. I TIG welded this axle. That's why I tac weld with the mig, but Always finish weld with Oxy / Accy. Chuck G. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: ribs
Date: Jan 09, 2007
From: "Jack T. Textor" <jtextor(at)thepalmergroup.com>
Ben, 1" will work for many of them. I cut mine into 1 1/2 circles, sanded, then split in half with the band saw. You can see pictures on my site, www.textors.com, under Piet Project. Also some pictures of Oshkosh and Brodhead under Miscellaneous at the bottom. Jack Textor ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ed G." <flyboy_120(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: ribs
Date: Jan 09, 2007
There are no dimensions called out for the gussets. It's one of those places in the plans where you need to use the scale of the plans, a little eyeball dimensioning, a little imagination, a little guesswork and a little Kentucky windage. I have seen pictures of everything from little tiny ones that don't look like they would work to really oversized ones and they all seem to work fine. One of those places where you get to do your own thing. I will suggest standardizing them as much as possible so you dont have a different size gusset for each joint like I did. it's a lot easier to have only two or three sizes to deal with. If you have access to a papercutter you can cut some 1" strips and cut the gussets from them with shears or tin snips. have fun .... Ed G. >From: Ben Ramler <ben_ramler2002(at)yahoo.com> >Reply-To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: ribs >Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 10:18:46 -0800 (PST) > > >I have the full rib drawing but I do not the dimensions. > >----- Original Message ---- >From: Dick Navratil <horzpool(at)goldengate.net> >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >Sent: Tuesday, January 9, 2007 11:01:07 AM >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: ribs > > > > >Ben >Most all gussets are different sizes. You need a full size plan for the >ribs to make them. >Dick N. >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Ben Ramler" <ben_ramler2002(at)yahoo.com> >To: >Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 10:46 AM >Subject: Pietenpol-List: ribs > > >does anyone know what the dimensions of the gussetts are on the ribs? >thanks? the only thing I have is 1" square gussetts, which will not work. > >take care, > >Ben > >__________________________________________________ > > >__________________________________________________ > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 09, 2007
From: "Bill Princell" <weprincell(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Making Rib Gussets
Hi Ben: You might want to consider cutting them out with a 2 1/4" or 2 1/2" hole saw using a 1/32" pilot drill. Just stack them with the grain all the same direction and cut them in half on a band saw. That way you can make them all the same size and and modify a few if need that might require less area. I made mine that way. They make the finished rib look great. They're extremely strong and eliminate unneeded material. Bill Princell - ________________________________________________________________________________
From: lshutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan)
Date: Jan 09, 2007
Subject: Propellers
I am using a Model A, so I am going to have to have a prop made, but for you guys using aircraft engines or the Corvair, wouldn't it be simple to solve the prop question by using one of the ground adjustable (Ivo prop?) propellers. Dick: I built a 3 piece wing and I spent more time building the center section ( especially if I factor in the building of the fiberglass fuel tank ) then the 2 wing panels. Ken Perkins has a one piece wing. After a forced landing he had to take the wing off to transport the airplane home and really regretted the one piece wing-at least at that time. another good reason for the 3piece. Leon S. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Making Rib Gussets
Date: Jan 09, 2007
From: "Steve Eldredge" <steve(at)byu.edu>
You guys are making want to build a set just for fun! How many multiple piet builders are there out there? Steve E From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Princell Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 12:58 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Making Rib Gussets Hi Ben: You might want to consider cutting them out with a 2 1/4" or 2 1/2" hole saw using a 1/32" pilot drill. Just stack them with the grain all the same direction and cut them in half on a band saw. That way you can make them all the same size and and modify a few if need that might require less area. I made mine that way. They make the finished rib look great. They're extremely strong and eliminate unneeded material. Bill Princell - ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: packing
From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com>
Date: Jan 09, 2007
Hey Mike, One day ol' Forrest and I were talking about the props so we checked his and it was a X 44 on Sky Gypsy, which surprised me and didn't make me feel too good either! I've kinda been looking around and thinking about a flatter pitch. Trees at one end and wires at the other of my home base. It's about 2500' long and I can get 250' by the end of the runway now but as you know it's a different airplane in the summer with a load. Thinking about going to a climb prop. Thanks for the comment on the plane, I suppose I'll have to buy you breakfast now if I see you at a fly-in this year! Thanks to global warming I've flown each month now this winter. The runway is a sloppy mess with a lot of it stuck to the plane! Don Emch Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=86648#86648 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: TGSTONE236(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 09, 2007
Subject: weight
After reading all your emails,I see that I'm not the only one that needs to shed a few (40-50) pounds,I don't want my Piet to look like a swaybacked Camel.I am walking my dog down our 2750 ft runway round trip.The dog needs to loose weight also but I just tell people I'm walking the dog because she needs it. Ted Stone ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dick Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net>
Subject: Re: wings
Date: Jan 09, 2007
The three piece is definetly heavier. With all the extra bracing and steel fittings, I would say at least 5 lb. more. I see the point of being easier to transport a three piece after an off field landing. Dick N. ----- Original Message ----- From: HelsperSew(at)aol.com To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 11:16 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: wings Dick, Do you think the 3-piece wing is heavier than the 1-piece? Dan Helsper Poplar Grove, IL. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 09, 2007
From: shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: wings& trailering
YES SIR! That 3 piece makes it a lot eaiser to tow home when the ponies quit working before gravity does. Done it twice now and we trucked it 500 miles on a 20ft flat bed snowmobile trailer. 2nd time on a heavy equipment trailer, but luckly it was only 10 miles. Shad Dick Navratil wrote: The three piece is definetly heavier. With all the extra bracing and steel fittings, I would say at least 5 lb. more. I see the point of being easier to transport a three piece after an off field landing. Dick N. __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Pietsrneat(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 09, 2007
Subject: Re: McNuggets
In a message dated 1/9/2007 11:37:56 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov writes: You know Harvey, I was thinking along the lines of a nice steakhouse or rib place myself but it looks like in the effort to minimize travel and entertainment costs Ron is going on the cheap with me but for the sake of the Pietenpol movement I'll show him my plane and then pass on the drive thru at Mc'Ds so he can get on the road again and not miss any of the great action in store at Brodhead ! Mike C. Another example of one of my sad jokes going terribly wrong. A big, fat steak it is, Mike. After all you've done for me, that is the least I can do. Ron ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 09, 2007
From: shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Ohio piets planning on brodhead
Just wondering who plans on flying up to Brodhead from Ohio or surrounding states. Trying to see if I can arange any wingmen to go up togeather. As far as Dad's piet we are waiting to get the heads back. They were sent out to get some milling done. Overhauled re-radius'd crank is installed and I think Dad is going to put the jugs on this weekend. Hopefully it will be back togeather and test runs done by the time the "Lost runway of Atlantis" resurfaces from benieth the mud. In the mean time my runway mowing tractor, a 1955 Allis Chalmers WD45 decided it was time for an engine overhaul, and I think tractor parts might give airplane parts a run for their money in the cost department. Oh well, its good practice ....come to think of it, Corvair or my Allis Chalmers if it breaks down I am stuck out in a field either way. Well have a good winter Y'all, and hopefully most of you have been enjoying this mild winter from the cockpit of your Piets. Hope to see (meet) you all soon. Shad __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Pietsrneat(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 09, 2007
Subject: Re: wings
In a message dated 1/9/2007 12:03:32 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, horzpool(at)goldengate.net writes: For all in the process of building and not yet done the wings, I just finished building a three piece wing. On my last Piet I built a one piece wing. In my opinion the three section was much harder to build. Yes, it is easier to move around in smaller sections and the one piece requires a larger work area, but if there is a next time, it'll be a one piece. Dick N Dick, I find it very interesting you would opt for the one piece if you were to do another. I have probably wrestled with this aspect of construction (one piece or three piece) more than any other. Although I initially gravitated toward the one piece, it seemed logistically prudent to go the 3-piece route, especially if I wanted to build in some dihedral. On the other hand, the one piece looks cumbersome and hard to handle. Ron ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Graham Hansen" <ghans@cable-lynx.net>
Subject: Re: wings (3-piece vs. one piece)
Date: Jan 09, 2007
Dan, The 3-piece wing is heavier than the one piece version. How much I don't know, but BHP himself told me the difference could be as much as 15 pounds when the weight of the extra hardware, two more ribs, etc. is taken into account. Note also that the butt ribs and center section ribs need to be reinforced and braced against fabric pull. More pieces = more weight (and complexity) I used the 3-piece wing on my Pietenpol because of work space limitations. As far as awkwardness in handling the one piece version is concerned, I have had the wings off my Pietenpol only twice, for re-painting and recovering, in over 36 years. A friend built a Pietenpol with a one piece wing years ago and removed the wing for winter storage every autumn, and re-installing it in the spring, for several years. The job required three men and wasn't all that difficult. I wouldn't want to do it now, though; I'm 78 and everything is heavier than it used to be. If I were to build another (which I won't), it would have the one piece wing, provided I had the working space to build it. Graham Hansen (Pietenpol CF-AUN in an Alberta blizzard.) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mike Whaley" <MerlinFAC(at)cfl.rr.com>
Subject: You know you like Pietenpols when...
Date: Jan 09, 2007
Here's one for Tim Hansen... You know you like Pietenpols when you watch a football game and every time the announcer says the word "Buckeye" you mentally add "Pietenpol Association"! My team won, but I will admit that the Ohio State 1st-play touchdown was impressive, and that "Ohio" formation their band did was pretty dang impressive. Maybe the tuba player that dotted the "i" should try out for quarterback next year. -Mike (down here in Gator Country) PS - Here's a strange and completely unrelated request... if anyone has any photos, 3-views, or info of the Douglas Commuter light aircraft from 1926 (other than what's already posted on Aerofiles.com) please lemme know! Mike Whaley Webmaster, OV-10 Bronco Association http://www.ov-10bronco.net/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Rob Stapleton" <foto(at)alaska.net>
Subject: Operators Manual
Date: Jan 09, 2007
Oh great. I have been anxious to examine this info..thanks! RS -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rcaprd(at)aol.com Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 10:14 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Operators Manual In a message dated 1/9/2007 12:44:01 AM Central Standard Time, foto(at)alaska.net writes: Any comments or clues, or better yet graphs and operators manual info...? Rob Stapleton, Anchorage, Alaska Rob, You might get some ideas of some of the various loading configurations, from my Weight & Ballance sheets on this page: http://nx770cg.com/OperationsManual.html Chuck G. NX770CG ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Propellers
Date: Jan 10, 2007
From: <harvey.rule(at)bell.ca>
I may be starting a storm here but from what I have read on the web about direct drive and ground adjustable props, it's not a good idea. Because of pulses that the direct drive puts out the ground adjustable prop has a tendency to loose blades. I have even received an email from an engine builder who told me this was bad practice. -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Leon Stefan Sent: January 9, 2007 5:23 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Propellers I am using a Model A, so I am going to have to have a prop made, but for you guys using aircraft engines or the Corvair, wouldn't it be simple to solve the prop question by using one of the ground adjustable (Ivo prop?) propellers. Dick: I built a 3 piece wing and I spent more time building the center section ( especially if I factor in the building of the fiberglass fuel tank ) then the 2 wing panels. Ken Perkins has a one piece wing. After a forced landing he had to take the wing off to transport the airplane home and really regretted the one piece wing-at least at that time. another good reason for the 3piece. Leon S. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: prop pitch and winter flying
Date: Jan 10, 2007
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
Wow Don, that surprises me that Frank's prop is not a x42 but a x44. I certainly am happy with the x42 pitch, even if it does cost me some speed in cruise, I'd rather not flirt with tree tops or power lines on climb out. You can tell that you are still on your honeymoon with your new Pietenpol Don because for the first 2-3 years I would fly it in all kinds of runway conditions, barring anything that would make ruts in the sod runway. For even a 10 minute flight I would end up spending 30 minutes cleaning the muck off of the bottom of the wings and fuselage and horizontal tail. On January 1, 2000 a few of us wanted to see if our airplanes were Y2K compliant. It was a sunny New Year's Day with about 1 inch of snow blanketing the runway, but the OAT was only 8F. With a torpedo heater we preheated the Cub and Piet engines and it still took lots of propping on the Piet to get it going. Nothing like getting all sweaty then climbing in an open cockpit day for a 70 mph wind chill on a balmy 8 F. (no, we were not drinking) The owner of the Cub said "I'll bet you don't stay up for more than 5 minutes" so of course that was a dare, right ? After about 13 minutes I had proved my level of stubbornness sufficiently so I landed at about the 15 minute mark and that is all Brian talked about for the rest of the day I heard. he, of course, had cabin heat in his Cub) Mike C. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 10, 2007
From: Tim Willis <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: pilot weight/was builders ages
I am 65, 6'1" and weigh 270-- too damned much. My age is under "two decades ahead" of my age, instead of "three decades ahead," where it should be. About 8 months ago I bought Corky's second Piet project. It is a long fuze and has a Continental A-65, just like his first plane (Oscar's). If you recall reading some of my other posts, I have some issues in weight, and thus in CG, and in fitting in the airplane. I appreciate the many suggestions I got from this board relative to both CG and airfoil discussions. I have enhanced my CG spreadsheet to allow me to tinker things on the fly very quickly. Because I weigh much more than Corky and because the A-65 is so light, I am definitely having to extend the motor mounts and tilt the cabanes back 4 inches as well. *Note: Extending the motor mounts causes flying stability problems, as has been pointed out, and might require more tail surface to compensate (which as also has been pointed out, adds weight in the worst place). Here's what I "know" from my CG table (using estimated weights for components); thus it's not really what I KNOW, it's what I think I think (I think): All of the data below are relative to the chord of the wing, getting the CG forward of 20" behind the wing leading edge (LE). [Datum actually used is the firewall, with wing placement adjusted as dependent variable, then CG recalculated.] With the motor mount 9" longer than plans, and with the cabanes tilted to move the wings back 4": the CG for the plane and pilot (no fuel) is 3/4 of an inch AHEAD (good) of the maximum rearwards CG allowed. That is the worst case-- the empty landing condition-- and that result is fine, in fact nearly optimum, but in order to achieve this, the engine is likely too far forward, as stated above*. Using this as a starting data set (datum), each move below INDEPENDENTLY changes the CG as follows: 1. Taking 4" off the length of the motor mount moves the CG rearwards 1"-- that's too much. 2. In order to get the 1" back, tilting the wing aftwards another inch (5" total) moves the CG forward an inch, but that is more than any other application, and makes pilot entry/egress even more problematic. 3. Alternatively adding a 22# battery mounted forward of the firewall moves the CG forward 3/4"... I'd rather not have that weight. 4. Moving my heavy weight forward 3" moves the CG (again, this is the case with an empty plane plus pilot) forward 1". (However, I likely can't move forward presently more than an inch. Foam might allow that 1", yet still allow my knees to clear the bottom of the instrument panel on entry and egress.) 5. Losing 28 pounds of pilot weight moves the CG forward an inch. Another 27 pounds loss moves the CG forward another inch. [This is a great solution for many reasons, but is not an "engineering solution." Moreover, in my case it might be achieved only by an extended vacation in Ethiopia.] 6. Adding 18 gal. of fuel in the nose tank moves the CG forward almost 3 inches. Of course, this is a different case, looking for the FORWARD CG limits. In this regard, a 220 pound pilot with a full tank of fuel is right at the forward CG limit (25% of chord). The solution for such a temporary pilot is to add tail weight. For such a pemanent pilot, the solution is to move the wing forward. 7. Adding a totally impractical 340# passenger (2 X "std." passenger) moves the CG rearwards half an inch with the tank full or only 3/8" with the tank empty. This is just to prove that, as Oscar says, the CG is not sensitive to passenger weight. 8. Of course there are also LG placement, braking, and ground handling issues to consider, but they are another whole linkage and discussion. I hope this discussion helps someone else with their CG considerations. Tim in central TX -----Original Message----- >From: Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> >Sent: Jan 9, 2007 8:49 AM >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Pietenpol-List: pilot weight/was builders ages > > >Rob wrote- > >>As a builder who is 55, I am far less by waistline than the previously >>mentioned waistlines, but now I am curious about the useful load, and what >>(lbs) is allowed in the back seat for proper CG. > >I'm about to do a new W&B on 41CC this weekend and I'll let you know how it >turns out, but the biggest factor is what engine you have on the airplane. >I've run many 'what-ifs' in the W&B spreadsheet on 41CC in its previous trim >and can tell you a couple of things that the numbers show on this airplane. >And it has a Continental A65-8, cabanes swung back 4", and split axle >Cub-style gear. And I'm 55 and not "oversquare" in the waistline (32" on a >good day, before dinner, without tucking in my shirt). > >One thing the numbers show is that my airplane should only be soloed from >the rear seat, especially with full fuel (16 gal. in a header tank). >Another thing is that there is a minimum pilot weight, solo with full fuel, >of about 95 lbs. or the CG is too far forward. Another thing is that it's >virtually impossible for the passenger's weight to affect the CG... I've >tried passenger weights up to 350 lbs. with a 95 lb. pilot and I really >don't believe that can physically be done by any 350 pounder I've ever seen. > More realistic passenger weights do not change the CG to any appreciable >extent. > >So... to your question. "Useful load" for 41CC is a pilot, passenger, full >fuel, and a couple of headsets. There is essentially no place to put >baggage, certainly not behind the pilot. On this airplane, that amounts to >roughly 500 lbs. available for pilot and passenger. I've run scenarios (on >paper) with large pilot and passenger and full fuel and you can put the >airplane out of CG limits and over-gross, but I really don't believe it's >physically possible to stuff two people that large into both cockpits, >especially into the front. And more than that, my understanding is that the >A65 won't pull the airplane up with any gusto in this configuration, >especially on a warm day or at anything much above sea level. > >I'll let you know how the new W&B turns out. > >Oscar Zuniga >San Antonio, TX >mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com >website at http://www.flysquirrel.net > >_________________________________________________________________ >Fixing up the home? Live Search can help > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dick Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net>
Subject: Re: wings
Date: Jan 10, 2007
----- Original Message ----- From: Pietsrneat(at)aol.com To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 7:27 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: wings Ron I built my one piece wing and installed it, then had it inspected. My hangar is in the metro area and not in an area approved for test flying. I removed the wing with the help of two others. I transported the wing 45 miles and with the help of Del Magsen, we re-mounted the wing in less than 2 hours. Building in the dihedral was easy. Working on the wing was not a problem. I build a 16' rolling table that rotated. I had enough visitors to the hangar, that turning the wing over a couple of times wasn't a problem. Initial fitting not a problem with pulley system hanging from rafters suspending wing while playing with lift struts. Dick N. Dick, I find it very interesting you would opt for the one piece if you were to do another. I have probably wrestled with this aspect of construction (one piece or three piece) more than any other. Although I initially gravitated toward the one piece, it seemed logistically prudent to go the 3-piece route, especially if I wanted to build in some dihedral. On the other hand, the one piece looks cumbersome and hard to handle. Ron ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: side business
Date: Jan 10, 2007
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
Kip, that would be a great place to start eh, doing a cost/profit calculation to make it even worthwhile to do and then see what the Piet market would bear. I might be out of the ballpark some on what Charlie was charging for ribs in recent years since I did hear those prices second-hand. Be something to look into and something your little girl could maybe even help with for 'extra credit' points with Dad:) Mike C. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Roman Bukolt" <conceptmodels(at)tds.net>
Subject: Re: pilot weight/was builders ages
Date: Jan 10, 2007
According to Bill Rewey, when calculating the C.G., the pilot and the passenger their C.G. is where their navel is. In my case it's 10" ahead of the back of the seat. At 270 lbs. how forward of your back is your navel. That might be enough to influence your C.G. location. Then again you could live in fantasy land and use the FAA standard for Wt. & Bal. and assume each person is the "standard" 170 lbs. Alternative: Eat a late breakfast of oatmeal (good for your heart), skip lunch then have a light and healthy supper. Do this for about a yr. and you'll feel good and look good and feel "svelt". and the girls will shower you with attention. Yeah, right!! Roman Bukolt NX20795 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Willis" <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net> Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 8:53 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: pilot weight/was builders ages > > > I am 65, 6'1" and weigh 270-- too damned much. My age is under "two > decades ahead" of my age, instead of "three decades ahead," where it > should be. > > About 8 months ago I bought Corky's second Piet project. It is a long > fuze and has a Continental A-65, just like his first plane (Oscar's). If > you recall reading some of my other posts, I have some issues in weight, > and thus in CG, and in fitting in the airplane. > > I appreciate the many suggestions I got from this board relative to both > CG and airfoil discussions. > > I have enhanced my CG spreadsheet to allow me to tinker things on the fly > very quickly. Because I weigh much more than Corky and because the A-65 > is so light, I am definitely having to extend the motor mounts and tilt > the cabanes back 4 inches as well. > > *Note: Extending the motor mounts causes flying stability problems, as > has been pointed out, and might require more tail surface to compensate > (which as also has been pointed out, adds weight in the worst place). > > Here's what I "know" from my CG table (using estimated weights for > components); thus it's not really what I KNOW, it's what I think I think > (I think): > > All of the data below are relative to the chord of the wing, getting the > CG forward of 20" behind the wing leading edge (LE). [Datum actually used > is the firewall, with wing placement adjusted as dependent variable, then > CG recalculated.] > > With the motor mount 9" longer than plans, and with the cabanes tilted to > move the wings back 4": > > the CG for the plane and pilot (no fuel) is 3/4 of an inch AHEAD (good) of > the maximum rearwards CG allowed. That is the worst case-- the empty > landing condition-- and that result is fine, in fact nearly optimum, but > in order to achieve this, the engine is likely too far forward, as stated > above*. > > Using this as a starting data set (datum), each move below INDEPENDENTLY > changes the CG as follows: > > 1. Taking 4" off the length of the motor mount moves the CG rearwards > 1"-- that's too much. > > 2. In order to get the 1" back, tilting the wing aftwards another inch > (5" total) moves the CG forward an inch, but that is more than any other > application, and makes pilot entry/egress even more problematic. > > 3. Alternatively adding a 22# battery mounted forward of the firewall > moves the CG forward 3/4"... I'd rather not have that weight. > > 4. Moving my heavy weight forward 3" moves the CG (again, this is the > case with an empty plane plus pilot) forward 1". (However, I likely can't > move forward presently more than an inch. Foam might allow that 1", yet > still allow my knees to clear the bottom of the instrument panel on entry > and egress.) > > 5. Losing 28 pounds of pilot weight moves the CG forward an inch. > Another 27 pounds loss moves the CG forward another inch. [This is a > great solution for many reasons, but is not an "engineering solution." > Moreover, in my case it might be achieved only by an extended vacation in > Ethiopia.] > > 6. Adding 18 gal. of fuel in the nose tank moves the CG forward almost 3 > inches. Of course, this is a different case, looking for the FORWARD CG > limits. In this regard, a 220 pound pilot with a full tank of fuel is > right at the forward CG limit (25% of chord). The solution for such a > temporary pilot is to add tail weight. For such a pemanent pilot, the > solution is to move the wing forward. > > 7. Adding a totally impractical 340# passenger (2 X "std." passenger) > moves the CG rearwards half an inch with the tank full or only 3/8" with > the tank empty. This is just to prove that, as Oscar says, the CG is not > sensitive to passenger weight. > > 8. Of course there are also LG placement, braking, and ground handling > issues to consider, but they are another whole linkage and discussion. > > I hope this discussion helps someone else with their CG considerations. > > Tim in central TX > > -----Original Message----- >>From: Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> >>Sent: Jan 9, 2007 8:49 AM >>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >>Subject: Pietenpol-List: pilot weight/was builders ages >> >> >> >>Rob wrote- >> >>>As a builder who is 55, I am far less by waistline than the previously >>>mentioned waistlines, but now I am curious about the useful load, and >>>what >>>(lbs) is allowed in the back seat for proper CG. >> >>I'm about to do a new W&B on 41CC this weekend and I'll let you know how >>it >>turns out, but the biggest factor is what engine you have on the airplane. >>I've run many 'what-ifs' in the W&B spreadsheet on 41CC in its previous >>trim >>and can tell you a couple of things that the numbers show on this >>airplane. >>And it has a Continental A65-8, cabanes swung back 4", and split axle >>Cub-style gear. And I'm 55 and not "oversquare" in the waistline (32" on >>a >>good day, before dinner, without tucking in my shirt). >> >>One thing the numbers show is that my airplane should only be soloed from >>the rear seat, especially with full fuel (16 gal. in a header tank). >>Another thing is that there is a minimum pilot weight, solo with full >>fuel, >>of about 95 lbs. or the CG is too far forward. Another thing is that it's >>virtually impossible for the passenger's weight to affect the CG... I've >>tried passenger weights up to 350 lbs. with a 95 lb. pilot and I really >>don't believe that can physically be done by any 350 pounder I've ever >>seen. >> More realistic passenger weights do not change the CG to any appreciable >>extent. >> >>So... to your question. "Useful load" for 41CC is a pilot, passenger, >>full >>fuel, and a couple of headsets. There is essentially no place to put >>baggage, certainly not behind the pilot. On this airplane, that amounts >>to >>roughly 500 lbs. available for pilot and passenger. I've run scenarios >>(on >>paper) with large pilot and passenger and full fuel and you can put the >>airplane out of CG limits and over-gross, but I really don't believe it's >>physically possible to stuff two people that large into both cockpits, >>especially into the front. And more than that, my understanding is that >>the >>A65 won't pull the airplane up with any gusto in this configuration, >>especially on a warm day or at anything much above sea level. >> >>I'll let you know how the new W&B turns out. >> >>Oscar Zuniga >>San Antonio, TX >>mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com >>website at http://www.flysquirrel.net >> >>_________________________________________________________________ >>Fixing up the home? Live Search can help >> >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 10, 2007
From: "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: pilot weight/was builders ages
Bill was just being nice to you. In the early days it was where "other things" were, and it been since cleaned up for mixed company. "other things" don't move forward when the belly grows. :^) walt evans NX140DL "Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you" Ben Franklin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Roman Bukolt" <conceptmodels(at)tds.net> Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 11:53 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: pilot weight/was builders ages > > > According to Bill Rewey, when calculating the C.G., the pilot and the > passenger their C.G. is where their navel is. In my case it's 10" ahead > of the back of the seat. At 270 lbs. how forward of your back is your > navel. That might be enough to influence your C.G. location. > Then again you could live in fantasy land and use the FAA standard for Wt. > & Bal. and assume each person is the "standard" 170 lbs. > Alternative: > Eat a late breakfast of oatmeal (good for your heart), skip lunch then > have a light and healthy supper. > Do this for about a yr. and you'll feel good and look good and feel > "svelt". and the girls will shower you with attention. > > Yeah, right!! > > Roman Bukolt NX20795 > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tim Willis" <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net> > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 8:53 AM > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: pilot weight/was builders ages > > >> >> >> I am 65, 6'1" and weigh 270-- too damned much. My age is under "two >> decades ahead" of my age, instead of "three decades ahead," where it >> should be. >> >> About 8 months ago I bought Corky's second Piet project. It is a long >> fuze and has a Continental A-65, just like his first plane (Oscar's). If >> you recall reading some of my other posts, I have some issues in weight, >> and thus in CG, and in fitting in the airplane. >> >> I appreciate the many suggestions I got from this board relative to both >> CG and airfoil discussions. >> >> I have enhanced my CG spreadsheet to allow me to tinker things on the fly >> very quickly. Because I weigh much more than Corky and because the A-65 >> is so light, I am definitely having to extend the motor mounts and tilt >> the cabanes back 4 inches as well. >> >> *Note: Extending the motor mounts causes flying stability problems, as >> has been pointed out, and might require more tail surface to compensate >> (which as also has been pointed out, adds weight in the worst place). >> >> Here's what I "know" from my CG table (using estimated weights for >> components); thus it's not really what I KNOW, it's what I think I think >> (I think): >> >> All of the data below are relative to the chord of the wing, getting the >> CG forward of 20" behind the wing leading edge (LE). [Datum actually >> used is the firewall, with wing placement adjusted as dependent variable, >> then CG recalculated.] >> >> With the motor mount 9" longer than plans, and with the cabanes tilted to >> move the wings back 4": >> >> the CG for the plane and pilot (no fuel) is 3/4 of an inch AHEAD (good) >> of the maximum rearwards CG allowed. That is the worst case-- the empty >> landing condition-- and that result is fine, in fact nearly optimum, but >> in order to achieve this, the engine is likely too far forward, as stated >> above*. >> >> Using this as a starting data set (datum), each move below INDEPENDENTLY >> changes the CG as follows: >> >> 1. Taking 4" off the length of the motor mount moves the CG rearwards >> 1"-- that's too much. >> >> 2. In order to get the 1" back, tilting the wing aftwards another inch >> (5" total) moves the CG forward an inch, but that is more than any other >> application, and makes pilot entry/egress even more problematic. >> >> 3. Alternatively adding a 22# battery mounted forward of the firewall >> moves the CG forward 3/4"... I'd rather not have that weight. >> >> 4. Moving my heavy weight forward 3" moves the CG (again, this is the >> case with an empty plane plus pilot) forward 1". (However, I likely >> can't move forward presently more than an inch. Foam might allow that >> 1", yet still allow my knees to clear the bottom of the instrument panel >> on entry and egress.) >> >> 5. Losing 28 pounds of pilot weight moves the CG forward an inch. >> Another 27 pounds loss moves the CG forward another inch. [This is a >> great solution for many reasons, but is not an "engineering solution." >> Moreover, in my case it might be achieved only by an extended vacation in >> Ethiopia.] >> >> 6. Adding 18 gal. of fuel in the nose tank moves the CG forward almost 3 >> inches. Of course, this is a different case, looking for the FORWARD CG >> limits. In this regard, a 220 pound pilot with a full tank of fuel is >> right at the forward CG limit (25% of chord). The solution for such a >> temporary pilot is to add tail weight. For such a pemanent pilot, the >> solution is to move the wing forward. >> >> 7. Adding a totally impractical 340# passenger (2 X "std." passenger) >> moves the CG rearwards half an inch with the tank full or only 3/8" with >> the tank empty. This is just to prove that, as Oscar says, the CG is not >> sensitive to passenger weight. >> >> 8. Of course there are also LG placement, braking, and ground handling >> issues to consider, but they are another whole linkage and discussion. >> >> I hope this discussion helps someone else with their CG considerations. >> >> Tim in central TX >> >> -----Original Message----- >>>From: Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> >>>Sent: Jan 9, 2007 8:49 AM >>>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >>>Subject: Pietenpol-List: pilot weight/was builders ages >>> >>> >>> >>>Rob wrote- >>> >>>>As a builder who is 55, I am far less by waistline than the previously >>>>mentioned waistlines, but now I am curious about the useful load, and >>>>what >>>>(lbs) is allowed in the back seat for proper CG. >>> >>>I'm about to do a new W&B on 41CC this weekend and I'll let you know how >>>it >>>turns out, but the biggest factor is what engine you have on the >>>airplane. >>>I've run many 'what-ifs' in the W&B spreadsheet on 41CC in its previous >>>trim >>>and can tell you a couple of things that the numbers show on this >>>airplane. >>>And it has a Continental A65-8, cabanes swung back 4", and split axle >>>Cub-style gear. And I'm 55 and not "oversquare" in the waistline (32" on >>>a >>>good day, before dinner, without tucking in my shirt). >>> >>>One thing the numbers show is that my airplane should only be soloed from >>>the rear seat, especially with full fuel (16 gal. in a header tank). >>>Another thing is that there is a minimum pilot weight, solo with full >>>fuel, >>>of about 95 lbs. or the CG is too far forward. Another thing is that >>>it's >>>virtually impossible for the passenger's weight to affect the CG... I've >>>tried passenger weights up to 350 lbs. with a 95 lb. pilot and I really >>>don't believe that can physically be done by any 350 pounder I've ever >>>seen. >>> More realistic passenger weights do not change the CG to any >>> appreciable >>>extent. >>> >>>So... to your question. "Useful load" for 41CC is a pilot, passenger, >>>full >>>fuel, and a couple of headsets. There is essentially no place to put >>>baggage, certainly not behind the pilot. On this airplane, that amounts >>>to >>>roughly 500 lbs. available for pilot and passenger. I've run scenarios >>>(on >>>paper) with large pilot and passenger and full fuel and you can put the >>>airplane out of CG limits and over-gross, but I really don't believe it's >>>physically possible to stuff two people that large into both cockpits, >>>especially into the front. And more than that, my understanding is that >>>the >>>A65 won't pull the airplane up with any gusto in this configuration, >>>especially on a warm day or at anything much above sea level. >>> >>>I'll let you know how the new W&B turns out. >>> >>>Oscar Zuniga >>>San Antonio, TX >>>mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com >>>website at http://www.flysquirrel.net >>> >>>_________________________________________________________________ >>>Fixing up the home? Live Search can help >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 10, 2007
From: Tim Willis <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: pilot weight/was builders ages
Thanks for correcting my typo. I meant to say, "My age is over two decades larger than my waistline, but should be three." But you knew what I meant. I am measuring from my navel, which is an advantage, given the forward displacement of same. Actually I think it's appropriate because I have heavy legs. Guys with beer guts and BLs (bird legs) should not do so. Babe Ruth comes to mind. The comment about another measurement metric is appropriate but useless, as my such gear is in defilade. Thanks for bearing with me on my continued rants on weight, balance and CG. I am like the old saw, "When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail." Which reminds me... have I told you about my CG issues? ;) Golly, it's too late now for looks. I am building the plane to get away from women. Tim in central TX -----Original Message----- >From: Roman Bukolt <conceptmodels(at)tds.net> >Sent: Jan 10, 2007 10:53 AM >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: pilot weight/was builders ages > > >According to Bill Rewey, when calculating the C.G., the pilot and the >passenger their C.G. is where their navel is. In my case it's 10" ahead of >the back of the seat. At 270 lbs. how forward of your back is your navel. >That might be enough to influence your C.G. location. >Then again you could live in fantasy land and use the FAA standard for Wt. & >Bal. and assume each person is the "standard" 170 lbs. >Alternative: >Eat a late breakfast of oatmeal (good for your heart), skip lunch then have >a light and healthy supper. >Do this for about a yr. and you'll feel good and look good and feel "svelt". >and the girls will shower you with attention. > >Yeah, right!! > >Roman Bukolt NX20795 >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Tim Willis" <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net> >To: >Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 8:53 AM >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: pilot weight/was builders ages > > >> >> >> I am 65, 6'1" and weigh 270-- too damned much. My age is under "two >> decades ahead" of my age, instead of "three decades ahead," where it >> should be. >> >> About 8 months ago I bought Corky's second Piet project. It is a long >> fuze and has a Continental A-65, just like his first plane (Oscar's). If >> you recall reading some of my other posts, I have some issues in weight, >> and thus in CG, and in fitting in the airplane. >> >> I appreciate the many suggestions I got from this board relative to both >> CG and airfoil discussions. >> >> I have enhanced my CG spreadsheet to allow me to tinker things on the fly >> very quickly. Because I weigh much more than Corky and because the A-65 >> is so light, I am definitely having to extend the motor mounts and tilt >> the cabanes back 4 inches as well. >> >> *Note: Extending the motor mounts causes flying stability problems, as >> has been pointed out, and might require more tail surface to compensate >> (which as also has been pointed out, adds weight in the worst place). >> >> Here's what I "know" from my CG table (using estimated weights for >> components); thus it's not really what I KNOW, it's what I think I think >> (I think): >> >> All of the data below are relative to the chord of the wing, getting the >> CG forward of 20" behind the wing leading edge (LE). [Datum actually used >> is the firewall, with wing placement adjusted as dependent variable, then >> CG recalculated.] >> >> With the motor mount 9" longer than plans, and with the cabanes tilted to >> move the wings back 4": >> >> the CG for the plane and pilot (no fuel) is 3/4 of an inch AHEAD (good) of >> the maximum rearwards CG allowed. That is the worst case-- the empty >> landing condition-- and that result is fine, in fact nearly optimum, but >> in order to achieve this, the engine is likely too far forward, as stated >> above*. >> >> Using this as a starting data set (datum), each move below INDEPENDENTLY >> changes the CG as follows: >> >> 1. Taking 4" off the length of the motor mount moves the CG rearwards >> 1"-- that's too much. >> >> 2. In order to get the 1" back, tilting the wing aftwards another inch >> (5" total) moves the CG forward an inch, but that is more than any other >> application, and makes pilot entry/egress even more problematic. >> >> 3. Alternatively adding a 22# battery mounted forward of the firewall >> moves the CG forward 3/4"... I'd rather not have that weight. >> >> 4. Moving my heavy weight forward 3" moves the CG (again, this is the >> case with an empty plane plus pilot) forward 1". (However, I likely can't >> move forward presently more than an inch. Foam might allow that 1", yet >> still allow my knees to clear the bottom of the instrument panel on entry >> and egress.) >> >> 5. Losing 28 pounds of pilot weight moves the CG forward an inch. >> Another 27 pounds loss moves the CG forward another inch. [This is a >> great solution for many reasons, but is not an "engineering solution." >> Moreover, in my case it might be achieved only by an extended vacation in >> Ethiopia.] >> >> 6. Adding 18 gal. of fuel in the nose tank moves the CG forward almost 3 >> inches. Of course, this is a different case, looking for the FORWARD CG >> limits. In this regard, a 220 pound pilot with a full tank of fuel is >> right at the forward CG limit (25% of chord). The solution for such a >> temporary pilot is to add tail weight. For such a pemanent pilot, the >> solution is to move the wing forward. >> >> 7. Adding a totally impractical 340# passenger (2 X "std." passenger) >> moves the CG rearwards half an inch with the tank full or only 3/8" with >> the tank empty. This is just to prove that, as Oscar says, the CG is not >> sensitive to passenger weight. >> >> 8. Of course there are also LG placement, braking, and ground handling >> issues to consider, but they are another whole linkage and discussion. >> >> I hope this discussion helps someone else with their CG considerations. >> >> Tim in central TX >> >> -----Original Message----- >>>From: Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> >>>Sent: Jan 9, 2007 8:49 AM >>>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >>>Subject: Pietenpol-List: pilot weight/was builders ages >>> >>> >>> >>>Rob wrote- >>> >>>>As a builder who is 55, I am far less by waistline than the previously >>>>mentioned waistlines, but now I am curious about the useful load, and >>>>what >>>>(lbs) is allowed in the back seat for proper CG. >>> >>>I'm about to do a new W&B on 41CC this weekend and I'll let you know how >>>it >>>turns out, but the biggest factor is what engine you have on the airplane. >>>I've run many 'what-ifs' in the W&B spreadsheet on 41CC in its previous >>>trim >>>and can tell you a couple of things that the numbers show on this >>>airplane. >>>And it has a Continental A65-8, cabanes swung back 4", and split axle >>>Cub-style gear. And I'm 55 and not "oversquare" in the waistline (32" on >>>a >>>good day, before dinner, without tucking in my shirt). >>> >>>One thing the numbers show is that my airplane should only be soloed from >>>the rear seat, especially with full fuel (16 gal. in a header tank). >>>Another thing is that there is a minimum pilot weight, solo with full >>>fuel, >>>of about 95 lbs. or the CG is too far forward. Another thing is that it's >>>virtually impossible for the passenger's weight to affect the CG... I've >>>tried passenger weights up to 350 lbs. with a 95 lb. pilot and I really >>>don't believe that can physically be done by any 350 pounder I've ever >>>seen. >>> More realistic passenger weights do not change the CG to any appreciable >>>extent. >>> >>>So... to your question. "Useful load" for 41CC is a pilot, passenger, >>>full >>>fuel, and a couple of headsets. There is essentially no place to put >>>baggage, certainly not behind the pilot. On this airplane, that amounts >>>to >>>roughly 500 lbs. available for pilot and passenger. I've run scenarios >>>(on >>>paper) with large pilot and passenger and full fuel and you can put the >>>airplane out of CG limits and over-gross, but I really don't believe it's >>>physically possible to stuff two people that large into both cockpits, >>>especially into the front. And more than that, my understanding is that >>>the >>>A65 won't pull the airplane up with any gusto in this configuration, >>>especially on a warm day or at anything much above sea level. >>> >>>I'll let you know how the new W&B turns out. >>> >>>Oscar Zuniga >>>San Antonio, TX >>>mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com >>>website at http://www.flysquirrel.net >>> >>>_________________________________________________________________ >>>Fixing up the home? Live Search can help >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 10, 2007
From: Larry Rice <rice(at)iapdatacom.net>
Subject: Kerosene Heater
My friend was recovering wings on an early Cessna 170. So, I know about fabric effects, but nothing else. Larry the MicroMong guy -- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 10, 2007
From: Larry Rice <rice(at)iapdatacom.net>
Subject: Welding
Did my micro mong fuselage with oxy-acetylene and mild steel rod (RG45), and after welding each cluster used the flame to make it cool slow. One of these days we'll see if it holds together in the air! ;) Larry the micro Mong guy -- ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Kerosene Heater
From: "Glenn Thomas" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com>
Date: Jan 10, 2007
I called System 3 and talked to tech support about the kerosene heater. Because I sand the surface of the gusset and the rib at the gusset location prior to T-88 application I should be fine. He also recommended using a solvent to clean the 2 surfaces before bonding as indicated on the instructions. Aware of this, I chose to just clean with a shop vac because I was unable to find a satisfactory promise that the solvent wouldn't adversely react to the adhesives in the plywood (which are fairly thin layers in 1/16" ply). ...but no more kerosene anymore. Although the idea of standing in a cold shed after being on my ass for 3 days of the flu is not attractive right now. Thanks for the warning. -------- Glenn Thomas N????? http://www.flyingwood.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=86848#86848 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Making Rib Gussets
From: "Glenn Thomas" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com>
Date: Jan 10, 2007
The hole saw approach will save a significant amount of time. Each one of my gussets is a different size and making custom sized gussets for each place on a rib took me 3 full days to make them all. I've seen pictures of someone else on the list (Bill Church's log on MyKitPlane I believe) where he used round gussets and was able to quickly sand the edges smooth with a drill and a piece of sandpaper. You could probably cut the length of the gusset cutting process down to 1/3 if you made them all the same size and just stacked them up aligning grain and cut them in half. If I do this again I will do that. -------- Glenn Thomas N????? http://www.flyingwood.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=86851#86851 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Greg Bacon" <gbacon67(at)hughes.net>
Subject: Center section butt rib location
Date: Jan 10, 2007
Does anyone know if a significant reason the butt rib on the center section is 1-7/8 inch from the end of the spar while the butt rib on the wing is only 1/2 inch from the end of it's spar? It looks as though the butt rib could be closer to the end of the CS spar without causing any major problem. However, I might be failing to see potential/operational problems. I would like to have the butt ribs on the CS as far apart as possible to allow for a wider arc cut-out (instead of the flop). I'm rebuilding Mtn Piet's CS a little wider, like Bill Rewey's bird. Thanks, Greg Bacon Prairie Home, MO P.S. For the age survey, I'm 39 with only 16 days until 40! ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "DOUGLAS BLACKBURN" <twinboom(at)msn.com>
Subject: Congratulations Gene Hubbard
Date: Jan 10, 2007
Good job Gene!!!!! I have been down to see Gene a few times over the years. He even loaned me his rib jig to many years ago. I have to say I have been the proverbial bump on a log, and I'd say it is time to get off that log and pull my head out and get to building. Even though Gene loaned me his jig, It appears to be a better deal to build your own from what I have been reading in the archives this evening. I have the cap-strip for the ribs, the wood for the tail group, and all the wood for the fuse in the attic above the garage. I suppose this list is making me accountable so to speak for getting this project on the road. I hope my questions over the next few years don't become too much for you guys. No more excuses either. Tomorrow I will pick up a board to build the rib jig. Gene I will return yours as soon as it fits into yours and mines schedule. Email me off list and we will work that out. My wife has had many health problems and I suppose I have been hiding behind that in a way. He rproblems continue, but it is time for me to move forward with this dream of mine to build a plane. I hope to learn as much, and be able to teach as much some day to someone else, in the way you all teach each other. I'll get off the soapbox now, I need to find a place to build a website, and start the progress logs. Thanks, you'll be hearing from me. Doug Blackburn Yucaipa California p.s. Carl Levken, drop me a line.............. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Skip-Cinda Gadd" <csfog(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: January 2007 Newsletter
Date: Jan 11, 2007
Doc Mosher, Just received the newsletter, GREAT job, thanks for taking the time and effort to keep it going at such a high level of excellence. One small note, Larry Harrison's first Piet, the blue and orange one had Chevy 2.4 liter power.

December 23, 2006 - January 11, 2007

Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-fo