Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-fq
January 30, 2007 - February 13, 2007
Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-fq
January 30, 2007 - February 13, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web.com Enhanced email for the mobile individual based on Microsoft
Exchange - http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene and Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Fuel tanks
Date: Jan 30, 2007
All good information to pass along for those interested in building fuel
tanks with fiberglass. I'm certainly not an engineer and don't have a lot
of experience but I do have to question why those with fiberglass tanks that
never use auto gas with alcohol simply don't have problems and those that
use auto gas with alcohol report lots of problems. I don't belong to "Boat
US" anymore (got out of boating) but up to at least last year they were
paying big buck to lobby against alcohol in fuel because of the huge
problems involving fiberglass tanks on boats.
I've about beaten this subject to death but hope to have at least caused
anyone interested to do some independent research.
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: <gbowen(at)ptialaska.net>
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 5:51 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
>
>
> The Canardian group I'm a member has about 1000 members via Yahoo, several
> are engineers in the fuel industry. Since all the Rutanesque type planes
> have all composite tanks, this problem of Mogas has been beat around a
> heck
> of alot. Biggest issue is the variable nature of Mogas, diff formula for
> different times of year and different regions of the country. Issue of
> increased amounts of alcohol in Mogas has been of great concern lately.
> Most problems have come from the additives to gas eating the various
> gaskets in the entire fuel system. I spent most of my career in the epoxy
> industry, so can be pretty sure the least of the problems with composite
> tanks is the epoxy. Derakane, epoxie's chemical cousin is used for
> underground fuel storage tanks at the local gas station.
> Gordon
>
> Original Message:
> -----------------
> From: Gene and Tammy zharvey(at)bellsouth.net
> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 16:31:36 -0600
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
>
>
>
>
> Gordon,
> Your right that as long as you use Avgas, fiberglass tanks are safe. I'm
> one of those that simply wants to be able to make the choice without fear
> of
> putting my self or my plane in danger. The last plane I owned (Avid) had
> fiberglass tanks and I didn't have one single problem. I always tested
> every tank of gas for alcohol. Others with the same plane, same
> fiberglass
> tanks, that did not test their gas, were having bad problems and some
> planes
> may have been lost because of it. Lots of problems with fiberglass and
> alcohol are well documented. I'm not trying to scare anyone or badmouth
> fiberglass, just want others to be informed.
> Gene ----- Original Message -----
> From: <gbowen(at)ptialaska.net>
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 2:45 PM
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
>
>
>>
>>
>> Gene,
>> The issue of alcohol in fuel has been batted around the canardian group a
>> lot. Concensus is use AVgas, unless forced to use a tank or two of Mogas
>> with alcohol. Epoxy is pretty resistant to alcohol and most other
>> solvents, I suspect the aromatics they put in no-lead fuel is more
>> damaging
>> to epoxy tanks than the issue of alcohol. I run only Avgas.
>> Gordon
>>
>> Original Message:
>> -----------------
>> From: Gene and Tammy zharvey(at)bellsouth.net
>> Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 18:02:33 -0600
>> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Gordon,
>> Very interested in your galvanized steel tank. What thickness did you
>> use?
>> How hard was it to work with? I plan on forming my own and then having
>> it
>> welded by someone that knows what their doing. Sounds like you get great
>> performance out of your plane.
>> I'm in the middle of completely going thru my Piet and doing a major on
>> the
>> A-65. I'm not completely happy with the current fuel tank and using a
>> heavier metel would allow me to do away with the lead.
>> As far as fiberglass using polyester resin or epoxy I encourage anyone
>> considering building a fuel tank from fiberglass to check around and do a
>> little investigating pior to building. Boat US is a good source of
>> information on fiberglass fuel tanks as well as many of the homebuilt
>> sites
>> (Avid, Kit Fox ect) that use fiberglass tanks. Fuel with alcohol is a
>> big
>> problem for fiberglass tanks everyone should be awear of..
>> Gene
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: <gbowen(at)ptialaska.net>
>> To:
>> Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 4:35 PM
>> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Gene,
>>> Fiberglass made using polyester resin is a problem with all sorts of
>>> solvents, including normal fuel. But fiberglass tanks made with epoxy
>>> have
>>> been in service with the canard-pusher guys since Rutan first flew into
>>> Osh
>>> in the early 70's. If they're done right, they don't leak. But if
>>> weight
>>> is the consideration, make them out of galvanized steel like my Piete.
>>> If
>>> fixed my weight problem (I'm 275lbs) with a 0-235 engine, chevy starter,
>>> car battery under legs of passenger seat and moved the engine mount
>>> forward
>>> about 4". With Aeronca wings get about 750'/min. climb, with full 22
>>> gal
>>> fuel, my fat carcass, and indicates 105 mph at 3000' with full 2650 rpm
>>> power. But love to cruise at 2000 rpm at 75mph indicated, hang the
>>> elbow
>>> out the side like driving a convertable, fuel burn is about 6 gal/hr
>>> Fresh
>>> jugs on Lyco gets about 108 hp.
>>> Gordon
>>>
>>> Original Message:
>>> -----------------
>>> From: Gene and Tammy zharvey(at)bellsouth.net
>>> Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 13:30:11 -0600
>>> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>>> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for the reply Gordon.
>>> Fiberglass was considered as I've built and repaired fiberglass boats
>>> for
>>> a
>>> fair number of years. I discarded the idea for a number of reasons. I
>>> actually need more weight not less. I guess the biggest reason is the
>>> alcohol that is finding its way into almost all fuel. A real killer on
>>> fiberglass tanks. If you use only av gas it shouldn't be a problem for
>>> now,
>>> but I end up using a lot of auto gas.
>>> Thank you
>>> Gene in Tennessee (down with the flu)
>>>
>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> mail2web.com - Enhanced email for the mobile individual based on
>>>> Microsoft
>>>> Exchange - http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> myhosting.com - Premium Microsoft Windows and Linux web and
>>> application
>>> hosting - http://link.mail2web.com/myhosting
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> myhosting.com - Premium Microsoft Windows and Linux web and application
>> hosting - http://link.mail2web.com/myhosting
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> mail2web.com - Enhanced email for the mobile individual based on
> Microsoft
> Exchange - http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Tour De Corky
Date: Jan 30, 2007
Thanks to Ken Heide, we have pictures of Corky's new prize and epic journey.
I've put them on a webpage at
http://www.flysquirrel.net/piets/Defender.html
Good to have you back south of the Mason-Dixon line, with IT or without IT,
Corky ;o)
Oscar Zuniga
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
_________________________________________________________________
something more.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dick Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net>
Subject: Re: Fuel tanks
Date: Jan 30, 2007
Gene
You might want to check a local steel - aluminum warehouse. I just
picked up remanants of 5052-H32. Got 3 30x48" pieces for $42 total. I
am building 2 wing tanks, 9 gal each.
To the other post on tank baffles, they arent hard to install and add
stability and strength.
Dick N.
----- Original Message -----
From: Gene and Tammy
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 11:47 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
Jack,
Hate to make a pest out of myself but where have you found to be the
best place to order your metal. Still haven't decided what I'm going to
use but I need to place an order soon.
How soon can I expect a report on that prop?
Thanks
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: Phillips, Jack
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 10:20 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
Gene,
I made my tank out of 5052 aluminum, .040" thick, riveted together
and then TIG welded
Jack
NX899JP
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gene and
Tammy
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 12:57 PM
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
I'm checking into building a new fuel tank for my Piet. What grade
of aluminum should I use? Has anyone used any other metal for their
tanks? I could use extra weight up front so the weight is not a
negative factor. I'm changing from a metal prop to a wood one, a loss of
about 12 lbs Plus when I pulled my old tank I found 16 lbs of lead the
builder had installed in front of the tank. I'm going to mount a
battery and a tool box on the firewall and that will help some.
Thanks
Gene
_________________________________________________
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
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: "Ed G." <flyboy_120(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Fuel tanks
Date: Jan 30, 2007
I have built both of my fuel tanks using West System epoxy and
Fiberglass. An 11 gallon cowl tank and a 7 gallon auxilliary wing tank.
When I built them I was under the impression that epoxy resins were
unaffected by all types of fuel. AFTER they were finished I read up on
it in their manual ( It's a guy thing) and found that the company says
that their epoxy resins will deteriorate from prolonged contact with
alcohol. Maybe they are being over cautious but I feel that I will have
to be careful with ethanol content in auto fuels and try to stick mostly
with Avgas. Ed G.
----- Original Message -----
From: Gene and Tammy<mailto:zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 8:32 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
>
All good information to pass along for those interested in building
fuel
tanks with fiberglass. I'm certainly not an engineer and don't have a
lot
of experience but I do have to question why those with fiberglass
tanks that
never use auto gas with alcohol simply don't have problems and those
that
use auto gas with alcohol report lots of problems. I don't belong to
"Boat
US" anymore (got out of boating) but up to at least last year they
were
paying big buck to lobby against alcohol in fuel because of the huge
problems involving fiberglass tanks on boats.
I've about beaten this subject to death but hope to have at least
caused
anyone interested to do some independent research.
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: <gbowen(at)ptialaska.net<mailto:gbowen(at)ptialaska.net>>
To:
>
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 5:51 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
"gbowen(at)ptialaska.net"
> >
>
> The Canardian group I'm a member has about 1000 members via Yahoo,
several
> are engineers in the fuel industry. Since all the Rutanesque type
planes
> have all composite tanks, this problem of Mogas has been beat around
a
> heck
> of alot. Biggest issue is the variable nature of Mogas, diff
formula for
> different times of year and different regions of the country. Issue
of
> increased amounts of alcohol in Mogas has been of great concern
lately.
> Most problems have come from the additives to gas eating the various
> gaskets in the entire fuel system. I spent most of my career in the
epoxy
> industry, so can be pretty sure the least of the problems with
composite
> tanks is the epoxy. Derakane, epoxie's chemical cousin is used for
> underground fuel storage tanks at the local gas station.
> Gordon
>
> Original Message:
> -----------------
> From: Gene and Tammy
zharvey(at)bellsouth.net
> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 16:31:36 -0600
> To:
pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
>
>
> >
>
> Gordon,
> Your right that as long as you use Avgas, fiberglass tanks are safe.
I'm
> one of those that simply wants to be able to make the choice without
fear
> of
> putting my self or my plane in danger. The last plane I owned
(Avid) had
> fiberglass tanks and I didn't have one single problem. I always
tested
> every tank of gas for alcohol. Others with the same plane, same
> fiberglass
> tanks, that did not test their gas, were having bad problems and
some
> planes
> may have been lost because of it. Lots of problems with fiberglass
and
> alcohol are well documented. I'm not trying to scare anyone or
badmouth
> fiberglass, just want others to be informed.
> Gene ----- Original Message -----
> From: <gbowen(at)ptialaska.net<mailto:gbowen(at)ptialaska.net>>
> To:
>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 2:45 PM
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
>
>
"gbowen(at)ptialaska.net"
>> >
>>
>> Gene,
>> The issue of alcohol in fuel has been batted around the canardian
group a
>> lot. Concensus is use AVgas, unless forced to use a tank or two of
Mogas
>> with alcohol. Epoxy is pretty resistant to alcohol and most other
>> solvents, I suspect the aromatics they put in no-lead fuel is more
>> damaging
>> to epoxy tanks than the issue of alcohol. I run only Avgas.
>> Gordon
>>
>> Original Message:
>> -----------------
>> From: Gene and Tammy
zharvey(at)bellsouth.net
>> Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 18:02:33 -0600
>> To:
pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
>>
>>
>> >
>>
>> Gordon,
>> Very interested in your galvanized steel tank. What thickness did
you
>> use?
>> How hard was it to work with? I plan on forming my own and then
having
>> it
>> welded by someone that knows what their doing. Sounds like you get
great
>> performance out of your plane.
>> I'm in the middle of completely going thru my Piet and doing a
major on
>> the
>> A-65. I'm not completely happy with the current fuel tank and
using a
>> heavier metel would allow me to do away with the lead.
>> As far as fiberglass using polyester resin or epoxy I encourage
anyone
>> considering building a fuel tank from fiberglass to check around
and do a
>> little investigating pior to building. Boat US is a good source of
>> information on fiberglass fuel tanks as well as many of the
homebuilt
>> sites
>> (Avid, Kit Fox ect) that use fiberglass tanks. Fuel with alcohol
is a
>> big
>> problem for fiberglass tanks everyone should be awear of..
>> Gene
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: <gbowen(at)ptialaska.net<mailto:gbowen(at)ptialaska.net>>
>> To:
>
>> Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 4:35 PM
>> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
>>
>>
"gbowen(at)ptialaska.net"
>>> >
>>>
>>> Gene,
>>> Fiberglass made using polyester resin is a problem with all sorts
of
>>> solvents, including normal fuel. But fiberglass tanks made with
epoxy
>>> have
>>> been in service with the canard-pusher guys since Rutan first flew
into
>>> Osh
>>> in the early 70's. If they're done right, they don't leak. But
if
>>> weight
>>> is the consideration, make them out of galvanized steel like my
Piete.
>>> If
>>> fixed my weight problem (I'm 275lbs) with a 0-235 engine, chevy
starter,
>>> car battery under legs of passenger seat and moved the engine
mount
>>> forward
>>> about 4". With Aeronca wings get about 750'/min. climb, with full
22
>>> gal
>>> fuel, my fat carcass, and indicates 105 mph at 3000' with full
2650 rpm
>>> power. But love to cruise at 2000 rpm at 75mph indicated, hang
the
>>> elbow
>>> out the side like driving a convertable, fuel burn is about 6
gal/hr
>>> Fresh
>>> jugs on Lyco gets about 108 hp.
>>> Gordon
>>>
>>> Original Message:
>>> -----------------
>>> From: Gene and Tammy
zharvey(at)bellsouth.net
>>> Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 13:30:11 -0600
>>> To:
pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>>> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> Thanks for the reply Gordon.
>>> Fiberglass was considered as I've built and repaired fiberglass
boats
>>> for
>>> a
>>> fair number of years. I discarded the idea for a number of
reasons. I
>>> actually need more weight not less. I guess the biggest reason is
the
>>> alcohol that is finding its way into almost all fuel. A real
killer on
>>> fiberglass tanks. If you use only av gas it shouldn't be a
problem for
>>> now,
>>> but I end up using a lot of auto gas.
>>> Thank you
>>> Gene in Tennessee (down with the flu)
>>>
>>>>>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> mail2web.com - Enhanced email for the mobile individual based on
>>>> Microsoft=AE
>>>> Exchange -
http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail
Personal/EnhancedEmail>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> myhosting.com - Premium Microsoft=AE Windows=AE and Linux web and
>>> application
>>> hosting -
http://link.mail2web.com/myhosting>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
>> myhosting.com - Premium Microsoft=AE Windows=AE and Linux web and
application
>> hosting -
http://link.mail2web.com/myhosting>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> mail2web.com - Enhanced email for the mobile individual based on
> Microsoft=AE
> Exchange -
http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail
Personal/EnhancedEmail>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
m/Navigator?Pietenpol-List>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "GlennThomas(at)flyingwood.com" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com>
Subject: Re: 17 gallon nose tank, no baffles
Date: Jan 30, 2007
Walt,
What did you use for the female threaded fittings in your tank? ...and did
you thread AL pipe into it for your cap/gas gauge? Just wondering if once
you use Al for the tank if you must use Al all around due to chemical
reactions between metals.
Glenn W. Thomas
Storrs, CT
http://www.flyingwood.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 3:19 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: 17 gallon nose tank, no baffles
> Mine looks very similar to yours mike, except 14 gallons. Made mine to sit
> on the original "A" shelf.
> No baffles
> The pics are of the tank BEFORE having it rewelded by my welder/builder
> friend. After I welded it I used it to water the flowers in the garden,
> then had it rewelded. :^)
> 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]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 2:00 PM
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: 17 gallon nose tank, no baffles
>
>
> My behind the firewall tank is just like Jack's being 5052 .040" and TIG
> welded. I have the tank well supported so it doesn't oil can on me that
> I can
> tell and no leaks after 300 plus hours.
>
> Used Fuel Lube on the screw-in fittings. Small can will last you two or
> three
> lifetimes and to share with other homebuilders. I liken it to cold bees
> wax...very
> stiff and sticky but better than using teflon tape (which is verboten in
> fuel systems...see
> Bingelis books) or other goop.
>
> Mike C.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 30, 2007
Subject: Re: Tour De Corky
In a message dated 1/30/2007 8:27:56 PM Central Standard Time,
taildrags(at)hotmail.com writes:
Thanks to Ken Heide, we have pictures of Corky's new prize and epic journey.
I've put them on a webpage at
http://www.flysquirrel.net/piets/Defender.html
Good to have you back south of the Mason-Dixon line, with IT or without IT,
Corky ;o)
Oscar Zuniga
San Antonio, TX
OK Oscar,
You haven't got any excuse for not making the trek to Brodhead this summer.
You've got plenty of months to get enough 'Time in the Seat'. And Corky, with
his ARF (Almost Ready to Fly) hasn't got much of an excuse for not making it,
either. All ya gotta do is plug the wings in, and go fly. :) he he he !!
Best of luck to you guys, getting ready for the Big Adventure !! I think
it's going to be an exciting summer !!
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 30, 2007
From: KMHeide <kmheidecpo(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: A Corksickle Update
Gene,
Not knowing much about my new camera, it appears the photo are too large for
the list site. If you contact Oscar I believe he has resized them and can send
you the photos....
Ken
Gene and Tammy wrote:
Ken,
Thanks for the report on Corky the wimp. Where can I find the photos?
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: KMHeide
To: Pietenpol
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 1:04 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: A Corksickle Update
Today we finished securing the airplane and wings in place. Everything is tucked
underneath with the tail section dissembled and stored in the back of the
truck.
As Corky filled up with gas, I made sure the trailer tires were properly inflated.
Finally with map in one hand and the other waving goodbye, I heard him exclaim....Merry
Christmas to all..... and to yous Yankees with 15 below kiss my cold
southern @*#%+ ass!
Tee-hee-hee
Enjoy the trip corky and my god bless you always!
Members...enjoy the photos.
Ken H.
Fargo, ND
---------------------------------
Don't get soaked. Take a quick peak at the forecast
with theYahoo! Search weather shortcut.
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: HelsperSew(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 31, 2007
Subject: Re: Tailwheel spring & Skid
Chuck,
You said you need to change your 3-1/2" tail wheel with a 4" wheel. Why?
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: <harvey.rule(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: Tour De Corky
Date: Jan 31, 2007
I didn't see any pics of Corky,just the plane ,trailor and truck.I was
hoping to see what a sawtherner looks like.HAHAHA!
>From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
>Reply-To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: Tour De Corky
>Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 20:26:29 -0600
>
>
>
>Thanks to Ken Heide, we have pictures of Corky's new prize and epic
>journey. I've put them on a webpage at
>http://www.flysquirrel.net/piets/Defender.html
>
>Good to have you back south of the Mason-Dixon line, with IT or without IT,
>Corky ;o)
>
>Oscar Zuniga
>San Antonio, TX
>mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
>website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>something more.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene and Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Tour De Corky
Date: Jan 31, 2007
Thanks Oscar and Ken for the photos. Shame Corky didn't get that cool
weather ride in a Piet while he was there.
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 8:26 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Tour De Corky
>
>
> Thanks to Ken Heide, we have pictures of Corky's new prize and epic
> journey. I've put them on a webpage at
> http://www.flysquirrel.net/piets/Defender.html
>
> Good to have you back south of the Mason-Dixon line, with IT or without
> IT, Corky ;o)
>
> Oscar Zuniga
> San Antonio, TX
> mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
> website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> something more.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene and Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Fuel tanks
Date: Jan 31, 2007
Good idea Dick. That is a good price plus you saved shipping. Thanks
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: Dick Navratil
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 8:46 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
Gene
You might want to check a local steel - aluminum warehouse. I just
picked up remanants of 5052-H32. Got 3 30x48" pieces for $42 total. I
am building 2 wing tanks, 9 gal each.
To the other post on tank baffles, they arent hard to install and add
stability and strength.
Dick N.
----- Original Message -----
From: Gene and Tammy
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 11:47 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
Jack,
Hate to make a pest out of myself but where have you found to be the
best place to order your metal. Still haven't decided what I'm going to
use but I need to place an order soon.
How soon can I expect a report on that prop?
Thanks
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: Phillips, Jack
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 10:20 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
Gene,
I made my tank out of 5052 aluminum, .040" thick, riveted together
and then TIG welded
Jack
NX899JP
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gene and
Tammy
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 12:57 PM
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
I'm checking into building a new fuel tank for my Piet. What
grade of aluminum should I use? Has anyone used any other metal for
their tanks? I could use extra weight up front so the weight is not a
negative factor. I'm changing from a metal prop to a wood one, a loss of
about 12 lbs Plus when I pulled my old tank I found 16 lbs of lead the
builder had installed in front of the tank. I'm going to mount a
battery and a tool box on the firewall and that will help some.
Thanks
Gene
_________________________________________________
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
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
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 and Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Fuel tanks
Date: Jan 31, 2007
ED,
I know I said I wasn't going to comment anymore on Fiberglass tanks but
maybe I can help put your mind at ease. The problem with the alcohol
comes from the fuel setting in the tanks, usually takes a year or more.
It first shows up as gunk going into your carb. I have not heard of
anyone having a problem that closley checked their fuel each and every
time before they fueled with auto gas. (you don't want to use fuel
with alcohol anyway, as pointed out by Gordon, that it destroys many
other things on your engine). It's easy to make a tester for your fuel
for alcohol. If you need that info, contact me off line.
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: Ed G.
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 9:04 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
I have built both of my fuel tanks using West System epoxy and
Fiberglass. An 11 gallon cowl tank and a 7 gallon auxilliary wing tank.
When I built them I was under the impression that epoxy resins were
unaffected by all types of fuel. AFTER they were finished I read up on
it in their manual ( It's a guy thing) and found that the company says
that their epoxy resins will deteriorate from prolonged contact with
alcohol. Maybe they are being over cautious but I feel that I will have
to be careful with ethanol content in auto fuels and try to stick mostly
with Avgas. Ed G.
----- Original Message -----
From: Gene and Tammy
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 8:32 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
All good information to pass along for those interested in building
fuel
tanks with fiberglass. I'm certainly not an engineer and don't have
a lot
of experience but I do have to question why those with fiberglass
tanks that
never use auto gas with alcohol simply don't have problems and those
that
use auto gas with alcohol report lots of problems. I don't belong
to "Boat
US" anymore (got out of boating) but up to at least last year they
were
paying big buck to lobby against alcohol in fuel because of the huge
problems involving fiberglass tanks on boats.
I've about beaten this subject to death but hope to have at least
caused
anyone interested to do some independent research.
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: <gbowen(at)ptialaska.net>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 5:51 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
>
>
> The Canardian group I'm a member has about 1000 members via Yahoo,
several
> are engineers in the fuel industry. Since all the Rutanesque type
planes
> have all composite tanks, this problem of Mogas has been beat
around a
> heck
> of alot. Biggest issue is the variable nature of Mogas, diff
formula for
> different times of year and different regions of the country.
Issue of
> increased amounts of alcohol in Mogas has been of great concern
lately.
> Most problems have come from the additives to gas eating the
various
> gaskets in the entire fuel system. I spent most of my career in
the epoxy
> industry, so can be pretty sure the least of the problems with
composite
> tanks is the epoxy. Derakane, epoxie's chemical cousin is used
for
> underground fuel storage tanks at the local gas station.
> Gordon
>
> Original Message:
> -----------------
> From: Gene and Tammy zharvey(at)bellsouth.net
> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 16:31:36 -0600
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
>
>
>
>
> Gordon,
> Your right that as long as you use Avgas, fiberglass tanks are
safe. I'm
> one of those that simply wants to be able to make the choice
without fear
> of
> putting my self or my plane in danger. The last plane I owned
(Avid) had
> fiberglass tanks and I didn't have one single problem. I always
tested
> every tank of gas for alcohol. Others with the same plane, same
> fiberglass
> tanks, that did not test their gas, were having bad problems and
some
> planes
> may have been lost because of it. Lots of problems with
fiberglass and
> alcohol are well documented. I'm not trying to scare anyone or
badmouth
> fiberglass, just want others to be informed.
> Gene ----- Original Message -----
> From: <gbowen(at)ptialaska.net>
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 2:45 PM
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
>
>
>>
>>
>> Gene,
>> The issue of alcohol in fuel has been batted around the canardian
group a
>> lot. Concensus is use AVgas, unless forced to use a tank or two
of Mogas
>> with alcohol. Epoxy is pretty resistant to alcohol and most
other
>> solvents, I suspect the aromatics they put in no-lead fuel is
more
>> damaging
>> to epoxy tanks than the issue of alcohol. I run only Avgas.
>> Gordon
>>
>> Original Message:
>> -----------------
>> From: Gene and Tammy zharvey(at)bellsouth.net
>> Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 18:02:33 -0600
>> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Gordon,
>> Very interested in your galvanized steel tank. What thickness
did you
>> use?
>> How hard was it to work with? I plan on forming my own and then
having
>> it
>> welded by someone that knows what their doing. Sounds like you
get great
>> performance out of your plane.
>> I'm in the middle of completely going thru my Piet and doing a
major on
>> the
>> A-65. I'm not completely happy with the current fuel tank and
using a
>> heavier metel would allow me to do away with the lead.
>> As far as fiberglass using polyester resin or epoxy I encourage
anyone
>> considering building a fuel tank from fiberglass to check around
and do a
>> little investigating pior to building. Boat US is a good source
of
>> information on fiberglass fuel tanks as well as many of the
homebuilt
>> sites
>> (Avid, Kit Fox ect) that use fiberglass tanks. Fuel with alcohol
is a
>> big
>> problem for fiberglass tanks everyone should be awear of..
>> Gene
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: <gbowen(at)ptialaska.net>
>> To:
>> Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 4:35 PM
>> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Gene,
>>> Fiberglass made using polyester resin is a problem with all
sorts of
>>> solvents, including normal fuel. But fiberglass tanks made with
epoxy
>>> have
>>> been in service with the canard-pusher guys since Rutan first
flew into
>>> Osh
>>> in the early 70's. If they're done right, they don't leak. But
if
>>> weight
>>> is the consideration, make them out of galvanized steel like my
Piete.
>>> If
>>> fixed my weight problem (I'm 275lbs) with a 0-235 engine, chevy
starter,
>>> car battery under legs of passenger seat and moved the engine
mount
>>> forward
>>> about 4". With Aeronca wings get about 750'/min. climb, with
full 22
>>> gal
>>> fuel, my fat carcass, and indicates 105 mph at 3000' with full
2650 rpm
>>> power. But love to cruise at 2000 rpm at 75mph indicated, hang
the
>>> elbow
>>> out the side like driving a convertable, fuel burn is about 6
gal/hr
>>> Fresh
>>> jugs on Lyco gets about 108 hp.
>>> Gordon
>>>
>>> Original Message:
>>> -----------------
>>> From: Gene and Tammy zharvey(at)bellsouth.net
>>> Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 13:30:11 -0600
>>> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>>> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for the reply Gordon.
>>> Fiberglass was considered as I've built and repaired fiberglass
boats
>>> for
>>> a
>>> fair number of years. I discarded the idea for a number of
reasons. I
>>> actually need more weight not less. I guess the biggest reason
is the
>>> alcohol that is finding its way into almost all fuel. A real
killer on
>>> fiberglass tanks. If you use only av gas it shouldn't be a
problem for
>>> now,
>>> but I end up using a lot of auto gas.
>>> Thank you
>>> Gene in Tennessee (down with the flu)
>>>
>>>>>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> mail2web.com - Enhanced email for the mobile individual based
on
>>>> Microsoft=AE
>>>> Exchange - http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> myhosting.com - Premium Microsoft=AE Windows=AE and Linux web
and
>>> application
>>> hosting - http://link.mail2web.com/myhosting
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
>> myhosting.com - Premium Microsoft=AE Windows=AE and Linux web and
application
>> hosting - http://link.mail2web.com/myhosting
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
> mail2web.com - Enhanced email for the mobile individual based on
> Microsoft=AE
> Exchange - http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail
>
>
>
>
>
>
> nbsp; Features Subscriptions
title=http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.mat
p; available via title=http://forums.matronics.com/
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: fiberglass fuel tanks
Date: Jan 31, 2007
If I were to build a fiberglass fuel tank for an aircraft, I'd use
vinylester resin only. It's smelly, fussy about resin/hardener
proportioning, but resistant to fuels and most alcohols. Most.
That said, if I flew with a Bendix Stromberg NAS3 carb, after my experience
with 41CC, I would never let auto gas near it. The carb operates perfectly
with avgas, but is a dribbling mess on auto gas. The float level was set
perfectly and everything works perfectly with avgas. It does not like auto
gas, alcohol or not.
Oscar Zuniga
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
_________________________________________________________________
Get in the mood for Valentine's Day. View photos, recipes and more on your
Live.com page.
http://www.live.com/?addTemplate=ValentinesDay&ocid=T001MSN30A0701
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: what does Corky look like ?
Date: Jan 31, 2007
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
The Gentleman from Louisiana, attached.
Mike C.
"walk tall and carry a big prop"
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: always helps to attach the photo
Date: Jan 31, 2007
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
what do you expect from some Yankee boy, anyway ?
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "MICHAEL SILVIUS" <M.Silvius(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Fuel tanks
Date: Jan 31, 2007
Folks:
Bellow are a series of snippets form the Flyrotary list (I lurk) where
the subject of alcohol in fuel and composite fuel tanks was recently
discussed. (a few fast glass builders). and my be of interest to
composite fuel tank builders here.
you may find more on the subject here:
Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/
michael silvius
scarborough, maine
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------
After flying for six years, finally removed and disassembled my glass
and
foam header tank. During those six years I periodically used ethanol
fuel
and whatever. Always used auto fuel. No evidence of degradation of any
component....soft aluminum, foam, epoxy. All looks perfect.
I'm going to replace glass tank with aluminum so I can mount two wet
pumps inside. Wet pumps the only way to go for safety advantage.
Just a reminder, all epoxy that is fuel exposed must be high ratio type.
Like 4 to 1. 50/50 ratio epoxies can NOT handle fuel over time.
-al wick
Cozy IV powered by Turbo Subaru 3.0R with variable valve lift and cam
timing.
Artificial intelligence in cockpit, N9032U 240+ hours from Portland,
Oregon
Glass panel design, Subaru install, Prop construct, Risk assessment
info:
http://www.maddyhome.com/canardpages/pages/alwick/index.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------
I used both the Aeropoxy and West Systems in the construction of my
integral fuel tank.
I can now confirm that the tank has been severely deteriorated by the
use of auto fuel, mostly in the last year or two since ethanol has been
added.
Jim
Dyke Delta N11XD
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------
Spoke to an Industrial Chemist with a long history in resin manufacture.
He
tells me that only about 4 companies in the world manufacture resin and
distribute it - the complex part is the catalyst. The better the
catalyst
the better the total product.
George ( down under)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Just another data point for you to add to your list. Jeffco 1307 resin
with
3102 or 3156 hardener is a 100:25 system by volume, or 100:22 by weight.
The
differences in the hardeners are time to cure... the 3102 is a fast
cure, with
a 15 minute pot life, the 3156 is a slower cure, with 30 minute pot
life. I
also use their 3179 hardener down here in FL where the temps get
outrageous in
the summertime, for a 45-50 minute pot life. The 3179 also has a much
lower
viscosity than the other hardeners so it makes a thinner mixture...
makes
wetting out much easier, even with temps down into the 60s. Once again,
this
is the resin system used in the Lancairs.
Marvin Kaye
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------
The ratio info I got from both Gary Hunter and personal experience. In
general, ratios near 50/50 are not as chemical resistant. But I know
nothing about EZ poxy directly.
-al wick
-------------------------------------------------------------------
To put a bit of perspective on this, one will be hard pressed to find a
laminating epoxy that is in the 100:25 range, such as Al W wrote.
E-Z Poxy 100:45 by weight
MGS 285/287 (and 335) 100:45 by weight
Pro-Set 100:30 by weight
AEROPOXY is 100:27 by weight
ACSpruce's data on the West System 105/205 spec was "5:1"
which suggests it is a volume measurement, but it doesn't have
the Rutan Blessing, last I knew.
IIRC, Perry Mick used MGS 335 and runs auto fuel in his EZ.
Dale Rogers
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
Charlie Smith, who used to be on the list but isn't any more is an
industrial chemist. He is building the same plane as I am, and we use
the Aeropoxy system. As a test, I made up some samples (1" square pieces
of fiberglass) and coated them with Jeffco 9700 FCR. He made up some
samples coated with Aeropoxy. He then weighed them and then soaked them
in 10 (or 15?)% alcohol in gasoline. The Jeffco samples did swell some
and gain some weight, but remained intact. The Aeropoxy samples flaked
off and disintegrated.
http://www.aerocraftparts.com/ItemForm.aspx?item=9700-1G&Category=992
b7b06-e01b-4918-bb0c-79343cdb7869
Our interpretation was that the Jeffco coating is fine, but we are still
concerned about the joint where the wing skin is bonded on as the last
step to closing the wing. That area is impossible to coat with the
Jeffco. That bonding agent is a Hysol material that we have not tested
with the alcohol.
Bill Schertz
KIS Cruiser # 4045
-----------------------------------------------------------
Bill,
My past research indicates that Hysol is a very high quality product -
Used in the Europa as well I believe.
George Lendich ( down under)
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/menus/cs/fueltanksealants.html
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Roman Bukolt" <conceptmodels(at)tds.net>
Subject: Re: Fuel tanks
Date: Jan 31, 2007
My two cents worth.
Bill Rewey has logged over 500 hrs. on his Pietenpol over the last 16 yrs.
He has a fiberglas wing tank made with epoxy in his plane. Mostly he burns
auto fuel but also has burned enough 100LL to eventually freeze up one of
his exh. valves.
Here in Madison, Wi. we purchase our auto gas from Citgo. No alcohol.
Roman Bukolt NX20795
----- Original Message -----
From: <gbowen(at)ptialaska.net>
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 2:45 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
>
>
> Gene,
> The issue of alcohol in fuel has been batted around the canardian group a
> lot. Concensus is use AVgas, unless forced to use a tank or two of Mogas
> with alcohol. Epoxy is pretty resistant to alcohol and most other
> solvents, I suspect the aromatics they put in no-lead fuel is more
> damaging
> to epoxy tanks than the issue of alcohol. I run only Avgas.
> Gordon
>
> Original Message:
> -----------------
> From: Gene and Tammy zharvey(at)bellsouth.net
> Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 18:02:33 -0600
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
>
>
>
>
> Gordon,
> Very interested in your galvanized steel tank. What thickness did you
> use?
> How hard was it to work with? I plan on forming my own and then having it
> welded by someone that knows what their doing. Sounds like you get great
> performance out of your plane.
> I'm in the middle of completely going thru my Piet and doing a major on
> the
> A-65. I'm not completely happy with the current fuel tank and using a
> heavier metel would allow me to do away with the lead.
> As far as fiberglass using polyester resin or epoxy I encourage anyone
> considering building a fuel tank from fiberglass to check around and do a
> little investigating pior to building. Boat US is a good source of
> information on fiberglass fuel tanks as well as many of the homebuilt
> sites
> (Avid, Kit Fox ect) that use fiberglass tanks. Fuel with alcohol is a big
> problem for fiberglass tanks everyone should be awear of..
> Gene
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <gbowen(at)ptialaska.net>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 4:35 PM
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
>
>
>>
>>
>> Gene,
>> Fiberglass made using polyester resin is a problem with all sorts of
>> solvents, including normal fuel. But fiberglass tanks made with epoxy
>> have
>> been in service with the canard-pusher guys since Rutan first flew into
>> Osh
>> in the early 70's. If they're done right, they don't leak. But if
>> weight
>> is the consideration, make them out of galvanized steel like my Piete.
>> If
>> fixed my weight problem (I'm 275lbs) with a 0-235 engine, chevy starter,
>> car battery under legs of passenger seat and moved the engine mount
>> forward
>> about 4". With Aeronca wings get about 750'/min. climb, with full 22 gal
>> fuel, my fat carcass, and indicates 105 mph at 3000' with full 2650 rpm
>> power. But love to cruise at 2000 rpm at 75mph indicated, hang the elbow
>> out the side like driving a convertable, fuel burn is about 6 gal/hr
>> Fresh
>> jugs on Lyco gets about 108 hp.
>> Gordon
>>
>> Original Message:
>> -----------------
>> From: Gene and Tammy zharvey(at)bellsouth.net
>> Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 13:30:11 -0600
>> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tanks
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks for the reply Gordon.
>> Fiberglass was considered as I've built and repaired fiberglass boats for
>> a
>> fair number of years. I discarded the idea for a number of reasons. I
>> actually need more weight not less. I guess the biggest reason is the
>> alcohol that is finding its way into almost all fuel. A real killer on
>> fiberglass tanks. If you use only av gas it shouldn't be a problem for
>> now,
>> but I end up using a lot of auto gas.
>> Thank you
>> Gene in Tennessee (down with the flu)
>>
>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> mail2web.com - Enhanced email for the mobile individual based on
>>> Microsoft
>>> Exchange - http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> myhosting.com - Premium Microsoft Windows and Linux web and application
>> hosting - http://link.mail2web.com/myhosting
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> myhosting.com - Premium Microsoft Windows and Linux web and application
> hosting - http://link.mail2web.com/myhosting
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Isablcorky(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 31, 2007
Subject: Re: always helps to attach the photo
Mike,
That's a pic when I received my prop from Hegy for 41CC. Gosh I sure looked
young. Thanks for the reminder.
Ole Reb
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 31, 2007
From: "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: 17 gallon nose tank, no baffles
Glen,
I got them out of the AS&S catalog. You can choose the size . Mine was 1/4"
NPT fuel output. Called "Aluminum Welding Flanges"
And filler fitting matched the fill pipe/cap that they also supplied. Comes
as a set with cap,neck, and welding flange.
In fuel section. (2004/2005 catalog page 158)
walt evans
NX140DL
"Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you"
Ben Franklin
----- Original Message -----
From: "GlennThomas(at)flyingwood.com" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 10:18 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: 17 gallon nose tank, no baffles
>
>
> Walt,
> What did you use for the female threaded fittings in your tank? ...and
> did you thread AL pipe into it for your cap/gas gauge? Just wondering if
> once you use Al for the tank if you must use Al all around due to chemical
> reactions between metals.
>
> Glenn W. Thomas
> Storrs, CT
> http://www.flyingwood.com
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 3:19 PM
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: 17 gallon nose tank, no baffles
>
>
>> Mine looks very similar to yours mike, except 14 gallons. Made mine to
>> sit
>> on the original "A" shelf.
>> No baffles
>> The pics are of the tank BEFORE having it rewelded by my welder/builder
>> friend. After I welded it I used it to water the flowers in the garden,
>> then had it rewelded. :^)
>> 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]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
>> To:
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 2:00 PM
>> Subject: Pietenpol-List: 17 gallon nose tank, no baffles
>>
>>
>>
>> My behind the firewall tank is just like Jack's being 5052 .040" and TIG
>> welded. I have the tank well supported so it doesn't oil can on me that
>> I can
>> tell and no leaks after 300 plus hours.
>>
>> Used Fuel Lube on the screw-in fittings. Small can will last you two or
>> three
>> lifetimes and to share with other homebuilders. I liken it to cold bees
>> wax...very
>> stiff and sticky but better than using teflon tape (which is verboten in
>> fuel systems...see
>> Bingelis books) or other goop.
>>
>> Mike C.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: lshutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan)
Date: Jan 31, 2007
Subject: fuel tank
With av-gas beeing such a small volume of gasoline production, how long
will it be before alcohol shows up in av gas? You can argue that the FAA
won't allow it, but the gas co'c can simply stop av gas production.
Then it's car gas only, for every one. I mentioned this before, but at
EAA a few months ago a discussion on alcohol came up and one of the guys
claimed alcohol can and does attack aluminum too. What next? Leon S. In
Ks. with another damn snow storm raging outside again.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: always helps to attach the photo
Date: Jan 31, 2007
Corky,
Glad you made it home safe and sound. Do you happen to have contact
info for hegy? How did you like the prop and what size is it?
Gene
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Fuel tanks
Date: Jan 31, 2007
From: hvandervoo(at)aol.com
Guys,
On the subject of Avgas vs Auto gas:
Please be aware that auto gas is not the same year around (winter gas vs summer
gas)
Or from state to state, In Texas, Kalifornia and a few others Ethanol is a mandatory
component.
You want to test for ethanol it is very easy, use your standard aviation fuel tester,
add a few drops of water, shake it if the water does not settle out at
the bottom of the cup, you have ethanol in the fuel.
Ethanol is hygroscopic it absorbs water and it will do this while stored at your
local gas station.
Avgas is Avgas no matter where or when you fill up
I had my bad experience with Auto gas and use only Avgas now.
It is simply cheap insurance.
Hans
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Joseph Czaplicki" <fishin3(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Way to go Corky
Date: Jan 31, 2007
Corky, glad to hear that you made the return trip safely. I'm sure you've spent
the last 3000+ miles rekindling memories of your WW Twice days flying the Defender
and looking forward to this springs new adventures in Blue Boy II.
I can appreciate your comment about being only as old as you feel. While I'm just
around the corner from turning 69, compared to you I'm just a kid. But you
know, that's just how I feel. After getting your Piet off the ground with my initial
building process, now completed restoring my second Ercoupe while continuing
keeping current in my 150, I find myself searching for my next project .
I hope you will get Blue Boy back together and will consider a trip to Brodhead
this summer. Betcha you'll be the star attraction at the flyin. I'm sure you'll
agree that staying young involves keeping active doing what you love, loving
your lifes partner so she will keep you out of trouble and if she's like
my bride, will insist you stay healthy. Give daily thanks to the Big Guy for the
gifts you've been given. Life is one grand adventure.
JoeC in cold and white NE Illinois suffering the single digit temps that you
broke loose from Fargo
Joseph Czaplicki
fishin3(at)earthlink.net
EarthLink Revolves Around You.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: HelsperSew(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 31, 2007
Subject: Re: Way to go Corky
Joe,
Thanks for the reminder to who we owe all. Where are you at in N.E.
ILLinois?
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Hegy prop
Date: Jan 31, 2007
I'll let Corky reply on his experience with the Hegy 72x42 prop on 41CC
since he flew the airplane with a metal prop before he had the Hegy on it,
but so far my experience with it has been very good. In climbout at 50MPH
with this prop, the engine turns 2250RPM. The prop is nice.
Not sure what Corky paid for it, but probably $500-$600. Again, I'll let
him chime in here.
Oscar Zuniga
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
_________________________________________________________________
Laugh, share and connect with Windows Live Messenger
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Hegy Prop 41CC
Date: Jan 31, 2007
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
The guy who knows all those details (probably by memory) is Edwin
Johnson, Corky's test pilot and Turbo Commander captain.
(well....retired).
Of course once Corky thaws out he'll remember too.
I'll let Corky reply on his experience with the Hegy 72x42 prop on 41CC
since he flew the airplane with a metal prop before he had the Hegy on
it, but so far my experience with it has been very good. In climbout at
50MPH with this prop, the engine turns 2250RPM. The prop is nice.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Isablcorky(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 31, 2007
Subject: Re: Hegy prop
Oscar, you are doing a good job about the prop. Hegy 72X42 as recommended by
most. Made from birch. I'll try and find address as he has moved to Colorado
from Marfa, Tx. The second prop I bought from him is laminated maple and
walnut for 311CC which I sold as a project Tim Willis in Georgetown, Tx. Pd $580
w/freight.
Corky
________________________________________________________________________________
From: <harvey.rule(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: always helps to attach the photo
Date: Jan 31, 2007
Now there is a real sawthern gentleman!Prop and all.I hope I get to see ya
all in person some day Corky.I'll bet ya got some great stories!
>From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
>Reply-To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: always helps to attach the photo
>Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 08:22:20 -0600
>
>what do you expect from some Yankee boy, anyway ?
>
>
><< corkyprop.jpg >>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: covering your tailfeather
Date: Jan 31, 2007
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
Here we see this WWII Veteran from Louisiana covering one of his
flippers. Union shop rate: $85/hour for Yankee customers.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Kirk, Bruce" <bkirk(at)yccd.edu>
Subject: Re: fuel tank
Date: Jan 31, 2007
lshutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan) wrote:
Has anyone investigated the idea of using thin stainless
steel as a alternative to
aluminum or any other material for fuel tanks.
Bruce Kirk bkirk(at)yccd.edu
>(Leon Stefan)
>
> With av-gas beeing such a small volume of gasoline
>production, how long
> will it be before alcohol shows up in av gas? You can
>argue that the FAA
> won't allow it, but the gas co'c can simply stop av gas
>production.
> Then it's car gas only, for every one. I mentioned this
>before, but at
> EAA a few months ago a discussion on alcohol came up and
>one of the guys
> claimed alcohol can and does attack aluminum too. What
>next? Leon S. In
> Ks. with another damn snow storm raging outside again.
>
>
>page,
>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
>Forums!
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: <harvey.rule(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: covering your tailfeather
Date: Jan 31, 2007
Man does he look intence!
>From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
>Reply-To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: covering your tailfeather
>Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 12:51:39 -0600
>
>Here we see this WWII Veteran from Louisiana covering one of his
>flippers. Union shop rate: $85/hour for Yankee customers.
>
>Mike C.
>
><< Corkycovering.jpg >>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Piet video on YouTube
Date: Jan 31, 2007
From: "Bill Church" <eng(at)canadianrogers.com>
There's a video on YouTube of a side-by-side Piet (that's currently for
sale on Barnstormers) flying on a bit of a windy day:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06_I-of-XhM
If the link doesn't work, just type wingit demo in the YouTube search
box.
The plane looks a little strange - wings look short (no center section),
cabanes similar to a Baby Ace, landing gear looks narrow, and of course,
the fuse is wider (duh).
Bill C
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Abramson" <davea(at)symbolicdisplays.com>
Subject: covering your tailfeather
Date: Jan 31, 2007
WoW!!! That yank gets up early! (5:38am)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-----Original Message-----
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: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 10:52 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: covering your tailfeather
Here we see this WWII Veteran from Louisiana covering one of his flippers.
Union shop rate: $85/hour for Yankee customers.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Abramson" <davea(at)symbolicdisplays.com>
Subject: covering your tailfeather
Date: Jan 31, 2007
OOOOOOOOP's!!!!!!!!!!!!! I mean that "SOUTHERN GENTELMAN"... (was doing 3
things at once)
-----Original Message-----
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: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 10:52 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: covering your tailfeather
Here we see this WWII Veteran from Louisiana covering one of his flippers.
Union shop rate: $85/hour for Yankee customers.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 31, 2007
From: "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Piet video on YouTube
Bill ,
The only things that look like Pietenpol is the tail section.
Oh well, that was quite a breeze!
walt evans
NX140DL
"Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you"
Ben Franklin
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Church
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 3:18 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Piet video on YouTube
There's a video on YouTube of a side-by-side Piet (that's currently
for sale on Barnstormers) flying on a bit of a windy day:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06_I-of-XhM
If the link doesn't work, just type wingit demo in the YouTube
search box.
The plane looks a little strange - wings look short (no center
section), cabanes similar to a Baby Ace, landing gear looks narrow, and
of course, the fuse is wider (duh).
Bill C
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 31, 2007
Subject: Re: Tailwheel spring & Skid
In a message dated 1/31/2007 6:16:22 AM Central Standard Time,
HelsperSew(at)aol.com writes:
You said you need to change your 3-1/2" tail wheel with a 4" wheel. Why?
Well, it was only a consideration, and would simply be to help taxiing in
tall grass, no other reason. When I taxi In the grass I have to use a
brake to help 'er go where she needs to go, like a turnaround at the end of the
runway. On the pavement, though, I don't need the brakes to turn fairly sharp.
On landing roll out, I try not to use any brakes at all. The rudder is more
than effective enough. I have Titan 8.00 X 6 turf tires for the mains, so the
downside of the 4" wheel, is that a 3 point, full stall landing would be more
difficult to make 'er stay on the ground without a bounce, because the wing
is not yet stalled all the way. If you had the taller motorcycle wheels, a
full stall would be easier to come by.
With the set up I have now, I can spin doughnuts with one brake locked,
about 1200 rpm, some forward stick to get the tail off the ground a couple of
inches, smoke pouring out till she disappears behind a man made cloud !!
After exhaustive testing of the side loads on the tail skid / wheel, there is no
damage to the short little wheel back there !! That manuver is kind of my
trade mark, so I'm not going to mess with the tailwheel.
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 31, 2007
From: Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu>
Subject: Re: Piet video on YouTube
Did you notice that that "Piet" has no flying wires between the wing
struts? LG looks like a Grega.
>There's a video on YouTube of a side-by-side Piet (that's currently
>for sale on Barnstormers) flying on a bit of a windy day:
>
>
><http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06_I-of-XhM>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06_I-of-XhM
>
>If the link doesn't work, just type wingit demo in the YouTube search box.
>
>The plane looks a little strange - wings look short (no center
>section), cabanes similar to a Baby Ace, landing gear looks
>narrow, and of course, the fuse is wider (duh).
>
>
>Bill C
>
>
--
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: fuel tank
Date: Jan 31, 2007
From: "Bill Church" <eng(at)canadianrogers.com>
Bruce,
The most likely reason for choosing aluminum over stainless steel is
weight. On a volumetric basis, stainless steel weighs almost 3 times as
much as aluminum. The typical aluminum tank seems to be made from .040"
thick aluminum. This thickness can be TIG welded successfully (by a
skilled welder) to produce a leak-proof tank. The thinnest stainless
steel that can practically be welded (again, by a skilled TIG welder) is
probably 22ga (.031" thick) or 20ga (.037").
Without doing any accurate calculations, it looks like the typical nose
tank (like Mike Cuy's sketch) might have about 20 square feet of
surface. Aluminum weighs .563 pounds per square foot for .040"
thickness, and T304 stainless steel weighs 1.27 pounds per sq.ft. for
.031" thickness. The aluminum tank would weigh about 11 pounds, whereas
the stainless tank would weigh about 25 1/2 pounds. That's a 14+ pound
penalty. (If you choose 20ga st.st. add an additional 5 pounds.)
Bill C
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "MICHAEL SILVIUS" <M.Silvius(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Piet video on YouTube
Date: Jan 31, 2007
This plane was advertized for sale localy here in Manie last year and I
went to see it. Workmanship over all looked decent. It is side-by-each
seating but it is a tight squeze. Mother better be real tiny. I believe
I measured it at 34 inch wide at the elbows. It has a door of sorts on
the left side. Also has a shelf that runs along the bottom edge of the
panel that is a X brace beween the two sides of the fuselage. The
cabanes are canted inwards with no wing center section, though as best I
could tell it is a two piece wing. The word was that it is a bit hot to
handle with the short wings. I was also told that with the wider
frontal profile it is a bit dragier than she ought to be and could
actually use a bit more in the HP dept.
michael silvius
scarborough, maine
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Church
There's a video on YouTube of a side-by-side Piet (that's currently
for sale on Barnstormers) flying on a bit of a windy day:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06_I-of-XhM
If the link doesn't work, just type wingit demo in the YouTube
search box.
The plane looks a little strange - wings look short (no center
section), cabanes similar to a Baby Ace, landing gear looks narrow, and
of course, the fuse is wider (duh).
Bill C
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Jan 31, 2007
Subject: Re: what does Corky look like ?
Here is a picture of Corky, when he sat down for a minute, after loading the
1942 Aeronca Defender. Not sure who that is with him... :) he he he !!
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 31, 2007
From: shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Brodhead 07, Ohio Gathering
Howdy Gents, Just wondering if anyone planned on going into the bee hive up at
lake winnabago AKA Oshkosh, after Brodhead 07. Never flown in there before,
But wouldn't mind flying up as a group if anyone was interested. Also wondering
if anyone gave anymore thought to the Ohio area Piet gathering. The WACO
Fly In at Wynkoop Field would be a good time I think. I remember someone was
trying to look into having one in Aliance at Barber Field but haven't heard anything
since. As far as NX92GB we are still waiting to get the heads back from
the machine shop. New crank and lower end is ready to go togeather. I guess
we'll give the old Chevy one more try. If it has as much power as before, and
she stays togeather, "she's in there like swim wear." If any of you are attending
fly-ins within a couple hrs piet time of Central Ohio email me and I'll
try to meet up with you.
Stay out of the trees, and on the dry side of the ice,
Shad
---------------------------------
No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go
with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jan 31, 2007
From: Ben Ramler <ben_ramler2002(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Brodhead 07, Ohio Gathering
Sorry for the stupid question but, isn't broadhead still happening? I will
say right now Iplan on coming with whatever I have done on my piet.=0A=0ABe
n R.=0ASt. Cloud, MN=0A=0A=0A----- Original Message ----=0AFrom: shad bell
=0ATo: Pietenpol Discussion =0ASent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 6:21:15 PM=0ASubject: Pietenpol-
List: Brodhead 07, Ohio Gathering=0A=0A=0AHowdy Gents, Just wondering if a
nyone planned on going into the bee hive up at lake winnabago AKA Oshkosh,
after Brodhead 07. Never flown in there before, But wouldn't mind flying
up as a group if anyone was interested. Also wondering if anyone gave anym
ore thought to the Ohio area Piet gathering. The WACO Fly In at Wynkoop Fi
eld would be a good time I think. I remember someone was trying to look in
to having one in Aliance at Barber Field but haven't heard anything since.
As far as NX92GB we are still waiting to get the heads back from the machi
ne shop. New crank and lower end is ready to go togeather. I guess we'll
give the old Chevy one more try. If it has as much power as before, and sh
e stays togeather, "she's in there like swim wear." If any of you are atte
nding fly-ins within a couple hrs piet time of Central Ohio email me and I'
ll try to meet up with you.=0A =0AStay out of the trees, and on the dry sid
e of the ice,=0AShad=0A=0A=0ANo need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go
====================0A=0A=0A=0A =0A__
___________________________________________________________________________
_______=0ANeed Mail bonding?=0AGo to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips fro
m Yahoo! Answers users.=0Ahttp://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=3
96546091
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "DJ Vegh" <dj(at)veghdesign.com>
Subject: Re: Piet video on YouTube
Date: Jan 31, 2007
wow... sure looks like it could use an extra 3' of wing on each site....
different but neat!
DJ
----- Original Message -----
From: MICHAEL SILVIUS
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 4:27 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Piet video on YouTube
This plane was advertized for sale localy here in Manie last year and
I went to see it. Workmanship over all looked decent. It is side-by-each
seating but it is a tight squeze. Mother better be real tiny. I believe
I measured it at 34 inch wide at the elbows. It has a door of sorts on
the left side. Also has a shelf that runs along the bottom edge of the
panel that is a X brace beween the two sides of the fuselage. The
cabanes are canted inwards with no wing center section, though as best I
could tell it is a two piece wing. The word was that it is a bit hot to
handle with the short wings. I was also told that with the wider
frontal profile it is a bit dragier than she ought to be and could
actually use a bit more in the HP dept.
michael silvius
scarborough, maine
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Church
There's a video on YouTube of a side-by-side Piet (that's currently
for sale on Barnstormers) flying on a bit of a windy day:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06_I-of-XhM
If the link doesn't work, just type wingit demo in the YouTube
search box.
The plane looks a little strange - wings look short (no center
section), cabanes similar to a Baby Ace, landing gear looks narrow, and
of course, the fuse is wider (duh).
Bill C
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Tailwheel spring & Skid
From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com>
Date: Jan 31, 2007
Chuck,
It's funny you talk about going from a 3 1/2" wheel to a 4" wheel. It sure doesn't
sound like much but I had a 3 1/2" wheel and decided I could squeeze a 4"
into its place. It really made a big difference both in the steering effectiveness
and the ride while taxiing. It doesn't 'jar' the spring nearly as much
now. Its crazy to think it would make a difference but it really did! I really
don't think the weight difference was much either. Here's a shot;
http://westcoastpiet.com/images/Don%20Emch/dscn0380_596.jpg
Don Emch
NX899DE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=91988#91988
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dick Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net>
Subject: Re: 17 gallon nose tank, no baffles
Date: Jan 31, 2007
You should probably order the 3/8" welding flange. Then you can install the
finger strainer in the tank and that has a 1/4" finished thread.
Dick N.
----- Original Message -----
From: "GlennThomas(at)flyingwood.com" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 9:18 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: 17 gallon nose tank, no baffles
>
>
> Walt,
> What did you use for the female threaded fittings in your tank? ...and
> did you thread AL pipe into it for your cap/gas gauge? Just wondering if
> once you use Al for the tank if you must use Al all around due to chemical
> reactions between metals.
>
> Glenn W. Thomas
> Storrs, CT
> http://www.flyingwood.com
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 3:19 PM
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: 17 gallon nose tank, no baffles
>
>
>> Mine looks very similar to yours mike, except 14 gallons. Made mine to
>> sit
>> on the original "A" shelf.
>> No baffles
>> The pics are of the tank BEFORE having it rewelded by my welder/builder
>> friend. After I welded it I used it to water the flowers in the garden,
>> then had it rewelded. :^)
>> 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]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
>> To:
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 2:00 PM
>> Subject: Pietenpol-List: 17 gallon nose tank, no baffles
>>
>>
>>
>> My behind the firewall tank is just like Jack's being 5052 .040" and TIG
>> welded. I have the tank well supported so it doesn't oil can on me that
>> I can
>> tell and no leaks after 300 plus hours.
>>
>> Used Fuel Lube on the screw-in fittings. Small can will last you two or
>> three
>> lifetimes and to share with other homebuilders. I liken it to cold bees
>> wax...very
>> stiff and sticky but better than using teflon tape (which is verboten in
>> fuel systems...see
>> Bingelis books) or other goop.
>>
>> Mike C.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Brodhead 07, Ohio Gathering
From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com>
Date: Jan 31, 2007
Hey Shad,
I plan to do the WACO and T-Craft Fly-ins this year. I talked to Forrest Barber
about doubling up with the T-Craft guys and he was very positve and liked the
idea and had even talked about calling the Fly-in a Taylorcraft/Aeronca/Pietenpol
Fly-in. That was his plan and I plan to show up for it. I really enjoy
flying in to Barber Airport and Forrest is quite a character. I'm sure those
of you that know him know what I mean. I'm also going to try for Mt. Vernon
and the Waco Fly-in. That is kinda getting in the way of some family vacation
plans and I'll have to watch on that one. But I'm sure gonna try. Also thinking
I might be able to wrestle some time off work for Brodhead too. Would like
to do OSH but really think that would be pushing it for me.
Don Emch
NX899DE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=91991#91991
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "gcardinal" <gcardinal(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: fuel tank and ethanol
Date: Jan 31, 2007
Hi Leon,
Things might not be quite so bleak. A few years ago in Minnesota laws were
passed that required all gasoline to contain a percentage of ethanol. The
Minnesota Street Rod Association balked and successfully lobbied to allow
gas stations to sell non-oxygenated gasoline for off-road vehicles, lawn
mowers, snowblowers, etc...
The MSRA maintains a listing of all gas stations in Minnesota selling
non-oxygenated gasoline.
Check with your local Street Rod Association.
Greg Cardinal
Minneapolis
----- Original Message -----
From: "Leon Stefan" <lshutks(at)webtv.net>
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 8:45 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: fuel tank
>
> With av-gas beeing such a small volume of gasoline production, how long
> will it be before alcohol shows up in av gas? You can argue that the FAA
> won't allow it, but the gas co'c can simply stop av gas production.
> Then it's car gas only, for every one. I mentioned this before, but at
> EAA a few months ago a discussion on alcohol came up and one of the guys
> claimed alcohol can and does attack aluminum too. What next? Leon S. In
> Ks. with another damn snow storm raging outside again.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 01, 2007
Subject: Re: Tailwheel spring & Skid
In a message dated 1/31/2007 8:17:38 PM Central Standard Time,
EmchAir(at)aol.com writes:
Chuck,
It's funny you talk about going from a 3 1/2" wheel to a 4" wheel. It sure
doesn't sound like much but I had a 3 1/2" wheel and decided I could squeeze a
4" into its place. It really made a big difference both in the steering
effectiveness and the ride while taxiing. It doesn't 'jar' the spring nearly as
much now. Its crazy to think it would make a difference but it really did! I
really don't think the weight difference was much either. Here's a shot;
http://westcoastpiet.com/images/Don%20Emch/dscn0380_596.jpg
Don Emch
NX899DE
Don,
Yes, I'm sure it did make a difference, and with those tall wheels you have,
you can probably still get the wing stalled before touchdown. Are you able to
get the tail to touch before the mains ? Do you do very many landings on
hard surface ? On hard surface landings, I have to make wheel landings, or
she'll bounce back up almost every time...even if I drag the tail down first.
On
the turf, she'll stay down.
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
From: lshutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan)
Date: Feb 01, 2007
Subject: Fuel tank
Beside having a fuel tank that won't melt from ethanol, what else would
be required to make a Model A Piet E-85 compatible. ? Anyone? Leon S.
Looking to the future.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Fuel tank
From: Hans Vander Voort <hans.vander.voort(at)alfalaval.com>
Date: Feb 01, 2007
Leon,
All your gaskets and plastic parts in your carburetor.
Hans
lshutks(at)webtv.net
(Leon Stefan)
Sent by: To
owner-pietenpol-l pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
ist-server@matron cc
ics.com
Subject
Pietenpol-List: Fuel tank
02/01/2007 08:40
AM
Please respond to
pietenpol-list@ma
tronics.com
Beside having a fuel tank that won't melt from ethanol, what else would
be required to make a Model A Piet E-85 compatible. ? Anyone? Leon S.
Looking to the future.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 01, 2007
From: gus notti <gus_notti(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Fabric attachment for Pietenpol wings?
Hello all,
I need to know should the fabric have some type of physical attachment besides
just glue?
I'm a tube and fabric guy, but the wings on this Pietenpol are just glued.
I know the school of though on the 'Peeling' for the fabric. I'm thinking I might
rib stitch them or screw attach them ( what can I use for wood ribs besides
stitching)?
Do they need it?
Thanks
Gus
---------------------------------
Looking for earth-friendly autos?
Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 01, 2007
Subject: Re: Fabric attachment for Pietenpol wings?
In a message dated 2/1/2007 11:24:00 AM Central Standard Time,
gus_notti(at)yahoo.com writes:
I need to know should the fabric have some type of physical attachment
besides just glue?
I'm a tube and fabric guy, but the wings on this Pietenpol are just glued.
I know the school of though on the 'Peeling' for the fabric. I'm thinking I
might rib stitch them or screw attach them ( what can I use for wood ribs
besides stitching)?
Do they need it?
Gus,
Yes, the wings should be rib stitched, not screwed. There's simply no other
way than the tried and true. If there's not paint on the wing, you're good to
go. If there's paint, it will take more work.
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
From: HelsperSew(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 01, 2007
Subject: Re: Fabric attachment for Pietenpol wings?
Gus,
Yes, wings should always have some means of fabric attachment along the
ribs. If you have aluminum ribs, you can use screws (a-la-Aeronca Champ). If
you have wood ribs, you need to use rib stitching. Even at these slow speeds,
a little corner of fabric coming loose from the glue could start "flagging"
and result in disaster so fast it would make your head spin. I think this is
what happened to Steve Whittman if I am not mistaken in his "O and O"
airplane where he met an untimely and very unfortunate demise.
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "MICHAEL SILVIUS" <M.Silvius(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Fabric attachment for Pietenpol wings?
Date: Feb 01, 2007
Gus:
to my knowledge only the HIPEC product is designed to not require rib
stiching.
http://musclebiplane.org/htmlfile/hipec.html
http://www.falconaravia.com/
http://members.shaw.ca/kfalconar/HIPEC/ErcoupeCovering.htm
michael
----- Original Message -----
From: gus notti
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 12:18 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fabric attachment for Pietenpol wings?
Hello all,
I need to know should the fabric have some type of physical attachment
besides just glue?
I'm a tube and fabric guy, but the wings on this Pietenpol are just
glued.
I know the school of though on the 'Peeling' for the fabric. I'm
thinking I might rib stitch them or screw attach them ( what can I use
for wood ribs besides stitching)?
Do they need it?
Thanks
Gus
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Looking for earth-friendly autos?
Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene and Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Piet video on YouTube
Date: Feb 02, 2007
Michael,
Thanks for the interesting report. I was really wondering about it.
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: MICHAEL SILVIUS
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 5:27 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Piet video on YouTube
This plane was advertized for sale localy here in Manie last year and
I went to see it. Workmanship over all looked decent. It is side-by-each
seating but it is a tight squeze. Mother better be real tiny. I believe
I measured it at 34 inch wide at the elbows. It has a door of sorts on
the left side. Also has a shelf that runs along the bottom edge of the
panel that is a X brace beween the two sides of the fuselage. The
cabanes are canted inwards with no wing center section, though as best I
could tell it is a two piece wing. The word was that it is a bit hot to
handle with the short wings. I was also told that with the wider
frontal profile it is a bit dragier than she ought to be and could
actually use a bit more in the HP dept.
michael silvius
scarborough, maine
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Church
There's a video on YouTube of a side-by-side Piet (that's currently
for sale on Barnstormers) flying on a bit of a windy day:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06_I-of-XhM
If the link doesn't work, just type wingit demo in the YouTube
search box.
The plane looks a little strange - wings look short (no center
section), cabanes similar to a Baby Ace, landing gear looks narrow, and
of course, the fuse is wider (duh).
Bill C
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene and Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: what does Corky look like ?
Date: Feb 02, 2007
Fits with the image I had in my mind. Corkey has to be a really "cool"
guy.
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 5:38 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: what does Corky look like ?
Here is a picture of Corky, when he sat down for a minute, after
loading the 1942 Aeronca Defender. Not sure who that is with him... :)
he he he !!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene and Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Tailwheel spring & Skid
Date: Feb 02, 2007
Don, is that Gold Wing your?
Gene
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 02, 2007
From: gus notti <gus_notti(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Another wing stitching ?
One more quick question, does the original plans for the Air camper call for rib
stitching?
Would the FAA sign off if the wings were only glued with no other kind of attachments?
I'm thinking about buying this flying project, (yes N number back in 1991) however
when I asked the current owner if the fabric was rib stitched he said no,
(not sure he know's what to look for)
What are the guide lines requiring the stitching? Vse and Max weight...right?
Thanks
---------------------------------
Now that's room service! Choose from over 150,000 hotels
in 45,000 destinations on Yahoo! Travel to find your fit.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 02, 2007
Subject: Re: Another wing stitching ?
In a message dated 2/2/2007 8:04:58 AM Central Standard Time,
gus_notti(at)yahoo.com writes:
One more quick question, does the original plans for the Air camper call for
rib stitching?
Would the FAA sign off if the wings were only glued with no other kind of
attachments?
I'm thinking about buying this flying project, (yes N number back in 1991)
however when I asked the current owner if the fabric was rib stitched he said
no, (not sure he know's what to look for)
What are the guide lines requiring the stitching? Vse and Max weight...right?
Thanks
The plans don't show anything about the covering process. Covering an
airplane is a whole seperate process, and isn't specific to any certain type, except
for Vne (which requires closer spacing of the rib stitches). The Stitts
process is what I used, and it calls out 3 1/2" spacing of the stitches, and in
the prop wash plus one rib, it calls out 2 1/2" spacing. I have a total of
about 500 stitches in my wing. You can easily see the stitches under the 2" tape.
I think Stitts suplies this document for sale, and should be closely
followed. I doubt if the FAA or a DAR would sign off on it, and I question how
it
got it's original Airworthyness Certificate. My guess is that it doesn't have
very many actual flight hours, for fear of the fabric coming off. The 1/2"
wide cap strips just simply doesn't have enough area to glue to, and I would also
suggest a close look at the ribs, to see if any of them are pulled sideways,
and possibly cracked, from the heat shrink process. It might even require a
re-cover job, which would risk destroying some ribs. After a very close
inspection inside the wing, if there is no damage, you could probaly remove the
paint along the ribs, stitch it, and put the 2" tape on top, then re-paint. It
amazes me why someone would cut corners in such a critical area. On the other
hand, maybe it actually does have stitches, and the current owner just doesn't
know what to look for.
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Another wing stitching ?
Date: Feb 02, 2007
Gus; the requirement for rib stitching comes from the covering system
manufacturer (Poly-Fiber, etc.) as well as from best practices guidelines.
As mentioned in an earlier post, one Pieter feels that Hipec may be the only
manufacturer that does not require rib stitching. If you can determine the
covering system used on the airplane, that would help.
I would think that you could go back and do rib stitching by removing the
paint over the ribs, stitching after applying rib lace reinforcing tape over
the rib area, going over that with finishing tapes, and then refinishing the
new areas. Matter of fact, if the Stits method was used to cover the
aircraft, you don't even have to remove the paint and other finishes before
laying down the new work... they claim that all their components are
completely compatible with one another. However, it will probably be easier
to see through the wing fabric to do the rib stitching if you remove the
finishes over the ribs, down to bare fabric. It won't be as messy, either.
Like the man says, "you can pay me now, or you can pay me later". Somebody
didn't pay the man when the airplane was first covered ;o)
Oscar Zuniga
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
_________________________________________________________________
Valentines Day -- Shop for gifts that spell L-O-V-E at MSN Shopping
http://shopping.msn.com/content/shp/?ctId=8323,ptnrid=37,ptnrdata=24095&tcode=wlmtagline
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Another wing stitching ?
Date: Feb 02, 2007
From: "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal.com>
Regardless of the plans (they don't mention covering at all), the fabric
should be ribstitched. If the fabric is just glued to the capstrips,
the ribs are loaded in tension and are prone to failure. Ribstitching
(more properly called rib-lacing) loads the ribs in compression, where
they are much stronger. I know of a number of designs which call out
glued fabric rather than laced (the Osprey 2 amphibian comes to mind),
but in all cases, the rib cap is at least 2" wide, providing generous
area to glue to, and the rib itself is solid plywood - not a built up
truss rib. I wouldn't fly a Pietenpol with glued on fabric. Makes you
wonder what other corners got cut in the building process. Ribstitching
just doesn't take that long - about 12 hours per wing.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of gus
notti
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 9:02 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Another wing stitching ?
One more quick question, does the original plans for the Air camper call
for rib stitching?
Would the FAA sign off if the wings were only glued with no other kind
of attachments?
I'm thinking about buying this flying project, (yes N number back in
1991) however when I asked the current owner if the fabric was rib
stitched he said no, (not sure he know's what to look for)
What are the guide lines requiring the stitching? Vse and Max
weight...right?
Thanks
_____
Now that's room service! Choose from over 150,000 hotels
in 45,000 destinations on Yahoo! Travel
<http://travel.yahoo.com/hotelsearchpage;_ylc=X3oDMTFtaTIzNXVjBF9TAzk3ND
A3NTg5BF9zAzI3MTk0ODEEcG9zAzIEc2VjA21haWx0YWdsaW5lBHNsawNxMS0wNw--%0d%0a
> to find your fit.
_________________________________________________
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: Feb 02, 2007
From: gus notti <gus_notti(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Another wing stitching ?
I'm going to go get the Pietenpol this weekend, I know what to look for with
a fabric covered airplane. If the wing ribs are not stitched I will ribstitch
them before I fly it,
NO IF AND BUTTS ABOUT IT!
( I have 2 many mouths to feed to have something stupid happen). I have over
a 1000 + hours all in tube and fabric planes I have never flown a fabric covered
plane with out the fabric being attached properly. I sure in the hell not starting
now.
I'm thinking the current owner don't know what to look for.
Yes if needed it will be an fairly easy job, no topcoat of paint is on the fabric,
it's through silver. I guess it's been flying that way since A/W was issused
in 1991.
Thanks for your thoughts!
Gus
---------------------------------
Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate
in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Tailwheel spring & Skid
From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com>
Date: Feb 02, 2007
Chuck,
Three-points come pretty easy, as long as you keep thinking, "hold it off, hold
it off, hold it off." If I give the tall gear/wheels a chance to touch first,
which is easy to do, I am guaranteed a bounce. It does have a fairly high
deck angle. Usually as long as I "hold it off, hold it off" on the second landing
it is usually slowed up enough to be at the right angle to touch all three.
I think that's the key. Sometimes if it's been a few weeks or so since
I've flown my brain seems to forget that it is kind of a steep three-point. If
my nose tank is full it seems to take a very conscious full pull back to my
stop to get the tail to touch with the mains. It is much easier when the tank
is at least a few gallons lower. Hard surface landings aren't my favorite, but
I've done some. Not too much different I guess, probably more psychological
than anything but I still don't like them. A cool thing is that the tires don't
chirp, it's more like a short howl to get them up to speed. Hard surface
takeoffs seem no different than grass.
Gene, no that's not my Goldwing. That picture was taken at Barber Airport.
Forrest Barber is the Goldwing guy. My dad is a big Goldwing groupie and I do
have to admit, it is one classy and nice to ride bike. He's had it all over
the country, with probably over 100,000 miles on it by now.
The good flying weather isn't too far off!
Don Emch
NX899DE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=92422#92422
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 02, 2007
From: Tim Verthein <minoxphotographer(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: E-85 (was Fuel Tank)
We have some guys in the Corvair clubs running E-85 in their Corvair
cars....here's what I know for sure (mostly) and I imagine most of the
same would apply:
Make darn sure every plastic or rubber part in the fuel system is
alchohol compatible (old rubber, seals, gaskets, fuel pump diaphrams,
etc..won't be) Also, the alchohol is a heck of a fuel system cleaner,
so if you have things that are relying on old "gunk" to keep them
sealed, they'll probably start leaking.
You have higher octane, but less BTU's, so you'll lose a bit of power
and "mileage" but can use advanced timing and higher compression
(probably not an issue in a model A) which can usually make up for most
of the loss.
You will need to rejet the carb..you need everything richer.
And you'll need to tweak the timing...advanced a bit.
That's what I know from an old car perspective.
Tim in Bovey
>
> From: lshutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan)
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tank
>
>
> Beside having a fuel tank that won't melt from ethanol, what else
> would
> be required to make a Model A Piet E-85 compatible. ? Anyone? Leon S.
> Looking to the future.
>
==
You *can* repair a flip-flop with a capacitor!
==
Get your own web address.
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/domains/?p=BESTDEAL
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 02, 2007
From: gus notti <gus_notti(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: E-85 (was Fuel Tank)
Why would you want too? E85 is a joke, it's not solving any energy issues just
creating more. I know that's a very hard truth but that's the way it is.
I'm a active ag producer, As a grower Bio-Diesel is the way to go after we start
producing small 4 cylinder motors like the Germans currently do. 50 + MPG
that where the potential lays!
Good luck. I know that's a BIG can of worms.....
Tim Verthein wrote:
We have some guys in the Corvair clubs running E-85 in their Corvair
cars....here's what I know for sure (mostly) and I imagine most of the
same would apply:
Make darn sure every plastic or rubber part in the fuel system is
alchohol compatible (old rubber, seals, gaskets, fuel pump diaphrams,
etc..won't be) Also, the alchohol is a heck of a fuel system cleaner,
so if you have things that are relying on old "gunk" to keep them
sealed, they'll probably start leaking.
You have higher octane, but less BTU's, so you'll lose a bit of power
and "mileage" but can use advanced timing and higher compression
(probably not an issue in a model A) which can usually make up for most
of the loss.
You will need to rejet the carb..you need everything richer.
And you'll need to tweak the timing...advanced a bit.
That's what I know from an old car perspective.
Tim in Bovey
>
> From: lshutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan)
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tank
>
>
> Beside having a fuel tank that won't melt from ethanol, what else
> would
> be required to make a Model A Piet E-85 compatible. ? Anyone? Leon S.
> Looking to the future.
>
==
You *can* repair a flip-flop with a capacitor!
==
Get your own web address.
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/domains/?p=BESTDEAL
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 02, 2007
From: Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu>
Subject: Re: E-85 (was Fuel Tank)
I'm guessing you'd "want to" because it's simply dealing with
reality. Seasonally, autogas contains alcohol. If you don't have
access to avgas (as we don't at our little country strip, 2GA9), it's
something to deal with.
But man-o-man, would I love to be driving one of those
high-efficiency diesels on biodiesel. I'm 100% with you there.
Someone commented that Citgo doesn't lace it's juice with alcohol.
Does anyone know more about this?
Thanks,
Jeff
>Why would you want too? E85 is a joke, it's not solving any energy
>issues just creating more. I know that's a very hard truth but
>that's the way it is.
>I'm a active ag producer, As a grower Bio-Diesel is the way to go
>after we start producing small 4 cylinder motors like the Germans
>currently do. 50 + MPG that where the potential lays!
>
>
>Good luck. I know that's a BIG can of worms.....
>
>
>Tim Verthein wrote:
>
>
>We have some guys in the Corvair clubs running E-85 in their Corvair
>cars....here's what I know for sure (mostly) and I imagine most of the
>same would apply:
>
>Make darn sure every plastic or rubber part in the fuel system is
>alchohol compatible (old rubber, seals, gaskets, fuel pump diaphrams,
>etc..won't be) Also, the alchohol is a heck of a fuel system cleaner,
>so if you have things that are relying on old "gunk" to keep them
>sealed, they'll probably start leaking.
>
>You have higher octane, but less BTU's, so you'll lose a bit of power
>and "mileage" but can use advanced timing and higher compression
>(probably not an issue in a model A) which can usually make up for most
>of the loss.
>
>You will need to rejet the carb..you need everything richer.
>
>And you'll need to tweak the timing...advanced a bit.
>
>That's what I know from an old car perspective.
>
>Tim in Bovey
>
>
>>
>> From: lshutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan)
>> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tank
>>
>>
>> Beside having a fuel tank that won't melt from ethanol, what else
>> would
>> be required
>
>
><http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
--
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/
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 02, 2007
From: Mike Volckmann <mike_cfi(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: E-85 (was Fuel Tank)
>From what I have been reading one burns 100 BTUs of natural gas to produce
80-120 BTUs of ethanol (from corn numbers change if you are using sugar can
e). Sounds like playing at being green while accomplishing nothing to get
to reduce the US's dependency on petroleum. I would agree that bio-diesel
run in small motors like the new VW bug shows a lot more promise.=0A =0AMik
e=0A=0A=0A----- Original Message ----=0AFrom: gus notti <gus_notti(at)yahoo.co
m>=0ATo: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com=0ASent: Friday, February 2, 2007 5:47
:38 PM=0ASubject: Re: Pietenpol-List: E-85 (was Fuel Tank)=0A=0A=0AWhy woul
d you want too? E85 is a joke, it's not solving any energy issues just cre
ating more. I know that's a very hard truth but that's the way it is.=0AI'm
a active ag producer, As a grower Bio-Diesel is the way to go after we sta
rt producing small 4 cylinder motors like the Germans currently do. 50 + MP
G that where the potential lays!=0A =0A =0A =0AGood luck. I know that's a B
IG can of worms.....=0A=0A=0ATim Verthein wro
guys in the Corvair clubs running E-85 in their Corvair=0Acars....here's w
hat I know for sure (mostly) and I imagine most of the=0Asame would apply:
=0A=0AMake darn sure every plastic or rubber part in the fuel system is=0Aa
lchohol compatible (old rubber, seals, gaskets, fuel pump diaphrams,=0Aetc.
.won't be) Also, the alchohol is a heck of a fuel system cleaner,=0Aso if y
ou have things that are relying on old "gunk" to keep them=0Asealed, they'l
l probably start leaking.=0A=0AYou have higher octane, but less BTU's, so y
ou'll lose a bit of power=0Aand "mileage" but can use advanced timing and h
igher compression=0A(probably not an issue in a model A) which can usually
make up for most=0Aof the loss.=0A=0AYou will need to rejet the carb..you n
eed everything richer.=0A=0AAnd you'll need to tweak the timing...advanced
a bit.=0A=0AThat's what I know from an old car perspective. =0A=0ATim in Bo
on Stefan)=0A> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tank=0A> =0A> =0A> Beside havi
ng a fuel tank that won't melt from ethanol, what else=0A> would=0A> be req
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 02, 2007
From: <bike.mike(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: E-85 (was Fuel Tank)
Popping open 12 oz of fish bait:
While I agree that bio-deisel has a lot of promise that may not be realized by
ethanol, the refining costs of ethanol are very simlar to the refining costs of
gasoline. Oil refineries run at about a 44% energy cost, meaning that it takes
about 100 BTUs to produce about 120-130 BTUs of gasoline. It doesn't matter,
in terms of energy used, what the fuel is that makes the heat that distills
the crude and pumps it around.
Ethanol certainly requires energy to make, but that energy can theoretically come
from ethanol, not just natural gas, or coal, or oil, or even buffalo chips.
The real tell-tale is going to be the cost of converting whiskey and government
subsidized plow-under into auto fuel, or the political costs of making the
sugar cane growers of Cuba wealthy, compared to the costs of keeping the mid-east
oil-producing nations in operation.
Mike Hardaway
---- Mike Volckmann wrote:
> >From what I have been reading one burns 100 BTUs of natural gas to produce 80-120
BTUs of ethanol (from corn numbers change if you are using sugar cane).
Sounds like playing at being green while accomplishing nothing to get to reduce
the US's dependency on petroleum. I would agree that bio-diesel run in small
motors like the new VW bug shows a lot more promise.
Mike
----- Original Message ----
From: gus notti <gus_notti(at)yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, February 2, 2007 5:47:38 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: E-85 (was Fuel Tank)
Why would you want too? E85 is a joke, it's not solving any energy issues just
creating more. I know that's a very hard truth but that's the way it is.
I'm a active ag producer, As a grower Bio-Diesel is the way to go after we start
producing small 4 cylinder motors like the Germans currently do. 50 + MPG that
where the potential lays!
Good luck. I know that's a BIG can of worms.....
Tim Verthein wrote:
We have some guys in the Corvair clubs running E-85 in their Corvair
cars....here's what I know for sure (mostly) and I imagine most of the
same would apply:
Make darn sure every plastic or rubber part in the fuel system is
alchohol compatible (old rubber, seals, gaskets, fuel pump diaphrams,
etc..won't be) Also, the alchohol is a heck of a fuel system cleaner,
so if you have things that are relying on old "gunk" to keep them
sealed, they'll probably start leaking.
You have higher octane, but less BTU's, so you'll lose a bit of power
and "mileage" but can use advanced timing and higher compression
(probably not an issue in a model A) which can usually make up for most
of the loss.
You will need to rejet the carb..you need everything richer.
And you'll need to tweak the timing...advanced a bit.
That's what I know from an old car perspective.
Tim in Bovey
>
> From: lshutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan)
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tank
>
>
> Beside having a fuel tank that won't melt from ethanol, what else
> would
> be req
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene and Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: E-85 (was Fuel Tank)
Date: Feb 02, 2007
Re: Pietenpol-List: E-85 (was Fuel Tank)Don't know about Citgo but BP
stations are alcohol free in the area (Tennessee) I live in. I have
been told by a station manager that BP's policy is not to use alcohol
unless it's the law. I still do an alcohol check each time, just in
case. It's so easy, even a cave man could do it.
Gene
________________________________________________________________________________
From: HelsperSew(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 03, 2007
Subject: Re: E-85 (was Fuel Tank)
Gene,
I just wandered out of my cave to read your post about the alcohol test.
How do you do this test?
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 03, 2007
From: gus notti <gus_notti(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: E-85 (was Fuel Tank)
YES the energy cost to refine is about the same, I read the numbers, however when
using E85 we all know it's 85 % ethanol 15% petro. The user gets 1/3 less milage
when using it,
we all understand the BTU's from the fuel. Plus I read several reports about
the poultion it
creates to make the Ethanol itself. Time will tell, but I'm thinking here in
just a few short years we will relize what a mistake we made.
Also can somebody riddle me this, Nebraska stations has E85 for $2.85... unleaded
gas here is $2.12 $ 2.22 I was in South Dakota last month and E85 was $1.65,
now tell me what's up with that. Nebraska is either #2 or #3 for making Ethanol....Why
such a big price difference. Even at a $1.65 your still loosing $$
due to the 1/3 less milage issuse, and it does not make a difference how you
drive....I tried it for several months. I'm done with it I'll even pass on E10
they can keep it.
Goodluck
ubike.mike(at)charter.net wrote:
Popping open 12 oz of fish bait:
While I agree that bio-deisel has a lot of promise that may not be realized by
ethanol, the refining costs of ethanol are very simlar to the refining costs of
gasoline. Oil refineries run at about a 44% energy cost, meaning that it takes
about 100 BTUs to produce about 120-130 BTUs of gasoline. It doesn't matter,
in terms of energy used, what the fuel is that makes the heat that distills
the crude and pumps it around.
Ethanol certainly requires energy to make, but that energy can theoretically come
from ethanol, not just natural gas, or coal, or oil, or even buffalo chips.
The real tell-tale is going to be the cost of converting whiskey and government
subsidized plow-under into auto fuel, or the political costs of making the
sugar cane growers of Cuba wealthy, compared to the costs of keeping the mid-east
oil-producing nations in operation.
Mike Hardaway
---- Mike Volckmann wrote:
> >From what I have been reading one burns 100 BTUs of natural gas to produce 80-120
BTUs of ethanol (from corn numbers change if you are using sugar cane).
Sounds like playing at being green while accomplishing nothing to get to reduce
the US's dependency on petroleum. I would agree that bio-diesel run in small
motors like the new VW bug shows a lot more promise.
Mike
----- Original Message ----
From: gus notti
Sent: Friday, February 2, 2007 5:47:38 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: E-85 (was Fuel Tank)
Why would you want too? E85 is a joke, it's not solving any energy issues just
creating more. I know that's a very hard truth but that's the way it is.
I'm a active ag producer, As a grower Bio-Diesel is the way to go after we start
producing small 4 cylinder motors like the Germans currently do. 50 + MPG that
where the potential lays!
Good luck. I know that's a BIG can of worms.....
Tim Verthein wrote:
We have some guys in the Corvair clubs running E-85 in their Corvair
cars....here's what I know for sure (mostly) and I imagine most of the
same would apply:
Make darn sure every plastic or rubber part in the fuel system is
alchohol compatible (old rubber, seals, gaskets, fuel pump diaphrams,
etc..won't be) Also, the alchohol is a heck of a fuel system cleaner,
so if you have things that are relying on old "gunk" to keep them
sealed, they'll probably start leaking.
You have higher octane, but less BTU's, so you'll lose a bit of power
and "mileage" but can use advanced timing and higher compression
(probably not an issue in a model A) which can usually make up for most
of the loss.
You will need to rejet the carb..you need everything richer.
And you'll need to tweak the timing...advanced a bit.
That's what I know from an old car perspective.
Tim in Bovey
>
> From: lshutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan)
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tank
>
>
> Beside having a fuel tank that won't melt from ethanol, what else
> would
> be req
---------------------------------
Need a quick answer? Get one in minutes from people who know. Ask your question
on Yahoo! Answers.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 03, 2007
From: Kip and Beth Gardner <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: E-85 (was Fuel Tank)
Boy,
This whole topic gets my back up, there is just SO much
misinformation out there right now. I'm an Agricultural Scientist &
I've been following a lot of this argument for the past 10 years,
recently because it's become part of my work.
Except for a few discredited critics, (the most commonly quote one
being David Pimental at Cornell University, an entemologist who gets
a lot of his funding from the oil industry), the data indicates that
the energy return from corn-based ethanol is between 1.67 and 2.5X
greater than the energy you put in, depending on the distillery
setup. The Brazilians get back about 5-7x from sugar cane because of
the way they grow, harvest & utilize the whole plant in their
distilling processes.
The current energy "return" for GASOLINE is 0.8X (i.e. it takes more
energy to pump, refine & produce Gas than you get back).
These numbers come directly from the Director of the National
Renewable Energy Lab in Colorado, the arm of the Fed Gov't
responsible for all renwables research, whom I spoke with at length
last Spring.
However, I'm not suggesting that corn-based ethanol is a good
long-term solution, it's not possible to grow enough corn to offset
our energy needs. Even if 90% of the corn grown in this country was
used for ethanol, it would only produce enough ethanol to meet about
6% of demand.
One "silver lining" to corn ethanol is that the residues (called
dried distiller's grains, or DDG'S) make a superior, cheap livestock
feed, and are very underused in the market. The part of corn that
gets converted to alcohol (the starch) is actually not utilized
efficiently in the digestive tracts of hogs and cattle, so removing
it from the corn through the distilling process actually makes the
corn a better feed.
Cellulosic ethanol (made from switch grass, agricultural waste, waste
paper, etc), has the potential to meet about 50% of our current
gasoline consumption, but again there is not enough of these
resources to meet all of current demand, and the technology is still
under development. The enrgy return on this kind of ethanol is
typically around 4-5x with the current "pilot' technology, and will
probably be at least that good at industrial scales.
Biodiesel is a great, energy-dense fule, but again, it's not possible
to produce enough to meet anything more than a fraction of demand,
even with high mpg engines in wide use. I'm actually gearing up to
make my own biodiesel from waste cooking oil (otainable for free from
your local Chinese restraunt), so I agree, it's a great fuel, but
it's potential is just as limited by agricultural realities as
ethanol.
The final point to consider is that NONE of the US-made cars designed
to use E85 have engines specifically designed for that purpose, they
are all basically gas engines with the mass flow computer adjusted to
burn either E85, gas, or a mix. A friend of mine in California
recently sent me an article about engines being produced in Sweden
that get 60-80 mpg on ethanol because theyspecifically designed for
ethanol. Sweden has decided to be petroleum-free within 10 years,
and theyb are the current leaders in this kind of engine design
research.
The big problem with any internal combustion engine is that about 70%
of any fuel's energy is lost as heat; reduce that number and you can
really improve engine efficiency. That's what the Swedes are
focusing on & it appears to be paying off.
Sorry for the long, off-topic post, but as I said, this topic gets my
back up, and some day, fuel type and availability for flying will be
an even bigger issue than it is now.
As far as I'm concerned, the only real, long-term solution to
reducing our dependence on oil is significant reduction of total
energy demand, combine with a sensible program of alternative
renewable enrgy production, and at this point, I think the jury is
still out on what the best mix of alternatives is.
Kip Gardner
>From what I have been reading one burns 100 BTUs of natural gas to
>produce 80-120 BTUs of ethanol (from corn numbers change if you are
>using sugar cane). Sounds like playing at being green while
>accomplishing nothing to get to reduce the US's dependency on
>petroleum. I would agree that bio-diesel run in small motors like
>the new VW bug shows a lot more promise.
>
>Mike
>
>----- Original Message ----
>From: gus notti <gus_notti(at)yahoo.com>
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Sent: Friday, February 2, 2007 5:47:38 PM
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: E-85 (was Fuel Tank)
>
>Why would you want too? E85 is a joke, it's not solving any energy
>issues just creating more. I know that's a very hard truth but
>that's the way it is.
>I'm a active ag producer, As a grower Bio-Diesel is the way to go
>after we start producing small 4 cylinder motors like the Germans
>currently do. 50 + MPG that where the potential lays!
>
>
>Good luck. I know that's a BIG can of worms.....
--
North Canton, OH
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "MICHAEL SILVIUS" <M.Silvius(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: E-85 (was Fuel Tank)
Date: Feb 03, 2007
Re: Pietenpol-List: E-85 (was Fuel Tank)Jef Boatright wrote:
"Someone commented that Citgo doesn't lace it's juice with alcohol. Does
anyone know more about this?"
That's right:
CITGO is 100 % pure Maracaibo (Venezuela) crude. The US buys
approximately 8 to 10% of our oil from PDVSA (Petroleos de Venezuela)
and this represents about 70% of their production. But I as a Venezuelan
ex-pat I suggest it be avoided at all cost. Chavez (remember the one
about the sulfur comments at the UN) runs the place. He has
systematically dismantled democracy and openly had declared himself
president for life, with a declared communist agenda and a openly
expressed disdain for the US. he is rubbing elbows with every one of the
bad guys around the world. Buying missiles and rockets form Putin with
his oil revenues and expressing his readiness to use them on us.
I would provide links to sites supporting all of this but apparently he
has shut down every one of them I had marked as he also controls press
and communication.
http://www.venezuelatoday.net/gustavo-coronel/2006-archive.html
With his oil revenues he is also buying up control of these entities in
a greater part of south America as well as US voting machines
manufacturers.
now how do we get back to Pietenpols after this one?
michael silvius
scarborough, maine
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Boatright
Someone commented that Citgo doesn't lace it's juice with alcohol.
Does anyone know more about this?
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 03, 2007
From: gus notti <gus_notti(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: E-85 (was Fuel Tank)
Well I speak from experience I have made Bi-diesel from waste oil, I have also
ran straight
SWO after heating it in a 1995 Cummings. Yes you will save money but it's not
all that fun
pumping out WO from the oil pit out back. If you can get them to place the old
oil back in the 2.5 gallon containers that helps. What I'm saying it takes work/time.
I believe we have alternative energy systems now to take alot of homes off the
grid.
I have a Trace Sun tie with Sharp 165 w panels + a 2kw wind turbine up and running,
on a good month I save 40% off my monthly bill. But I'm into these kind
of things!
Nebraska sucks with a net metering program...(they don't have one) Ca and IL
have some of the best Net metering programs in the country.
75% rebates + you are paid retail for each Kw you out back on the grid.
Right now several of the plains states could easily produce a large amount of
there energy needs with the big Megawatt wind turbines. Yes this is only one
area of energy, I'm in the process of going off the grid, just saving a little
more cash to get my system fully up and running. Yes I will keep the grid there
for $15.00 per month just as a backup.
My thought we have technology right now to put a big dent in our energy needs.
Ethanol is not one of them though, yes it has a small place in the big schema
of things.
Good luck
PS: Switch grass When they get that figured out I'm going to dedicate some acres
to it.
Kip and Beth Gardner wrote:
Boy,
This whole topic gets my back up, there is just SO much
misinformation out there right now. I'm an Agricultural Scientist &
I've been following a lot of this argument for the past 10 years,
recently because it's become part of my work.
Except for a few discredited critics, (the most commonly quote one
being David Pimental at Cornell University, an entemologist who gets
a lot of his funding from the oil industry), the data indicates that
the energy return from corn-based ethanol is between 1.67 and 2.5X
greater than the energy you put in, depending on the distillery
setup. The Brazilians get back about 5-7x from sugar cane because of
the way they grow, harvest & utilize the whole plant in their
distilling processes.
The current energy "return" for GASOLINE is 0.8X (i.e. it takes more
energy to pump, refine & produce Gas than you get back).
These numbers come directly from the Director of the National
Renewable Energy Lab in Colorado, the arm of the Fed Gov't
responsible for all renwables research, whom I spoke with at length
last Spring.
However, I'm not suggesting that corn-based ethanol is a good
long-term solution, it's not possible to grow enough corn to offset
our energy needs. Even if 90% of the corn grown in this country was
used for ethanol, it would only produce enough ethanol to meet about
6% of demand.
One "silver lining" to corn ethanol is that the residues (called
dried distiller's grains, or DDG'S) make a superior, cheap livestock
feed, and are very underused in the market. The part of corn that
gets converted to alcohol (the starch) is actually not utilized
efficiently in the digestive tracts of hogs and cattle, so removing
it from the corn through the distilling process actually makes the
corn a better feed.
Cellulosic ethanol (made from switch grass, agricultural waste, waste
paper, etc), has the potential to meet about 50% of our current
gasoline consumption, but again there is not enough of these
resources to meet all of current demand, and the technology is still
under development. The enrgy return on this kind of ethanol is
typically around 4-5x with the current "pilot' technology, and will
probably be at least that good at industrial scales.
Biodiesel is a great, energy-dense fule, but again, it's not possible
to produce enough to meet anything more than a fraction of demand,
even with high mpg engines in wide use. I'm actually gearing up to
make my own biodiesel from waste cooking oil (otainable for free from
your local Chinese restraunt), so I agree, it's a great fuel, but
it's potential is just as limited by agricultural realities as
ethanol.
The final point to consider is that NONE of the US-made cars designed
to use E85 have engines specifically designed for that purpose, they
are all basically gas engines with the mass flow computer adjusted to
burn either E85, gas, or a mix. A friend of mine in California
recently sent me an article about engines being produced in Sweden
that get 60-80 mpg on ethanol because theyspecifically designed for
ethanol. Sweden has decided to be petroleum-free within 10 years,
and theyb are the current leaders in this kind of engine design
research.
The big problem with any internal combustion engine is that about 70%
of any fuel's energy is lost as heat; reduce that number and you can
really improve engine efficiency. That's what the Swedes are
focusing on & it appears to be paying off.
Sorry for the long, off-topic post, but as I said, this topic gets my
back up, and some day, fuel type and availability for flying will be
an even bigger issue than it is now.
As far as I'm concerned, the only real, long-term solution to
reducing our dependence on oil is significant reduction of total
energy demand, combine with a sensible program of alternative
renewable enrgy production, and at this point, I think the jury is
still out on what the best mix of alternatives is.
Kip Gardner
>From what I have been reading one burns 100 BTUs of natural gas to
>produce 80-120 BTUs of ethanol (from corn numbers change if you are
>using sugar cane). Sounds like playing at being green while
>accomplishing nothing to get to reduce the US's dependency on
>petroleum. I would agree that bio-diesel run in small motors like
>the new VW bug shows a lot more promise.
>
>Mike
>
>----- Original Message ----
>From: gus notti
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Sent: Friday, February 2, 2007 5:47:38 PM
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: E-85 (was Fuel Tank)
>
>Why would you want too? E85 is a joke, it's not solving any energy
>issues just creating more. I know that's a very hard truth but
>that's the way it is.
>I'm a active ag producer, As a grower Bio-Diesel is the way to go
>after we start producing small 4 cylinder motors like the Germans
>currently do. 50 + MPG that where the potential lays!
>
>
>Good luck. I know that's a BIG can of worms.....
--
North Canton, OH
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Taylorcraft Gathering, Alliance, Ohio
Date: Feb 03, 2007
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
With regard to what Don Emch said in talking to Forrest Barber
(owner/operator of Barber Field in Alliance where the annual Taylorcraft
Fly-In
is held) about having a combined event with Taylorcrafts, Pietenpols,
and Aeroncas I couldn't help but smile as that is what has been going on
(without a name tag or official announcement) for YEARS. July 6,7&
8th this year. http://www.barberaircraft.com/
There are normally a nice variety of older taildraggers there with
Saturday AM to about 2 PM being the peak attendance.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene and Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: E-85 (was Fuel Tank)
Date: Feb 03, 2007
Hi Dan,
Find your self a tall glass jar (about 6" highwill do) slender (about 1
1/2" or so diameter) with a lid. An olive or hot pepper jar is the one
I use.
About 1/4 of the way up from the bottom put a line around the jar..
Fill the jar up to the line with water. Fill the rest of the way with
gas. Put lid on and mildly shake it. Wait about a minute and check
your water level at the line. If the water level is above the line (you
made water) then there is alcohol in the fuel. Alcohol and water
combine, gas does not combine with water. If water level is still at
the mark then gas does not contain alcohol.
EAA also sells a fuel tester for about $15 to $20 but I'd rather buy the
olives for about $2, eat the olives then make a tester. I'm not cheap
but I've been know to squeek when I walk.
Hope this helps and hope to see you in person at Brodhead this year.
Gene
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: EAA Chapter 1279 Pietenpol Project Update in Southern
California
Date: Feb 03, 2007
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
I thought I'd give our group a quick update, courtesy of Steve
Williamson, EAA Chapter 1279's President,
by passing along an update of how they are progressing on their chapter
project.
For more history on the project (and some very good photos) go here:
http://www.eaa1279.org/Pietenpol.htm
Steve has shown some great leadership on this project and has a good
group to work with so it sounds like
this new airplane will be taking to the air in just a few short years or
less. Thanks for keeping us posted guys !
Mike C.
________________________________
From: ThePhoebusC(at)aol.com [mailto:ThePhoebusC(at)aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 11:24 PM
Subject: SoCal Pietenpol Progress
Hi Michael.
We here at EAA Chapter 1279 (So Calif) are progressing nicely
with our Pietenpol project. At the moment our fuselage is upside down
as we complete our gear legs. They're basically done except for the
final contouring (see photos below). While the fuselage is upside down,
I would like to attach one or two stringers down the underside of the
fuselage. The main purpose would be to create a "trough" to allow any
accumulated moisture to flow toward a drain hole in the tail as the
plane rests on the tailwheel.
I noticed on your video that you installed two stringers on the
underside of your Piet with an inspection plate for checking the
elevator idler arm. I intended to simply install an inspection plate.
But the idea of having a hinged door to allow you to reach up in there
is appealing. Did you build a frame for attaching the inspection door?
The door seems to be attached using a "piano hinge." What does the
hinge attach to? (a sketch/.jpg image will be posted to the list
shortly)
Any guidance you can offer would be appreciated. Thanks for
your reply. See photos below.
Steve Williamson, Pres.
EAA Chapter 1279
French Valley, CA
Rough cut legs and fittings.
Close up of fittings and spreader bar.
Checking wheels for fit.
Installing tires.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: bellcrank area: belly access door idea
Date: Feb 03, 2007
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
This was my response to Chapter 1279's question on a possible belly
access solution under the
elevator bellcrank area.
I've sketched out how I did my elevator bellcrack access panel
and I hope you can make out that I basically just boxed in an area
roughly 9" x 12" (give or take and 1") and then reinforced the
box with the yellow highlighted spruce reinforcement pieces in order
that
the fabric, once glued to the perimeter of that box, when shrunk
, would not distort the belly stringers and boxed area in an outward
fashion.
The boxed access area stayed a rectangle and I cut and fitted
a sheet of aluminum to act as a hinged (at the front) access panel.
(I don't see why velcro wouldn't work either or other types of
fasteners)
This panel works well for initial installation of your elevator
control cables as well as cotter pinning and/or safety wiring that
normally needs
to take place in there. I also found this panel very useful in
allowing light into the fuselage for my inspections. With my seat back
being
hinged and this belly access panel, I can really get a good
amount of light (and some of my forehead) in there to do inspections or
retrieve wayward items that have migrated back there like
sunglasses, charts, gum, candy, and pens.
Sorry this drawing isn't to scale or in CAD and would probably
make Tony Bingelis cringe, but I hope it answers your question.
I know there is no way I'd want to work on safety wiring
turnbuckles up in there on the bellcrank thru just a normal inspection
hole or
two-----but it can be done.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 03, 2007
Subject: Re: E-85 (was Fuel Tank)
There are a few FBO's out there that still have MoGas pump, next to the AvGas
pump. Do they have the responsibility of checking to make sure there isn't
any Alcohol in the MoGas fuel ?? When it's available, I always use the MoGas
pump, but I trust there isn't any Alcohol.
Chuck G.
NX770CG
p.s. I use my fuel sump tool to check for Alcohol at home, but I don't
bother to check when on a cross country flight.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Isablcorky(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 03, 2007
Subject: Re: bellcrank area: belly access door idea
There is another way. Check with Oscar Zuniga.
CMC
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 03, 2007
From: "Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Tour De Corky
I heard that most of them look like that Colonel Sanders guy (with or
without the glasses).
On 1/31/07, harvey.rule(at)sympatico.ca wrote:
>
>
> I didn't see any pics of Corky,just the plane ,trailor and truck.I was
> hoping to see what a sawtherner looks like.HAHAHA!
>
>
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 03, 2007
From: Greg Chapman <greg(at)mousetrax.com>
Subject: Re: E-85 (was Fuel Tank)
So Kip and Beth,
If you read what you wrote, there's a line in there that just makes a
complete mockery of the argument that E85 is efficient...unless we can
get some data to explain it. Here it is:
> The current energy "return" for GASOLINE is 0.8X (i.e. it takes more
> energy to pump, refine & produce Gas than you get back).
There are two angles to this logic challenging statement.
First, since we are so dependent on the oil and only recently (last 20
years or so) have been riding on gasoline hybrids with ethanol as a
summer component and since none of the trucks and trains within the last
50 years have burned a lump of coal or a roentgen of radioactivity or a
kilowatt of solar or wind generated energy to deliver gasoline, how was
there ever been a gallon of gasoline left to drop in the tank under the
filling station pump? To create a quart of lubricating oil?
Second, if we move over to the perspective that we have to get off the
petroleum and do it now, how do you beat the physics of E85 producing
20% fewer BTUs yet costing less energy to service the same refueling
facilities.
I don't care if that is a government think tank, their numbers are
indicating that their methodology is way off in estimating the
efficiency of the two processes. It begins, in fact, to take on the
appearance of a less than unbiased set of calculations.
If we were to do this correctly, we'd have to recognize that we're
trying to use logic to work with an illogical entity, that of consensus
science (which ain't science if it's merely based on consensus rather
than measurement and reproducability of results).
Numbers like that tell me that the statistitician set a zero value
(there goes empirical measurement!) before measuring costs and then
skewed his measurements with an apple to orange comparison of
transforming the raw element, refining the product, delivering the
refined product and then consuming it. In this case, he set zero below
the actual zero in order to set the current fuel production cost at .8
times actual in an effort to offset the 20% efficiency loss in BTUs. I'd
love to see the non-comparative elements used in the calculations (the
apples).
That's pseudo science, man.
The ONLY argument which favors ethanol today is that it is renewable. It
is certainly less efficient in raw BTU value. And since it continues to
produce a hydro-carbon exhaust, it cannot beat the simple organic
chemistry and rules of physics which produce the carbon-replacement
table. It's that table which dictates which elements will combine with
free elements anywhere, not just in the atmosphere. It's that 'feature'
of carbon which leads to the great greenhouse gas debate.
Also, when looking at this stuff, let's remember Occum's Razor coupled
with Einstein's Addendum:
Occum's Razor: for the set of 'known' facts, the simplest answer which
addresses the most of those facts is probably the truth.
Einstein's Addendum: Yes, but make that answer no simpler!!
SO, the simplest statment is that 20% fewer BTUs means creating more
hydro-carbon exhaust per unit of work performed.
Now, let's find someone to do some honest math on this. Obviously, the
Director of Renewable Energy is starting to look like a salesman
employed by the government or else he simply thinks the rest of us are
idiots.
Call the director and get him to show us where we're ignorant.
Greg Chapman
Kip and Beth Gardner wrote:
>
>
> Boy,
>
> This whole topic gets my back up, there is just SO much misinformation
> out there right now. I'm an Agricultural Scientist & I've been
> following a lot of this argument for the past 10 years, recently because
> it's become part of my work.
>
> Except for a few discredited critics, (the most commonly quote one being
> David Pimental at Cornell University, an entemologist who gets a lot of
> his funding from the oil industry), the data indicates that the energy
> return from corn-based ethanol is between 1.67 and 2.5X greater than the
> energy you put in, depending on the distillery setup. The Brazilians
> get back about 5-7x from sugar cane because of the way they grow,
> harvest & utilize the whole plant in their distilling processes.
>
> The current energy "return" for GASOLINE is 0.8X (i.e. it takes more
> energy to pump, refine & produce Gas than you get back).
>
> These numbers come directly from the Director of the National Renewable
> Energy Lab in Colorado, the arm of the Fed Gov't responsible for all
> renwables research, whom I spoke with at length last Spring.
>
> However, I'm not suggesting that corn-based ethanol is a good long-term
> solution, it's not possible to grow enough corn to offset our energy
> needs. Even if 90% of the corn grown in this country was used for
> ethanol, it would only produce enough ethanol to meet about 6% of demand.
>
> One "silver lining" to corn ethanol is that the residues (called dried
> distiller's grains, or DDG'S) make a superior, cheap livestock feed, and
> are very underused in the market. The part of corn that gets converted
> to alcohol (the starch) is actually not utilized efficiently in the
> digestive tracts of hogs and cattle, so removing it from the corn
> through the distilling process actually makes the corn a better feed.
>
> Cellulosic ethanol (made from switch grass, agricultural waste, waste
> paper, etc), has the potential to meet about 50% of our current gasoline
> consumption, but again there is not enough of these resources to meet
> all of current demand, and the technology is still under development.
> The enrgy return on this kind of ethanol is typically around 4-5x with
> the current "pilot' technology, and will probably be at least that good
> at industrial scales.
>
> Biodiesel is a great, energy-dense fule, but again, it's not possible to
> produce enough to meet anything more than a fraction of demand, even
> with high mpg engines in wide use. I'm actually gearing up to make my
> own biodiesel from waste cooking oil (otainable for free from your local
> Chinese restraunt), so I agree, it's a great fuel, but it's potential is
> just as limited by agricultural realities as ethanol.
>
> The final point to consider is that NONE of the US-made cars designed to
> use E85 have engines specifically designed for that purpose, they are
> all basically gas engines with the mass flow computer adjusted to burn
> either E85, gas, or a mix. A friend of mine in California recently sent
> me an article about engines being produced in Sweden that get 60-80 mpg
> on ethanol because theyspecifically designed for ethanol. Sweden has
> decided to be petroleum-free within 10 years, and theyb are the current
> leaders in this kind of engine design research.
>
> The big problem with any internal combustion engine is that about 70% of
> any fuel's energy is lost as heat; reduce that number and you can really
> improve engine efficiency. That's what the Swedes are focusing on & it
> appears to be paying off.
>
> Sorry for the long, off-topic post, but as I said, this topic gets my
> back up, and some day, fuel type and availability for flying will be an
> even bigger issue than it is now.
>
> As far as I'm concerned, the only real, long-term solution to reducing
> our dependence on oil is significant reduction of total energy demand,
> combine with a sensible program of alternative renewable enrgy
> production, and at this point, I think the jury is still out on what the
> best mix of alternatives is.
>
> Kip Gardner
>
>
>> From what I have been reading one burns 100 BTUs of natural gas to
>> produce 80-120 BTUs of ethanol (from corn numbers change if you are
>> using sugar cane). Sounds like playing at being green while
>> accomplishing nothing to get to reduce the US's dependency on
>> petroleum. I would agree that bio-diesel run in small motors like the
>> new VW bug shows a lot more promise.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: gus notti <gus_notti(at)yahoo.com>
>> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>> Sent: Friday, February 2, 2007 5:47:38 PM
>> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: E-85 (was Fuel Tank)
>>
>> Why would you want too? E85 is a joke, it's not solving any energy
>> issues just creating more. I know that's a very hard truth but that's
>> the way it is.
>> I'm a active ag producer, As a grower Bio-Diesel is the way to go
>> after we start producing small 4 cylinder motors like the Germans
>> currently do. 50 + MPG that where the potential lays!
>>
>>
>>
>> Good luck. I know that's a BIG can of worms.....
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 03, 2007
From: Kip and Beth Gardner <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: E-85 (was Fuel Tank)
Greg,
The point you are missing here is that all of the enrgy-consuming
processes that go into producing any fuel (or altered energy form)
need to go into the energy-balance equation. For Petroleum
(gasoline), that includes the energy costs of getting the crude out
of the ground, shipped to ther refinery, the energy cost of creating
the extraction/distribution/refining infrastructure, the energy
needed to do the actual refining, etc. etc. etc. Add all that up &
you get the 0.8X figure.
What it amounts to is that we are using a lot of energy to create
different, more usable energy forms. The same kind of accounting
applies to generating electricity, burning coal, making ethanol, you
name it. In some cases you get back more than you put in & some
times you get less. The fact that we haven't had massive fuel
shortages is that up to now, we've had a large surplus of available
"raw" energy (if you will) to make these conversions without going
into a total net energy loss. T o say that no coal, nuclear energy or
whatever has gone to make refined petroleum products is a complete
distortion of the energy-use pattern in this country. Indirectly, ALL
of those forms of energy have made their way into every gas tank in
the world over the past century.
The rest of your argument falls apart on that basic misunderstanding,
no psuedoscience involved. And, BTW, the NREL lab is not a think
tank, it's a working, hands-on research center, and anyone can
access their raw data and do the math for themselves.
I'm not busting on you personally, but this whole discussion is just
an example of how little most people understand about the wasy we use
energy in the industrialized world.
BT, Gus, glad to hear how far you have gotten towards getting off
the grid. I'll be building a house in the next couple of years, and
it will be a net energy producer, incorporating both energy reducing
features, as well as PV panels (or wind turbine) and a biogas
generator to convert the sewage stream to methane. Right now I'm
renting & there are a limited # of things I can do to reduce my
energy usage, but I still use a lot less than my neighbors & live
comfortably.
And yeah, I know it can be a pain to collect that waste oil, I'm
working on getting them tyo give it to me in containers straight out
of the fryer.
Ohio has net metering, but unless the law has changed in the past
year, they are only required to pay what they call the "residual"
cost i.e. the difference between what it costs to prdcue power
themselves & what it would cost them to buy power from another
utility - works out to about 6 cents per kilowatt.
Kip Gardner
>
>So Kip and Beth,
>
>If you read what you wrote, there's a line in there that just makes
>a complete mockery of the argument that E85 is efficient...unless we
>can get some data to explain it. Here it is:
>
>> The current energy "return" for GASOLINE is 0.8X (i.e. it takes more
>> energy to pump, refine & produce Gas than you get back).
>
>There are two angles to this logic challenging statement.
>
>First, since we are so dependent on the oil and only recently (last
>20 years or so) have been riding on gasoline hybrids with ethanol as
>a summer component and since none of the trucks and trains within
>the last 50 years have burned a lump of coal or a roentgen of
>radioactivity or a kilowatt of solar or wind generated energy to
>deliver gasoline, how was there ever been a gallon of gasoline left
>to drop in the tank under the filling station pump? To create a
>quart of lubricating oil?
>
>Second, if we move over to the perspective that we have to get off
>the petroleum and do it now, how do you beat the physics of E85
>producing 20% fewer BTUs yet costing less energy to service the same
>refueling facilities.
>
>I don't care if that is a government think tank, their numbers are
>indicating that their methodology is way off in estimating the
>efficiency of the two processes. It begins, in fact, to take on the
>appearance of a less than unbiased set of calculations.
>
>If we were to do this correctly, we'd have to recognize that we're
>trying to use logic to work with an illogical entity, that of
>consensus science (which ain't science if it's merely based on
>consensus rather than measurement and reproducability of results).
>
>Numbers like that tell me that the statistitician set a zero value
>(there goes empirical measurement!) before measuring costs and then
>skewed his measurements with an apple to orange comparison of
>transforming the raw element, refining the product, delivering the
>refined product and then consuming it. In this case, he set zero
>below the actual zero in order to set the current fuel production
>cost at .8 times actual in an effort to offset the 20% efficiency
>loss in BTUs. I'd love to see the non-comparative elements used in
>the calculations (the apples).
>
>That's pseudo science, man.
>
>The ONLY argument which favors ethanol today is that it is
>renewable. It is certainly less efficient in raw BTU value. And
>since it continues to produce a hydro-carbon exhaust, it cannot beat
>the simple organic chemistry and rules of physics which produce the
>carbon-replacement table. It's that table which dictates which
>elements will combine with free elements anywhere, not just in the
>atmosphere. It's that 'feature' of carbon which leads to the great
>greenhouse gas debate.
>
>Also, when looking at this stuff, let's remember Occum's Razor
>coupled with Einstein's Addendum:
>Occum's Razor: for the set of 'known' facts, the simplest answer
>which addresses the most of those facts is probably the truth.
>Einstein's Addendum: Yes, but make that answer no simpler!!
>
>SO, the simplest statment is that 20% fewer BTUs means creating more
>hydro-carbon exhaust per unit of work performed.
>
>Now, let's find someone to do some honest math on this. Obviously,
>the Director of Renewable Energy is starting to look like a salesman
>employed by the government or else he simply thinks the rest of us
>are idiots.
>
>Call the director and get him to show us where we're ignorant.
>
>Greg Chapman
--
North Canton, OH
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 03, 2007
From: Greg Chapman <greg(at)mousetrax.com>
Subject: Re: E-85 (was Fuel Tank)
That was the point exactly of what I wrote. The two processes are
amazingly similar. Essentially, the only place where the processes
differ is in the 'harvesting' portion.
The math is flawed, completely, in that it doesn't have to be a .87x
cost to produce the petroleum product it has just come to be that way
over time as energy producers moved petroleum into a commodity based
trading and distribution system. The same will happen as Ethanol moves
into a high-demand trading system.
There is no increased effeciency to burning alcohol. The physics simply
doesn't support that answer.
Now, I'm not saying to not develop that fuel. I am indicating that most
of the major issues surrounding fuel type are not answered by ethanol
fuels. Chief amongst those not satisfied are the environmental issues
and I am tired of seeing that idea given credibility along with poor
assumptions built into the argument's supporting data.
And I don't see this as you and I cracking on each other. I do see that
the numbers do not make sense and that, 1) the comparisons are not equal
in that data and, 2)the most important problem is not being addressed by
this product: pollution.
I have to be skeptical on this stuff. For instance, people think coal
power is dirty but safer than nuclear energy if for no other reason than
radioactive waste. What they don't seem to realize is that burning coal
produces radioactive ash at an incredible rate and it actually
represents a waste management problem nearly a full magnitude greater
than does spend nuclear pellets. Now, why don't they know that? Well,
there's a large industry built around coal that, naturally, isn't going
to talk about it.
So what's the angle with Ethanol which allows us to come to these other
conclusions. Again, the simplest physics surrounding the energy to
produce a gallon of fuel cannot possibly indicate a negative for any
viable fuel source. Doing so says that we've twisted one positive proof
in order to build a negative proof. It pays to recall that there is no
such thing as proving a negative argument.
Greg
Kip and Beth Gardner wrote:
>
>
> Greg,
>
> The point you are missing here is that all of the enrgy-consuming
> processes that go into producing any fuel (or altered energy form) need
> to go into the energy-balance equation. For Petroleum (gasoline), that
> includes the energy costs of getting the crude out of the ground,
> shipped to ther refinery, the energy cost of creating the
> extraction/distribution/refining infrastructure, the energy needed to do
> the actual refining, etc. etc. etc. Add all that up & you get the 0.8X
> figure.
>
> What it amounts to is that we are using a lot of energy to create
> different, more usable energy forms. The same kind of accounting
> applies to generating electricity, burning coal, making ethanol, you
> name it. In some cases you get back more than you put in & some times
> you get less. The fact that we haven't had massive fuel shortages is
> that up to now, we've had a large surplus of available "raw" energy (if
> you will) to make these conversions without going into a total net
> energy loss. T o say that no coal, nuclear energy or whatever has gone
> to make refined petroleum products is a complete distortion of the
> energy-use pattern in this country. Indirectly, ALL of those forms of
> energy have made their way into every gas tank in the world over the
> past century.
>
> The rest of your argument falls apart on that basic misunderstanding, no
> psuedoscience involved. And, BTW, the NREL lab is not a think tank,
> it's a working, hands-on research center, and anyone can access their
> raw data and do the math for themselves.
>
> I'm not busting on you personally, but this whole discussion is just an
> example of how little most people understand about the wasy we use
> energy in the industrialized world.
>
> BT, Gus, glad to hear how far you have gotten towards getting off the
> grid. I'll be building a house in the next couple of years, and it will
> be a net energy producer, incorporating both energy reducing features,
> as well as PV panels (or wind turbine) and a biogas generator to convert
> the sewage stream to methane. Right now I'm renting & there are a
> limited # of things I can do to reduce my energy usage, but I still use
> a lot less than my neighbors & live comfortably.
>
> And yeah, I know it can be a pain to collect that waste oil, I'm working
> on getting them tyo give it to me in containers straight out of the fryer.
>
> Ohio has net metering, but unless the law has changed in the past year,
> they are only required to pay what they call the "residual" cost i.e.
> the difference between what it costs to prdcue power themselves & what
> it would cost them to buy power from another utility - works out to
> about 6 cents per kilowatt.
>
> Kip Gardner
>
>
>>
>> So Kip and Beth,
>>
>> If you read what you wrote, there's a line in there that just makes a
>> complete mockery of the argument that E85 is efficient...unless we can
>> get some data to explain it. Here it is:
>>
>>> The current energy "return" for GASOLINE is 0.8X (i.e. it takes more
>>> energy to pump, refine & produce Gas than you get back).
>>
>>
>> There are two angles to this logic challenging statement.
>>
>> First, since we are so dependent on the oil and only recently (last 20
>> years or so) have been riding on gasoline hybrids with ethanol as a
>> summer component and since none of the trucks and trains within the
>> last 50 years have burned a lump of coal or a roentgen of
>> radioactivity or a kilowatt of solar or wind generated energy to
>> deliver gasoline, how was there ever been a gallon of gasoline left to
>> drop in the tank under the filling station pump? To create a quart of
>> lubricating oil?
>>
>> Second, if we move over to the perspective that we have to get off the
>> petroleum and do it now, how do you beat the physics of E85 producing
>> 20% fewer BTUs yet costing less energy to service the same refueling
>> facilities.
>>
>> I don't care if that is a government think tank, their numbers are
>> indicating that their methodology is way off in estimating the
>> efficiency of the two processes. It begins, in fact, to take on the
>> appearance of a less than unbiased set of calculations.
>>
>> If we were to do this correctly, we'd have to recognize that we're
>> trying to use logic to work with an illogical entity, that of
>> consensus science (which ain't science if it's merely based on
>> consensus rather than measurement and reproducability of results).
>>
>> Numbers like that tell me that the statistitician set a zero value
>> (there goes empirical measurement!) before measuring costs and then
>> skewed his measurements with an apple to orange comparison of
>> transforming the raw element, refining the product, delivering the
>> refined product and then consuming it. In this case, he set zero below
>> the actual zero in order to set the current fuel production cost at .8
>> times actual in an effort to offset the 20% efficiency loss in BTUs.
>> I'd love to see the non-comparative elements used in the calculations
>> (the apples).
>>
>> That's pseudo science, man.
>>
>> The ONLY argument which favors ethanol today is that it is renewable.
>> It is certainly less efficient in raw BTU value. And since it
>> continues to produce a hydro-carbon exhaust, it cannot beat the simple
>> organic chemistry and rules of physics which produce the
>> carbon-replacement table. It's that table which dictates which
>> elements will combine with free elements anywhere, not just in the
>> atmosphere. It's that 'feature' of carbon which leads to the great
>> greenhouse gas debate.
>>
>> Also, when looking at this stuff, let's remember Occum's Razor coupled
>> with Einstein's Addendum:
>> Occum's Razor: for the set of 'known' facts, the simplest answer which
>> addresses the most of those facts is probably the truth.
>> Einstein's Addendum: Yes, but make that answer no simpler!!
>>
>> SO, the simplest statment is that 20% fewer BTUs means creating more
>> hydro-carbon exhaust per unit of work performed.
>>
>> Now, let's find someone to do some honest math on this. Obviously, the
>> Director of Renewable Energy is starting to look like a salesman
>> employed by the government or else he simply thinks the rest of us are
>> idiots.
>>
>> Call the director and get him to show us where we're ignorant.
>>
>> Greg Chapman
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: bellcrank area: belly access door idea
Date: Feb 03, 2007
Well, I posted this a couple of months back when the question of tailcone
access came up. The first two photos on this page-
http://www.flysquirrel.net/piets/repairs/repairs.html
show how Corky built in the access to the elevator bellcrank and tail area
on 41CC. It works pretty slick.
Oscar Zuniga
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
_________________________________________________________________
>From predictions to trailers, check out the MSN Entertainment Guide to the
Academy Awards
http://movies.msn.com/movies/oscars2007/?icid=ncoscartagline1
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene and Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: bellcrank area: belly access door idea
Date: Feb 03, 2007
Oscar,
I'm impressed!
Gene in Tennessee
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Don Emch at Oshkosh
From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com>
Date: Feb 03, 2007
Mike,
Nice comments, but I really don't think its at that level! I'd really like to
make Oshkosh, mainly because it doesn't get many Piets, they'd just rather go
to Brodhead. I can probably only get enough time for either OSH or Brodhead,
and given the choice I'd go for Brodhead. Just more my kind of thing, I guess.
Mike, are you still using the same set up on the smoke system? I've got a few
regulars that I like to go buzz when I'm out flying. Just for kicks, I've done
the air horn thing and about blew out my eardrums! (Gotta hold that thing a
long way out of the cockpit!) I've been thinking about something a little less
noisy, something like smoke. I remember you had a pretty simple setup. Is
that still working for you?
Don
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=92753#92753
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Roman Bukolt" <conceptmodels(at)tds.net>
Subject: Re: E-85 (was Fuel Tank)
Date: Feb 03, 2007
FYI Brodhead, which by the way is a private airport, in case you
wondered, has MoGas and 100LL on the field.
----- Original Message -----
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2007 12:25 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: E-85 (was Fuel Tank)
There are a few FBO's out there that still have MoGas pump, next to
the AvGas pump. Do they have the responsibility of checking to make
sure there isn't any Alcohol in the MoGas fuel ?? When it's available,
I always use the MoGas pump, but I trust there isn't any Alcohol.
Chuck G.
NX770CG
p.s. I use my fuel sump tool to check for Alcohol at home, but I
don't bother to check when on a cross country flight.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 04, 2007
From: Larry Rice <rice(at)iapdatacom.net>
Subject: Ethanol Tester
I used an "olive jar" ethanol tester for years with good results. It
does have one problem - if you get gas with ethanol that has already
absorbed water to the point of saturation, you will get the same results
as with straight gas. It is going to work properly the great majority of
the time, that's a lot better than no test at all, and by combining the
test results with checking the label on the pump and asking the folks in
the office if their fuel is alcohol free, you ought to be in good shape.
BTW, I agree that we can't replace petroleum with ethanol, etc, at the
moment. However, every little bit that we do replace will make the
petroleum last longer. Remember, during the worst times in '73 to '74 we
were only about 10% short. Ethanol is a darn good octane booster,
probably makes great sense for that purpose compared to MTBE.
I've also read that the reduction in mileage with ethanol is not quite
as much as the BTU numbers alone would cause one to think, due to some
other factors that improve efficiency (charge cooling, higher flame
speed leading to high pressure earlier in the combustion cycle, etc). If
you boosted compression in an ethanol only engine, I don't know where
you'd end up.
IMHO, when it comes to fixing our energy problems, there's not likely to
be a single magic bullet. It will be a mix of biofuels, solar, wind,
nukes (fusion, I hope), improved efficiency, etc that will get us there
in the long run.
Larry the micro mong guy
--
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 04, 2007
From: Tim Verthein <minoxphotographer(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: re: E-85 (OT)
Wow! I'm sure this E-85 thread is waaaay off topic by now, but just for
the record, I'm finding it all fascinating. Couple quick comments....
Here in Minnesota, at least up north here (where right now, it's -27
below zero at my house) E-85 is substantially less expensive than any
other gas at the pump...sometimes up to a buck less. And as I
understand it, it's cheaper 'cause our tax dollars are going to
subsidize it's production, etc..so we're really still paying plenty for
it..but those who don't try to use it are paying for it and not getting
any of it!
And, at least as far as the 3 Corvair guys I know running it, they're
losing about 2-3 MPG in a car that is generally getting 25-27 mpg, so
that's not anywhere the 1/3 loss that's been mentioned, of course, not
exactly scientific research!
And I'm running 110LL avgas in my 1958 Edsel.
Tim in Bovey (going out to see if my truck will start now)
==
You *can* repair a flip-flop with a capacitor!
==
Looking for earth-friendly autos?
Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 04, 2007
From: "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Ethanol Tester
Larry,
The company that I work for has recently qualified to do the wind generator
work. We have about 4 guys who travel as needed for repairs. I've never been
in one, but the pictures thay bring back are amazing.
Start by checking out the ones in Texas on Chuck G.,s video.
walt evans
NX140DL
"Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you"
Ben Franklin
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Rice" <rice(at)iapdatacom.net>
Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 9:29 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Ethanol Tester
>
> I used an "olive jar" ethanol tester for years with good results. It does
> have one problem - if you get gas with ethanol that has already absorbed
> water to the point of saturation, you will get the same results as with
> straight gas. It is going to work properly the great majority of the time,
> that's a lot better than no test at all, and by combining the test results
> with checking the label on the pump and asking the folks in the office if
> their fuel is alcohol free, you ought to be in good shape.
>
> BTW, I agree that we can't replace petroleum with ethanol, etc, at the
> moment. However, every little bit that we do replace will make the
> petroleum last longer. Remember, during the worst times in '73 to '74 we
> were only about 10% short. Ethanol is a darn good octane booster, probably
> makes great sense for that purpose compared to MTBE.
>
> I've also read that the reduction in mileage with ethanol is not quite as
> much as the BTU numbers alone would cause one to think, due to some other
> factors that improve efficiency (charge cooling, higher flame speed
> leading to high pressure earlier in the combustion cycle, etc). If you
> boosted compression in an ethanol only engine, I don't know where you'd
> end up.
>
> IMHO, when it comes to fixing our energy problems, there's not likely to
> be a single magic bullet. It will be a mix of biofuels, solar, wind, nukes
> (fusion, I hope), improved efficiency, etc that will get us there in the
> long run.
>
> Larry the micro mong guy
>
>
> --
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 04, 2007
From: Kip and Beth Gardner <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: re: E-85 (OT)
>
>
>Wow! I'm sure this E-85 thread is waaaay off topic by now, but just for
>the record, I'm finding it all fascinating. Couple quick comments....
>
>Here in Minnesota, at least up north here (where right now, it's -27
>below zero at my house) E-85 is substantially less expensive than any
>other gas at the pump...sometimes up to a buck less. And as I
>understand it, it's cheaper 'cause our tax dollars are going to
>subsidize it's production, etc..so we're really still paying plenty for
>it..but those who don't try to use it are paying for it and not getting
>any of it!
>
>And, at least as far as the 3 Corvair guys I know running it, they're
>losing about 2-3 MPG in a car that is generally getting 25-27 mpg, so
>that's not anywhere the 1/3 loss that's been mentioned, of course, not
>exactly scientific research!
>
>And I'm running 110LL avgas in my 1958 Edsel.
>
>Tim in Bovey (going out to see if my truck will start now)
>
>==
>You *can* repair a flip-flop with a capacitor!
==
Tim,
I'm going to make one quick comment re your post and then drop the
topic, Greg & I were way off topic & I think we've thrashed things
enough.
Re your comment on mileage. In the process of setting up a small
still to make fuel EtOH from feed mill wastes, I've had many my
discussions with my friends who are involved in developing ways to
sustainably produce ethanol (their '"target group " are small farmers
or waste-sugar utilizers who want to produce EtOH at home for
personal use). They have tested many models of cars on pure EtOH as
well as blends, and their results pretty much match those of your
Corvair friends.
There are many reasons for this, but the upshot is that an "Apples to
Apples" comparison of BTU content per volume of fuel doesn't tell the
whole story. Efficiency of combustion plays a big role.
With EtOH/Gas blends, you actually get a "synergistic" effect, where
the EtOH causes much more complete combustion of the gas, improving
the performance relative to what you would expect to get based on the
BTU content of a gallon of blend. With "pure" EOH, mileage is
improved dramatically if some water is left in the fuel (a still can
only get you to 95% EtOH, with 5% water left over anyway, and going
to 90%EtOH/10% water actually improves mileage!). Basically, you are
creating the same situation as water injection in a high-performance
engine.
These numbers come from my friends' extensive testing, on cars that
were carefully modified to get the best efficiency from engines
originally designed to run on gas, so they don't even tell the whole
story (off the shelf E85 vehicles from Detroit are
mediocre-performing because they were designed to work no matter what
the average joe driver puts in the tank) . They are also the source
of that intriguing comment regarding Swedish research into high-mpg
EtOH engine designs (they actually have an older model Volvo S70 that
they run on pure EtOH with no modification, at about 90% of the mpg
it got on gasoline, so the Swedes have clearly been working on this
for quite a while).
That's all I'm going to say on the matter, back to Piets!
Kip Gardner
--
North Canton, OH
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: smoke
Date: Feb 04, 2007
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
Don & Group,
Yes, the smoke setup I have is still as per original idea and is about
as simple and reliable as you can get. I use a 2 quart
poly pump-up bug sprayer from the Wal Mart garden department, hacksaw
off the plastic handle, remove the spray wand and
discard and adapt 1/4" plastic airspeed tubing to the sprayer nozzle
with rubber hose and either tye-wraps and or hose clamps.
The 1/4" poly line is connected to a 1/4" copper, stainless, or aluminum
tube which connects to a fitting (mine is a Swaglok fitting)
that you weld into one of your aft exhaust pipes (they run hotter than
the fronts on 65 Continentals) about 1-2" down from the flange.
On the ID of the fitting that is welded to the exhaust pipe you drill
two No. 60 drill bit holes in your exhaust pipe wall and whala, you
have a smoke system. (I suppose you could drill one hole with the
same equivalent area but have not tried that)
Might want to put a vibration loop or two in your metal tubing from the
firewall to your exhaust stack to dampen the stresses and
strain on the tube so your metal doesn't fatigue.
The smoke oil I use is Texaco Canopus No. 13 which is basically a
mineral oil. They used to call it Corvus oil.
Every other year the Thunderbirds park at our NASA hangar when they are
in town and I salivate beyond measure when I go up there
and see beyond the cyclone fence about a dozen 55 gallon drums of the
smoke oil ready for the Thunderbirds to use in our airshow.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 04, 2007
From: "Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Taxing with a fixed tailwheel
Sounds like you would want a steerable tailwheel with a cockpit controlled
locking pin to make it fixed when you want, like on a DC-3. More hassle than
it would be worth on a Piet of course.
On 1/25/07, Catdesigns wrote:
>
> Thanks Shad, that's exactly the advice I was looking for. I will stick
> with my sterable tailwheel for now as I doubt I will land on grass very
> much. Do they even have grass runways in California? Good to have a great
> flight report as it's always something I have wondered about. Tell your Dad
> he did a great job.
>
> Chris Tracy
> Sacramento, Ca
> Website at http://www.Westcoastpiet.com
>
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: smoke
From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com>
Date: Feb 04, 2007
Mike,
Thanks for the info. I do remember your setup being pretty simple. There must
not be much concern about having those holes in the exhaust up that close
to the exhaust flange? A No. 60 hole is fairly small anyway. Sounds like it
might make a good project to have ready for spring!
Don E.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=92839#92839
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: smoke
Date: Feb 04, 2007
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
Don,
I had done some preliminary testing on an Aeronca Champ I owned with a
partner before starting the Pietenpol
and I experimented (ground tests) with a 'wand' that I would insert up
into the exhaust stacks (a 1/4" stainless tube)
and clamp it at various distances down from the exhaust flange. I found
that I got better smoke up high in the stacks
where the combustion products are hottest. After seeing how good the
smoke was I decided against installing multiple
ports in my system which proved to be a smoke oil saver I believe.
The only issue I have with the system is a checklist-related one whereby
I sometimes neglect to unscrew or
depressurize my smoke oil container. The check valve or trigger valve
will dribble oil into the exhaust stack between
flights and upon start up I will have an engine that appears to have a
couple bad sets of rings for the first minute or
two of running time. (plus it can leak on your hangar floor and leave
oil spots less you have cardboard down or a drip pan)
Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 04, 2007
Subject: Things with Props
In a message dated 2/4/2007 9:00:55 AM Central Standard Time,
waltdak(at)verizon.net writes:
Larry,
The company that I work for has recently qualified to do the wind generator
work. We have about 4 guys who travel as needed for repairs. I've never been
in one, but the pictures thay bring back are amazing.
Start by checking out the ones in Texas on Chuck G.,s video.
walt evans
NX140DL
Walt,
The wind generators in my video are just south of the small town of
Beaumont Kansas. It's about 25 miles east of Wichita. There are 100 of the
se
massive generators out there...which is quite a site from the air. These th
ings
are about 400 feet from the ground to the top of the top blade. On a clear
day, you can see them on the flat horizon out here, from 40 or 50 miles awa
y.
Beoumont has a fly - in breakfast on the second saturday of the
month...land on the grass strip that is east of the little town, then taxi d
own the
back country road to the Beoumont Hotel / Resturant, to the 'Bent Prop Airpl
ane
Parking Area'. There's almost always a couple dozen airplanes that show up,
and the only bent prop I've ever seen, is the one on the sign. It's a great
way
to start the weekend.
There is at least three of these 'Wind Farms' out here in Kansas, and I
certainly support the effort. There are some folks that believe they detrac
t
from the scenery...as for me, I like anything that has a propellor on it !!
Chuck G.
NX770CG
26=BA, calm winds, clear blue sky
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Builders log
Date: Feb 04, 2007
From: amsafetyc(at)aol.com
Okay gang, I have gotten a number of issues sorted out with a few more remaining,
I expect to begin building at the beginning of March. I am looking for the
recommended software, download or method to set up and maintain my builders log.
What is the easiest format to follow with text pics and information required in
setting up the log. Does anyone have a sample format or copy of one that they
would be willing to share?
Please advise
Thanks
John
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "GlennThomas(at)flyingwood.com" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com>
Subject: Re: Builders log
Date: Feb 04, 2007
I made my own from scratch, not knowing there is a place on the internet
that provides a place for your log for free.
http://www.mykitplane.com
Just register and start building your log. Good place to go to see how
others did things too. Mine goes into a database and I can that I can
print out and have the ABDAR sign off on it. Don't know about a print
feature but I think you could just print out each entry.
Glenn W. Thomas
Storrs, CT
http://www.flyingwood.com
----- Original Message -----
From: amsafetyc(at)aol.com
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 2:44 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Builders log
Okay gang, I have gotten a number of issues sorted out with a few
more remaining, I expect to begin building at the beginning of March. I
am looking for the recommended software, download or method to set up
and maintain my builders log.
What is the easiest format to follow with text pics and information
required in setting up the log. Does anyone have a sample format or copy
of one that they would be willing to share?
Please advise
Thanks
John
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: I'm a Pietenpol pilot
Date: Feb 04, 2007
Long day. Good trip. I made my first takeoff and landing in 41CC today
after Charlie had her up and everything checked out OK after we worked on
the wing struts and tail brace wires. Pretty good rigging work on my part,
if I may say so myself. And not a bad touch on the stick after more than 2
yrs. having not flown. Made a circuit, it was so beautiful to see the
ground melt away and the hangar go from being a metal building to being a
little piece on a Monopoly board. And the wind in my hair-! It was getting
late, my wife was back at her mother's wondering where I was, the dog had
been sitting in the car for about an hour because I didn't want her on the
ramp around spinning propellers, but I just had to make a circuit and
Charlie knew it was my turn. It was wonderful. It was cool, it was cloudy,
it was perfect. The airplane was responsive, limber, strong, but demanding.
She's a great ride. Oh, she's a great ride and that engine is running so
strong and smooth.
We got the wings re-rigged properly and the airplane flew so smooth and
nice, so responsive. I'm ready for some serious instruction before I make
the cross-country trek with her from Zapata to San Antonio, but even so-
this airplane talks to me real nice. I think anyone would enjoy flying in
this 1930's airplane. She's so simple, yet so complex. Stick and rudder,
Langewiesche, that's all she is, but she has a thousand tricks up her wood
and fabric sleeve and she showed me a few on landing rollout. If you can
fly this airplane, you can fly any airplane. You fly this one by the sound
of the engine, the wind on your face, the feel, the touch. Forget the
instruments.
Corky knows, Edwin knows. Now I know. What a great day today has been for
me. I have a few pictures and I'll put them up soon, but they can't tell
you the story. You have to go up in a Pietenpol to know the story.
Oscar Zuniga
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
_________________________________________________________________
Check out all that glitters with the MSN Entertainment Guide to the Academy
Awards http://movies.msn.com/movies/oscars2007/?icid=ncoscartagline2
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Steve Ruse" <steve(at)wotelectronics.com>
Subject: Oklahoma Fly-In, Saturday February 10th
Date: Feb 04, 2007
I am having a fly-in this weekend at O44 (Oscar44) south of Norman, OK.
Everyone is welcome...its a good 'ol grass strip where my plane is based.
We'll have food and a good time.
I sure wish some of you guys would come (Chuck G.?, Jim M.?, anybody else).
I'd love to see some more Pietenpols there.
More details here:
http://www.wotelectronics.com/flyin/
Steve Ruse
Norman, OK
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 04, 2007
From: Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Fabric attachment for Pietenpol wings?
In my personal opinion, I dont believe it, but no personal experience with Hipec.
More real and less dramatic: I will not take the chance... I always rib stich
my fabric.
Flying is enjoying the event, not have unecesary things to be aware off...
Saludos
Gary Gower.
MICHAEL SILVIUS wrote: Gus:
to my knowledge only the HIPEC product is designed to not require rib stiching.
http://musclebiplane.org/htmlfile/hipec.html
http://www.falconaravia.com/
http://members.shaw.ca/kfalconar/HIPEC/ErcoupeCovering.htm
michael
----- Original Message -----
From: gus notti
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 12:18 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fabric attachment for Pietenpol wings?
Hello all,
I need to know should the fabric have some type of physical attachment besides
just glue?
I'm a tube and fabric guy, but the wings on this Pietenpol are just glued.
I know the school of though on the 'Peeling' for the fabric. I'm thinking
I might rib stitch them or screw attach them ( what can I use for wood ribs
besides stitching)?
Do they need it?
Thanks
Gus
---------------------------------
Looking for earth-friendly autos?
Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center.
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 04, 2007
From: KMHeide <kmheidecpo(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Builders log
http://www.expercraft.com/signup/index.php?q=confirm&id=501a50a5
amsafetyc(at)aol.com wrote: Okay gang, I have gotten a number of issues sorted
out with a few more remaining, I expect to begin building at the beginning of
March. I am looking for the recommended software, download or method to set up
and maintain my builders log.
What is the easiest format to follow with text pics and information required
in setting up the log. Does anyone have a sample format or copy of one that they
would be willing to share?
Please advise
Thanks
John
---------------------------------
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "pietflyr" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Builders log
Date: Feb 05, 2007
SSBqdXN0IHVzZWQgYSBzcGlyYWwgYm91bmQgbm90ZWJvb2suICBJIGtlcHQgcGhvdG9zIGluIGEg
c2VwYXJhdGUgc2NyYXBib29rLg0KDQpKYWNrIFBoaWxsaXBzDQpOWDg5OUpQDQogIC0tLS0tT3Jp
Z2luYWwgTWVzc2FnZS0tLS0tDQogIEZyb206IG93bmVyLXBpZXRlbnBvbC1saXN0LXNlcnZlckBt
YXRyb25pY3MuY29tIFttYWlsdG86b3duZXItcGlldGVucG9sLWxpc3Qtc2VydmVyQG1hdHJvbmlj
cy5jb21dT24gQmVoYWxmIE9mIGFtc2FmZXR5Y0Bhb2wuY29tDQogIFNlbnQ6IFN1bmRheSwgRmVi
cnVhcnkgMDQsIDIwMDcgMjo0NCBQTQ0KICBUbzogcGlldGVucG9sLWxpc3RAbWF0cm9uaWNzLmNv
bQ0KICBTdWJqZWN0OiBQaWV0ZW5wb2wtTGlzdDogQnVpbGRlcnMgbG9nDQoNCg0KICAgT2theSBn
YW5nLCBJIGhhdmUgZ290dGVuIGEgbnVtYmVyIG9mIGlzc3VlcyBzb3J0ZWQgb3V0IHdpdGggYSBm
ZXcgbW9yZSByZW1haW5pbmcsIEkgZXhwZWN0IHRvIGJlZ2luIGJ1aWxkaW5nIGF0IHRoZSBiZWdp
bm5pbmcgb2YgTWFyY2guIEkgYW0gbG9va2luZyBmb3IgdGhlIHJlY29tbWVuZGVkIHNvZnR3YXJl
LCBkb3dubG9hZCBvciBtZXRob2QgdG8gc2V0IHVwIGFuZCBtYWludGFpbiBteSBidWlsZGVycyBs
b2cuIA0KDQogIFdoYXQgaXMgdGhlIGVhc2llc3QgZm9ybWF0IHRvIGZvbGxvdyB3aXRoIHRleHQg
cGljcyBhbmQgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gcmVxdWlyZWQgaW4gc2V0dGluZyB1cCB0aGUgbG9nLiBEb2Vz
IGFueW9uZSBoYXZlIGEgc2FtcGxlIGZvcm1hdCBvciBjb3B5IG9mIG9uZSB0aGF0IHRoZXkgd291
bGQgYmUgd2lsbGluZyB0byBzaGFyZT8NCg0KICBQbGVhc2UgYWR2aXNlIA0KDQogIFRoYW5rcw0K
DQogIEpvaG4NCg0KLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t
LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tDQoNCg0KDQpfLT09PT09PT09PT09PT09
PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PQ0KXy09ICAgICAg
ICAgIC0gVGhlIFBpZXRlbnBvbC1MaXN0IEVtYWlsIEZvcnVtIC0NCl8tPSBVc2UgdGhlIE1hdHJv
bmljcyBMaXN0IEZlYXR1cmVzIE5hdmlnYXRvciB0byBicm93c2UNCl8tPSB0aGUgbWFueSBMaXN0
IHV0aWxpdGllcyBzdWNoIGFzIHRoZSBTdWJzY3JpcHRpb25zIHBhZ2UsDQpfLT0gQXJjaGl2ZSBT
ZWFyY2ggJiBEb3dubG9hZCwgNy1EYXkgQnJvd3NlLCBDaGF0LCBGQVEsDQpfLT0gUGhvdG9zaGFy
ZSwgYW5kIG11Y2ggbXVjaCBtb3JlOg0KXy09ICAgLS0+IGh0dHA6Ly93d3cubWF0cm9uaWNzLmNv
bS9OYXZpZ2F0b3I/UGlldGVucG9sLUxpc3QNCl8tPT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09
PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09DQpfLT0gICAgICAgICAgICAgIC0gTkVX
IE1BVFJPTklDUyBXRUIgRk9SVU1TIC0NCl8tPSBTYW1lIGdyZWF0IGNvbnRlbnQgbm93IGFsc28g
YXZhaWxhYmxlIHZpYSB0aGUgV2ViIEZvcnVtcyENCl8tPSAgIC0tPiBodHRwOi8vZm9ydW1zLm1h
dHJvbmljcy5jb20NCl8tPT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09
PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09DQoNCg=
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 05, 2007
From: Jim Markle <jim_markle(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: I'm a Pietenpol pilot
Reading this was a most fantastic way to start off the week...
Thanks Oscar!
-----Original Message-----
>From: Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
>Sent: Feb 4, 2007 10:14 PM
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: I'm a Pietenpol pilot
>
>
>Long day. Good trip. I made my first takeoff and landing in 41CC today
>after Charlie had her up and everything checked out OK after we worked on
>the wing struts and tail brace wires. Pretty good rigging work on my part,
>if I may say so myself. And not a bad touch on the stick after more than 2
>yrs. having not flown. Made a circuit, it was so beautiful to see the
>ground melt away and the hangar go from being a metal building to being a
>little piece on a Monopoly board. And the wind in my hair-! It was getting
>late, my wife was back at her mother's wondering where I was, the dog had
>been sitting in the car for about an hour because I didn't want her on the
>ramp around spinning propellers, but I just had to make a circuit and
>Charlie knew it was my turn. It was wonderful. It was cool, it was cloudy,
>it was perfect. The airplane was responsive, limber, strong, but demanding.
> She's a great ride. Oh, she's a great ride and that engine is running so
>strong and smooth.
>
>We got the wings re-rigged properly and the airplane flew so smooth and
>nice, so responsive. I'm ready for some serious instruction before I make
>the cross-country trek with her from Zapata to San Antonio, but even so-
>this airplane talks to me real nice. I think anyone would enjoy flying in
>this 1930's airplane. She's so simple, yet so complex. Stick and rudder,
>Langewiesche, that's all she is, but she has a thousand tricks up her wood
>and fabric sleeve and she showed me a few on landing rollout. If you can
>fly this airplane, you can fly any airplane. You fly this one by the sound
>of the engine, the wind on your face, the feel, the touch. Forget the
>instruments.
>
>Corky knows, Edwin knows. Now I know. What a great day today has been for
>me. I have a few pictures and I'll put them up soon, but they can't tell
>you the story. You have to go up in a Pietenpol to know the story.
>
>Oscar Zuniga
>San Antonio, TX
>mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
>website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Check out all that glitters with the MSN Entertainment Guide to the Academy
>Awards http://movies.msn.com/movies/oscars2007/?icid=ncoscartagline2
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 05, 2007
From: Tim Willis <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: I'm a Pietenpol pilot
Congratulations, Oscar. Good writing, too. Ernest Gann, make room for Oscar Zuniga.
Tim in central TX
-----Original Message-----
>From: Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
>Sent: Feb 4, 2007 10:14 PM
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: I'm a Pietenpol pilot
>
>
>Long day. Good trip. I made my first takeoff and landing in 41CC today
>after Charlie had her up and everything checked out OK after we worked on
>the wing struts and tail brace wires. Pretty good rigging work on my part,
>if I may say so myself. And not a bad touch on the stick after more than 2
>yrs. having not flown. Made a circuit, it was so beautiful to see the
>ground melt away and the hangar go from being a metal building to being a
>little piece on a Monopoly board. And the wind in my hair-! It was getting
>late, my wife was back at her mother's wondering where I was, the dog had
>been sitting in the car for about an hour because I didn't want her on the
>ramp around spinning propellers, but I just had to make a circuit and
>Charlie knew it was my turn. It was wonderful. It was cool, it was cloudy,
>it was perfect. The airplane was responsive, limber, strong, but demanding.
> She's a great ride. Oh, she's a great ride and that engine is running so
>strong and smooth.
>
>We got the wings re-rigged properly and the airplane flew so smooth and
>nice, so responsive. I'm ready for some serious instruction before I make
>the cross-country trek with her from Zapata to San Antonio, but even so-
>this airplane talks to me real nice. I think anyone would enjoy flying in
>this 1930's airplane. She's so simple, yet so complex. Stick and rudder,
>Langewiesche, that's all she is, but she has a thousand tricks up her wood
>and fabric sleeve and she showed me a few on landing rollout. If you can
>fly this airplane, you can fly any airplane. You fly this one by the sound
>of the engine, the wind on your face, the feel, the touch. Forget the
>instruments.
>
>Corky knows, Edwin knows. Now I know. What a great day today has been for
>me. I have a few pictures and I'll put them up soon, but they can't tell
>you the story. You have to go up in a Pietenpol to know the story.
>
>Oscar Zuniga
>San Antonio, TX
>mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
>website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Check out all that glitters with the MSN Entertainment Guide to the Academy
>Awards http://movies.msn.com/movies/oscars2007/?icid=ncoscartagline2
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: 41CC returns to service
Date: Feb 05, 2007
Some pictures (not real great), at
http://www.flysquirrel.net/piets/Firstflight.html
Thanks again, Nathan and Corky, for a really sweet airplane. Hope to see
you soon... with smoke on!
Oscar Zuniga
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
_________________________________________________________________
>From predictions to trailers, check out the MSN Entertainment Guide to the
Academy Awards
http://movies.msn.com/movies/oscars2007/?icid=ncoscartagline1
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 05, 2007
From: shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: I'm a Pietenpol pilot
CONGRADULATIONS!!!! It's all worth it on that first trip off the Earth , isn't
it? Your story is going to be an inspiration to all the list members who are
currently building or just waiting for the warm flying weather. Just reading
your post makes me want to get my tractor re-build done so I can get back to work
on my airplane and write you all a simmilar story.
Congradulations!!
Shad
>
>Long day. Good trip. I made my first takeoff and landing in 41CC today
>after Charlie had her up and everything checked out OK after we worked on
>the wing struts and tail brace wires. Pretty good rigging work on my part,
>if I may say so myself. And not a bad touch on the stick after more than 2
>yrs. having not flown. Made a circuit, it was so beautiful to see the
>ground melt away and the hangar go from being a metal building to being a
>little piece on a Monopoly board. And the wind in my hair-! It was getting
>late, my wife was back at her mother's wondering where I was, the dog had
>been sitting in the car for about an hour because I didn't want her on the
>ramp around spinning propellers, but I just had to make a circuit and
>Charlie knew it was my turn. It was wonderful. It was cool, it was cloudy,
>it was perfect. The airplane was responsive, limber, strong, but demanding.
> She's a great ride. Oh, she's a great ride and that engine is running so
>strong and smooth.
>
>We got the wings re-rigged properly and the airplane flew so smooth and
>nice, so responsive. I'm ready for some serious instruction before I make
>the cross-country trek with her from Zapata to San Antonio, but even so-
>this airplane talks to me real nice. I think anyone would enjoy flying in
>this 1930's airplane. She's so simple, yet so complex. Stick and rudder,
>Langewiesche, that's all she is, but she has a thousand tricks up her wood
>and fabric sleeve and she showed me a few on landing rollout. If you can
>fly this airplane, you can fly any airplane. You fly this one by the sound
>of the engine, the wind on your face, the feel, the touch. Forget the
>instruments.
>
>Corky knows, Edwin knows. Now I know. What a great day today has been for
>me. I have a few pictures and I'll put them up soon, but they can't tell
>you the story. You have to go up in a Pietenpol to know the story.
>
>Oscar Zuniga
>San Antonio, TX
>mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
>website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Check out all that glitters with the MSN Entertainment Guide to the Academy
>Awards http://movies.msn.com/movies/oscars2007/?icid=ncoscartagline2
>
>
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Fuse question
Date: Feb 05, 2007
From: "Dan Loegering" <danl(at)odayequipment.com>
Okay gang,
Need a little help here. I am at the point of joining my fuse sides and have a
couple of questions. First, for those of you using a continental or anything
other than the model A engines, did you still use the ash cross piece at the
firewall? I don't see where this would be needed if not using the original wood
motor mount for the "A". Second, on the long fuselage plans, what is the
dimension on the side view on the front of the firewall for - I believe it was
11 3/8" down from the top longeron (not looking at the plans right now...) On
the original short fuse plans, this dimension is for the location of the side
stringer and is around 10"... why the difference? And finally, did you put
in the lower cross piece at the front of the firewall and trim it for the motor
mount fittings later, or did you omit this piece until the floor is glued in
place?
Dan Loegering
Fargo, ND
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dick Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net>
Subject: Re: I'm a Pietenpol pilot
Date: Feb 05, 2007
Oscar
You expressed it all very well. The feeling doesn't go away.
Good Going
Dick N.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 10:14 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: I'm a Pietenpol pilot
>
>
> Long day. Good trip. I made my first takeoff and landing in 41CC today
> after Charlie had her up and everything checked out OK after we worked on
> the wing struts and tail brace wires. Pretty good rigging work on my
> part, if I may say so myself. And not a bad touch on the stick after more
> than 2 yrs. having not flown. Made a circuit, it was so beautiful to see
> the ground melt away and the hangar go from being a metal building to
> being a little piece on a Monopoly board. And the wind in my hair-! It
> was getting late, my wife was back at her mother's wondering where I was,
> the dog had been sitting in the car for about an hour because I didn't
> want her on the ramp around spinning propellers, but I just had to make a
> circuit and Charlie knew it was my turn. It was wonderful. It was cool,
> it was cloudy, it was perfect. The airplane was responsive, limber,
> strong, but demanding. She's a great ride. Oh, she's a great ride and
> that engine is running so strong and smooth.
>
> We got the wings re-rigged properly and the airplane flew so smooth and
> nice, so responsive. I'm ready for some serious instruction before I make
> the cross-country trek with her from Zapata to San Antonio, but even so-
> this airplane talks to me real nice. I think anyone would enjoy flying in
> this 1930's airplane. She's so simple, yet so complex. Stick and rudder,
> Langewiesche, that's all she is, but she has a thousand tricks up her wood
> and fabric sleeve and she showed me a few on landing rollout. If you can
> fly this airplane, you can fly any airplane. You fly this one by the
> sound of the engine, the wind on your face, the feel, the touch. Forget
> the instruments.
>
> Corky knows, Edwin knows. Now I know. What a great day today has been
> for me. I have a few pictures and I'll put them up soon, but they can't
> tell you the story. You have to go up in a Pietenpol to know the story.
>
> Oscar Zuniga
> San Antonio, TX
> mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
> website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Check out all that glitters with the MSN Entertainment Guide to the
> Academy Awards
> http://movies.msn.com/movies/oscars2007/?icid=ncoscartagline2
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Fuse question
From: "Catdesigns" <Catdesigns(at)comcast.net>
Date: Feb 05, 2007
Dan
Q: did you still use the ash cross piece at the firewall? I don't see where this
would be needed if not using the original wood motor mount for the "A".
A: I did not use it and I agree with your reasoning.
Q: Second, on the long fuselage plans, what is the dimension on the side view on
the front of the firewall for - I believe it was 11 3/8" down from the top longeron.
On the original short fuse plans, this dimension is for the location
of the side stringer and is around 10"... why the difference?
A: I have always thought it is for the side stringer. My guess as to why it is
lower is because the stringer ends near the bottom of the last upright before
the tail. On the long fuselage, this upright is longer then the short fuselage.
Therefore, the stringer needs to be lower in the front. Just install stringer
where it needs to be to make it level.
Q: did you put in the lower cross piece at the front of the firewall and trim it
for the motor mount fittings later, or did you omit this piece until the floor
is glued in place?
A: I put the floor on but didnt install the cross piece yet. I will install this
piece after the lower engine mount fittings are installed. My firewall is
temporarily nailed to the front of the fuselage. I will glue the firewall on
after I get the cross piece installed and the engine on.
--------
Chris Tracy
WestCoastPiet.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=93003#93003
________________________________________________________________________________
From: <bcharvet(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Fuse question
Date: Feb 05, 2007
If you are using the Corvair motor mount depicted on the long fuselage plans, the
ash cross piece supports the engine bearing tubes where they meet the firewall.
I don't see why you would need it with the Continental mount. I installed
the lower cross piece at the bottom of the firewall and then cut it out after
the floor was in place to make room for the lower motor mounts. There may
be an easier way, but I had already done it when I got ready to install my lower
mounts....
Just one of the things that I would do differently if I had it to do over again.
Ben
>
> From: "Dan Loegering" <danl(at)odayequipment.com>
> Date: 2007/02/05 Mon AM 10:28:05 EST
> To:
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fuse question
>
>
> Okay gang,
>
> Need a little help here. I am at the point of joining my fuse sides and have
a couple of questions. First, for those of you using a continental or anything
other than the model A engines, did you still use the ash cross piece at the
firewall? I don't see where this would be needed if not using the original
wood motor mount for the "A". Second, on the long fuselage plans, what is the
dimension on the side view on the front of the firewall for - I believe it was
11 3/8" down from the top longeron (not looking at the plans right now...)
On the original short fuse plans, this dimension is for the location of the side
stringer and is around 10"... why the difference? And finally, did you put
in the lower cross piece at the front of the firewall and trim it for the motor
mount fittings later, or did you omit this piece until the floor is glued
in place?
>
> Dan Loegering
> Fargo, ND
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 05, 2007
From: Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu>
Subject: Piet spits bits
Piet spits bits, no quits;
Now to fix!
http://tinyurl.com/ywc3ez
--
_____________________________________________________________
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: "Gene and Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: I'm a Pietenpol pilot
Date: Feb 05, 2007
Oscar,
I second that! Congrats.! After my flight from Florida to Tennessee I
tried to tell all who would listen how great is was, but I just couldn't put
it into words like you just did.
Gene
N502R
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dick Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net>
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 11:05 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: I'm a Pietenpol pilot
>
>
> Oscar
> You expressed it all very well. The feeling doesn't go away.
> Good Going
> Dick N.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 10:14 PM
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: I'm a Pietenpol pilot
>
>
>>
>>
>> Long day. Good trip. I made my first takeoff and landing in 41CC today
>> after Charlie had her up and everything checked out OK after we worked on
>> the wing struts and tail brace wires. Pretty good rigging work on my
>> part, if I may say so myself. And not a bad touch on the stick after
>> more than 2 yrs. having not flown. Made a circuit, it was so beautiful
>> to see the ground melt away and the hangar go from being a metal building
>> to being a little piece on a Monopoly board. And the wind in my hair-!
>> It was getting late, my wife was back at her mother's wondering where I
>> was, the dog had been sitting in the car for about an hour because I
>> didn't want her on the ramp around spinning propellers, but I just had to
>> make a circuit and Charlie knew it was my turn. It was wonderful. It
>> was cool, it was cloudy, it was perfect. The airplane was responsive,
>> limber, strong, but demanding. She's a great ride. Oh, she's a great
>> ride and that engine is running so strong and smooth.
>>
>> We got the wings re-rigged properly and the airplane flew so smooth and
>> nice, so responsive. I'm ready for some serious instruction before I
>> make the cross-country trek with her from Zapata to San Antonio, but even
>> so- this airplane talks to me real nice. I think anyone would enjoy
>> flying in this 1930's airplane. She's so simple, yet so complex. Stick
>> and rudder, Langewiesche, that's all she is, but she has a thousand
>> tricks up her wood and fabric sleeve and she showed me a few on landing
>> rollout. If you can fly this airplane, you can fly any airplane. You
>> fly this one by the sound of the engine, the wind on your face, the feel,
>> the touch. Forget the instruments.
>>
>> Corky knows, Edwin knows. Now I know. What a great day today has been
>> for me. I have a few pictures and I'll put them up soon, but they can't
>> tell you the story. You have to go up in a Pietenpol to know the story.
>>
>> Oscar Zuniga
>> San Antonio, TX
>> mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
>> website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Check out all that glitters with the MSN Entertainment Guide to the
>> Academy Awards
>> http://movies.msn.com/movies/oscars2007/?icid=ncoscartagline2
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: HelsperSew(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 05, 2007
Subject: ATT: Mike Cuy- Fuel tank goop
Hey Mike,
Last week your post said something about some fuel tank fitting goop. Where
did you get that stuff. I can't find it.
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: fuel lube/thread sealant goop
Date: Feb 05, 2007
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
Dan,
I purchased (or so I thought) a small can of fuel lube from Wicks
Aircraft but could not find it doing a search on the Wicks
web site. Although I'm not a fan at all of ASSCO (Aircraft Spruce &
Specialty Co) I couldn't find it on their web site either.
I am going to have to look at the can label which is in our garage. I
used it on the threads to the fuel finger strainer and on
any aluminum (blue anodized) fuel line fittings and/or flexible hose
connections. Works very good and helps to not gall or
strip threads. Makes disassembly easy too should you ever have to dig
into your fuel line system.
Mike C.
(the stuff looks like bees wax and has the consistency of cold peanut
butter )
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene and Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: fuel lube/thread sealant goop
Date: Feb 05, 2007
Page 314 of the 2001-2002 Spruce catalog
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 4:11 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: fuel lube/thread sealant goop
Dan,
I purchased (or so I thought) a small can of fuel lube from Wicks
Aircraft but could not find it doing a search on the Wicks
web site. Although I'm not a fan at all of ASSCO (Aircraft Spruce &
Specialty Co) I couldn't find it on their web site either.
I am going to have to look at the can label which is in our garage. I
used it on the threads to the fuel finger strainer and on
any aluminum (blue anodized) fuel line fittings and/or flexible hose
connections. Works very good and helps to not gall or
strip threads. Makes disassembly easy too should you ever have to dig
into your fuel line system.
Mike C.
(the stuff looks like bees wax and has the consistency of cold peanut
butter )
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 05, 2007
From: "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Piet spits bits
Piet spits bitsJeff,
You lost me, lost me, lost me........................................
walt evans
NX140DL
"Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you"
Ben Franklin
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Boatright
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 3:48 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Piet spits bits
Piet spits bits, no quits;
Now to fix!
http://tinyurl.com/ywc3ez
--
_____________________________________________________________
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: "Lynn Knoll" <dknoll(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: ATT: Mike Cuy- Fuel tank goop
Date: Feb 05, 2007
See ASSCO (Aircraft Spruce & Specialty Co.) on line catalog part numbers
09-00306 5 oz tube & 09-00180 1 lb can.
----- Original Message -----
From: HelsperSew(at)aol.com
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 3:26 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: ATT: Mike Cuy- Fuel tank goop
Hey Mike,
Last week your post said something about some fuel tank fitting goop.
Where did you get that stuff. I can't find it.
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dale Johnson" <ddjohn(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Fuse question
Date: Feb 05, 2007
Hi Dan
With the Cont you don't need the ash . I used 3/4 + 3/4 spruce with 1/8
plywood for the firewall and gussets
on the inside.
No 2 ? On the long fuselage I made it 10" down and parallel with top
longeron.
The space between the plywood and the fabric is used to run all the wiring
& pluming.
No 3? Put the upper & lower cross pieces in as shown but make the motor
mounts
longer to clear the cross pieces.
I'am going to be in Fargo on Wednesday landing about 10 AM.
Coming up there in a Mn King Air.
I built a Wright Flyer a few years ago and we are going to move it up to
Bemidji this summer.
I want to see how they hung the Wright Flyer at Fargo.
Dale Johnson Mlps
> [Original Message]
> From: Dan Loegering <danl(at)odayequipment.com>
> To:
> Date: 2/5/2007 9:32:33 AM
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fuse question
>
>
> Okay gang,
>
> Need a little help here. I am at the point of joining my fuse sides and
have a couple of questions. First, for those of you using a continental or
anything other than the model A engines, did you still use the ash cross
piece at the firewall? I don't see where this would be needed if not
using the original wood motor mount for the "A". Second, on the long
fuselage plans, what is the dimension on the side view on the front of the
firewall for - I believe it was 11 3/8" down from the top longeron (not
looking at the plans right now...) On the original short fuse plans, this
dimension is for the location of the side stringer and is around 10"...
why the difference? And finally, did you put in the lower cross piece at
the front of the firewall and trim it for the motor mount fittings later,
or did you omit this piece until the floor is glued in place?
>
> Dan Loegering
> Fargo, ND
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 05, 2007
Subject: Re: Builders log
In a message dated 2/5/2007 4:52:35 AM Central Standard Time,
pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net writes:
I just used a spiral bound notebook. I kept photos in a separate scrapbook.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Me too. A long time after certification, I scanned them, and built my web
site.
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 05, 2007
From: Larry Rice <rice(at)iapdatacom.net>
Subject: BUILDERS LOG & WEATHER
Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I just have a spiral notebook with notes,
photos & etc taped in.
It was -2 F here this AM.
Larry the micro mong guy
--
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 05, 2007
Subject: Re: I'm a Pietenpol pilot
Congrats, Oscar !! That's sure one for the log book !! Great Post.
Now, as you become more intimately familiar with 'er, it just gets better and
better.
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 05, 2007
From: Ben Charvet <bcharvet(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Builders log
About the logbook thing.....I've tried to keep my online logbook up to
date at mykitplane.com, but it actually I am just keeping track of what
I do on notebook paper on a clipboard. I take pictures once in a
while. About every 6 months I update the mykitplane site, but its a
pretty tedious task. The site is nice in that its FREE, and lets you
share your pictures, etc with others, but day to day I'm happy with my
clipboard system.
Ben Charvet
Mims, Fl
Rcaprd(at)aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 2/5/2007 4:52:35 AM Central Standard Time,
> pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net writes:
>
> I just used a spiral bound notebook. I kept photos in a separate
> scrapbook.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: fuel line thread sealant EZ Turn
Date: Feb 06, 2007
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
Great detective work guys for finding the fuel line sealer I was trying
to tell Dan H. about. The name is evidently now
EZ Turn and Aircraft Spruce and Wicks show it. Wicks will sell you a
smaller tube though which is all you should ever need
for the lifetime of a Pietenpol.
EZ TURN LUBE-1 LB CAN
EZ-TURN - A specialty lubricant/sealant for fuel & oil line valves where
high-octane fuels, chemical compounds, or other harsh elements are
present. Will not gum, dry out or crack. Also effective for its
anti-corrosion, anti-seize, & anti-wear properties. Shelf life: 18 mos.
Temp range: 600+=BAF. Meets MIL-G-6032D AM I Type I.
SKU: FL16
Our Price: $22.87
http://www.wicksaircraft.com/catalog/product_detail.php/pid=10408~subid
=2303/index.html
EZ TURN LUBE-5 OZ TUBE
EZ-TURN - A specialty lubricant/sealant for fuel & oil line valves where
high-octane fuels, chemical compounds, or other harsh elements are
present. Will not gum, dry out or crack. Also effective for its
anti-corrosion, anti-seize, & anti-wear properties. Shelf life: 18 mos.
Temp range: 600+=BAF. Meets MIL-G-6032D AM I Type I.
SKU: FL5
Our Price: $13.25
http://www.wicksaircraft.com/catalog/product_detail.php/pid=9281~subid=
2303/index.html
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: builders log
Date: Feb 06, 2007
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
Didn't even keep a spiral notebook record and my FAA MIDO inspector was
happy with what I provided him which were
folders which had invoices of everything that I purchased broken down
categories like airframe, engine, mags/carb/prop,
and fabric/paint. I glued many construction photos to four poster
boards in chronological order and he really liked that.
I think the thing that got him to sign off my airplane is that I put on
a pot of coffee in the hangar that morning and brought
1/2 dozen donuts with me.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: HelsperSew(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 06, 2007
Subject: Re: fuel line thread sealant EZ Turn
Mike and all,
Thanks, I'll buy a small tube and be set for life!!!
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: HelsperSew(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 06, 2007
Subject: Re: builders log
Mike,
My "builder's log" will be the same as yours. It's been 7 years and I have
yet to write one word. It would be pretty hard to catch up now. I saved all
my invoices and have lots of pictures.
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Weather, Chet Peek's book, Parts
Date: Feb 06, 2007
From: tbyh(at)aol.com
Was 14 below zero in La Crosse yesterday morning, only about 10 below this morning.
Supposed to warm up to 10-20 above the next coupld of days -- a heat wave!
My dad called the other night and said that he heard that there had been a homebuilt
airplane accident in Iowa. He wondered if it was a Pietenpol. I told
him that with temps below zero and strong Northwest winds I seriously doubted
that anyone would be out and about in an open-cockpit Piet! Then again, if you
put a little cardboard over the radiator...
It was 42 below zero (without wind chill) at Embarass, MN, yesterday...I'd be embarassed
to live there, too. Only time you hear of the place is when it's that
cold
Makes me wonder if over the years anyone has ever installed a canopy or enclosure
on their Air Camper...
I have to put in a plug for Chet Peek's new book "The Pietenpol Story." I ordered
my copy about a week ago and it arrived this past Friday -- by Friday midnight
I had read it cover to cover. Excellent! I easpecially enjoyed the stories
and pictures from the early days of Air Camper development. Anyway, I highly
recommend this book for all Pietenpol enthusiasts, whether you own one, are building
one or just plain love airplanes. Send Chet a check for $29.95 (that includes
the shipping) and if you ask, he'll even sign your copy.
Occasionally I get over to Rochester, MN, to see my cousin. (Rochester is not too
far from Cherry Grove country).We had breakfast the Saturday before Christmas
at "Cheap Charlie's" in Rochester (about the best breakfast in town -- lots
of good food at low cost. The atmosphere? Well, what can I say? Guys like it).
One of my cousin's pals happened to there. This fellow used to drive a bread
truck down to Cherry Grove and delivered at the general store -- which had been
previously owned by Bernard's Uncle, if I read Chet's book correctly. He told
us that one day while he was there (many, many years ago) the store owner said
his phone was out of order -- which was kind of important since many of his
farmer customers would call in their orders and he'd deliver their groceries
out to their farms. He said Bernard was coming by to fix the phone -- but the
owner wasn't sure when. He said that Bernard was not always too quick to respond.
However, all of a sudden there was Bernard comin
g through the door with his toolbox, all set to fix the phone. The store owner
made a comment to Bernard that he was surprised to see Bernard so soon. All Bernard
said was, "Kind of hard to run a business without a phone, isn't it?"
Anyway, thought that was a good piece of Pietenpol lore...
Well, I've got a whole bunch of new Model A engine parts from Snyder's being delivered
this week -- plus an Ed Sterba prop for a Model A (was on e-Bay last week
-- was Ron Vander Hart's -- has only 8 hours on it). Guess what I'm doing
this weekend? Yep -- I'll be in the basement working on the Piet's engine!
Stay warm!
Fred B.
La Crosse, WI
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: builders log
Date: Feb 06, 2007
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
>From my understanding the purpose of the builders log it to verify that
we are the ones who in fact built the airplane and that we didn't buy
a disassembled old homebuilt or a nearly complete one then try to pass
off as if we did all the work. Some inspectors will wink and turn
the other cheek if you try to do this and others will be more selective
to ensure that you built the majority of the plane. I think the deeper
issue is that the feds (or designee) want to know that you know the
airplane inside and out prior to issuing a Repairman Certificate that
authorizes you
to do your own yearly condition inspections and sign it off in the log
books. Last year I billed myself double for what I billed myself for
the
prior years inspection. I'm finally starting to make money off of
myself:)
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: HelsperSew(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 06, 2007
Subject: Re: Weather, Chet Peek's book, Parts
Fred,
What size prop did you order for your A?
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 06, 2007
From: "Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Weather, Chet Peek's book, Parts
I also highly recommend Chet Peeks new Pietenpol Story book, no Piet builder
should be without it. Also have his Heath and Jenny books which are also
excellent. (Now I know why the Heath aircraft are so small, did you know
that Mr. Heath only weighed 130 lbs? Heck thats half the weight of some of
us Piet builders).
Rick
On 2/6/07, tbyh(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> Was 14 below zero in La Crosse yesterday morning, only about 10 below this
> morning. Supposed to warm up to 10-20 above the next coupld of days -- a
> heat wave! My dad called the other night and said that he heard that there
> had been a homebuilt airplane accident in Iowa. He wondered if it was a
> Pietenpol. I told him that with temps below zero and strong Northwest winds
> I seriously doubted that anyone would be out and about in an open-cockpit
> Piet! Then again, if you put a little cardboard over the radiator...
>
> It was 42 below zero (without wind chill) at Embarass, MN, yesterday...I'd
> be embarassed to live there, too. Only time you hear of the place is when
> it's that cold
>
> Makes me wonder if over the years anyone has ever installed a canopy or
> enclosure on their Air Camper...
>
> I have to put in a plug for Chet Peek's new book "The Pietenpol Story." I
> ordered my copy about a week ago and it arrived this past Friday -- by
> Friday midnight I had read it cover to cover. Excellent! I easpecially
> enjoyed the stories and pictures from the early days of Air Camper
> development. Anyway, I highly recommend this book for all Pietenpol
> enthusiasts, whether you own one, are building one or just plain love
> airplanes. Send Chet a check for $29.95 (that includes the shipping) and if
> you ask, he'll even sign your copy.
>
> Occasionally I get over to Rochester, MN, to see my cousin. (Rochester is
> not too far from Cherry Grove country).We had breakfast the Saturday before
> Christmas at "Cheap Charlie's" in Rochester (about the best breakfast in
> town -- lots of good food at low cost. The atmosphere? Well, what can I say?
> Guys like it). One of my cousin's pals happened to there. This fellow used
> to drive a bread truck down to Cherry Grove and delivered at the general
> store -- which had been previously owned by Bernard's Uncle, if I read
> Chet's book correctly. He told us that one day while he was there (many,
> many years ago) the store owner said his phone was out of order -- which was
> kind of important since many of his farmer customers would call in their
> orders and he'd deliver their groceries out to their farms. He said Bernard
> was coming by to fix the phone -- but the owner wasn't sure when. He said
> that Bernard was not always too quick to respond. How ever, all of a sudden
> there was Bernard coming through the door with his toolbox, all set to fix
> the phone. The store owner made a comment to Bernard that he was surprised
> to see Bernard so soon. All Bernard said was, "Kind of hard to run a
> business without a phone, isn't it?"
>
> Anyway, thought that was a good piece of Pietenpol lore...
>
> Well, I've got a whole bunch of new Model A engine parts from Snyder's
> being delivered this week -- plus an Ed Sterba prop for a Model A (was on
> e-Bay last week -- was Ron Vander Hart's -- has only 8 hours on it). Guess
> what I'm doing this weekend? Yep -- I'll be in the basement working on the
> Piet's engine!
>
> Stay warm!
> Fred B.
> La Crosse, WI
> ------------------------------
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Weather check and fuse
Date: Feb 06, 2007
From: "Dan Loegering" <danl(at)odayequipment.com>
Thank you all for the comments on fuse building - lots of good tips!
Now for my weather check-in from balmy Fargo ND. Yesterday morning hauling the
trash to the curb for pickup I thought to myself that the cold streak had finally
broken - here I was with no hat or gloves and was feeling pretty good about
the heat wave that we were experiencing. Jumped into the car to head to work
and was greeted with the weather on the radio - it had "warmed up" to -16 and
we were expecting a high of -7! Heat wave! The low had been -26... Today
we are expected to warm up a bit to -3 for a high and tomorrow we might be on
the positive side of 0 for the first day since last Thursday.
Definitely makes it a challenge to warm up the shop for building nights! So cold
out your nose hairs freeze when you breathe (an interesting feeling that I
would suggest everyone should try at least once), and when you let the dog outside
to answer nature - they have about a 30 second TBF (time before freeze-up).
Got to love the North!
On the piet front - we now have three active builders locally and one more ready
to start on his rib set. So far three complete rib sets, two complete tail
sets, two complete fuse side sets, two engines purchased, and ready to start joining
fuselage sides. One more guy that just needs a little shove to jump on
board and start the fifth project! Just wait a few years and we will have a
mass fly down to Brodhead from the North.
Dan Loegering
Fargo, ND
PS - any of you out there know of someone looking for a Cessna 177B Cardinal -
I have one for sale...
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: shelf life
Date: Feb 06, 2007
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
Great catch, Bill. I was amused by the description of the thread
sealer saying that it won't get hard or deteriorate and such
and then they add the shelf life of 18 months notation ! I can tell
you from experience that the shelf life (like on some food products)
of that stuff is years and years. This probably doesn't apply much to
our 2% milk though in the fridge right now.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Roman Bukolt" <conceptmodels(at)tds.net>
Subject: Re: Weather, Chet Peek's book, Parts
Date: Feb 06, 2007
You didn't finish your plug of Peek's book.
Where does one send the $29.95?
----- Original Message -----
From: tbyh(at)aol.com
To: pietenpol-list-digest(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 8:03 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Weather, Chet Peek's book, Parts
Was 14 below zero in La Crosse yesterday morning, only about 10 below
this morning. Supposed to warm up to 10-20 above the next coupld of days
-- a heat wave! My dad called the other night and said that he heard
that there had been a homebuilt airplane accident in Iowa. He wondered
if it was a Pietenpol. I told him that with temps below zero and strong
Northwest winds I seriously doubted that anyone would be out and about
in an open-cockpit Piet! Then again, if you put a little cardboard over
the radiator...
It was 42 below zero (without wind chill) at Embarass, MN,
yesterday...I'd be embarassed to live there, too. Only time you hear of
the place is when it's that cold
Makes me wonder if over the years anyone has ever installed a canopy
or enclosure on their Air Camper...
I have to put in a plug for Chet Peek's new book "The Pietenpol
Story." I ordered my copy about a week ago and it arrived this past
Friday -- by Friday midnight I had read it cover to cover. Excellent! I
easpecially enjoyed the stories and pictures from the early days of Air
Camper development. Anyway, I highly recommend this book for all
Pietenpol enthusiasts, whether you own one, are building one or just
plain love airplanes. Send Chet a check for $29.95 (that includes the
shipping) and if you ask, he'll even sign your copy.
Occasionally I get over to Rochester, MN, to see my cousin. (Rochester
is not too far from Cherry Grove country).We had breakfast the Saturday
before Christmas at "Cheap Charlie's" in Rochester (about the best
breakfast in town -- lots of good food at low cost. The atmosphere?
Well, what can I say? Guys like it). One of my cousin's pals happened to
there. This fellow used to drive a bread truck down to Cherry Grove and
delivered at the general store -- which had been previously owned by
Bernard's Uncle, if I read Chet's book correctly. He told us that one
day while he was there (many, many years ago) the store owner said his
phone was out of order -- which was kind of important since many of his
farmer customers would call in their orders and he'd deliver their
groceries out to their farms. He said Bernard was coming by to fix the
phone -- but the owner wasn't sure when. He said that Bernard was not
always too quick to respond. How ever, all of a sudden there was Bernard
coming through the door with his toolbox, all set to fix the phone. The
store owner made a comment to Bernard that he was surprised to see
Bernard so soon. All Bernard said was, "Kind of hard to run a business
without a phone, isn't it?"
Anyway, thought that was a good piece of Pietenpol lore...
Well, I've got a whole bunch of new Model A engine parts from Snyder's
being delivered this week -- plus an Ed Sterba prop for a Model A (was
on e-Bay last week -- was Ron Vander Hart's -- has only 8 hours on it).
Guess what I'm doing this weekend? Yep -- I'll be in the basement
working on the Piet's engine!
Stay warm!
Fred B.
La Crosse, WI
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "gbowen(at)ptialaska.net" <gbowen(at)ptialaska.net>
Date: Feb 06, 2007
Subject: builders log
A DAR here in FL that specilizes in writing off Lancairs has a chk list of
stuff he likes to have done before he shows for inspection. One item re
builders log is simply ck marks in the building manual as each step is
completed, instead of a written log. This is not too applicable to the
Piete but may be useful. Some pictures, recpts, etc, also required but the
only thing he seems to concern about is YOU have signed off on the fact you
built 51% of the plane, can prove it with recpts and if it looks "somewhat"
airworthy. Lots of Lancairs are being built by some APs, with owner only
showing up for some of the construction. This FL DAR says he really don't
care if the owner builds it or not, who ever is the builder has to sign the
FAA form as builder. As far as he's concerned owner and builder can be two
different people.
Gordon
Original Message:
-----------------
From: Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC] michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 07:26:13 -0600
Subject: Pietenpol-List: builders log
Didn't even keep a spiral notebook record and my FAA MIDO inspector was
happy with what I provided him which were
folders which had invoices of everything that I purchased broken down
categories like airframe, engine, mags/carb/prop,
and fabric/paint. I glued many construction photos to four poster
boards in chronological order and he really liked that.
I think the thing that got him to sign off my airplane is that I put on
a pot of coffee in the hangar that morning and brought
1/2 dozen donuts with me.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://link.mail2web.com/mail2web
________________________________________________________________________________
From: <harvey.rule(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: builders log
Date: Feb 06, 2007
Sometimes I wonder if the inspectors go too far in their rules.I'm probably
opening a can of worms here but I remember when I wanted to be a ham radio
operator.They wanted us to be able to build our own radio's and be able to
tear them apart and put them back together again.I never figured that it was
necessary to have to go through all that in order to be an operator so I
went to the CB radio band instead and had just as much fun. I never did
build a radio.I have yet to build an aircraft from the ground up.I realize
there is a certain amount of satisfaction in having built your own aircraft
and flying it but I doubt if it makes one a better pilot.Seeing another mans
work being better than mine and knowing that the plane was put together
better than I could have done is good enough for me.There are builders,there
are builder flyers and there are just flyers.I doubt if most of those guys
flying around in Cessna's could even begin to tear it apart and put it back
together again.I don't believe that a home built has to be the product of
the pilot.That's my take on it anyway.
>From: "gbowen(at)ptialaska.net" <gbowen(at)ptialaska.net>
>Reply-To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: builders log
>Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2007 12:00:23 -0500
>
>
>
>A DAR here in FL that specilizes in writing off Lancairs has a chk list of
>stuff he likes to have done before he shows for inspection. One item re
>builders log is simply ck marks in the building manual as each step is
>completed, instead of a written log. This is not too applicable to the
>Piete but may be useful. Some pictures, recpts, etc, also required but the
>only thing he seems to concern about is YOU have signed off on the fact you
>built 51% of the plane, can prove it with recpts and if it looks "somewhat"
>airworthy. Lots of Lancairs are being built by some APs, with owner only
>showing up for some of the construction. This FL DAR says he really don't
>care if the owner builds it or not, who ever is the builder has to sign the
>FAA form as builder. As far as he's concerned owner and builder can be two
>different people.
>Gordon
>
>Original Message:
>-----------------
>From: Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC] michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov
>Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 07:26:13 -0600
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: builders log
>
>
>Didn't even keep a spiral notebook record and my FAA MIDO inspector was
>happy with what I provided him which were
>folders which had invoices of everything that I purchased broken down
>categories like airframe, engine, mags/carb/prop,
>and fabric/paint. I glued many construction photos to four poster
>boards in chronological order and he really liked that.
>I think the thing that got him to sign off my airplane is that I put on
>a pot of coffee in the hangar that morning and brought
>1/2 dozen donuts with me.
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>mail2web - Check your email from the web at
>http://link.mail2web.com/mail2web
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Builders log
From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com>
Date: Feb 06, 2007
My inspector, which I think was the same as Mike Cuy's (seriously), said "oh, you
passed, I can go ahead and leave!", as soon as he walked in the hangar and
saw the card table set up with coffee and donuts! Thanks Mike, I think you may
have even dropped that advice to me. Anyway, my builder's log consisted of
a picture album and a bundle of receipts. Both of which he looked through. They
did spawn a lot of questions which made for some nice small talk about airplanes.
I don't think he was looking for any kind certain log, just something
to back up the fact that I built it. Just last night I sat down with my kids
and looked through the picture album. They think it's pretty cool. The pictures
go back long before they were around!
Don Emch
NX899DE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=93320#93320
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mike King" <mikek120(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Piet in Texas
Date: Feb 06, 2007
BlankLast Sunday I went scouting around local (Krum, Texas) airports
with grass
strips and found a private airport with some interesting airplanes.
As I walked along the grass strip lined with houses with attached
hangars
and/or work shops, I heard a voice coming from a shop window asking
if I needed some help. I introduced myself to Bobby and Bob, local
residents with experimental aircraft based there. Bobby invited me
into his shop where he was rebuilding a......are you ready?......a PIET.
He said he flew PIETs in the past and bought this damaged blue PIET
off EBay last summer from someone in Missouri. He is about 95% finished
with it and may sell it sometime down the road. He is an accomplished
builder and is really doing a great job getting the plane back in the
air.
I told him about this discussion group and the great talent online.
Hopefully he will become an active member and pass along some
of his building expertise.
Mike King
GN-1
77MK
Ponder (north of Dallas) Texas
70 degrees today with sunshine
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dick Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net>
Subject: builders log
Date: Feb 06, 2007
I don't know about others, but the DAR signed me off without much
looking at the builders log. However, when I went in for my Aircraft
Repairmans certificate, the inspector went thru it page by page asking
me how I built things and materials used and assorted questions. He
flat out told me he had to make sure I was the one who built it.
Dick N.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Krum Texas Water Tower
Date: Feb 07, 2007
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
Mike King & group,
Not a fan of American Idol but I watched the try-outs on tv last night
from San Antonio. There was a young lady from Krum on
and she made the cut but they did an overview of life there and showed
farm life there and the water tower you probably flew over.
Good to hear that there are some guys rebuilding a Piet there too.
You'll have a wingman.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: good inspectors
Date: Feb 07, 2007
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
YES Don, Matt T. was my inspector too and he's a push over given a free
meal. Seriously, he's a good
guy plus he is an A&P, private, and owns a Champ so he at least knows
what he's looking at. He made some
good suggestions up in my center section pullies where the brackets
holding my pullies would not have
necessarily retained my 3/32" aileron cables and they could have become
jammed. I installed small L-shaped
brackets on each pulley to keep the cable from jumping out of the groove
ever. Matt gives a good presentation
on how to certify a home built too for EAA Chapters and such in the
northern 1/3 of Ohio. We had him at our
EAA meeting back in the fall.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: TBYH(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 07, 2007
Subject: Sterba Prop & Chet Peek's address
The Sterba prop I purchased on e-Bay is 76 by 46 -- UPS says it is to be
delivered today as are the engine parts from Snyders! I even took a day off work
-- it feels like Christmas, Hannukah abd Quanza and others all rolled into one!
I believe the Pietenpol prop drawing calls for 76 by 44 -- so maybe this one
will give a bit more cruise and a little less climb -- depending on how many
Wheaties I feed my Model A...
As for Chet Peek's address, here it is: 1861 Danfield Drive, Norman, OK
73072-3000.
Best regards to all! Stay warm!
Fred B.
La Crosse, WI
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: avoiding liability
Date: Feb 07, 2007
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
I personally know of a Sky Scout that was started by a friend here in
Ohio and nearly ready to fly when the builder got out of aviation
completely and de-registered the aircraft saying that it was destroyed.
The plane was then sold as and changed hands until it was put together
and flown for the first time. The original builder wanted to wash his
hands of any future liability. EAA has a form you can have a buyer
sign that is intended to help deflect liability if you are the builder
but I have hear that if the attorneys want to suck you for blood they
can find a way to do it should something bad happen to someone flying a
plane you sold them and built.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mike King" <mikek120(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Krum Texas Water Tower
Date: Feb 07, 2007
BlankMike,
You are right about the Krum water tower. I live five miles south of
Krum in a smaller town named PONDER. And about three miles
south of me is the community of DISH. Yes, this is the little town
that changed its name from Clark to DISH......after the DISH
satellite company that offered a prize to any town in the country
that would change its name to be its namesake.
A few miles south of that is Justin.....the town that makes Justin
cowboy boots.
Lots of interesting town names and characters who live in those
communities. Come see us.
Mike King
77MK
GN-1
Ponder, Texas
----- Original Message -----
From: Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 6:21 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Krum Texas Water Tower
Mike King & group,
Not a fan of American Idol but I watched the try-outs on tv last night
from San Antonio. There was a young lady from Krum on
and she made the cut but they did an overview of life there and showed
farm life there and the water tower you probably flew over.
Good to hear that there are some guys rebuilding a Piet there too.
You'll have a wingman.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: lshutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan)
Date: Feb 07, 2007
Subject: Pietenpols
harvey: the airplane was once 100% finished and flying. The owner had
unregistered it and gotten rid of any paper trail to him so he wouldn't
loose his business in a law suit if a new owner flew it into a mountain
in IFR weather. (deep pockets ) I was looking at the possibility of
reassembling it and reregistering it. My DAR said he would work with me
on it until I couldn't show a log of it's construction for the 51% rule.
He told me the owner didn't need to be the builder. As someone said,
many projects pass threw several owners before they are licensed. I cant
remember the last time I saw a new construction with Cub (etc.) wings.
Leon S.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 07, 2007
Subject: Re: Sterba Prop & Chet Peek's address
In a message dated 2/7/2007 7:44:24 AM Central Standard Time, TBYH(at)aol.com
writes:
I believe the Pietenpol prop drawing calls for 76 by 44 -- so maybe this one
will give a bit more cruise and a little less climb -- depending on how many
Wheaties I feed my Model A...
Fred,
The Orin Hoopman drawing, dated 3-3-33, for the Model A prop, is 76 X 48.
That's what I built. It was too much prop for the stock Model A engine, except
with the Aluminum 6:1 head, so it would never unload in cruise, and I could
never get into the horsepower / torque range for take off. I think you did
good, going with a 76 X 44. If anything, a 76 X 42 would be better, which I
think is what Ken Perkins suggests.
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 07, 2007
From: "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Pietenpols
Leon,
But there's a difference between Experimental and Certified projects.
You can rebuild a Cub, or another , if you find an AI who will sign you off
along the way for a final FAA inspection on the Certified.
Apples and oranges
walt evans
NX140DL
"Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you"
Ben Franklin
----- Original Message -----
From: "Leon Stefan" <lshutks(at)webtv.net>
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 5:17 PM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Pietenpols
>
> harvey: the airplane was once 100% finished and flying. The owner had
> unregistered it and gotten rid of any paper trail to him so he wouldn't
> loose his business in a law suit if a new owner flew it into a mountain
> in IFR weather. (deep pockets ) I was looking at the possibility of
> reassembling it and reregistering it. My DAR said he would work with me
> on it until I couldn't show a log of it's construction for the 51% rule.
> He told me the owner didn't need to be the builder. As someone said,
> many projects pass threw several owners before they are licensed. I cant
> remember the last time I saw a new construction with Cub (etc.) wings.
> Leon S.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Andimaxd(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 07, 2007
Subject: Re: Krum Texas Water Tower
In a message dated 2/7/2007 5:08:20 P.M. Central Standard Time,
Rcaprd(at)aol.com writes:
I always thought that would be a humorous conversation - "I live in
West Texas". "Well, what part of West Texas?" "West Texas". "Ya mean West
Texas, Texas?" "Yep, West Texas, out in Western Texas".
Chuck,
When I went to school at West Texas State in Canyon, about the time I was
acquiring my Private Pilot, I knew a guy from Earth, TX. He had been in a
fight or two over that one! Where are you from? "Earth", how 'bout you?
Max (Mad Dawg) Davis
(NX101XW reserved)
Aggie by proxy; Texas A&M bought West Texas State the year I graduated.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 07, 2007
From: KMHeide <kmheidecpo(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Krum Texas Water Tower
Oh yea......Well I am from Fargo North Dakota where the movie failed and the money's
lost!
Curent temp on my new digital thermometer.....-22 below with no wind chill. As
dad would say.....put that in your pipe and smoke it!
Ken H.
Yankee
Fargo, ND
Andimaxd(at)aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 2/7/2007 5:08:20 P.M. Central Standard Time, Rcaprd(at)aol.com
writes:
I always thought that would be a humorous conversation - "I live in West
Texas". "Well, what part of West Texas?" "West Texas". "Ya mean West Texas,
Texas?" "Yep, West Texas, out in Western Texas".
Chuck,
When I went to school at West Texas State in Canyon, about the time I was acquiring
my Private Pilot, I knew a guy from Earth, TX. He had been in a fight
or two over that one! Where are you from? "Earth", how 'bout you?
Max (Mad Dawg) Davis
(NX101XW reserved)
Aggie by proxy; Texas A&M bought West Texas State the year I graduated.
---------------------------------
Any questions? Get answers on any topic at Yahoo! Answers. Try it now.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 07, 2007
From: Clif Dawson <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: Pietenpols
Harvy, you must remember that our laws are different up here.
Lawsuits don't work the same way as in the States. Mostly in the
realm of intangibles like pain and suffering. Our courts don't
take as much stock of that and also concern themselves with
the defendant's reasonable ability to pay. The first thing of
concern is that of fault. If some guy stupidly flies VFR into
one of our rock filled clouds there's no way a Canadian court
is going to fault the previous owner or builder because the
plane slid down the mountain face in pieces.
Clif
Sometimes we watch way too much US TV!
http://www.tc.gc.ca/civilaviation/RegServ/Affairs/cars/Part5/549.htm
----- Original Message -----
From: "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 3:25 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Pietenpols
>
> Leon,
> But there's a difference between Experimental and Certified projects.
> You can rebuild a Cub, or another , if you find an AI who will sign you
> off along the way for a final FAA inspection on the Certified.
> Apples and oranges
> walt evans
> NX140DL
>
> "Put your wealth in knowledge, and no one can ever take it from you"
> Ben Franklin
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Leon Stefan" <lshutks(at)webtv.net>
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 5:17 PM
> Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Pietenpols
>
>
>>
>> harvey: the airplane was once 100% finished and flying. The owner had
>> unregistered it and gotten rid of any paper trail to him so he wouldn't
>> loose his business in a law suit if a new owner flew it into a mountain
>> in IFR weather. (deep pockets ) I was looking at the possibility of
>> reassembling it and reregistering it. My DAR said he would work with me
>> on it until I couldn't show a log of it's construction for the 51% rule.
>> He told me the owner didn't need to be the builder. As someone said,
>> many projects pass threw several owners before they are licensed. I cant
>> remember the last time I saw a new construction with Cub (etc.) wings.
>> Leon S.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 3:33 PM
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 08, 2007
From: Clif Dawson <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: Krum Texas Water Tower
Now that's a good one! Right up there with Drain Oregon. We have a
bar/restaurant here
called Nevermind. "Where'd you go last night?" "Nevermind!". I've had a
couple of
folks stalk off in a huff before I could explain. :-)
Clif, finally starting my center section.
When I went to school at West Texas State in Canyon, about the time I
was acquiring my Private Pilot, I knew a guy from Earth, TX. He had
been in a fight or two over that one! Where are you from? "Earth", how
'bout you?
Max (Mad Dawg) Davis
(NX101XW reserved)
Aggie by proxy; Texas A&M bought West Texas State the year I
graduated.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: great evening viewing
From: "Glenn Thomas" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com>
Date: Feb 08, 2007
Chris,
I must have spent an hour (at least) just looking at center sections and occassionally
getting distracted and looking at other construction photos. That's a
great collection you put together. My wife was the only reason it didn't go
on longer.
Thanks for putting that together. It's a great resource for the rest of us!
--------
Glenn Thomas
N?????
http://www.flyingwood.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=93606#93606
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 08, 2007
From: gus notti <gus_notti(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Several ?? on this Pietenpol I just bought.
Hello all,
OK I have a few questions on how the steel bellcranks are attached to the wood.
Less start with the rudder bellcrank, (I can take pictures next week if needed),
The bellcrank for the rudder is lose due to the 2 small bolts that hold it
to the wood ( the wood running from the top of the rudder to the bottom up front)
on the rudder came loose after only 25 hours of flying. I can snug the 2
bolts down and tighten them up with no problems, however I can see these working
loose again, thread lock wold most likely stop this. My question is, are these
2 little bolts the only attachments to the rudder? The rudder is built solid,
so I'm not concerned about that.
2). The bellcranks for the elevator I see they are attached with 3 bolts. 1 upfront
going through the front leading edge of the elevator, with 2 bolds bolted
through a peice of wood about 1/3 way back from the leading edge of the elevator.
My question here is does this
sound properly attached?
One more quick one, I have allways been a production flying clown, this is my
1st journey with a homebuilt, here's the scope on it. It was built in 1991 has
flown off the 25hours, it has a N #, the 25 hours was flown with a C65 for the
motor, in 1994 they replaced the c65 with a VW conversion 1835cc. Now the way
I understand it that's a major modifcation.
So what do I need to do? After I have it back in airworthy condition do I have
to have an AI inspect it? What else?
Thanks,
Gus
If this makes any since please let me know.....
---------------------------------
TV dinner still cooling?
Check out "Tonight's Picks" on Yahoo! TV.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Several ?? on this Pietenpol I just bought.
From: Hans Vander Voort <hans.vander.voort(at)alfalaval.com>
Date: Feb 08, 2007
Gus,
All bolts should be AN type with self locking nuts
Nylon insert type nut for non moving parts.
Castle nuts with cotter pin where the bolt acts as a hinge pin or in high
temperature areas (under the cowling)
No regular nuts should be used.
On the VW conversion:
Since you did not indicate that it has flown with the VW, I strongly
recommend to do a Weight and Balance first !
The VW should be considerably lighter.
I personally doubt the VW is a strong enough engine for the Pietenpol, but
I leave that up to you.
Most importantly it needs to be a balanced plane.
As it is an experimental Airplane there is no need to get an AI involved.
An A&P can do the AI's job.
However when a different engine is installed you do have to go through the
fly-off period again
This applies when you swap the C 65 with a VW
it does not apply if you swap a C 65 with another C 65
Fly off period for a automotive engine powered aircraft is 40 hours with a
certified aircraft engine it is 25 hours.
Within that 40 hours no passengers are allowed and all flights can not
extend beyond a 20 mile radius of home field.
20 miles is typical, you can negotiate more with the FAA.
You will have to notify the FAA that engines have been replaced unless the
previous owner did that.
As a general statement as this is your first experimental, I recommend you
contact a local EAA tech counselor and let them have a look at it.
The EAA tech counselors are volunteers and it is free of charge (OK, maybe
some coffee and donuts)
Hans
gus notti
<gus_notti@yahoo.
com> To
Sent by: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
owner-pietenpol-l cc
ist-server@matron
ics.com Subject
Pietenpol-List: Several ?? on this
Pietenpol I just bought.
02/08/2007 09:04
AM
Please respond to
pietenpol-list@ma
tronics.com
Hello all,
OK I have a few questions on how the steel bellcranks are attached to the
wood.
Less start with the rudder bellcrank, (I can take pictures next week if
needed), The bellcrank for the rudder is lose due to the 2 small bolts that
hold it to the wood ( the wood running from the top of the rudder to the
bottom up front) on the rudder came loose after only 25 hours of flying. I
can snug the 2 bolts down and tighten them up with no problems, however I
can see these working loose again, thread lock wold most likely stop this.
My question is, are these 2 little bolts the only attachments to the
rudder? The rudder is built solid, so I'm not concerned about that.
2). The bellcranks for the elevator I see they are attached with 3 bolts. 1
upfront going through the front leading edge of the elevator, with 2 bolds
bolted through a peice of wood about 1/3 way back from the leading edge of
the elevator. My question here is does this
sound properly attached?
One more quick one, I have allways been a production flying clown, this is
my 1st journey with a homebuilt, here's the scope on it. It was built in
1991 has flown off the 25hours, it has a N #, the 25 hours was flown with a
C65 for the motor, in 1994 they replaced the c65 with a VW conversion
1835cc. Now the way I understand it that's a major modifcation.
So what do I need to do? After I have it back in airworthy condition do I
have to have an AI inspect it? What else?
Thanks,
Gus
If this makes any since please let me know.....
TV dinner still cooling?
Check out "Tonight's Picks" on Yahoo! TV.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ed G." <flyboy_120(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Several ?? on this Pietenpol I just bought.
Date: Feb 08, 2007
Hi Gus...The rudder horn should have three bolts. There should be a steel
piece aproxamately 5/8" wide that is welded into the back edge of the rudder
horn and bolted into the center spar of the rudder with one bolt. I can see
that if it is not there there would be alot of twisting force on the front
two bolts and a risk of wringing the leading edge out of the rudder. That's
if I'm understanding what your trying to say of course. Ed G.
>From: gus notti <gus_notti(at)yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: Several ?? on this Pietenpol I just bought.
>Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 07:04:40 -0800 (PST)
>
>Hello all,
>
> OK I have a few questions on how the steel bellcranks are attached to
>the wood.
>
> Less start with the rudder bellcrank, (I can take pictures next week if
>needed), The bellcrank for the rudder is lose due to the 2 small bolts that
>hold it to the wood ( the wood running from the top of the rudder to the
>bottom up front) on the rudder came loose after only 25 hours of flying. I
>can snug the 2 bolts down and tighten them up with no problems, however I
>can see these working loose again, thread lock wold most likely stop this.
>My question is, are these 2 little bolts the only attachments to the
>rudder? The rudder is built solid, so I'm not concerned about that.
> 2). The bellcranks for the elevator I see they are attached with 3
>bolts. 1 upfront going through the front leading edge of the elevator, with
>2 bolds bolted through a peice of wood about 1/3 way back from the leading
>edge of the elevator. My question here is does this
> sound properly attached?
>
> One more quick one, I have allways been a production flying clown, this
>is my 1st journey with a homebuilt, here's the scope on it. It was built in
>1991 has flown off the 25hours, it has a N #, the 25 hours was flown with a
>C65 for the motor, in 1994 they replaced the c65 with a VW conversion
>1835cc. Now the way I understand it that's a major modifcation.
> So what do I need to do? After I have it back in airworthy condition do
>I have to have an AI inspect it? What else?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Gus
>
> If this makes any since please let me know.....
>
>
>---------------------------------
>TV dinner still cooling?
>Check out "Tonight's Picks" on Yahoo! TV.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: great evening viewing
From: Hans Vander Voort <hans.vander.voort(at)alfalaval.com>
Date: Feb 08, 2007
Oscar,
Congratulation on your first flight!
I hope you will enjoy many more.
B-T-W are you willing to share your powerpoint presentation with us ?
The local EAA chapter (774) is trying to get me to do something similar
Hans
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: good inspectors
From: Hans Vander Voort <hans.vander.voort(at)alfalaval.com>
Date: Feb 08, 2007
I used one of the first EAA, AB-DAR's
Ronald Morton from Sequin, Texas.
He flew in with his wife in their homebuild BD-4.
He spend two hours doing a thorough inspection of my Pietenpol.
His wife did all the FAA paper work.
They never looked at the receipts or the log book, just had to sign an
document that confirms the 51% rule.
Cost $ 100,-- for travel expenses.
Absolute first class.
For my repairman certificate I was also lucky, the FAA guy at the local
FSDO at Ellington was an EAA member.
No appointment, just walked in with all my documentation, half an hour
later done
So simple a cavemen can do it :-)
Hans.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Several ?? on this Pietenpol I just bought.
Date: Feb 08, 2007
From: "Bill Church" <eng(at)canadianrogers.com>
Gus,
Regarding the attachment of your control horns, it is very difficult to
determine how they are attached without seeing what they look like
(photos might help). Keeping in mind that we are talking about
EXPERIMENTAL aircraft, the builder was free to build as he/she saw fit,
and was not bound by the plans. Builders often seem to make changes on
the Pietenpol control horns, probably because they "think" they will be
difficult to make as per the plans. (The airfoil-shaped sheet metal
control horns are actually one of my favorite little details of the
Pietenpol). It does sound as though your elevator horns are not built to
plans, though, as there isn't a bolt "upfront going through the front
leading edge of the elevator" on the plans. Both the rudder and elevator
control horns are basically constructed in the same manner - one bolt
thru on each side of the horn, and another bolt thru the spar of the
empennage, which is attached to a strip welded to the horn.
I don't think even I understand what I just wrote in that last sentence,
so I've attached a small clip from the plans, showing an elevator horn
attachment (that should be worth about 1000 words). I've also attached a
photo of a control horn in position, but without fasteners (sorry, don't
know who the photo belongs to).
The bolts fastening your control horns definitely need locking nuts -
you don't want vibration to loosen that connection in flight. I would be
worried that the bolts fastening the rear tab to the spar (hidden by the
fabric) are also not using lock nuts (if the control horns were built
with the rear tabs). Maybe you need to make some inspection cuts in the
fabric to check that out. I would.
As for VW power - I haven't heard of a successful case in a Pietenpol
(but maybe there has been). Here's a link to an article that explains
the theory behind why it isn't considered a good idea:
http://users.aol.com/bpanews/3questions.html#vw
Bill C.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 08, 2007
From: gus notti <gus_notti(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Several ?? on this Pietenpol I just bought.
OK thanks for the pictures I will study them a little later.
Well less get the 65HP is 65 HP talk going. OK??
Help me understand this, I have a Hapi VW conversion weighting in at 165lbs,it's
rated at 65hp at takeoff 3600 rpm with a continues 60hp rating at 3400, if the
motor is running the way it should 60 65 hp should be enough power for the
Pietenpol and 2 pilots. Right?
Of course the weight and balance needs to be correct.
I don't see the problem. Can someone help me with this??
Thanks
Bill Church wrote:
Gus,
Regarding the attachment of your control horns, it is very difficult to determine
how they are attached without seeing what they look like (photos might help).
Keeping in mind that we are talking about EXPERIMENTAL aircraft, the builder
was free to build as he/she saw fit, and was not bound by the plans. Builders
often seem to make changes on the Pietenpol control horns, probably because
they "think" they will be difficult to make as per the plans. (The airfoil-shaped
sheet metal control horns are actually one of my favorite little details
of the Pietenpol). It does sound as though your elevator horns are not built
to plans, though, as there isn't a bolt "upfront going through the front leading
edge of the elevator" on the plans. Both the rudder and elevator control horns
are basically constructed in the same manner - one bolt thru on each side
of the horn, and another bolt thru the spar of the empennage, which is attached
to a strip welded to the horn.
I don't think even I understand what I just wrote in that last sentence, so I've
attached a small clip from the plans, showing an elevator horn attachment
(that should be worth about 1000 words). I've also attached a photo of a control
horn in position, but without fasteners (sorry, don't know who the photo belongs
to).
The bolts fastening your control horns definitely need locking nuts - you don't
want vibration to loosen that connection in flight. I would be worried that
the bolts fastening the rear tab to the spar (hidden by the fabric) are also
not using lock nuts (if the control horns were built with the rear tabs). Maybe
you need to make some inspection cuts in the fabric to check that out. I would.
As for VW power - I haven't heard of a successful case in a Pietenpol (but maybe
there has been). Here's a link to an article that explains the theory behind
why it isn't considered a good idea:
http://users.aol.com/bpanews/3questions.html#vw
Bill C.
---------------------------------
Don't pick lemons.
See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: RAMPEYBOY(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 08, 2007
Subject: Re: Several ?? on this Pietenpol I just bought.
I'm no expert, but recall reading something about this before. It has to do
with the ability of the VW to turn a big prop fast enough. Basically the VW
doesn't have the power to get to 3400RPM, unless you use a fairly small prop.
This in turn doesn't give you the Thrust from the prop that is needed for the
Pietenpol. On a slicker airframe, like a KR2, you can use the smaller prop,
and turn the 3400 RPM, and it all works out nicely.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: RAMPEYBOY(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 08, 2007
Subject: VW engines in Piets
_Three Questions asked of the BPA_
(http://users.aol.com/bpanews/3questions.html)
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 08, 2007
Subject: Re: Several ?? on this Pietenpol I just bought.
From: John Hofmann <jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc.com>
I will add to the debate.
It got 65 hp but it ain't got no torque! Not enough to haul a big, draggy
ole airplane around. Small, sleek, clean little Sonex or a little Flitzer
biplane and it is fine. For an example, the 1917 Curtiss OX-5 put out 90 hp
at 1400 RPMs. It had a huge club in front of it and loads of torque to pull
the Jenny around the patch. Do you really think you could get the weight and
balance right with a C-90 in front (engine mount would be pretty long) and
get that plane in the air in the same manner?
An A-65 makes its horsepower with 171 cubic inches and produces roughly 145
lb-ft of torque. The VW at about 133 cubic inches depending on conversion
and who you talk to, puts out between 80 and 115 lb-ft of torque (I see
between 85 and 90 mostly). The reality of airplane engines is conversion of
torque into thrust. You may insert horsepower into that equation if you wish
but it serves no practical purpose.
-john-
> OK thanks for the pictures I will study them a little later.
>
>
>
> Well less get the 65HP is 65 HP talk going. OK??
> Help me understand this, I have a Hapi VW conversion weighting in at
> 165lbs,it's rated at 65hp at takeoff 3600 rpm with a continues 60hp rating at
> 3400, if the motor is running the way it should 60 65 hp should be enough
> power for the Pietenpol and 2 pilots. Right?
>
> Of course the weight and balance needs to be correct.
>
> I don't see the problem. Can someone help me with this??
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
>
>
> Bill Church wrote:
>
>>
>> Gus,
>>
>>
>>
>> Regarding the attachment of your control horns, it is very difficult to
>> determine how they are attached without seeing what they look like (photos
>> might help). Keeping in mind that we are talking about EXPERIMENTAL aircraft,
>> the builder was free to build as he/she saw fit, and was not bound by the
>> plans. Builders often seem to make changes on the Pietenpol control horns,
>> probably because they "think" they will be difficult to make as per the
>> plans. (The airfoil-shaped sheet metal control horns are actually one of my
>> favorite little details of the Pietenpol). It does sound as though your
>> elevator horns are not built to plans, though, as there isn't a bolt
>> "upfront going through the front leading edge of the elevator" on the plans.
>> Both the rudder and elevator control horns are basically constructed in the
>> same manner - one bolt thru on each side of the horn, and another bolt thru
>> the spar of the empennage, which is attached to a strip welded to the horn.
>>
>> I don't think even I understand what I just wrote in that last sentence, so
>> I've attached a small clip from the plans, showing an elevator horn
>> attachment (that should be worth about 1000 words). I've also attached a
>> photo of a control horn in position, but without fasteners (sorry, don't know
>> who the photo belongs to).
>>
>> The bolts fastening your control horns definitely need locking nuts - you
>> don't want vibration to loosen that connection in flight. I would be worried
>> that the bolts fastening the rear tab to the spar (hidden by the fabric) are
>> also not using lock nuts (if the control horns were built with the rear
>> tabs). Maybe you need to make some inspection cuts in the fabric to check
>> that out. I would.
>>
>> As for VW power - I haven't heard of a successful case in a Pietenpol (but
>> maybe there has been). Here's a link to an article that explains the theory
>> behind why it isn't considered a good idea:
>>
>> http://users.aol.com/bpanews/3questions.html#vw
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Bill C.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> Don't pick lemons.
> See all the new 2007 cars
> <http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html;_ylc=X3oDMTE0OGRsc3F2BF9TAzk3MTA3MDc2BHN
> lYwNtYWlsdGFncwRzbGsDbmV3Y2Fycw--> at Yahoo! Autos.
> <http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html;_ylc=X3oDMTE0OGRsc3F2BF9TAzk3MTA3MDc2BHN
> lYwNtYWlsdGFncwRzbGsDbmV3Y2Fycw-->
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 08, 2007
Subject: Re: Several ?? on this Pietenpol I just bought.
In a message dated 2/8/2007 4:10:59 PM Central Standard Time,
gus_notti(at)yahoo.com writes:
Well less get the 65HP is 65 HP talk going. OK??
Help me understand this, I have a Hapi VW conversion weighting in at
165lbs,it's rated at 65hp at takeoff 3600 rpm with a continues 60hp rating at 3400,
if
the motor is running the way it should 60 65 hp should be enough power for
the Pietenpol and 2 pilots. Right?
Of course the weight and balance needs to be correct.
I don't see the problem. Can someone help me with this??
Thanks
Like Boyce said in the last post, the VW engine just isn't right for the
Pietenpol. A draggy airframe like the Piet requires a lot of Torque from it's
engine, and a large diameter prop. The Model A engine, with it's long stroke,
makes a lot of torque at low RPM, but it's lucky to make 35 or 40 horsepower.
Bottom line is that a V W engine, with it's short stroke, will NOT work on a
Pietenpol.
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 08, 2007
From: gus notti <gus_notti(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Several ?? on this Pietenpol I just bought.
Well I don't know if I'm buying this arugment, how is this any different then a
Cessna 150 with a 0200 on it, and it's really small prop? We have all seen a
150 up close the prop is really small, compare that to a Pa22-108 the Pa22 will
blow it away..,..bottom line.
I've rebuilt 0235.c1b's several times.
Here's my thoughts, on it if the 1835 cc VW conversion is running the way is
should 3600 red line with it maintaining 3400 rmp I'm thinking it will fly better
(due to less weight) then if it had the C65 on it? Come - on Less figure it
out. I could be wrong...but....
Thanks
RAMPEYBOY(at)aol.com wrote:
I'm no expert, but recall reading something about this before. It has
to do with the ability of the VW to turn a big prop fast enough. Basically the
VW doesn't have the power to get to 3400RPM, unless you use a fairly small prop.
This in turn doesn't give you the Thrust from the prop that is needed for
the Pietenpol. On a slicker airframe, like a KR2, you can use the smaller prop,
and turn the 3400 RPM, and it all works out nicely.
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
From: RAMPEYBOY(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 08, 2007
Subject: Re: Several ?? on this Pietenpol I just bought.
If the VW could turn the prop 3600RPM, the blades would be going too fast,
supersonic even?? Scary to say that in the same sentence as VW OR Pietenpol!
Most props are pitch for max efficiency at about 2600-2800RPM (from what I've
read). If the VW engine turned the prop at that RPM, it would make no where
near 60hp. Now, maybe you could hook it all to a PSRU, rev the engine to 3600,
slow the prop, then maybe you can get it to work. But why? By the time you
figure it all out, tune it, make a mount, figure the weight and balance...it's
no better than a common old A-65. And, you'll probably have more money in it
in the long run.
Boyce
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 08, 2007
From: gus notti <gus_notti(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Several ?? on this Pietenpol I just bought.
OK, where does A want to be Pietenpol flyer find a C65 motor mount?
I have a C65 I'll just major her real quick. Any thoughts?
I'm still going to taxi tax the VW conversion just to see.
RAMPEYBOY(at)aol.com wrote:
If the VW could turn the prop 3600RPM, the blades would be going too
fast, supersonic even?? Scary to say that in the same sentence as VW OR Pietenpol!
Most props are pitch for max efficiency at about 2600-2800RPM (from what
I've read). If the VW engine turned the prop at that RPM, it would make no where
near 60hp. Now, maybe you could hook it all to a PSRU, rev the engine to 3600,
slow the prop, then maybe you can get it to work. But why? By the time you
figure it all out, tune it, make a mount, figure the weight and balance...it's
no better than a common old A-65. And, you'll probably have more money in it
in the long run.
Boyce
---------------------------------
The fish are biting.
Get more visitors on your site using Yahoo! Search Marketing.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 08, 2007
From: shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: V.W engine option
I saw an article about a VW conversion with a reduction drive that would turn a
72'' or bigger prop. It was in an old Sport Aviation. I can't remember the
guy's name who sold it, but he was from out west in the mountians. The article
was about a guy building a something or another, and went to the guys strip
for a demo ride. Said it performed very well on the demo plane which was a one
off test bed airplane. It was a 2 place side by side open cockpit low wing
and said it would lift off in less than 300 ft with 2 abord and full fuel. If
I find the article I will pass the info along. Or just build a Wynne Corvair
for the Piet, and then build yourself a soneri for the VW, other end of the
speed spectrum.
Shad
---------------------------------
Have a burning question? Go to Yahoo! Answers and get answers from real people
who know.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 08, 2007
From: shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: I found the VW Reduction info
Hello, By dumb luck I found the info on the VW reduction drive. I was wrong, it
isn't a 72 inch prop, it is 96" yeah thats right a 96-60 prop on a VW. It was
mounted on a 600lb airplane with 400lbs of human cargo and got off in 250ft.
The guy is Gene Smith of Missouri. He is the guy who bought out Culver Props.
The new company is called Valley Engineering, and is in Rolla, Missouri.
I'm not sure if they have a web site or not but try to google it and see what
comes up. By the way the article is in the May 2004 Kitplanes mag.
Shad
hope this helps, maybe another good airplane- engine combo to be discovered
---------------------------------
Need a quick answer? Get one in minutes from people who know. Ask your question
on Yahoo! Answers.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 08, 2007
From: gus notti <gus_notti(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: V.W engine option
Can I just bolt on a Continental C65 motor mount? I thought I read some place
the motor sat 5degrees upward. IS this right?
shad bell wrote:
I saw an article about a VW conversion with a reduction drive that would turn
a 72'' or bigger prop. It was in an old Sport Aviation. I can't remember
the guy's name who sold it, but he was from out west in the mountians. The article
was about a guy building a something or another, and went to the guys strip
for a demo ride. Said it performed very well on the demo plane which was
a one off test bed airplane. It was a 2 place side by side open cockpit low wing
and said it would lift off in less than 300 ft with 2 abord and full fuel.
If I find the article I will pass the info along. Or just build a Wynne Corvair
for the Piet, and then build yourself a soneri for the VW, other end of
the speed spectrum.
Shad
---------------------------------
Have a burning question? Go to Yahoo! Answers and get answers from real people
who know.
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 08, 2007
From: shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: V.W engine option
I am not sure about the mount. I believe most engine mounts have down thrust,
and left or right thrust depending on which way the prop spins. For a direct
drive VW, Corvair or other "backwards" mounted auto engines they rotate counter
clockwise when viewed from behind, so they would either be neutral or have left
thrust to compensate for p-factor. US made aircraft engines rotate clockwise
from behind and many times have right thrust built into the mounts. The down
thrust would be to keep the airplane from pitching up when power is applied,
or at least reduce the pitching tendency at cruise power ,which in turn reduces
drag caused by having to use down elevator to keep from climbing. And everyone
knows how streamlined the piet is....ha ha ha. Hope the info is useful,
see my previous post for the info on the VW reduction drive company. Valley Engineering
of Rolla, Missuori. Gene and Larry Smith. Father son team I believe.
Shad
gus notti wrote:
Can I just bolt on a Continental C65 motor mount? I thought I read some place
the motor sat 5degrees upward. IS this right?
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "glich7(at)juno.com" <glich7(at)juno.com>
Date: Feb 09, 2007
Subject: various comments
Hey List,
Okay so here are a few comments in no particular order.
RE: Builder's Log etc: As several posts were getting at (Dick N. and
others), having the builder's log, generally speaking, proves that
the project is amateur built, and not built by a pro, especially if
some of your "amateur photography" includes pictures of the person
who did the building, instead of just parts. Having a very COMPLETE
log shows that it was YOU who did the building, especially if you're
the one in pictures, on invoice receipts, etc. The completeness and
the having you in pictures is what really helps make getting the
repairman's cert. a smooth process, while having some general proof
(basic log, pics at several stages, where things were purchased,
etc.) and your own personal statement that it's amateur-built is
usually enough to satisfy the 51% rule.
Mike C.-I'll have to remember the coffee and donuts idea come
inspection time, it's brilliant. I know I'm more reasonable when I'm
well fed, should work with others too. :)
Fred B.- "...makes me wonder if anyone has ever installed a
canopy/enclosure on their air camper..." -I can't think of anyone in
particular, but I do plan to make a detachable one for mine similar
to one I saw in an article in Sport Av on a Mignet Flying Flea. I
think it would fit well with the Piet because it was faceted
plexiglass(?) plates on a wood frame made of thin pieces and
stringers. I don't what issue it was in, but it looked perfect,
easily adaptable to the Piet, and fairly lightweight. I guess I have
a little Howard Hughes in me, detailing the design of seemingly less
important things before I have a plane to put them on (a la "picking
out the control wheel" for the HK1 Hercules).
Shad- I saw that VW testbed article. I believe they tested every
engine with the customer observing before giving it to them, shows
confidence in the product. Also, I think they either had a
prop-copier, made their own custom props for each application or
both. This supports the idea that smaller and/or custom props were
needed to get the rated performance depending on the design, and that
HP isn't the whole story. So I agree with the others that the VW
probably isn't ideal for a piet, but feel free to do what you like,
Gus.
And Finally, Max Davis- "Where are you from?" "Earth, how bout you?"
I couldn't stop laughing since I read this! hilarious! I can just
picture a real, serious Texas cowboy saying this with a straight
face, while gaging the all-too-familiar reaction. I won't be able to
ask anyone where they're from without chuckling now. Good Stuff.
Sorry this was so long, hope it was useful, stay warm.
Tim "Hoping the Groundhog was right" Hansen in Ohio
________________________________________________________________________
Interested in getting caught up on today's news?
Click here to checkout USA TODAY Headlines.
http://track.juno.com/s/lc?s=198954&u=http://www.usatoday.com/news/front.htm?csp=24
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "pietflyr" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Looking for someone
Date: Feb 08, 2007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________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Catdesigns" <catdesigns(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Several ?? on this Pietenpol I just bought.
Date: Feb 08, 2007
Gus, I would suggest buying a set of plans. They will answer your
questions, help with the annual inspection, and serve as a reference if
you need to do any maintenance. I know they seem expensive but I can't
imagine owning a Pietenpol without a set of plans.
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
Website at http://www.Westcoastpiet.com
----- Original Message -----
From: gus notti
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 7:04 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Several ?? on this Pietenpol I just bought.
Hello all,
OK I have a few questions on how the steel bellcranks are attached to
the wood.
Less start with the rudder bellcrank, (I can take pictures next week
if needed), The bellcrank for the rudder is lose due to the 2 small
bolts that hold it to the wood ( the wood running from the top of the
rudder to the bottom up front) on the rudder came loose after only 25
hours of flying. I can snug the 2 bolts down and tighten them up with no
problems, however I can see these working loose again, thread lock wold
most likely stop this. My question is, are these 2 little bolts the only
attachments to the rudder? The rudder is built solid, so I'm not
concerned about that.
2). The bellcranks for the elevator I see they are attached with 3
bolts. 1 upfront going through the front leading edge of the elevator,
with 2 bolds bolted through a peice of wood about 1/3 way back from the
leading edge of the elevator. My question here is does this
sound properly attached?
One more quick one, I have allways been a production flying clown,
this is my 1st journey with a homebuilt, here's the scope on it. It was
built in 1991 has flown off the 25hours, it has a N #, the 25 hours was
flown with a C65 for the motor, in 1994 they replaced the c65 with a VW
conversion 1835cc. Now the way I understand it that's a major
modifcation.
So what do I need to do? After I have it back in airworthy condition
do I have to have an AI inspect it? What else?
Thanks,
Gus
If this makes any since please let me know.....
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
TV dinner still cooling?
Check out "Tonight's Picks" on Yahoo! TV.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 08, 2007
From: shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Several ?? on this Pietenpol I just bought. and engine
mount length
As far as a C65 mount for your piet, you wil probably have to make your own or
have someone custom make it for you. There is usually enough differences from
one homebuilt, A Piet in this case, to another (measurements) that a mount off
someone elses piet probably won't fit yours. This might not be the case, maybe
you will get lucky and find one that fits your engine mount fittings on the
longerons and just bolt er on and go. Also doing some weight and ballance figures
on your plane with you or the intended pilot's weight in the rear seat and
normal fuel load will be very helpful for getting the CG correct. Make the
mount the correct length to suit YOUR Piet with you flying it. This can save
a lot of weight in ballast, especially if it ends up tail heavy. 5 lbs tail
heavy can eaisly take 40lbs of ballest at the firewall to compensate. 2 inches
of tubing is a lot lighter than ballest. I have some methoods of figuring
mount length in my Jungster 1 plans if you are
interested. Chuck Ganzer could probably chime in on this one, I believe his mount
is longer than most and probably for CG reasons.
Shad
gus notti wrote:
OK, where does A want to be Pietenpol flyer find a C65 motor mount?
I have a C65 I'll just major her real quick. Any thoughts?
I'm still going to taxi tax the VW conversion just to see.
---------------------------------
Have a burning question? Go to Yahoo! Answers and get answers from real people
who know.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 08, 2007
From: "Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Weather, Chet Peek's book, Parts
Here you go Roman:
*Yes I have the Pietenpol Story for sale @ $24.95 plus $4 for priority mail
shipping. Just send a check to:
Chet Peek
1861 Danfield
Norman, OK 73072
His Email is
RBaron18(at)aol.com*
On 2/6/07, Roman Bukolt wrote:
>
> You didn't finish your plug of Peek's book.
> Where does one send the $29.95?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* tbyh(at)aol.com
> *To:* pietenpol-list-digest(at)matronics.com
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 06, 2007 8:03 AM
> *Subject:* Pietenpol-List: Weather, Chet Peek's book, Parts
>
> Was 14 below zero in La Crosse yesterday morning, only about 10 below this
> morning. Supposed to warm up to 10-20 above the next coupld of days -- a
> heat wave! My dad called the other night and said that he heard that there
> had been a homebuilt airplane accident in Iowa. He wondered if it was a
> Pietenpol. I told him that with temps below zero and strong Northwest winds
> I seriously doubted that anyone would be out and about in an open-cockpit
> Piet! Then again, if you put a little cardboard over the radiator...
>
> It was 42 below zero (without wind chill) at Embarass, MN, yesterday...I'd
> be embarassed to live there, too. Only time you hear of the place is when
> it's that cold
>
> Makes me wonder if over the years anyone has ever installed a canopy or
> enclosure on their Air Camper...
>
> I have to put in a plug for Chet Peek's new book "The Pietenpol Story." I
> ordered my copy about a week ago and it arrived this past Friday -- by
> Friday midnight I had read it cover to cover. Excellent! I easpecially
> enjoyed the stories and pictures from the early days of Air Camper
> development. Anyway, I highly recommend this book for all Pietenpol
> enthusiasts, whether you own one, are building one or just plain love
> airplanes. Send Chet a check for $29.95 (that includes the shipping) and if
> you ask, he'll even sign your copy.
>
> Occasionally I get over to Rochester, MN, to see my cousin. (Rochester is
> not too far from Cherry Grove country).We had breakfast the Saturday before
> Christmas at "Cheap Charlie's" in Rochester (about the best breakfast in
> town -- lots of good food at low cost. The atmosphere? Well, what can I say?
> Guys like it). One of my cousin's pals happened to there. This fellow used
> to drive a bread truck down to Cherry Grove and delivered at the general
> store -- which had been previously owned by Bernard's Uncle, if I read
> Chet's book correctly. He told us that one day while he was there (many,
> many years ago) the store owner said his phone was out of order -- which was
> kind of important since many of his farmer customers would call in their
> orders and he'd deliver their groceries out to their farms. He said Bernard
> was coming by to fix the phone -- but the owner wasn't sure when. He said
> that Bernard was not always too quick to respond. How ever, all of a sudden
> there was Bernard coming through the door with his toolbox, all set to fix
> the phone. The store owner made a comment to Bernard that he was surprised
> to see Bernard so soon. All Bernard said was, "Kind of hard to run a
> business without a phone, isn't it?"
>
> Anyway, thought that was a good piece of Pietenpol lore...
>
> Well, I've got a whole bunch of new Model A engine parts from Snyder's
> being delivered this week -- plus an Ed Sterba prop for a Model A (was on
> e-Bay last week -- was Ron Vander Hart's -- has only 8 hours on it). Guess
> what I'm doing this weekend? Yep -- I'll be in the basement working on the
> Piet's engine!
>
> Stay warm!
> Fred B.
> La Crosse, WI
> ------------------------------
>
> *
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
> *
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
--
Rick Holland
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Roman Bukolt" <conceptmodels(at)tds.net>
Subject: Re: Weather, Chet Peek's book, Parts
Date: Feb 08, 2007
Thank you.
----- Original Message -----
From: Rick Holland
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 9:38 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Weather, Chet Peek's book, Parts
Here you go Roman:
Yes I have the Pietenpol Story for sale @ $24.95 plus $4 for priority
mailshipping. Just send a check to:Chet Peek1861 DanfieldNorman, OK
73072
His Email isRBaron18(at)aol.com
On 2/6/07, Roman Bukolt wrote:
You didn't finish your plug of Peek's book.
Where does one send the $29.95?
----- Original Message -----
From: tbyh(at)aol.com
To: pietenpol-list-digest(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 8:03 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Weather, Chet Peek's book, Parts
Was 14 below zero in La Crosse yesterday morning, only about 10
below this morning. Supposed to warm up to 10-20 above the next coupld
of days -- a heat wave! My dad called the other night and said that he
heard that there had been a homebuilt airplane accident in Iowa. He
wondered if it was a Pietenpol. I told him that with temps below zero
and strong Northwest winds I seriously doubted that anyone would be out
and about in an open-cockpit Piet! Then again, if you put a little
cardboard over the radiator...
It was 42 below zero (without wind chill) at Embarass, MN,
yesterday...I'd be embarassed to live there, too. Only time you hear of
the place is when it's that cold
Makes me wonder if over the years anyone has ever installed a
canopy or enclosure on their Air Camper...
I have to put in a plug for Chet Peek's new book "The Pietenpol
Story." I ordered my copy about a week ago and it arrived this past
Friday -- by Friday midnight I had read it cover to cover. Excellent! I
easpecially enjoyed the stories and pictures from the early days of Air
Camper development. Anyway, I highly recommend this book for all
Pietenpol enthusiasts, whether you own one, are building one or just
plain love airplanes. Send Chet a check for $29.95 (that includes the
shipping) and if you ask, he'll even sign your copy.
Occasionally I get over to Rochester, MN, to see my cousin.
(Rochester is not too far from Cherry Grove country).We had breakfast
the Saturday before Christmas at "Cheap Charlie's" in Rochester (about
the best breakfast in town -- lots of good food at low cost. The
atmosphere? Well, what can I say? Guys like it). One of my cousin's pals
happened to there. This fellow used to drive a bread truck down to
Cherry Grove and delivered at the general store -- which had been
previously owned by Bernard's Uncle, if I read Chet's book correctly. He
told us that one day while he was there (many, many years ago) the store
owner said his phone was out of order -- which was kind of important
since many of his farmer customers would call in their orders and he'd
deliver their groceries out to their farms. He said Bernard was coming
by to fix the phone -- but the owner wasn't sure when. He said that
Bernard was not always too quick to respond. How ever, all of a sudden
there was Bernard coming through the door with his toolbox, all set to
fix the phone. The store owner made a comment to Bernard that he was
surprised to see Bernard so soon. All Bernard said was, "Kind of hard to
run a business without a phone, isn't it?"
Anyway, thought that was a good piece of Pietenpol lore...
Well, I've got a whole bunch of new Model A engine parts from
Snyder's being delivered this week -- plus an Ed Sterba prop for a Model
A (was on e-Bay last week -- was Ron Vander Hart's -- has only 8 hours
on it). Guess what I'm doing this weekend? Yep -- I'll be in the
basement working on the Piet's engine!
Stay warm!
Fred B.
La Crosse, WI
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
http://forums.matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 09, 2007
Subject: Engines and Mounts
I don't think Continental ever built a 'C65' engine. It was an A65, then
an A75, then a C85 engine, which is close to the O-200. Recently, there was
an article in Sport Aviation about the history of Continental engines.
Throughout the history of the Pietenpol, it is notable to have had a
wider variety of engines than any other airframe in aviation history. However,
there is None that I know of that has had success with a V W engine. In my
opinion, the A65 engine is a near perfect match for the Pietenpol Airframe. As
far as PSRU's (Prop Speed Reduction Units), they add weight, complexity,
expense and maintenance...and more notable, they reduce reliability and
dependability. You simply can't disregard a trend analyst.
An engine mount would almost certainly have to be custom built for any
particular homebuilt airplane, or at least modified in some way if you would
purchase one. Another huge reason to build your own mount, is that it is a
reasonable method to attain a safe Center of Gravity location. Shad is correct
in that my engine mount is long, in order to maintain a safe C of G in any
loading configuration. I used the next heavier wall thickness tubing than in the
plans, and I built it with down thrust, and right thrust.
And Gus, I think you should certainly purchase a set of plans from the
Pietenpol Family. There is a link to their web site on my home page.
Chuck Gantzer
Wichita, KS
NX770CG
http://nx770cg.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 09, 2007
From: "john smoyer" <jpsmoyer(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Rubbing Aileron cables
The aileron control arrangement on the Air Camper I'm building has a horn
welded to the control stick torque tube. The horn looks like a very wide V,
with a single hole at the end of each leg of the V. The aileron cable for
the left aileron attaches to the right leg of the V, and vice versa. The
two cables cross about 12 inches above the V, then run onto pulleys on the
center section's aft spar.
The cables rub together where they cross. This seems to be unavoidable,
since the legs of the horn on the torque tube are aligned in the same plane.
I'm considering bending or twisting the legs so the cables don't rub. Is
the rubbing going to cause unacceptable wear problems in the cables? Is it
common to other Piet's with this arrangement?
Any comments would be much appreciated. Thanks to all who contribute to
this really great list.
John Smoyer
Mid-Atlantic Air Museum
Reading, PA
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mike King" <mikek120(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Engines and Mounts
Date: Feb 09, 2007
Chuck,
I have a Continental A-80 in my GN-1. It is an A-65 case with some
company mods.
Mike King
GN-1
77MK
Ponder, Texas
----- Original Message -----
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 11:28 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Engines and Mounts
I don't think Continental ever built a 'C65' engine. It was an
A65, then an A75, then a C85 engine, which is close to the O-200.
Recently, there was an article in Sport Aviation about the history of
Continental engines.
Throughout the history of the Pietenpol, it is notable to have
had a wider variety of engines than any other airframe in aviation
history. However, there is None that I know of that has had success
with a V W engine. In my opinion, the A65 engine is a near perfect
match for the Pietenpol Airframe. As far as PSRU's (Prop Speed
Reduction Units), they add weight, complexity, expense and
maintenance...and more notable, they reduce reliability and
dependability. You simply can't disregard a trend analyst.
An engine mount would almost certainly have to be custom built for
any particular homebuilt airplane, or at least modified in some way if
you would purchase one. Another huge reason to build your own mount, is
that it is a reasonable method to attain a safe Center of Gravity
location. Shad is correct in that my engine mount is long, in order
to maintain a safe C of G in any loading configuration. I used the next
heavier wall thickness tubing than in the plans, and I built it with
down thrust, and right thrust.
And Gus, I think you should certainly purchase a set of plans from
the Pietenpol Family. There is a link to their web site on my home
page.
Chuck Gantzer
Wichita, KS
NX770CG
http://nx770cg.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 09, 2007
From: Gene Beenenga <kgbunltd(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Engines and Mounts
Mike, I sure would like to see a pic or two, or three.... of your GN, when you
have a minute or two. I am about 90% along on a GN-1 with about 50% to go, as
the saying goes.
I am planning on a Corvair to pull mine through the air.
Gene
-----Original Message-----
>From: Mike King <mikek120(at)mindspring.com>
>Sent: Feb 9, 2007 7:01 AM
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Engines and Mounts
>
>Chuck,
>
>I have a Continental A-80 in my GN-1. It is an A-65 case with some company mods.
>
>
>Mike King
>GN-1
>77MK
>Ponder, Texas
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 11:28 PM
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Engines and Mounts
>
>
> I don't think Continental ever built a 'C65' engine. It was an A65, then
an A75, then a C85 engine, which is close to the O-200. Recently, there was
an article in Sport Aviation about the history of Continental engines.
> Throughout the history of the Pietenpol, it is notable to have had a
wider variety of engines than any other airframe in aviation history. However,
there is None that I know of that has had success with a V W engine. In my
opinion, the A65 engine is a near perfect match for the Pietenpol Airframe. As
far as PSRU's (Prop Speed Reduction Units), they add weight, complexity, expense
and maintenance...and more notable, they reduce reliability and dependability.
You simply can't disregard a trend analyst.
> An engine mount would almost certainly have to be custom built for any particular
homebuilt airplane, or at least modified in some way if you would purchase
one. Another huge reason to build your own mount, is that it is a reasonable
method to attain a safe Center of Gravity location. Shad is correct
in that my engine mount is long, in order to maintain a safe C of G in any loading
configuration. I used the next heavier wall thickness tubing than in the
plans, and I built it with down thrust, and right thrust.
> And Gus, I think you should certainly purchase a set of plans from the Pietenpol
Family. There is a link to their web site on my home page.
>
> Chuck Gantzer
> Wichita, KS
> NX770CG
> http://nx770cg.com/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "pietflyr" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Rubbing Aileron cables
Date: Feb 09, 2007
John,
I solved this problem in mine with a well calibrated whack to one of the horns
with a 2 lb sledge hammer. It shifted the associated cable by a 1/4" or so and
the rubbing magically went away.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of john
smoyer
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2007 7:28 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Rubbing Aileron cables
The aileron control arrangement on the Air Camper I'm building has a horn
welded to the control stick torque tube. The horn looks like a very wide V,
with a single hole at the end of each leg of the V. The aileron cable for
the left aileron attaches to the right leg of the V, and vice versa. The
two cables cross about 12 inches above the V, then run onto pulleys on the
center section's aft spar.
The cables rub together where they cross. This seems to be unavoidable,
since the legs of the horn on the torque tube are aligned in the same plane.
I'm considering bending or twisting the legs so the cables don't rub. Is
the rubbing going to cause unacceptable wear problems in the cables? Is it
common to other Piet's with this arrangement?
Any comments would be much appreciated. Thanks to all who contribute to
this really great list.
John Smoyer
Mid-Atlantic Air Museum
Reading, PA
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Rubbing Aileron cables
Date: Feb 09, 2007
John; take a look at the picture at
http://www.flysquirrel.net/piets/Pb030024.jpg
Your cable crossing probably looks similar. The cables get very close, but
you should be able to tweak one of the horns enough to allow them to clear
each other.
I don't know that I'd use a 2 lb. hammer, though. Some people are so crude!
;o)
Oscar Zuniga
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
_________________________________________________________________
FREE online classifieds from Windows Live Expo buy and sell with people
you know
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: I found the VW Reduction info
Date: Feb 09, 2007
From: "Bill Church" <eng(at)canadianrogers.com>
Here's a link to the Valley Engineering website:
http://www.culverprops.com/index.php
And here's one of their webpages with video of a 66-foot take-off, using
a VW/PSRU. Wow!
http://www.culverprops.com/back-yard-flyer.php
Granted, that's a special airplane - look at that wing construction. And
they don't say specifically how much the plane weighs, but it looks
pretty spartan.
Not sure that it would be applicable to a Pietenpol, but those guys are
doing some very interesting work.
Bill C
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tom Bernie" <tsbernie(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Rubbing Aileron cables
Date: Feb 09, 2007
John,
On my GN-1 I achieved aileron cable clearance by building one of the
pulley brackets taller (3/8") than the other.
Tom Bernie
Gloucester Mass
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of john
smoyer
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2007 7:28 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Rubbing Aileron cables
The aileron control arrangement on the Air Camper I'm building has a
horn
welded to the control stick torque tube. The horn looks like a very
wide V,
with a single hole at the end of each leg of the V. The aileron cable
for
the left aileron attaches to the right leg of the V, and vice versa.
The
two cables cross about 12 inches above the V, then run onto pulleys on
the
center section's aft spar.
The cables rub together where they cross. This seems to be unavoidable,
since the legs of the horn on the torque tube are aligned in the same
plane.
I'm considering bending or twisting the legs so the cables don't rub.
Is
the rubbing going to cause unacceptable wear problems in the cables? Is
it
common to other Piet's with this arrangement?
Any comments would be much appreciated. Thanks to all who contribute to
this really great list.
John Smoyer
Mid-Atlantic Air Museum
Reading, PA
________________________________________________________________________________
From: <harvey.rule(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: I found the VW Reduction info
Date: Feb 09, 2007
There is absolutely no way you could take off in that thing in a level
condition without tearring that prop all to hell.You would have to hold the
tail down and make a three point takeoff and landing and God help ya if
there is any abnormalities in the field.You will be eating toothpicks for
weeks!
>From: "Bill Church" <eng(at)canadianrogers.com>
>Reply-To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: I found the VW Reduction info
>Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 10:25:39 -0500
>
>Here's a link to the Valley Engineering website:
>
>http://www.culverprops.com/index.php
>
>And here's one of their webpages with video of a 66-foot take-off, using
>a VW/PSRU. Wow!
> http://www.culverprops.com/back-yard-flyer.php
>
>Granted, that's a special airplane - look at that wing construction. And
>they don't say specifically how much the plane weighs, but it looks
>pretty spartan.
>Not sure that it would be applicable to a Pietenpol, but those guys are
>doing some very interesting work.
>
>Bill C
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 09, 2007
From: gus notti <gus_notti(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Several ?? on this Pietenpol I just bought. and engine
mount length
OK I have to thank all of you for the very good input so far, Yes I will buy an
set of plans.
Will the plans tell me what I need to know about weight and balance and the correct
design
of the A65 motor mount? Now remember this Pietenpol had a A65 on it and it flew
off the needed 25 hours, then the motor had some problems that's when and A&P
swapped in the VW conversion. It's no big deal it's just going to take a little
longer to get her in the air,
I was thinking I would be in the air late next month. You know I gave $5500.00
for it.
I don't know if that's a good deal or not, but I just sold a older PA22 I had
so I could play with another PA20 I was working on.
About the motor mount I think I will find a mount for a A65 and just extend it
as needed.
Any luck with that IDEA?
Thanks.
If anybody has a mount they want to part with I'm in the market.......
Thanks,
I was going to shoot a coat of pain on it and bolt the wings on it and taxi test
it and fly it,
I think I'll forget the paint, but I will taxi test and may fly it with the VW
on her. I have a private srtip all I need is approx 70feet agl to be safe, but
if it stopped running it would be
trouble......We see.
shad bell wrote:
As far as a C65 mount for your piet, you wil probably have to make your own
or have someone custom make it for you. There is usually enough differences
from one homebuilt, A Piet in this case, to another (measurements) that a mount
off someone elses piet probably won't fit yours. This might not be the case,
maybe you will get lucky and find one that fits your engine mount fittings on
the longerons and just bolt er on and go. Also doing some weight and ballance
figures on your plane with you or the intended pilot's weight in the rear seat
and normal fuel load will be very helpful for getting the CG correct. Make
the mount the correct length to suit YOUR Piet with you flying it. This can
save a lot of weight in ballast, especially if it ends up tail heavy. 5 lbs
tail heavy can eaisly take 40lbs of ballest at the firewall to compensate. 2
inches of tubing is a lot lighter than ballest. I have some methoods of figuring
mount length in my Jungster 1 plans if you are
interested. Chuck Ganzer could probably chime in on this one, I believe his mount
is longer than most and probably for CG reasons.
Shad
gus notti wrote:
OK, where does A want to be Pietenpol flyer find a C65 motor mount?
I have a C65 I'll just major her real quick. Any thoughts?
I'm still going to taxi tax the VW conversion just to see.
---------------------------------
Have a burning question? Go to Yahoo! Answers and get answers from real people
who know.
---------------------------------
Bored stiff? Loosen up...
Download and play hundreds of games for free on Yahoo! Games.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Terry Hall" <adaairport(at)cableone.net>
Subject: North Texas and Oklahomal Pietenpol's welcome
Date: Feb 09, 2007
Hello everyone,
If you Piet pilots in North Texas and Oklahoma are looking for a place
to fly on June 16, 2007, why not fly to the Ada Air Expo in Ada, OK?
We'd love to have you.
Sincerely,
Terry Hall
Sky Scout Builder
Airport manager, City of Ada
________________________________________________________________________________
From: <harvey.rule(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: North Texas and Oklahomal Pietenpol's welcome
Date: Feb 09, 2007
We are havin a flyin and car drive in at Redeau Valley field south of Kars
on June 10th in the Ottawa area.Flyin ,look at some old cars,have a burger
and pop or a hot dog and sit a while.
>From: "Terry Hall" <adaairport(at)cableone.net>
>Reply-To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: North Texas and Oklahomal Pietenpol's welcome
>Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 11:09:05 -0600
>
>Hello everyone,
>
>If you Piet pilots in North Texas and Oklahoma are looking for a place to
>fly on June 16, 2007, why not fly to the Ada Air Expo in Ada, OK? We'd
>love to have you.
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Terry Hall
>Sky Scout Builder
>Airport manager, City of Ada
________________________________________________________________________________
From: <harvey.rule(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: North Texas and Oklahomal Pietenpol's welcome
Date: Feb 09, 2007
We are having a flyin and potluck at the Redeau Valley field by the Redeau
river on March 3rd for those hearty guys who like to fly during the
winter.Com on out and join the fun at Toms hanger for some excellent chilli!
>From: <harvey.rule(at)sympatico.ca>
>Reply-To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: North Texas and Oklahomal Pietenpol's welcome
>Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 17:53:55 +0000
>
>
>We are havin a flyin and car drive in at Redeau Valley field south of Kars
>on June 10th in the Ottawa area.Flyin ,look at some old cars,have a burger
>and pop or a hot dog and sit a while.
>
>
>>From: "Terry Hall" <adaairport(at)cableone.net>
>>Reply-To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>>To:
>>Subject: Pietenpol-List: North Texas and Oklahomal Pietenpol's welcome
>>Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 11:09:05 -0600
>>
>>Hello everyone,
>>
>>If you Piet pilots in North Texas and Oklahoma are looking for a place to
>>fly on June 16, 2007, why not fly to the Ada Air Expo in Ada, OK? We'd
>>love to have you.
>>
>>Sincerely,
>>
>>Terry Hall
>>Sky Scout Builder
>>Airport manager, City of Ada
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Several ?? on this Pietenpol I just bought. and engine
mount
From: "Catdesigns" <Catdesigns(at)comcast.net>
Date: Feb 09, 2007
Looks like you will need to buy the Original plans plus the Supplemental plans
if you want the motor mount plans. The wing plans are only needed if you have
a 3-piece wing. Thay have a CG and W&B information in the plans
Below are details of the plan packages.
Copied from
http://www.pressenter.com/~apietenp/My_Homepage_Files/Page47.html
Original Air Camper Plans
Air Camper (1933 design) - Two Place Plane - Simple, straight forward airplane
devoid of frills and built for hard usage. Air Camper uses the Ford Model A
engine. Plans include the Ford A conversion, and wood or steel fuselage. If you
are planning to use an engine lighter in weight than the Ford A (245 lb.), It is
suggested that you also purchase the supplemental Plans which elongates the
fuselage in order to accommodate the weight and balance requirements when
using a lighter aircraft engine.
Original Air Camper Supplemental Plans
Includes drawings showing the installation of the Corvair engine. This packet of
plans includes drawing for a longer fuselage, Corvair motor mount drawing,
Corvair propeller hub drawing, 65 hp Continental engine motor mount drawing.
Original Air Camper Three Piece Wing Plans
Includes and depicts the design changes to the original wing drawings. The
purpose is for those who haven't adequate building space to assemble a one
piece 29 foot wing.
--------
Chris Tracy
WestCoastPiet.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=94006#94006
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 09, 2007
From: Steve Ruse <steve(at)wotelectronics.com>
Subject: Re: North Texas and Oklahomal Pietenpol's welcome
I've already got it on my calendar, I hope it works out.
Is anybody else going to make it? I always like seeing Piets...there
are not enough of them around.
Steve Ruse
Norman, OK
Quoting Terry Hall :
> Hello everyone,
>
> If you Piet pilots in North Texas and Oklahoma are looking for a
> place to fly on June 16, 2007, why not fly to the Ada Air Expo in
> Ada, OK? We'd love to have you.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Terry Hall
> Sky Scout Builder
> Airport manager, City of Ada
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 09, 2007
From: shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Chuck's Web site
Chuck, I just saw your web page for the 1st time. Very Nice! You were at the
airport I took my tailwheel training at, Union Co just north west of Columbus
Ohio. That is also where I met airshow man Gene Soucey. He was enroute to the
Dayton airshow a couple years ago and got stuck by weather, so Dad let him
borrow his truck to go in town to get a bite to eat. If your ever over this way
again (30 miles east of Union Co) let me know and you can fly in to the strip
and talk Tailwinds with Bill the airport owner, as he has had 2 of them, and
the guy I bought the house from has the oldest flying tailwind, or so I am told.
It was in the hanger the 1st time I came to look at the house, dissassembled
and ready for restoration.
Hope to see you at Brodhead 07
Shad
---------------------------------
Never Miss an Email
Stay connected with Yahoo! Mail on your mobile. Get started!
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 09, 2007
From: Larry Rice <rice(at)iapdatacom.net>
Subject: VW Reduction Units
http://www.culverprops.com
http://www.greatplainsas.com/
I still think you'd be better off with a Corvair, though. Big engine
loafing vs little one working hard - reliability? Reduction drive &
simplicity & reliability? Remember that a lot of the WWII rigs, even
with all the government $$$ poured into development still had torsional
vibration problems.
Micro Mong Larry
--
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Wizzard187(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 09, 2007
Subject: Re: Engines and Mounts
Pieters, Does anyone know if it would be possible to bore out a 65 case to
fit 85 cylinders. New ones are much cheaper than 65s. Ken in cold Iowa
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 09, 2007
Subject: Re: Rubbing Aileron cables
In a message dated 2/9/2007 6:29:48 AM Central Standard Time,
jpsmoyer(at)verizon.net writes:
Is
the rubbing going to cause unacceptable wear problems in the cables? Is it
common to other Piet's with this arrangement?
John,
The rubbing is unacceptable. As mentioned in other posts, the best solution
is to offset the legs of the horns on the aileron torque tube, however, you
can also offset the holes in the base of the instrument area as somewhat of a
fairlead to keep them separated. And remember, there is no actual tension on
any of the control cables on the Pietenpol...just take all the slack out of the
cables.
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 10, 2007
Subject: Re: Several ?? on this Pietenpol I just bought. and engine
mo...
In a message dated 2/9/2007 11:01:31 AM Central Standard Time,
gus_notti(at)yahoo.com writes:
About the motor mount I think I will find a mount for a A65 and just extend
it as needed.
Any luck with that IDEA?
Gus,
It would be extremely unlikely that you would find an engine mount that
didn't need extensive modifications. Therefore, I think the best solution, after
some very careful weight & balance calculations, is to determine exactly where
the engine should be in relation to the firewall, and build the engine mount
from scratch. It would necessitate the construction of an engine mount jig,
but you will end up with much better results.
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 10, 2007
Subject: Re: North Texas and Oklahomal Pietenpol's welcome
In a message dated 2/9/2007 4:32:59 PM Central Standard Time,
steve(at)wotelectronics.com writes:
Is anybody else going to make it?
Steve,
I've also got the Ada OK Air Expo on my calender. I would have made it
there last summer, but work got in the way. And don't forget...first saturdays
of the month, Ponca City breakfast.
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 10, 2007
Subject: Re: Chuck's Web site
In a message dated 2/9/2007 6:13:41 PM Central Standard Time,
aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com writes:
Chuck, I just saw your web page for the 1st time. Very Nice! You were at
the airport I took my tailwheel training at, Union Co just north west of
Columbus Ohio. That is also where I met airshow man Gene Soucey. He was enroute
to
the Dayton airshow a couple years ago and got stuck by weather, so Dad let
him borrow his truck to go in town to get a bite to eat. If your ever over this
way again (30 miles east of Union Co) let me know and you can fly in to the
strip and talk Tailwinds with Bill the airport owner, as he has had 2 of them,
and the guy I bought the house from has the oldest flying tailwind, or so I am
told. It was in the hanger the 1st time I came to look at the house,
dissassembled and ready for restoration.
Hope to see you at Brodhead 07
Shad
Hey Shad,
I'm glad you like my site.
I stopped at Union Co. Airport for a visit with my sister. I think they have
some pictures of Gene Soucey there on the wall. When I took Sis for a
flight, there was a Blimp doing some flights in the area, and was using a small
field a couple of miles from the airport. We circled above the Blimp about 4 or
5
times when it landed...Smoke On of course !! They have about 20 or 30 people
standing in a formation on the ground, to grab hold of the ropes hanging down
from the Blimp, as it comes in to land. Quite an operation !!
I'll be sure to stop at your home field, if I'm ever in that area. Nothing I
like better than talking Pietenpols and Tailwinds !!
I gotta make Brodhead '07 this year. Upon departure, I'm flying cover for my
buddy and his wife on their Harley, en route to Sturges.
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 10, 2007
Subject: Re: VW Reduction Units
In a message dated 2/9/2007 7:46:28 PM Central Standard Time,
rice(at)iapdatacom.net writes:
Remember that a lot of the WWII rigs, even
with all the government $$$ poured into development still had torsional
vibration problems.
That's why the Rolls Royce Merlin Engine, in the P51 Mustang, has the prop
shaft attached to the crankshaft at the mid point on the crank.
The real beauty of a Pietenpol, is in it's simplicity. Keep it that way, and
you will be rewarded with a reliable, fun to fly airplane.
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 10, 2007
From: gus notti <gus_notti(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Less talk weight and balance real quick.
Well I don't know the 1st thing about it on the Pietenpol. Anyhelp?
Yes I'm going to buy a set of plans. But for now what is the forward cg and back
cg?
Thanks
---------------------------------
Never Miss an Email
Stay connected with Yahoo! Mail on your mobile. Get started!
________________________________________________________________________________
From: TBYH(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 10, 2007
Subject: Backyard Flyer
Neat little airplane. I notice that they brag about being able to remove the
wings in five minutes.
Shoot, I bet I could get the wings off in 5 milliseconds -- with a 7-G
pull-up!
Okay -- so I'm twisted, but then I'm building my own airplane, so what does
that tell you.... ; )
Fred B.
Still shivering in Wisconsin
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "gcardinal" <gcardinal(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Less talk weight and balance real quick.
Date: Feb 10, 2007
Gus,
The cg should fall between 15 and 20 inches aft of the wing leading
edge.
Greg Cardinal
----- Original Message -----
From: gus notti
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2007 8:14 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Less talk weight and balance real quick.
Well I don't know the 1st thing about it on the Pietenpol. Anyhelp?
Yes I'm going to buy a set of plans. But for now what is the forward
cg and back cg?
Thanks
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Never Miss an Email
Stay connected with Yahoo! Mail on your mobile. Get started!
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 10, 2007
From: del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com>
Subject: Re: Several ?? on this Pietenpol I just bought. and engine
mo...
I have acquired a 5,000 sq ft space in which I am setting up with my machine shop, cnc router, special jigs and fixtures for different airplane parts. Are there any suppliers out there right now for piet motor mounts? I could make up a fixture for welding the mounts. My intention is to have it available for builders to come and build here, but for parts I may just build and ship. Or bring some to brodhead. Maybe even bring the jig to brodhead along with a gas torch, tubing and a way to cut the tubing and have a workshop set up. Just thinking out loud......Any thoughts on this subject? I know William used to do it, but I know he just doesn't have time for it anymore. I started a website www.wisconsinoutdoorproducts.com and will be adding to it as I go. Not in it for the big bucks, just looking for an excuse to have a nice shop and do something for the homebuilders.
I also took a part time job as a trucker delivering garage doors all over the
east coast, I go once a month for a week and have been having fun seeing the
country and stopping at aviation points of interest. I stopped recently at Barber
field and met Forrest...I think I was in your country Mike C.
Del
Rcaprd(at)aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 2/9/2007 11:01:31 AM Central Standard Time, gus_notti(at)yahoo.com
writes:
About the motor mount I think I will find a mount for a A65 and just extend
it as needed.
Any luck with that IDEA?
Gus,
It would be extremely unlikely that you would find an engine mount that didn't
need extensive modifications. Therefore, I think the best solution, after some
very careful weight & balance calculations, is to determine exactly where
the engine should be in relation to the firewall, and build the engine mount from
scratch. It would necessitate the construction of an engine mount jig, but
you will end up with much better results.
Chuck G.
NX770CG
Del-New Richmond, Wi
"farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com"
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 10, 2007
From: shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Chuck's Web site
Chuck, Must have been the GoodYear boys from Akron. That thing is down this way
alot in the spring/ summer. I have "commenced attack" on it a couple times
in a Champ, but not yet with the Pietenpol Intercepter/ TP Bomber. Also if you
stop in here don't forget your post flight thirst, the fridge in the hanger
rarely runs dry of beer.
Shad
Rcaprd(at)aol.com wrote:
I'm glad you like my site.
I stopped at Union Co. Airport for a visit with my sister. I think they have
some pictures of Gene Soucey there on the wall. When I took Sis for a flight,
there was a Blimp doing some flights in the area, and was using a small field
a couple of miles from the airport. We circled above the Blimp about 4 or 5
times when it landed...Smoke On of course !! They have about 20 or 30 people
standing in a formation on the ground, to grab hold of the ropes hanging down
from the Blimp, as it comes in to land. Quite an operation !!
I'll be sure to stop at your home field, if I'm ever in that area. Nothing I
like better than talking Pietenpols and Tailwinds !!
I gotta make Brodhead '07 this year. Upon departure, I'm flying cover for my
buddy and his wife on their Harley, en route to Sturges.
Chuck G.
NX770CG
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
From: AMsafetyC(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 10, 2007
Subject: need some quick and easy info
Well, Quick and easy for you maybe, confusing for me!
I cut the first wood today and would like to continue that process. I am out
of the country all next week beginning tomorrow. I would like to put together
a plywood order, however from all that I have seen and read there all types of
plywood types, grades, types and sized, all of which add to the confusion.
Can someone please provide me with a basic plywood order list by size grade
and type Ill need to get to a completed project, in the quantities sizes and
type I should be ordering. I really have no desire to waste anymore time waiting
for materials so I can order on line Monday and hopefully have the stuff I
need by the time I get back on Friday, or at least have it in transit.
Naturally if there is anything I can use from home depot please advise me by
type thickness and quantity. I am all for going out to get what I need but
those things I cant pick up I want to get moving ASAP.
I appreciate any and all assistance offered and given, please be as specific
as possible and if you can tell me what each size is going to be used for. I
have a full set of prints but the variety seems so great I would like to know
what the best and most available choices and selections are
Thanks
John
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Catdesigns" <catdesigns(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: need some quick and easy info
Date: Feb 10, 2007
As near as I can remember I used,
1 sheet of 1/8-inch for the fuselage sides (make sure you can get it out
of one sheet)
1/2 of a sheet of 1/4-inch for the floor (2 feet x 8 feet)
1 sheet of 1/8-inch for the seat backs, head rest, inst panels and
gussets for fuselage
1 sheet 1/8 inch for tail gussets and firewall, but there is a lot left
over.
All Aircraft grade Mahogany from Aircraft Spruce.
Don't know what else you will need
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
Website at http://www.Westcoastpiet.com
----- Original Message -----
From: AMsafetyC(at)aol.com
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2007 8:40 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: need some quick and easy info
Well, Quick and easy for you maybe, confusing for me!
I cut the first wood today and would like to continue that process. I
am out of the country all next week beginning tomorrow. I would like to
put together a plywood order, however from all that I have seen and read
there all types of plywood types, grades, types and sized, all of which
add to the confusion.
Can someone please provide me with a basic plywood order list by size
grade and type Ill need to get to a completed project, in the quantities
sizes and type I should be ordering. I really have no desire to waste
anymore time waiting for materials so I can order on line Monday and
hopefully have the stuff I need by the time I get back on Friday, or at
least have it in transit.
Naturally if there is anything I can use from home depot please advise
me by type thickness and quantity. I am all for going out to get what I
need but those things I cant pick up I want to get moving ASAP.
I appreciate any and all assistance offered and given, please be as
specific as possible and if you can tell me what each size is going to
be used for. I have a full set of prints but the variety seems so great
I would like to know what the best and most available choices and
selections are
Thanks
John
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Silk Flyer's Scarf
Date: Feb 11, 2007
I received a military surplus catalog last week (don't have a clue how
they got my name) and inside found they have listed "silk flyer's
scarf Used, excellent white with embroidered Army AirForces logo.
Measures 6' long X 13"" $9.95. Think I'll order one. They also have
Mil Spec Goggles for $14.95.
If anyone is interested I'll provide ordering info. Just be awear, I
don't know anything about this outfit.
Gene
________________________________________________________________________________
From: HelsperSew(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 11, 2007
Subject: Re: Silk Flyer's Scarf
HI Gene,
I too would be interested in the scarf. Does this outfit have a websight?
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Silk Flyer's Scarf
Date: Feb 11, 2007
Dan,
The web site is www.MajorSurplus.com
Order phone # is 1-800-441-8855
Silk Flyer's Scarf is #8-7648
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: HelsperSew(at)aol.com
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2007 8:18 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Silk Flyer's Scarf
HI Gene,
I too would be interested in the scarf. Does this outfit have a
websight?
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: powerpoint presentation
Date: Feb 11, 2007
Well, the presentation to EAA Chapter 35 last night went very well. A
couple of interesting revelations. One was that the Chapter (or several
members of it) had built a Piet years ago, and it is reportedly sitting in a
hangar or barn somewhere with the wings off of it. Hmmm... I'll have to
follow up on that rumor! Maybe get the old bird out of storage, restore it
to airworthiness, and put another one in the air.
Second thing I found out is that not everyone is fond of smoke. A couple of
ladies (remember, we're based on an airpark with people living right
alongside the runway and hangars) remarked to me that they didn't care for
that smelly old smoke and to make sure the wind was blowing away from the
homes if I laid down a cloud. Hmmm... a lesson learned.
Oscar Zuniga
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
_________________________________________________________________
FREE online classifieds from Windows Live Expo buy and sell with people
you know
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "gcardinal" <gcardinal(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Silk Flyer's Scarf
Date: Feb 11, 2007
Another source of moderately priced accessories is Garcia Aviation
www.garciaaviation.com
And for truly top-shelf quality and authenticity check out Eastman
Leather Co.
www.eastmanleather.com
Bring a fat wallet.........
Greg C.
----- Original Message -----
From: Gene & Tammy
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2007 12:30 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Silk Flyer's Scarf
Dan,
The web site is www.MajorSurplus.com
Order phone # is 1-800-441-8855
Silk Flyer's Scarf is #8-7648
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: HelsperSew(at)aol.com
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2007 8:18 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Silk Flyer's Scarf
HI Gene,
I too would be interested in the scarf. Does this outfit have a
websight?
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
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: Silk Flyer's Scarf
Date: Feb 11, 2007
Greg,
A great site! Thank you.
Gene
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: "Ronnie Wagner" <wlrdlr(at)starband.net>
Subject: Piet for sale
Date: Feb 11, 2007
Pieters,
I'm going to list my plane on eBay in the next few days but in
appreciation for all the info I've gathered from this list, I thought I
would give someone here a chance at it first. I'm not a perfectionist by
any means, but I'm not a fisherman either :). My plane is sitting on the
gear, with controls installed, skytec struts, aluminum tanks, and some
instruments (not installed). I have laminated spars built and ribs
built, but not made into wings yet, the tailfeathers are complete but
not on the fuse.
It has a Franklin 90 hp engine mounted and cowling that isn't mounted
yet but comes with it, also have exhaust, carb, and Sensenich prop that
came with firewall forward package I traded for 2 years ago. The engine
was flying when removed from a clipped wing metal tube Piet in favor of
a 150 horse..... I talked to the man who removed it 6 mos after I traded
for it and he claimed it was good to go when he took it off his plane
and sold it to the man I bought it from. I have no logs so I would
suggest a borescope at the least and a teardown at the most. The welding
on gear, control and mounts was done by my mentor and an AP.
We bought building supply lumber and handpicked and cut down large
boards for all the wood, I was pleased with the price and the quality,
(at the time my local eaa chapter was rebuilding a plane and we ordered
900 dollars worth of unusable spruce, so I chose the hardware store
route, and wouldn't do it any different now.)
I have the seat leaned back 2 inches from plans and the bottom rear part
of the seat lowered 1 and a1/2 inches. I am 6"1' and fit nicely. I
raised the turtledeck and built a hat box in it with a couple extra
stringers to give it a more rounded look, ala Mike Cuys video. (thanks
Mike)
Whoever buys the plane can have my WW plans and several Corvair engine
pcs, ( enough to build a motor) also one of the blocks has a PSRU on it.
I started out with plans for the Corvair but when the Franklin engine
package came along I decided that would be best for me.
I'm selling the plane for several reasons, none of them have to do with
quality or workmanship problems, more along the lines of time
commitments, storage and a business that's growing faster than I'm
capable of running it. I'll be sad to see it go but would love to see it
fly.
Everyone on the list has contributed something but I would like to
Thank, Mike Cuy, Corky and Jim Markle especially.
The Piet is 5500.00 and you can email me off list for my phone numbers
if your interested.
Thanks everyone,
Ronnie Wagner
Mena, Arkansas
________________________________________________________________________________
From: <harvey.rule(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: Piet for sale
Date: Feb 12, 2007
Real sorry to hear you have to pack it in Ron.
>From: "Ronnie Wagner" <wlrdlr(at)starband.net>
>Reply-To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: Piet for sale
>Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 21:38:25 -0600
>
>Pieters,
> I'm going to list my plane on eBay in the next few days but in
>appreciation for all the info I've gathered from this list, I thought I
>would give someone here a chance at it first. I'm not a perfectionist by
>any means, but I'm not a fisherman either :). My plane is sitting on the
>gear, with controls installed, skytec struts, aluminum tanks, and some
>instruments (not installed). I have laminated spars built and ribs built,
>but not made into wings yet, the tailfeathers are complete but not on the
>fuse.
>It has a Franklin 90 hp engine mounted and cowling that isn't mounted yet
>but comes with it, also have exhaust, carb, and Sensenich prop that came
>with firewall forward package I traded for 2 years ago. The engine was
>flying when removed from a clipped wing metal tube Piet in favor of a 150
>horse..... I talked to the man who removed it 6 mos after I traded for it
>and he claimed it was good to go when he took it off his plane and sold it
>to the man I bought it from. I have no logs so I would suggest a borescope
>at the least and a teardown at the most. The welding on gear, control and
>mounts was done by my mentor and an AP.
>We bought building supply lumber and handpicked and cut down large boards
>for all the wood, I was pleased with the price and the quality, (at the
>time my local eaa chapter was rebuilding a plane and we ordered 900 dollars
>worth of unusable spruce, so I chose the hardware store route, and wouldn't
>do it any different now.)
>I have the seat leaned back 2 inches from plans and the bottom rear part of
>the seat lowered 1 and a1/2 inches. I am 6"1' and fit nicely. I raised the
>turtledeck and built a hat box in it with a couple extra stringers to give
>it a more rounded look, ala Mike Cuys video. (thanks Mike)
>Whoever buys the plane can have my WW plans and several Corvair engine pcs,
>( enough to build a motor) also one of the blocks has a PSRU on it. I
>started out with plans for the Corvair but when the Franklin engine package
>came along I decided that would be best for me.
>I'm selling the plane for several reasons, none of them have to do with
>quality or workmanship problems, more along the lines of time commitments,
>storage and a business that's growing faster than I'm capable of running
>it. I'll be sad to see it go but would love to see it fly.
>Everyone on the list has contributed something but I would like to Thank,
>Mike Cuy, Corky and Jim Markle especially.
>The Piet is 5500.00 and you can email me off list for my phone numbers if
>your interested.
>Thanks everyone,
>Ronnie Wagner
>Mena, Arkansas
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: elevator trim
Date: Feb 12, 2007
Since it's so slow here on the list, I'll review my elevator trim system a
bit. If you noticed the last photo on my "first flight" webpage,
http://www.flysquirrel.net/piets/Firstflight.html , you may have noticed
that on the ground the elevators are nearly neutral when the stick isn't
secured aft with the safety belt. That's due to the bungee tensioner that I
installed for elevator trim.
We haven't flown it on any cross-country yet, but around the pattern it
seems just about right for stick forces. What I did was just take out some
of the heaviness with the bungee, but additional back pressure can be
applied if needed in cruise. I've employed the "cord with knots, dropped
into a notch" method, with the bungee attached to the elevator bellcrank
back in the fuselage. The pilot can reach down to the right side front of
the seat and grab a ring, pull the cord out to the next knot, drop it in
that slot, or vice versa to back off. The idea is not to use this in the
pattern, but at cruise where it's needed. In the pattern, the stick
pressures have not been heavy at all. That was somewhat of a surprise to me
at first, because when it's sitting on the ground the stick makes all kinds
of noises and has quite a bit of resistance to being stirred around. In
flight it's very responsive and smooth.
The last time I flew a Cub, maybe 6 years ago, I remember the stick being
pretty heavy to hold back once you pulled power abeam the numbers and set up
your glide unless you started cranking in some trim. The Piet seems to have
pretty light stick forces, but maybe that means my bungee system is helping.
I should disconnect it to see what difference it makes. Something else to
play with.
Oscar Zuniga
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
_________________________________________________________________
Turn searches into helpful donations. Make your search count.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: HelsperSew(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 12, 2007
Subject: Re: elevator trim
Oscar,
I have incorporated a similar bungee system, also applying pressures to the
elevator bellcrank, either up or down. The mechanism I devised to apply the
"pulls" on the bungee's is a square-tube-inside-a-square tube- slider, with a
spring-loaded pin to set it where you want. Initially wanted to have it
with a tensioned lever, but couldn't find a place to put it and make it work the
way I wanted. The slider tubes are mounted on the floor down to the left
side. Not sure how this will prove out, but it will be interesting. How have
others coped with this problem?
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Roman Bukolt" <conceptmodels(at)tds.net>
Subject: Re: elevator trim
Date: Feb 12, 2007
Elevator trim.
As I understand it if your CG is aft you usually need forward pressure on
the stick to maintain level flight, and aft pressure if your CG is forward.
On both Bill Rewey's plane and mine, our CG is aft so we both need forward
pressure.
I followed Bill's elevator trim idea.
He has a loose fitting rubber lined Adel ( ? ) clamp on the stick with a
bunge cord attached between the clamp and a mount down low on the front seat
back just above where the control shaft goes forward under the front seat.
The trim is easy to adjust by sliding the clamp up or down the joy stick.
The downward pull on the clamp causes it to bind and stay where you put it.
On his long trips ( four of them to Sun N Fun) he was able to leave the
stick unattended long enough to unfold and study charts, take photos, and
look through airport directories for suitable fuel stops. When it came time
to land or take off, you simply slide the clamp down to take the load off.
Or you stilll have full control of thestick with the clamp in place because
of the stretch ability of the bunge.
So, I did the same for my Piet. Works for me!
Roman Bukolt Nx20795
----- Original Message -----
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 3:11 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: elevator trim
>
>
> Since it's so slow here on the list, I'll review my elevator trim system a
> bit. If you noticed the last photo on my "first flight" webpage,
> http://www.flysquirrel.net/piets/Firstflight.html , you may have noticed
> that on the ground the elevators are nearly neutral when the stick isn't
> secured aft with the safety belt. That's due to the bungee tensioner that
> I installed for elevator trim.
>
> We haven't flown it on any cross-country yet, but around the pattern it
> seems just about right for stick forces. What I did was just take out
> some of the heaviness with the bungee, but additional back pressure can be
> applied if needed in cruise. I've employed the "cord with knots, dropped
> into a notch" method, with the bungee attached to the elevator bellcrank
> back in the fuselage. The pilot can reach down to the right side front of
> the seat and grab a ring, pull the cord out to the next knot, drop it in
> that slot, or vice versa to back off. The idea is not to use this in the
> pattern, but at cruise where it's needed. In the pattern, the stick
> pressures have not been heavy at all. That was somewhat of a surprise to
> me at first, because when it's sitting on the ground the stick makes all
> kinds of noises and has quite a bit of resistance to being stirred around.
> In flight it's very responsive and smooth.
>
> The last time I flew a Cub, maybe 6 years ago, I remember the stick being
> pretty heavy to hold back once you pulled power abeam the numbers and set
> up your glide unless you started cranking in some trim. The Piet seems to
> have pretty light stick forces, but maybe that means my bungee system is
> helping. I should disconnect it to see what difference it makes.
> Something else to play with.
>
> Oscar Zuniga
> San Antonio, TX
> mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
> website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Turn searches into helpful donations. Make your search count.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Trucker Del
From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com>
Date: Feb 12, 2007
I was just reading Mike's Trucker Del post and realized that a lot of people really
do travel the Ohio turnpike frequently. So I thought I'd give an invitation.
I live about 10 minutes or so south of the "east-most" Ohio Turnpike exit.
I keep my plane about three miles from my house. If anyone is ever traveling
the turnpike and would like to stop and talk Piets, just let me know.
Don Emch
NX899DE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=94607#94607
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Propeller duplicator
From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com>
Date: Feb 12, 2007
Some of the talk about props over the last couple of months has stirred my interest
in propeller carving. I'm not really sure I would want to tackle something
like this, but I have thought about playing around with it. I know there are
some guys on here, Chuck G. and Greg C. and there may be more, that have carved
their own props. Where did you find your prop duplicator plans? I keep
looking online and can't seem to find anything. I'm still amazed that guys like
Ed Sterba are still out there that carve each prop individually by hand! I
wish I had that talent!
Don Emch
NX899DE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=94609#94609
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: elevator trim
Date: Feb 12, 2007
Roman-
Just out of curiosity, do your and Bill Rewey's planes have the fuel tanks
in the wing center section or out ahead in the nose cowling? If your fuel
is in the wing, maybe that's why you need forward stick to trim it in
cruise.
41CC has the fuel in the nose cowling ahead of the front cockpit and neither
Charlie nor I weigh all that much so with full fuel it has needed aft stick
to trim it in cruise. That's what it needed when Corky -er, Nathan- and
Edwin flew it. Corky had a bungee wrapped around the stick to apply back
pressure, with the "slide it up the stick for more, down the stick for less"
like you have except pulling back instead of forward.
Every Piet is different! Aren't you glad we're not all building
RV-somethings? ;o)
Oscar Zuniga
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
_________________________________________________________________
>From predictions to trailers, check out the MSN Entertainment Guide to the
Academy Awards
http://movies.msn.com/movies/oscars2007/?icid=ncoscartagline1
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Peter W Johnson" <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au>
Subject: Propeller duplicator
Date: Feb 13, 2007
Don,
Try http://www.aerodyndesign.com/PROP_DUP/PROP_DUP.htm or
http://www.wood-carver.com/Gemini.html or
http://www.donsplans.com/html/aircraft.html
I built mine by hand but I would like to have built one of these first.
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 Don Emch
Sent: Tuesday, 13 February 2007 1:34 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Propeller duplicator
Some of the talk about props over the last couple of months has stirred my
interest in propeller carving. I'm not really sure I would want to tackle
something like this, but I have thought about playing around with it. I
know there are some guys on here, Chuck G. and Greg C. and there may be
more, that have carved their own props. Where did you find your prop
duplicator plans? I keep looking online and can't seem to find anything.
I'm still amazed that guys like Ed Sterba are still out there that carve
each prop individually by hand! I wish I had that talent!
Don Emch
NX899DE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=94609#94609
--
1:23 PM
--
1:23 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "gcardinal" <gcardinal(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Propeller duplicator
Date: Feb 12, 2007
Plans for the prop duplicator were obtained from Gary McGill. He used to
advertise in the back of Sport Aviation. Not sure if he is still around.
I also have to add that it is Dale Johnson who is responsible for the prop
work on NX18235.
See attached picture.
Greg C.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com>
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 8:33 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Propeller duplicator
>
> Some of the talk about props over the last couple of months has stirred my
> interest in propeller carving. I'm not really sure I would want to tackle
> something like this, but I have thought about playing around with it. I
> know there are some guys on here, Chuck G. and Greg C. and there may be
> more, that have carved their own props. Where did you find your prop
> duplicator plans? I keep looking online and can't seem to find anything.
> I'm still amazed that guys like Ed Sterba are still out there that carve
> each prop individually by hand! I wish I had that talent!
>
> Don Emch
> NX899DE
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=94609#94609
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Catdesigns" <catdesigns(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Propeller duplicator
Date: Feb 12, 2007
My brother built a duplicator from these plans.. Said it worked good.
http://www.copycarver.com/
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
Website at http://www.Westcoastpiet.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com>
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 6:33 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Propeller duplicator
>
> Some of the talk about props over the last couple of months has stirred my
> interest in propeller carving. I'm not really sure I would want to tackle
> something like this, but I have thought about playing around with it. I
> know there are some guys on here, Chuck G. and Greg C. and there may be
> more, that have carved their own props. Where did you find your prop
> duplicator plans? I keep looking online and can't seem to find anything.
> I'm still amazed that guys like Ed Sterba are still out there that carve
> each prop individually by hand! I wish I had that talent!
>
> Don Emch
> NX899DE
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=94609#94609
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 13, 2007
Subject: Re: powerpoint presentation
In a message dated 2/11/2007 2:18:58 PM Central Standard Time,
taildrags(at)hotmail.com writes:
Second thing I found out is that not everyone is fond of smoke. A couple of
ladies (remember, we're based on an airpark with people living right
alongside the runway and hangars) remarked to me that they didn't care for
that smelly old smoke and to make sure the wind was blowing away from the
homes if I laid down a cloud. Hmmm... a lesson learned.
Oscar,
Use Baby Oil. Women love the smell of babies !!
Chuck 'Baby Oil' Gantzer
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 13, 2007
Subject: Re: elevator trim
In a message dated 2/12/2007 3:31:25 PM Central Standard Time,
HelsperSew(at)aol.com writes:
How have others coped with this problem?
I used fixed tabs on the trailing edge of the flippers. Simple install, and
no moving parts.
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 13, 2007
Subject: Re: Propeller duplicator
In a message dated 2/12/2007 8:38:03 PM Central Standard Time,
EmchAir(at)aol.com writes:
I know there are some guys on here, Chuck G. and Greg C. and there may be
more, that have carved their own props. Where did you find your prop duplicator
plans?
Don,
If you can build a Pietenpol, you can Certainly build a prop.
I didn't use a duplicator. I built two props for the Model A, and one
for the Continental A65. I've re-worked the prop for the A65 two times, to get
a little more RPM, and now have about 300 hours on that one. I used the book
by Eric Clutton, 'Propeller Making for the Amateur' - available through the
EAA. I still plan on building a Scimitar Prop for the Piet, using most of his
methods. I corresponded with him quite a bit (via e-mail) on the Scimitar, and
I find it a very interesting design.
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 13, 2007
From: del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com>
Subject: Re: powerpoint presentation
Rcaprd(at)aol.com wrote: In a message dated 2/11/2007 2:18:58 PM Central Standard
Time, taildrags(at)hotmail.com writes:
Second thing I found out is that not everyone is fond of smoke. A couple of
ladies (remember, we're based on an airpark with people living right
alongside the runway and hangars) remarked to me that they didn't care for
that smelly old smoke and to make sure the wind was blowing away from the
homes if I laid down a cloud. Hmmm... a lesson learned.
Oscar,
Use Baby Oil. Women love the smell of babies !!
Chuck 'Baby Oil' Gantzer
NX770CG
>>>>>Uhmmmm......say Chuck? I hate to reveal this to you... but baby oil isn't
made from babies...oh! and is this why your landings are always so soft?
Del
Del-New Richmond, Wi
"farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com"
---------------------------------
Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection.
Try the free Yahoo! Mail Beta.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 13, 2007
From: Kip and Beth Gardner <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: powerpoint presentation
Way off message, but Del, your comment reminded me of a recipe I have
in my files for Vegetarian Stew, it starts:
"Catch one plump vegetarian"
BTW, like Don Emch & Mikey, I live close to The OH Turnpike as well -
about 25 minutes due south off I-77, so you are welcome to visit here
too, but my project is still in the basement & pretty plain. Don &
Mikey, as most of you know, both have flying Piets that are just
plain pretty!!
Also, since it's a topic of discussion, does anyone out there have a
left-hand 64 x 33 (i.e. for Corvair) prop out there that could be
used as a duplication template? Even 1/2 of a prop, if you've been
unfortunate, would work. I have a mahogany/birch blank laid up & I
plan on trying my hand at turning it into a usable prop.
Thanks!
Kip Gardner
>
>Oscar,
>Use Baby Oil. Women love the smell of babies !!
>
>Chuck 'Baby Oil' Gantzer
>NX770CG
>
> >>>>>Uhmmmm......say Chuck? I hate to reveal this to you... but
>baby oil isn't made from babies...oh! and is this why your landings
>are always so soft?
>Del
>
>
>Del-New Richmond, Wi
>"farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com"
>
>
><
>
><http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
><http://forums.matronics.com>http://forums.matronics.com
--
North Canton, OH
January 30, 2007 - February 13, 2007
Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-fq