Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-gf
October 21, 2007 - November 13, 2007
Anyone know anything about the Campbell hand swaging tool? The price is
about $200 less than the "real" nicopress tool but I'm wondering if the
cable will know the difference?????
I saw an article several years ago (by Bill Rewey I think...) about how to
drill out a cable cutter to make an effective swaging tool...so I wonder if
this one might also do the job satisfatorily.
It's on eBay at:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&viewitem=&item=330177809225
Item number: 330177809225
Anyone ever tried one or know what I might be missing here?
Thanks!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "KMHeide, BA, CPO, FAAOP" <kmheidecpo(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Campbell swaging tool??? |
I believe the same tool is at Fleet Farm for the same price......if one is local
to you!
Anyone know anything about the Campbell hand swaging tool? The price is
about $200 less than the "real" nicopress tool but I'm wondering if the
cable will know the difference?????
I saw an article several years ago (by Bill Rewey I think...) about how to
drill out a cable cutter to make an effective swaging tool...so I wonder if
this one might also do the job satisfatorily.
It's on eBay at:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&viewitem=&item=330177809225
Item number: 330177809225
Anyone ever tried one or know what I might be missing here?
Thanks!
Kenneth M. Heide, BA, CPO, FAAOP
__________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | HelsperSew(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Campbell swaging tool??? |
Jim,
I've been flying behind those $13.00 tool swages for years. Still here.
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Stuck on fuselage joining dimensions |
| From: | "Ryan Michals" <aircamperace(at)yahoo.com> |
I am building a standard width, long "improved" Piet. The sup. Plans don't have
measurements for the width of the joined fuselage sides, in particular, the
empennage. What has everyone else done?
Ryan Michals
NXxxxCC
Clover Clipper
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dick Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Stuck on fuselage joining dimensions |
I used the width from the short fuse plan. Also, in setting up the bridge
decks, I used the dimensions from short fuse. That gave me extra room in
rear cockpit.
Dick N.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ryan Michals" <aircamperace(at)yahoo.com>
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 6:19 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Stuck on fuselage joining dimensions
>
>
> I am building a standard width, long "improved" Piet. The sup. Plans
> don't have measurements for the width of the joined fuselage sides, in
> particular, the empennage. What has everyone else done?
>
>
> Ryan Michals
> NXxxxCC
> Clover Clipper
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Eldredge <steve(at)byu.edu> |
| Subject: | Campbell swaging tool??? |
I bought a single action (like bolt cutter) type swager from Home depot abo
ut two years ago for $26. Look in the fencing department. I didn't need t
hem, but bought them anyway since I really would have liked to have them wh
en I built my piet!
Stevee
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-lis
t-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of HelsperSew(at)aol.com
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 2:55 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Campbell swaging tool???
Jim,
I've been flying behind those $13.00 tool swages for years. Still here.
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________
=========
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Egan <johnegan99(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Campbell swaging tool??? |
Jim M wrote: Anyone know anything about the Campbell hand swaging tool?
Regarding the swagging tool discussion: As a reminder, It's my understanding
that after we make our nicopress crimps, using a swagging tool, we measure the
crimped dimension of the nicopress using the proper gage. I recieved a little
gaging tool when I bought my $99 swagging tool from Aircraft Spruce. The
gage I recieved is similar to the gage shown in the Tony Bingalis book.
__________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Barry Davis" <bed(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Campbell swaging tool??? |
This is the same we used on 6 airplanes. It is adjustable. You can buy it
locally (Tractor Supply) if you have one nearby. My suggestion is to buy a
GO/NO-GO gauge fron A/Spruce and adjust the pinch to the correct setting, a
very simple adjustment.
Barry
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Markle" <jim_markle(at)mindspring.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2007 10:18 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Campbell swaging tool???
>
>
> Anyone know anything about the Campbell hand swaging tool? The price is
> about $200 less than the "real" nicopress tool but I'm wondering if the
> cable will know the difference?????
>
> I saw an article several years ago (by Bill Rewey I think...) about how to
> drill out a cable cutter to make an effective swaging tool...so I wonder
> if this one might also do the job satisfatorily.
>
> It's on eBay at:
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&viewitem=&item=330177809225
>
> Item number: 330177809225
>
> Anyone ever tried one or know what I might be missing here?
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Markle" <jim_markle(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Campbell swaging tool??? |
Tractor Supply? If I have one nearby? They know me by first name! :-)
This is just what I needed to know.
Thanks to everyone for all the very helpful input. I'm a lot more
comforable with the idea now...
I really appreciate everyone's help...
JM in Seattle...for the week...hoping to have time to go to the Boeing
museum...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Barry Davis" <bed(at)mindspring.com>
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 12:58 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Campbell swaging tool???
>
> This is the same we used on 6 airplanes. It is adjustable. You can buy it
> locally (Tractor Supply) if you have one nearby. My suggestion is to buy a
> GO/NO-GO gauge fron A/Spruce and adjust the pinch to the correct setting,
> a very simple adjustment.
> Barry
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim Markle" <jim_markle(at)mindspring.com>
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2007 10:18 PM
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Campbell swaging tool???
>
>
>>
>>
>> Anyone know anything about the Campbell hand swaging tool? The price is
>> about $200 less than the "real" nicopress tool but I'm wondering if the
>> cable will know the difference?????
>>
>> I saw an article several years ago (by Bill Rewey I think...) about how
>> to drill out a cable cutter to make an effective swaging tool...so I
>> wonder if this one might also do the job satisfatorily.
>>
>> It's on eBay at:
>> http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&viewitem=&item=330177809225
>>
>> Item number: 330177809225
>>
>> Anyone ever tried one or know what I might be missing here?
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Charvet <bcharvet(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Stuck on fuselage joining dimensions |
I just used the dimensions on the original plans at each station.
Seemed to work out fine
Ben
Ryan Michals wrote:
>
> I am building a standard width, long "improved" Piet. The sup. Plans don't
have measurements for the width of the joined fuselage sides, in particular, the
empennage. What has everyone else done?
>
>
> Ryan Michals
> NXxxxCC
> Clover Clipper
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Campbell swaging tool??? |
| From: | AmsafetyC(at)aol.com |
I was reading in one of my magazines that if you know a builder in Oklahoma, then
you don't need to buy one for your airplane.
Let me know when you buy the tool and get it figured out for the perfect clamp
pressure. Then put me first on the listto borrow it since I won't need my own!
You got that part covered
John
Bout time you got back in the game
Hope all is well with you on the ranch!
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-----Original Message-----
From: "Jim Markle" <jim_markle(at)mindspring.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 13:26:13
To:
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Campbell swaging tool???
Tractor Supply? If I have one nearby? They know me by first name! :-)
This is just what I needed to know.
Thanks to everyone for all the very helpful input. I'm a lot more
comforable with the idea now...
I really appreciate everyone's help...
JM in Seattle...for the week...hoping to have time to go to the Boeing
museum...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Barry Davis" <bed(at)mindspring.com>
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 12:58 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Campbell swaging tool???
>
> This is the same we used on 6 airplanes. It is adjustable. You can buy it
> locally (Tractor Supply) if you have one nearby. My suggestion is to buy a
> GO/NO-GO gauge fron A/Spruce and adjust the pinch to the correct setting,
> a very simple adjustment.
> Barry
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim Markle" <jim_markle(at)mindspring.com>
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2007 10:18 PM
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Campbell swaging tool???
>
>
>>
>>
>> Anyone know anything about the Campbell hand swaging tool? The price is
>> about $200 less than the "real" nicopress tool but I'm wondering if the
>> cable will know the difference?????
>>
>> I saw an article several years ago (by Bill Rewey I think...) about how
>> to drill out a cable cutter to make an effective swaging tool...so I
>> wonder if this one might also do the job satisfatorily.
>>
>> It's on eBay at:
>> http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&viewitem=&item=330177809225
>>
>> Item number: 330177809225
>>
>> Anyone ever tried one or know what I might be missing here?
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Markle <jim_markle(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Campbell swaging tool??? |
Hey, if you know a builder in Oklahoma.....tell me who it is!!! :-) Actually,
I spent some time this weekend bolting the wings on and using a laser level thingy
to level up the wings. I put an inch of dihedral and an inch of washout
in...i may increase the washout a bit...maybe not.
If nothing else, it just looks really cool to have the wings on.
How are things on the ranch? Hey, we get 5-6 nice fresh eggs every day...life
is good!
JM
-----Original Message-----
>From: AmsafetyC(at)aol.com
>Sent: Oct 22, 2007 3:18 PM
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Campbell swaging tool???
>
>
>I was reading in one of my magazines that if you know a builder in Oklahoma, then
you don't need to buy one for your airplane.
>
>Let me know when you buy the tool and get it figured out for the perfect clamp
pressure. Then put me first on the listto borrow it since I won't need my own!
You got that part covered
>
>
>John
>
>Bout time you got back in the game
>
>Hope all is well with you on the ranch!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Clif Dawson <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Helmet and Goggles |
If ya gotta fly--------Ya gotta fly!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=sdUUx5FdySs&feature=dir
Clif
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu> |
| Subject: | Front seat attachment |
Pieters,
In repairing damage to our fuselage, we found that the front seat was
held in only by two wood screws through the seat back. The front
vertical is made of a couple of 1x1 spruce sticks (the framing) and a
plywood web with a cut-out for control torque tube. Is that plywood
supposed to be glued to the spruce crossmember that is glued to the
bottom of the fuselage?
Thanks,
Jeff
--
_____________________________________________________________
Jeffrey H. Boatright, PhD
Associate Professor, Emory Eye Center, Atlanta, GA, USA
Senior Editor, Molecular Vision, http://www.molvis.org/molvis
mailto:jboatri(at)emory.edu
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Front seat attachment |
| From: | hvandervoo(at)aol.com |
Jeff,
My interpretation of the drawings was; yes all glued.
Including to the Ash cross member at the bottom.
Hans
-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu>
Sent: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 3:38 pm
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Front seat attachment
?
Pieters,?
?
In repairing damage to our fuselage, we found that the front seat was held in only
by two wood screws through the seat back. The front vertical is made of a
couple of 1x1 spruce sticks (the framing) and a plywood web with a cut-out for
control torque tube. Is that plywood supposed to be glued to the spruce crossmember
that is glued to the bottom of the fuselage??
?
Thanks,?
?
Jeff?
-- ?
_____________________________________________________________?
Jeffrey H. Boatright, PhD?
Associate Professor, Emory Eye Center, Atlanta, GA, USA?
Senior Editor, Molecular Vision, http://www.molvis.org/molvis?
mailto:jboatri(at)emory.edu?
?
?
?
________________________________________________________________________
Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Skip Gadd" <skipgadd(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Front seat attachment |
Jeff, I glued mine.
Skip
> [Original Message]
> From: Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu>
> Is that plywood supposed to be glued to the spruce crossmember that is
glued to the
> bottom of the fuselage?
> Thanks,
> Jeff
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Grega GN-1 Biplane Questions |
| From: | "jimd" <jlducey(at)hotmail.com> |
Hi,
There was some discussion on the list of the Grega gn-1 biplane that was for sale
on Barnstormers recently. I bought it and managed to get it home and have some
questions as a new builder.
First some background;
I found it is pretty much a plans-built Grega GN-1 with steel tube fuselage and
a larger/heavier engine than is typical. The biplane part is from the St. Croix/Chad
Willie "Aeriel Pietenpol" plans, which came with the plane and now make
more sense, as essentially they are add on wings for a regular Pietenpol, along
with some stuts and wires.
I did manage to find a similar plane, in that it has same rigging and basic configuration.
(Its in St. Louis at a museum.. seems odd to be building something
others put in museums..).
http://www.airandspacemuseum.org/photos%20Aug%2007/aPietenpol.jpg
Anyway to my questions;
There were two Grega specific items I wondered about; First, it has an .026 aircraft
aluminum leading edge, which is attached with lots of brads, but not glued.
I recall the Grega plans specify that kind of leading edge, but should it
be glued? From moving it is coming kind of loose, it would be easy to retack it
or to glue it, but wondered what the opinions would be on this.
Second, the passenger seat base is supported by a couple diagonal steel tubes that
are too close to the sides of the fuselage for me to comfortably fit my legs
in. Is there any way to know if they are load bearing and their design is key
to safety, they look like they could easily be cut/replaced with the same weight
tubes arched a bit to make for more leg room.
Any tips on creating the leading edge? Think it would be odd to have one wing skinned
in wood and one in aluminum, and suspect I will end up going aluminum to
match the one that is done. While by bottom Aeriel/St. Croix wing is pretty
well built, it doesn't have the leading edge spar built. I have head bannister
railing is commonly used, but would like more information, like .. if you use
aluminum for a leading edge, and you use a bannister railing for the spar, is
it supposed to support the leading edge.. meaning having same profile.. and would
it then be bradded and/or glued (T-88 I presume.)
This list is one of the things that helped convince me to go for the plane, in
that I saw a lot of good information flowing back and forth. I am in the EAA and
it is a great place to be to build high perf metal kit planes, or composite
ones, but they were kind of light on folks interested in wood, steel tube and
fabric, though there are a lot of good guys there.
Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Jim
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141388#141388
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/p19_132.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu> |
| Subject: | Front seat attachment |
Skip,
Thanks much. I think Oscar did, too.
Jeff
>
>Jeff, I glued mine.
>Skip
>
>
>> [Original Message]
>> From: Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu>
>> Is that plywood supposed to be glued to the spruce crossmember that is
>glued to the
>> bottom of the fuselage?
>> Thanks,
> Jeff
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Front seat attachment |
Hans,
Thanks much. The fellow who built the plane in '76 did such a great
job otherwise that it just seemed strange.
Jeff
>Jeff,
>
>My interpretation of the drawings was; yes all glued.
>Including to the Ash cross member at the bottom.
>
>Hans
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu>
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Sent: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 3:38 pm
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: Front seat attachment
>
><jboatri(at)emory.edu>
>
>Pieters,
>
>In repairing damage to our fuselage, we found that the front seat
>was held in only by two wood screws through the seat back. The front
>vertical is made of a couple of 1x1 spruce sticks (the framing) and
>a plywood web with a cut-out for control torque tube. Is that
>plywood supposed to be glued to the spruce crossmember that is glued
>to the bottom of the fuselage?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Jeff
>--
>______
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "DJ Vegh" <dj(at)veghdesign.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Grega GN-1 Biplane Questions |
was this the GN-1 that was in Mesa, AZ?
if so make sure you THOROUGHLY check the fuse for Black Widow nests. I saw
that plane months ago and it was full of them!
----- Original Message -----
From: "jimd" <jlducey(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 4:04 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Grega GN-1 Biplane Questions
>
> Hi,
> There was some discussion on the list of the Grega gn-1 biplane that was
> for sale on Barnstormers recently. I bought it and managed to get it home
> and have some questions as a new builder.
>
> First some background;
> I found it is pretty much a plans-built Grega GN-1 with steel tube
> fuselage and a larger/heavier engine than is typical. The biplane part is
> from the St. Croix/Chad Willie "Aeriel Pietenpol" plans, which came with
> the plane and now make more sense, as essentially they are add on wings
> for a regular Pietenpol, along with some stuts and wires.
>
> I did manage to find a similar plane, in that it has same rigging and
> basic configuration. (Its in St. Louis at a museum.. seems odd to be
> building something others put in museums..).
>
> http://www.airandspacemuseum.org/photos%20Aug%2007/aPietenpol.jpg
>
> Anyway to my questions;
>
> There were two Grega specific items I wondered about; First, it has an
> .026 aircraft aluminum leading edge, which is attached with lots of brads,
> but not glued. I recall the Grega plans specify that kind of leading edge,
> but should it be glued? From moving it is coming kind of loose, it would
> be easy to retack it or to glue it, but wondered what the opinions would
> be on this.
>
> Second, the passenger seat base is supported by a couple diagonal steel
> tubes that are too close to the sides of the fuselage for me to
> comfortably fit my legs in. Is there any way to know if they are load
> bearing and their design is key to safety, they look like they could
> easily be cut/replaced with the same weight tubes arched a bit to make for
> more leg room.
>
> Any tips on creating the leading edge? Think it would be odd to have one
> wing skinned in wood and one in aluminum, and suspect I will end up going
> aluminum to match the one that is done. While by bottom Aeriel/St. Croix
> wing is pretty well built, it doesn't have the leading edge spar built. I
> have head bannister railing is commonly used, but would like more
> information, like .. if you use aluminum for a leading edge, and you use a
> bannister railing for the spar, is it supposed to support the leading
> edge.. meaning having same profile.. and would it then be bradded and/or
> glued (T-88 I presume.)
>
> This list is one of the things that helped convince me to go for the
> plane, in that I saw a lot of good information flowing back and forth. I
> am in the EAA and it is a great place to be to build high perf metal kit
> planes, or composite ones, but they were kind of light on folks interested
> in wood, steel tube and fabric, though there are a lot of good guys there.
>
> Any suggestions would be appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jim
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141388#141388
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/p19_132.jpg
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Grega GN-1 Biplane Questions |
| From: | "jimd" <jlducey(at)hotmail.com> |
Yes it was the one, and I have spent about 8 hrs cleaning/vacuuming it so far,
and plan on spending more time on it. Amazing how much dust wings can hold by
the way... may have been partly cleaned when I got there as it wasn't too bad.
I pulled all the inspection plates and found a few webs, but not that bad.
It appears to be well built, love the Bucker Jungmann engine, should be really
fun, but have a number of things to work on, like getting the landing gear geometry
right, figuring out the rigging, etc.
Should be an adventure. May be the heaviest Pietenpol derived plane when its done
though, with the spare wing and heavy engine.
Jim
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141402#141402
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Grega GN-1 Biplane Questions |
| From: | <harvey.rule(at)bell.ca> |
Boy you can really see the resemblance to the Jenny there in that
picture.The Jenny was the plane that Bernard Pietenpol started with.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of jimd
Sent: October 23, 2007 7:05 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Grega GN-1 Biplane Questions
Hi,
There was some discussion on the list of the Grega gn-1 biplane that was
for sale on Barnstormers recently. I bought it and managed to get it
home and have some questions as a new builder.
First some background;
I found it is pretty much a plans-built Grega GN-1 with steel tube
fuselage and a larger/heavier engine than is typical. The biplane part
is from the St. Croix/Chad Willie "Aeriel Pietenpol" plans, which came
with the plane and now make more sense, as essentially they are add on
wings for a regular Pietenpol, along with some stuts and wires.
I did manage to find a similar plane, in that it has same rigging and
basic configuration. (Its in St. Louis at a museum.. seems odd to be
building something others put in museums..).
http://www.airandspacemuseum.org/photos%20Aug%2007/aPietenpol.jpg
Anyway to my questions;
There were two Grega specific items I wondered about; First, it has an
.026 aircraft aluminum leading edge, which is attached with lots of
brads, but not glued. I recall the Grega plans specify that kind of
leading edge, but should it be glued? From moving it is coming kind of
loose, it would be easy to retack it or to glue it, but wondered what
the opinions would be on this.
Second, the passenger seat base is supported by a couple diagonal steel
tubes that are too close to the sides of the fuselage for me to
comfortably fit my legs in. Is there any way to know if they are load
bearing and their design is key to safety, they look like they could
easily be cut/replaced with the same weight tubes arched a bit to make
for more leg room.
Any tips on creating the leading edge? Think it would be odd to have one
wing skinned in wood and one in aluminum, and suspect I will end up
going aluminum to match the one that is done. While by bottom Aeriel/St.
Croix wing is pretty well built, it doesn't have the leading edge spar
built. I have head bannister railing is commonly used, but would like
more information, like .. if you use aluminum for a leading edge, and
you use a bannister railing for the spar, is it supposed to support the
leading edge.. meaning having same profile.. and would it then be
bradded and/or glued (T-88 I presume.)
This list is one of the things that helped convince me to go for the
plane, in that I saw a lot of good information flowing back and forth. I
am in the EAA and it is a great place to be to build high perf metal kit
planes, or composite ones, but they were kind of light on folks
interested in wood, steel tube and fabric, though there are a lot of
good guys there.
Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Jim
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141388#141388
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/p19_132.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Stuck on fuselage joining dimensions |
| From: | "Ryan Michals" <aircamperace(at)yahoo.com> |
Thanks for the help Dick and Ben. So far I have used the dimensions at the top
and bottom of the pilots, seat brought the tail together, and let everything else
fall into place, then squared things up. My dimensions are just over an inch
or so of the prints. I haven't glued anything yet so nothing's final. I was
concerned about adding any more stress into the longerons than needed to be there.
Thanks again,
Ryan Michals
NXxxxCC
Clover Clipper
*Message sent from a mobile device.
-----Original Message-----
From: "Ben Charvet" <bcharvet(at)bellsouth.net>
Sent: 10/22/2007 6:21 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Stuck on fuselage joining dimensions
I just used the dimensions on the original plans at each station.
Seemed to work out fine
Ben
Ryan Michals wrote:
>
> I am building a standard width, long "improved" Piet. The sup. Plans don't
have measurements for the width of the joined fuselage sides, in particular, the
empennage. What has everyone else done?
>
>
> Ryan Michals
> NXxxxCC
> Clover Clipper
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | santiago morete <moretesantiago(at)yahoo.com.ar> |
Hello everyone!
I will carve a prop for a model A (maybe a 76 x42), but firstly I need to find
some drawings. If someone has for sale please let me know. I really like an antique
look prop, but any is wellcome.
Remember, I'm in Argentina (where some brave men have already sent things for me,
so it shouldn't be a problem : )
Saludos!
Santiago
---------------------------------
Los referentes ms importantes en compra/venta de autos se juntaron:
Demotores y Yahoo!.Ahora comprar o vender tu auto es ms fcil.
Visit http://ar.autos.yahoo.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Skip Gadd" <skipgadd(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Grega GN-1 Biplane Questions |
Jim,
My Grega plans call out .013 alum secured with 20 ga. 3/4" nails. Drawing
No. 800-20.
Skip
> Anyway to my questions;
> First, it has an
> .026 aircraft aluminum leading edge, which is attached with lots of
> brads, but not glued. I recall the Grega plans specify that kind of
> leading edge, but should it be glued? From moving it is coming kind of
> loose, it would be easy to retack it or to glue it, but wondered what
> the opinions would be on this.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Grega GN-1 Biplane Questions |
| From: | "jimd" <jlducey(at)hotmail.com> |
Thanks for the info.
Bet those brads I mentioned are really the same nails you refer to. They are a
little loose, but I think they will tighten back up.. suspect the wood went from
somewhere normal to Arizona where the wings were built and then shrank a little.
I am in Missouri, where the humidity varies a bit, but is much more humid
than AZ. Will tap them back in and see.
For the lower wing, the one without the leading edge, I am leaning toward doing
it exactly the same way, so will have to figure out how to shape and mount the
leading edge wood spar. Will look at the Aeriel plans and see what they specify,
probably talk to a DAR before going very far.
Thanks again,
Jim
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141489#141489
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Grega GN-1 Biplane Questions |
| From: | "jimd" <jlducey(at)hotmail.com> |
Some pics of the bipe.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141519#141519
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/p11_682.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/p16_108.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/p7_177.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Stabilizer Gussets |
| From: | "Bill Church" <eng(at)canadianrogers.com> |
Well, after a period of about a year and a half of zero building
activity, I have finally gotten back to building my Pietenpol! And I
must say, it does feel good to be back at it. As I was heading out to
the garage at 10:00 last night, my wife said to me "Are you going out to
play?".
I am presently tackling the empennage - more specifically, the
horizontal stabilizer, and last night (at midnight) I finished cutting
the various pieces, and began to notch the areas where the 1/8" plywood
gussets go. This appears at first glance to be a simple structure, but
after studying the plans for a bit, becomes a little bit complicated.
The "complicated" part is that the various cross-sections of the leading
edge, trailing edge, main beam and center beam don't match dimensionally
at the points where they intersect (and get covered with gussets). After
a sufficient amount of head scratching time I finally realized that some
of the ends would just need to be tapered at the gusset areas to bring
the mating surfaces flush. Anyway, today, at lunch I was browsing the
web, looking at pictures of how others had finished this part of their
planes, and I got a little worried, as all the photos I found showed a
different construction than what I had just finished cutting. The photos
I found all showed the spruce joints mitered, and the gussets sitting
inside the spruce lip around the perimeter of the stab, but I had cut my
spruce joints with butt joints, and my gussets are all cut to sit flush
with the outside perimeter of the stab (whereby the "lip" of spruce is
trimmed away at the gusset locations).
Before panic set in, I referred to the plans (what a crazy idea). My
pulse immediately slowed back to normal, as the plans showed exactly
what I had done last night. A little further investigation turned up a
few photos showing that others had actually "built to the plans". One of
those whose photos I found that built to the plans was Walt Evans, and
it must have worked just fine, since we all know that his plane flies
very well, thank-you. With my pulse back to normal I, too, can say
"Ain't life grand!". Whew.
Bill C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Stabilizer Gussets |
| From: | <harvey.rule(at)bell.ca> |
It might not be a bad idea to check the pictures and previous letters on
this web page before you do anything in the future.It will slow things
down but it will give you a better idea of what's been done before.Sort
of like a highway in the sky.
________________________________
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill
Church
Sent: October 24, 2007 3:43 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Stabilizer Gussets
Well, after a period of about a year and a half of zero building
activity, I have finally gotten back to building my Pietenpol! And I
must say, it does feel good to be back at it. As I was heading out to
the garage at 10:00 last night, my wife said to me "Are you going out to
play?".
I am presently tackling the empennage - more specifically, the
horizontal stabilizer, and last night (at midnight) I finished cutting
the various pieces, and began to notch the areas where the 1/8" plywood
gussets go. This appears at first glance to be a simple structure, but
after studying the plans for a bit, becomes a little bit complicated.
The "complicated" part is that the various cross-sections of the leading
edge, trailing edge, main beam and center beam don't match dimensionally
at the points where they intersect (and get covered with gussets). After
a sufficient amount of head scratching time I finally realized that some
of the ends would just need to be tapered at the gusset areas to bring
the mating surfaces flush. Anyway, today, at lunch I was browsing the
web, looking at pictures of how others had finished this part of their
planes, and I got a little worried, as all the photos I found showed a
different construction than what I had just finished cutting. The photos
I found all showed the spruce joints mitered, and the gussets sitting
inside the spruce lip around the perimeter of the stab, but I had cut my
spruce joints with butt joints, and my gussets are all cut to sit flush
with the outside perimeter of the stab (whereby the "lip" of spruce is
trimmed away at the gusset locations).
Before panic set in, I referred to the plans (what a crazy idea). My
pulse immediately slowed back to normal, as the plans showed exactly
what I had done last night. A little further investigation turned up a
few photos showing that others had actually "built to the plans". One of
those whose photos I found that built to the plans was Walt Evans, and
it must have worked just fine, since we all know that his plane flies
very well, thank-you. With my pulse back to normal I, too, can say
"Ain't life grand!". Whew.
Bill C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ryan Mueller <rmueller23(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Stabilizer Gussets |
The Matronics List Archive is also very useful for all those questions that have
been asked before. I was 3/4 of the way through typing a question about the
different beams in the empennage and where they go when I thought I had better
check the archive first, and sure enough I found that exact question had been
asked already.
http://www.matronics.com/searching/search.html
Pick the Piet list, and I particularly like the 3 view framed method of seeing
your results. Makes it very easy to go through all the messages and not lose your
place.
Also, a careful reading of the instructions can help you find many more pertinent
results than just typing in your search. For example, searching for "short
fuselage corvair" will look for that exact quote with the words in that order,
whereas a search for "short fuselage & corvair" will instead find all messages
that have the phrase "short fuselage" and the word "corvair" somewhere in the
message.
I know this because I didn't initially read the search instructions, and wasn't
getting as many good results. A slight modification of my method made an already
useful resource just that much better.
Ryan
harvey.rule(at)bell.ca wrote: v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) } It might
not be a bad idea to check the pictures and previous letters on this web page
before you do anything in the future.It will slow things down but it will give
you a better idea of whats been done before.Sort of like a highway in the
sky.
---------------------------------
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Church
Sent: October 24, 2007 3:43 PM
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Stabilizer Gussets
Well, after a period of about a year and a half of zero building activity,
I have finally gotten back to building my Pietenpol! And I must say, it does feel
good to be back at it. As I was heading out to the garage at 10:00 last night,
my wife said to me "Are you going out to play?".
I am presently tackling the empennage - more specifically, the horizontal stabilizer,
and last night (at midnight) I finished cutting the various pieces,
and began to notch the areas where the 1/8" plywood gussets go. This appears
at first glance to be a simple structure, but after studying the plans for a bit,
becomes a little bit complicated. The "complicated" part is that the various
cross-sections of the leading edge, trailing edge, main beam and center beam
don't match dimensionally at the points where they intersect (and get covered
with gussets). After a sufficient amount of head scratching time I finally realized
that some of the ends would just need to be tapered at the gusset areas
to bring the mating surfaces flush. Anyway, today, at lunch I was browsing the
web, looking at pictures of how others had finished this part of their planes,
and I got a little worried, as all the photos I found showed a different construction
than what I had just finished cutting.
The photos I found all showed the spruce joints mitered, and the gussets sitting
inside the spruce lip around the perimeter of the stab, but I had cut my spruce
joints with butt joints, and my gussets are all cut to sit flush with the
outside perimeter of the stab (whereby the "lip" of spruce is trimmed away at
the gusset locations).
Before panic set in, I referred to the plans (what a crazy idea). My pulse
immediately slowed back to normal, as the plans showed exactly what I had done
last night. A little further investigation turned up a few photos showing that
others had actually "built to the plans". One of those whose photos I found
that built to the plans was Walt Evans, and it must have worked just fine, since
we all know that his plane flies very well, thank-you. With my pulse back to
normal I, too, can say "Ain't life grand!". Whew.
Bill C.
__________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Stabilizer Gussets |
| From: | "Bill Church" <eng(at)canadianrogers.com> |
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Church
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 11:01 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Stabilizer Gussets
Ryan (and anyone else confused by my (NOT) eloquent description),
Attached are a few pics to help explain:
01BHPdwg2clip.jpg is a detail from the plans, showing the leading edge
and main beam running through, and the side pieces butting up against
these pieces (not a mitered corner). The gussets are shown extending to
the outside edges of the structure - the spruce "lip" would need to be
trimmed away where the gussets lie.
02WEgusset.jpg is a photo of Walt Evans' construction, which appears to
be exactly as per plans.
03JMgusset.jpg is a photo of Jim Markle's construction, which
incorporates the mitered spruce joints, and the gussets sitting inside
the spruce lip.
Both methods work equally well. It just seems that most of the photos
out there on the net are of the mitered corner version, like Jim's,
rather than the BHP plans version, like Walt's.
Bill C.
PS: anyone on the list that only gets the digest version (no
attachments) can view the photos by going to the following site:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewforum.php?f=7&sid=2ed4da73b54366540c0
d90
5c0d06a3a6
-----Original Message-----
From: Ryan Michals [mailto:aircamperace(at)yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 8:31 PM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Stabilizer Gussets
Bill,
Could you post an example pic of the "plans way" and the other way? It
sounds confusing.
Thank you,
Ryan Michals
NXxxxCC
Clover Clipper
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Stabilizer Gussets |
| From: | "Bill Church" <eng(at)canadianrogers.com> |
Harvey,
What do you think I've been doing for the past year and a half of not
building??? If I start building any slower, I'll be taking things apart.
just kidding...
Actually, what happened was that when I first received my plans, I
studied them, then started redrawing them using CAD (exactly as drawn by
Orrin Hoopman). When the time came to start building again, I plotted
out the drawing I had done a few years ago, and plopped it down on my
building board, and used it to start cutting my parts. I was perfectly
satisfied with my progress until I happened to look at a few photos of
work done by others, and upon seeing differences compared to what I had
done, I had a moment of panic. A quick check back to the plans revealed
that all was okay - I was building to the plans - others had chosen to
use a different technique.
I guess my point was that photos of other's work can be very helpful,
but they don't always show things the way they are in the plans - which
is fine. In fact, quite often, the photos may show an improved method.
As far as visual appearance goes, personally, I like the looks of the
modified gusset attachment with mitered joints, but for ease of
construction, the plans method is much easier. In the end, this
beautiful woodwork all gets covered up anyway.
Bill C
________________________________
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
harvey.rule(at)bell.ca
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 7:15 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Stabilizer Gussets
It might not be a bad idea to check the pictures and previous letters on
this web page before you do anything in the future.It will slow things
down but it will give you a better idea of what's been done before.Sort
of like a highway in the sky.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "KMHeide, BA, CPO, FAAOP" <kmheidecpo(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Fwd: : When Pilots Retire |
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Stabilizer Gussets |
Just to remind that my Piet was made 99.99999% to the prints. I'm a "to the
prints" guy.
That pic was of my tail, just before I pulled out the nails and started to
bevel the trailing edge with a hand plane to get the desired results.
"walt 100" is the rough,,,the rest are the finished products. And It's
flying great.
Make it to the plans. Don't change the plans.
Why would you change the plans?
Not one piece of his plans/design is deficient.
What an insult to change it.
Walt Evans
NX140DL
"No one ever learned anything by talking"
If you lend someone $20 and never see that person again, it was probably
worth it
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Church" <eng(at)canadianrogers.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 12:05 PM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Stabilizer Gussets
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Church
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 11:01 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Stabilizer Gussets
Ryan (and anyone else confused by my (NOT) eloquent description),
Attached are a few pics to help explain:
01BHPdwg2clip.jpg is a detail from the plans, showing the leading edge
and main beam running through, and the side pieces butting up against
these pieces (not a mitered corner). The gussets are shown extending to
the outside edges of the structure - the spruce "lip" would need to be
trimmed away where the gussets lie.
02WEgusset.jpg is a photo of Walt Evans' construction, which appears to
be exactly as per plans.
03JMgusset.jpg is a photo of Jim Markle's construction, which
incorporates the mitered spruce joints, and the gussets sitting inside
the spruce lip.
Both methods work equally well. It just seems that most of the photos
out there on the net are of the mitered corner version, like Jim's,
rather than the BHP plans version, like Walt's.
Bill C.
PS: anyone on the list that only gets the digest version (no
attachments) can view the photos by going to the following site:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewforum.php?f=7&sid=2ed4da73b54366540c0d90
5c0d06a3a6
-----Original Message-----
From: Ryan Michals [mailto:aircamperace(at)yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 8:31 PM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Stabilizer Gussets
Bill,
Could you post an example pic of the "plans way" and the other way? It
sounds confusing.
Thank you,
Ryan Michals
NXxxxCC
Clover Clipper
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "mmcfi(at)juno.com" <mmcfi(at)juno.com> |
| Subject: | Would like to join your discussion group |
Hello all,
I have a friend that put the crazy idea into my head that I should bu
ild an airplane! Problem is that I cannot get rid of the thought. Luck
ily I stumbled across the Air Camper and now I am nibbling.... I know
you all probally get this all the time, but before I rush out and buy ev
erything in sight that I might read about or stumble across, (possibly e
nding my marriage), Where is a good place to start?
I would love to see a Piet up close and make sure this is really what
I want to do. If there are any in the Denver area I would love to talk
to you and arrainge some time to see a Piet up close and let you set th
e hook. If not, I can travel to you given some time. I am thinking I w
ould like to build a 'long version' with a corvair engine.
Thanks for any input. I have loved reading your posts for the last l
ittle while and find them very informative. I am working through the ar
chives slowly.
Future Low and Slow Boy
Mark
P.S. Do you get bugs in your teeth flying the Piet? :)
_____________________________________________________________
Discount Online Trading - Click Now!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2111/fc/Ioyw6iiejgTb6M8m0KEZ9PuAr6Sx
pms437CTymCfgUy9XNOAEpdAZQ/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "KMHeide, BA, CPO, FAAOP" <kmheidecpo(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Would like to join your discussion group |
I know you all probably get this all the time, but before I rush out and buy everything
in sight that I might read about or stumble across, (possibly ending
my marriage), Where is a good place to start?
Tough question!....I would have to say wife and plane can be an oxymoron.
Village idiot!
__________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Piet biplane |
| From: | "jimd" <jlducey(at)hotmail.com> |
Hi,
The biplane conversion doesn't change the top wing much, far as I can tell. The
St. Croix/Aeriel plans essentially add a lower wing that attaches where the lift
struts would, the low wing has ailerons that are actuated by rods from the
high wings ailerons. Not positive without looking again, but I think the struts
from the end of the lower wings to the upper ones attach at the same point
as the lift struts normally would.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141840#141840
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/apietenpol_632.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Skip Gadd" <skipgadd(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Would like to join your discussion group |
Mark,
Welcome to the list.
Skip
>P.S. Do you get bugs in your teeth flying the Piet? :)
>Only if you smile ;o)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Grega GN-1 Biplane Questions |
| From: | "skellytownflyer" <hanover(at)centramedia.net> |
I understand the brads pulling loose on the wing wrap.I installed the .020 aluminum
leading edge wrap I got from DJ on these wings after pre-bending them over
a small pipe.And the still were really tough to get pulled down.I ended up using
very small wood screws-#2 maybe? and a dab of wood glue on each one to keep
them down.have the wings all ready to cover now and hoping to get back on the
project in about a month.been a long busy summer.Raymond
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141849#141849
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dick Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Would like to join your discussion group |
Welcome Mark
The first place to start is ordering a set of plans from Donald
Pietenpol. You dont know what engine you are using yet, so get the
supplement for the Corvair with the long fuselage plan. Also, order the
three piece wing plan. The plans are fairly basic, sit down and digest
them. Some would say to start by building wing ribs. I think your
first parts should be the tail feathers to give you more to look at to
start with. The parts to build them arent very expensive.
Dick N.
----- Original Message -----
From: mmcfi(at)juno.com
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 5:41 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Would like to join your discussion group
Hello all,
I have a friend that put the crazy idea into my head that I should
build an airplane! Problem is that I cannot get rid of the thought.
Luckily I stumbled across the Air Camper and now I am nibbling.... I
know you all probally get this all the time, but before I rush out and
buy everything in sight that I might read about or stumble across,
(possibly ending my marriage), Where is a good place to start?
I would love to see a Piet up close and make sure this is really
what I want to do. If there are any in the Denver area I would love to
talk to you and arrainge some time to see a Piet up close and let you
set the hook. If not, I can travel to you given some time. I am
thinking I would like to build a 'long version' with a corvair engine.
Thanks for any input. I have loved reading your posts for the last
little while and find them very informative. I am working through the
archives slowly.
Future Low and Slow Boy
Mark
P.S. Do you get bugs in your teeth flying the Piet? :)
_____________________________________________________________
Discount Online Trading - Click Now!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Baker" <dick(at)aerovisiontech.com> |
| Subject: | New Pietenpol Builder |
I too am about to begin construction for the second time. I ordered
plans
last year and purchased all of the spruce from AS&S. I live in Oregon
and
Massachusetts, spending about half the year in each location. I was
going to
build in Oregon and had the spruce shipped there. The summer of 2006
found
me building a million gussets and a jig for the wing ribs. It sure was a
beauty (+-1/32=94.) I had also built a real nice rack to store all of
the
precut spruce. I was all ready to go this past summer. In our absence
over
last winter it seems that someone entered my workshop and made the
nicest
bookcase out of what was to be the main wing spar and decided that all
those
nice smaller pieces of wood would make ideal tinder for the wood stove.
So,
it=92s $1400, 00 down the tubes. The worst thing is that my jig is gone.
I have just reordered more spruce to be shipped to Massachusetts. We
live in
a senior community and have a most wonderful workshop as many residents
brought their workshops from home. I will post some pictures of the shop
soon. I will continue to build anything that will fit in the Mooney out
in
Oregon and schlep parts across country. (Does anyone have plans for a 10
section wing?)
So, I guess my first contribution to the builder community is to keep an
eye
on your wood! I am going to keep this batch under the bed and hope that
Jane
doesn=92t notice. Once I do get started in earnest I will post my
builders log
and photos on my web site at www.aerovisiontech.com
Dick Baker
www.aerovisiontech.com
10/24/2007
2:31 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "MICHAEL SILVIUS" <M.Silvius(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | ebay pietenpol plans rip off artist? |
someone is selling copied Piet Plans on CD?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/The-plane-drawings-Pietenpol_W0QQitemZ220164360942QQihZ012QQcategoryZ26441QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
Michael
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Would like to join your discussion group |
Hello Mark!
Welcome to the largest group of people with character flaws on the web.
To answer your question;
Do you get bugs in your teeth flying the Piet?
The answer is no. A Pietenpol is too slow. The most common method is riding a
motorcycle to the airport, smiling because you know youll be in your Pietenpol
soon.
Welcome to the mess and hope that helps.
Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Markle <jim_markle(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Would like to join your discussion group |
The only issue I know of for the Pietenpol is the need to reinforce the trailing
edge to avoid damage from bird strikes...
-----Original Message-----
>From: BYD(at)att.net
>Sent: Oct 26, 2007 8:57 AM
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: Would like to join your discussion group
>
>
>Hello Mark!
>Welcome to the largest group of people with character flaws on the web.
>
>To answer your question;
>Do you get bugs in your teeth flying the Piet?
>The answer is no. A Pietenpol is too slow. The most common method is riding
a motorcycle to the airport, smiling because you know youll be in your Pietenpol
soon.
>Welcome to the mess and hope that helps.
>
>Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Would like to join your discussion group |
In a message dated 10/25/2007 5:44:09 PM Central Daylight Time,
mmcfi(at)juno.com writes:
P.S. Do you get bugs in your teeth flying the Piet? :)
Mark,
Some call it a Prop...I call it a 'Bug Whacker'. I smile all the time while
I'm flying, and have never had to use a toothpick !!
If you're ever heading East, be sure to stop in Wichita KS, for a ride in a
Pietenpol. Welcome to the group !!
Chuck G.
_http://nx770cg.com/_ (http://nx770cg.com/)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter W Johnson" <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au> |
| Subject: | ebay pietenpol plans rip off artist? |
Greg,
Same here, looks like he=92s used some of my web site pictures too.
Peter
Wonthaggi Australia
HYPERLINK "http://www.cpc-world.com/"http://www.cpc-world.com
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
gcardinal(at)comcast.net
Sent: Saturday, 27 October 2007 3:57 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: ebay pietenpol plans rip off artist?
One of the pictures in the ebay listing is of NX18235. The owners of
that
airplane have nothing whatsoever to do with this rip off.....
Greg Cardinal
Co-owner of NX18235
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Bill Church" <eng(at)canadianrogers.com>
>
> This is funny.
>
> The best part of this item is the description. Very interesting use of
> the English language. I think the CD not only includes the plans and
> photos, but also "roller video"! (wonder what that is?)
>
> They are clearly offering more than just plans, because it says "also
> you study in key rules and technologies of design of
> legkomotornyh-planes." I didn't realize I was building a
> legkomotornyh-plane.
>
> The item description says the item will ship from Kazakhstan. The
photo
> on the cover of the CD appears to be Oscar's NX41CC (the plane Corky
> built). Oscar said l ast we
"http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List"http://www.matronics.c
om/
Navigator?Pietenpol-List
"http://forums.matronics.com"http://forums.matronics.com
25/10/2007
5:38 PM
25/10/2007
5:38 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gordon Bowen" <gbowen(at)ptialaska.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Would like to join your discussion group |
All the Pieters that are gettin' rear-ended by birds on their trailing edge
need to consider a tad more H.P. on the bug chopper-upper. But that bee'ing
said, got hit in chest by bubblebee one time at about 70mph, looked down a
splatter, thought I had been shot, left nice welt, always wear Harley
chopper goggles and my leather helmet, eat your heart out Waldo Pepper.
Gordon
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Markle" <jim_markle(at)mindspring.com>
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 1:47 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Would like to join your discussion group
>
>
> The only issue I know of for the Pietenpol is the need to reinforce the
> trailing edge to avoid damage from bird strikes...
>
> -----Original Message-----
>>From: BYD(at)att.net
>>Sent: Oct 26, 2007 8:57 AM
>>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>>Subject: Pietenpol-List: Would like to join your discussion group
>>
>>
>>Hello Mark!
>>Welcome to the largest group of people with character flaws on the web.
>>
>>To answer your question;
>>Do you get bugs in your teeth flying the Piet?
>>The answer is no. A Pietenpol is too slow. The most common method is
>>riding a motorcycle to the airport, smiling because you know youll be in
>>your Pietenpol soon.
>>Welcome to the mess and hope that helps.
>>
>>Bill
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | HelsperSew(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Aluminum struts-what size? |
Gentlemen, (and one lady in Italy)
I am very happy to report that at long last (7 years +) that I am finally at
the stage of buying some wing strut material. I am looking to use aluminum
wing struts for the weight savings. In my research I see that there are
various suppliers that have this material (A/CS, Wicks, Carlsons, Skytech) in
various sizes. Can anyone with experience help me with the selection of material
size? I have been delinquent on my trips to Brodhead to take any
measurements. Engineering types please feel free to chime-in to the discussion.
Please
help.
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Gow" <rgow(at)avionicsdesign.ca> |
I recently contacted a Model A engine builder about building up an engine
for my Piet with a few mods for extra power (heads, bearings and so forth)
They declined because their insurance would not allow them to build an
engine for an aircraft. I assume others have had that problem as well . Do
you simply neglect to mention that the engine is intended for an aircraft or
is there someone put there who will build an engine up for a Piet? I wanted
a shop that does A engines all the time, has the speed mod bits and can dyno
the resulting engine.
Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | HelsperSew(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Engine builders |
Bob,
I got mine built-up by Antique Engine Rebuilder's in Skokie Illinois. The
prop's name is Rich Faluca. This guy is very well known among the Model A auto
restorers. He was very cooperative and knowledgeable on the Pietenpols, and
even pulled out his set of Piet plans when I was there. That is all he does is
rebuild antique auto engines. He will willingly answer all your questions. He
was able to supply an aluminum cam gear, chevy pistons, rebuilt cam shaft,
and counter-weighted crankshaft. He drilled and tapped the hole that goes down
and out of the valve chamber. He also can include modern insert bearings all
around. Also modern piston rods. He also supplied a rebuilt oil pump. I have
not run my engine yet but it feels good so far. He has a websight.
_http://www.antiqueenginerebuilding.com/
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
_ (http://www.antiqueenginerebuilding.com/)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Engine builders |
I just tell people that my corvair engine is for an air boat, but choosing a
model A for an air boat may sound a little weird.
Rick
On 10/27/07, Robert Gow wrote:
>
> I recently contacted a Model A engine builder about building up an engine
> for my Piet with a few mods for extra power (heads, bearings and so forth)
> They declined because their insurance would not allow them to build an
> engine for an aircraft. I assume others have had that problem as well . Do
> you simply neglect to mention that the engine is intended for an aircraft or
> is there someone put there who will build an engine up for a Piet? I wanted
> a shop that does A engines all the time, has the speed mod bits and can dyno
> the resulting engine.
>
> Bob
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
--
Rick Holland
ObjectAge Ltd.
Castle Rock, Colorado
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Aluminum struts-what size? |
| From: | "Arden Adamson" <aadamson(at)wnmdag.org> |
Dan,
Your Model A and panel look beautiful!!!! Great job. For those of us
who are not as far along it's an inspiration to keep building.
Arden Adamson
________________________________
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com on behalf of
HelsperSew(at)aol.com
Sent: Sat 10/27/2007 6:47 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Aluminum struts-what size?
Gentlemen, (and one lady in Italy)
I am very happy to report that at long last (7 years +) that I am
finally at the stage of buying some wing strut material. I am looking to
use aluminum wing struts for the weight savings. In my research I see
that there are various suppliers that have this material (A/CS, Wicks,
Carlsons, Skytech) in various sizes. Can anyone with experience help me
with the selection of material size? I have been delinquent on my trips
to Brodhead to take any measurements. Engineering types please feel free
to chime-in to the discussion. Please help.
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aluminum struts-what size? |
Beautiful instrument panel Dan, some of those instruments look like
authentic 1930s vintage.
Rick
On 10/27/07, HelsperSew(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> Gentlemen, (and one lady in Italy)
>
> I am very happy to report that at long last (7 years +) that I am finally
> at the stage of buying some wing strut material. I am looking to use
> aluminum wing struts for the weight savings. In my research I see that there
> are various suppliers that have this material (A/CS, Wicks, Carlsons,
> Skytech) in various sizes. Can anyone with experience help me with the
> selection of material size? I have been delinquent on my trips to Brodhead
> to take any measurements. Engineering types please feel free to chime-in to
> the discussion. Please *help*.
>
>
> Dan Helsper
> Poplar Grove, IL.
>
>
>
| Date: | Oct 27, 2007 |
| From: | santiago morete <moretesantiago(at)yahoo.com.ar> |
Hi Dan!
Our engine is being reibuilding right now, so I have a couple of questions. You
said "He drilled and tapped the hole that goes down and out of the valve chamber"
What is that!!?? Am I missing something?
Also you said you have an aluminum cam gear, I can only find the one made of
fiber. Could it be a problem? Any thoughts on how much can last?
Thanks!
Santiago
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Noticias
Todo lo que tens que saber sobre Elecciones Presidenciales 2007 encontralo en Yahoo!
Noticias.
http://ar.news.yahoo.com/elecciones2007/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | santiago morete <moretesantiago(at)yahoo.com.ar> |
Hi Dan!
Our engine is being reibuilding right now, so I have a couple of questions. You
said "He drilled and tapped the hole that goes down and out of the valve chamber"
What is that!!?? Am I missing something?
Also you said you have an aluminum cam gear, I can only find the one made of
fiber. Could it be a problem? Any thoughts on how much can last?
Thanks!
Santiago
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Noticias
Todo lo que tens que saber sobre Elecciones Presidenciales 2007 encontralo en Yahoo!
Noticias.
http://ar.news.yahoo.com/elecciones2007/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | HelsperSew(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Engine builders |
Santiago,
In the attached foto, in the lower right hand corner is shown the
hole/fitting I am referring to. It is shown on the 1933 plans. Write back with
questions if this is not clear.
Amigos,
Dan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | HelsperSew(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Engine builders |
Santiago,
Ken Perkins (Model A guru) recommends the aluminum cam gear. This can be
obtained at Snyder's Antique Auto Parts. _http://www.snydersantiqueauto.com/_
(http://www.snydersantiqueauto.com/)
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Stinemetze" <tstinemetze(at)cox.net> |
I will echo that as I once caught a wasp in the chest at about 70 mph on
a motorcycle. I had to stop by the side of the road and gasp for a
while. Thought I was having a heart attack. I'm not quite sure how a
wasp - bee - etc. would get around the windscreen to smack you in a Piet
though - unless he hit you from behind.
Tom Stinemetze
Enjoying a beautiful Fall in McPherson, KS.
____ | ____
\8/
/ \
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Egan <johnegan99(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aluminum struts-what size? |
Dan,
Regarding aluminum strut size:
I'm also in the building stage, and my project has not flown yet, so I have no
flying hours on my struts. I bought strut material from Skytec. I will use
the large 3-1/8" x 1-3/16" for my wing struts and 2-7/16" x 15/16" for my cabane
struts. I chose to use the same large strut material for my rear wing struts
as the front struts so all my end fittings are the same in design and size
for ease of construction. I believe a person could use the 2-7/16" strut material
for at least the rear strut if a person decided to, as much of the tensile
load required to hold the wings in place will come from the diagonal external
brace wires located between the two wing struts, and in this case, I will use
1/8" cable and attach the cable to the fuselage fittings and the spar fittings
(not to the struts themselves).
I asked the folks at Skytec if I could order a short sample of strut material
before placing my order, and the kind folks there offered to send me sample pieces
of each size at no charge. They also included a sample of very small aluminum
streamline tubing that is probably 1-1/4" across the wide dimension. Maybe
this material would be useful for jury struts?
I hope this helps, and I am certain that there are a number of reasonable options
to choose from.
John
in Greenville, Wisconsin who painted Corvair engine sheet metal pieces today
with high temp primer...
HelsperSew(at)aol.com wrote:
Gentlemen, (and one lady in Italy)
Can anyone with experience help me with the selection of material size?
__________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | HelsperSew(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Aluminum struts-what size? |
John,
Thank you for your
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | HelsperSew(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Aluminum struts-what size? |
John,
Thank you for your input. I really appreciate it. I have heard others
(archives) have done the same thing.
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Aluminum struts-what size? |
| From: | "carson" <carsonvella(at)yahoo.com.au> |
Dan
That panel looks great,Could I ask where you got the instruments and the mag switch.
I would like to have something similar and have looked in the AS&S cat and the
internet but can't seem to find anything.
Thanks
Carson
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142221#142221
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | santiago morete <moretesantiago(at)yahoo.com.ar> |
Thanks Dan, I misunderstood what you wrote. I was thinking of something like a
oil drain hole.
I will try to get an aluminum cam gear, just for peace of mind.
Looking at your fittings, I wondering what colors and paint schema have you in
mind? But.....keep the answer for you, sure will be a nice surprise
Congratulations again for your wonderful work!
Buena suerte
Santiago
---------------------------------
Los referentes ms importantes en compra/venta de autos se juntaron:
Demotores y Yahoo!.Ahora comprar o vender tu auto es ms fcil.
Visit http://ar.autos.yahoo.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "KMHeide, BA, CPO, FAAOP" <kmheidecpo(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Instruments......... |
Ditto's.....Yes where can you find these kind of instruments?
Ken H
Fargo, ND
carson wrote:
Dan
That panel looks great,Could I ask where you got the instruments and the mag switch.
I would like to have something similar and have looked in the AS&S cat and the
internet but can't seem to find anything.
Thanks
Carson
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142221#142221
Kenneth M. Heide, BA, CPO, FAAOP
__________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | HelsperSew(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Aluminum struts-what size? |
Carson,
Those instruments and mag switch are the result of searching on ebay for
years. You have to be diligent, be willing to dedicate the money, and also it
really pays to have one of those _www.Powersnipe.com_
(http://www.Powersnipe.com) accounts so you can out bid your opponents at the last second
automatically. I have 3 compasses in a box that I wasted money on and decided
were not
good enough. I wanted to have one of those Elgin clocks in my panel, and bought
a non-working one thinking that I could have it fixed. NOT!. I took it to 3
old-timer clock repair guys and they said forget it. I paid for that mistake.
Anyway I used to live in Elgin Illinois for 17 years where they used to have
the old factory, so that part of it is personal nostalgia for me. The
non-sensitive 4" altimeter is really neat, looks great and works good, but is
kind
of impractical because I will be flying at 500 ft. AGL and the needle will
hardly move. That's OK because when you are at 500 ft you don't need to look at
an altimeter anyway. The old 4" tach works but I am having to have a special
cable made for it. We shall see how that works. I got a matching set of
"book-end" veneer pieces from Bob Morgan's _www.morganwood.com_
(http://www.morganwood.com) . to make the face of the panels. Looks cool with no weight
penalty, and its away to customize. Good luck with yours.
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Gow" <rgow(at)avionicsdesign.ca> |
Perfect! Thanks.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
HelsperSew(at)aol.com
Sent: October 27, 2007 9:39 AM
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Engine builders
Bob,
I got mine built-up by Antique Engine Rebuilder's in Skokie Illinois. The
prop's name is Rich Faluca. This guy is very well known among the Model A
auto restorers. He was very cooperative and knowledgeable on the Pietenpols,
and even pulled out his set of Piet plans when I was there. That is all he
does is rebuild antique auto engines. He will willingly answer all your
questions. He was able to supply an aluminum cam gear, chevy pistons,
rebuilt cam shaft, and counter-weighted crankshaft. He drilled and tapped
the hole that goes down and out of the valve chamber. He also can include
modern insert bearings all around. Also modern piston rods. He also supplied
a rebuilt oil pump. I have not run my engine yet but it feels good so far.
He has a websight. http://www.antiqueenginerebuilding.com/
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Gow" <rgow(at)avionicsdesign.ca> |
MessageAt least in the Piet, unlike a motorcycle, you won't get hit by
stones off a gravel truck. That hurts.
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tom
Stinemetze
Sent: October 27, 2007 4:28 PM
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Bug Strike
I will echo that as I once caught a wasp in the chest at about 70
mph on a motorcycle. I had to stop by the side of the road and gasp for a
while. Thought I was having a heart attack. I'm not quite sure how a
wasp - bee - etc. would get around the windscreen to smack you in a Piet
though - unless he hit you from behind.
Tom Stinemetze
Enjoying a beautiful Fall in McPherson, KS.
____ | ____
\8/
/ \
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Singleton" <slsingleton(at)cvalley.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Would like to join your discussion group |
----- http://www.barnstormers.com/listing.php?id=177572
Hello Mark. If your interested in a Piet here is a project for sale
north of you a ways. The problem with this one is that i don't believe
there are any builder logs. Steve Singleton
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Engine builders |
| From: | "PatrickW" <pwhoyt(at)yahoo.com> |
When I needed machine work on my Corvair engine, I told them it was for a "high
performance off-road application".
Still, when I got the paperwork back it said, "Not for aviation usage".
But if I'd have uttered the word "airplane" I bet they wouldn't have done the work.
Patrick
Zodiac 601XL/Corvair
Piet Plans......
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142363#142363
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Aluminum struts-what size? |
| From: | "layke" <pnoldguy(at)yahoo.com> |
John, can you provide a link for aluminum streamline tubing? I can't find any reference
by Googling Skytec......... all I get is lightweight starters.
Thanks, Doug
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142398#142398
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eric Williams <ewilliams805(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aluminum struts-what size? |
Here ya go Doug. It's "Skytek" with a "k" not a "c"...
http://www.sky-tek.com/struts.html
Eric> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Aluminum struts-what size?> From: pnoldg
uy(at)yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 18:43:17 -0700> To: pietenpol-list@mat
.com>> > John, can you provide a link for aluminum streamline tubing? I can
't find any reference by Googling Skytec......... all I get is lightweight
starters.> Thanks, Doug> > > > > Read this topic online here:> > http://for
==========> > >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Douwe Blumberg" <douweblumberg(at)earthlink.net> |
Bob,
I had mine built by Ron Kelly down in TX. He builds very strong
modified A's and has done a few for piets and has no problem with it.
Mine has been running very strong and reliably on it's stand for a
couple of years now and I was pleased with his work. He's expensive,
but worth it. He has dyno results on his site.
His # is 972 771 1911
Good luck
Douwe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | HelsperSew(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Aluminum struts-what size? |
Eric,
Do you have an email address or phone for Carlson's? I can't find either on
their websight anywhere.
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Prop drawing |
| From: | "womenfly2" <keriannprice(at)hotmail.com> |
Hi Santiago,
I do have a blade drawing of the 2nd prop that she flew with. This prop is an 80
x 43 and was designed based on the performance calculation of my Pietenpol,
NX3116, it was the 2nd prop I carved.
This may/will not be an effective prop for your plane unless your engine is putting
out 57 Hp @ 1600 rpm at cruise, which my calculations were based on. You
need to be in the peak torque range of the Model-A for the best airplane, engine
and prop combination. Using a typical prop off a C-65 will be more efficient
at 2200 rpm and well out, and on the down side, of the torque curve for the
model-A. High drag planes, like the Pietenpol, fly best with big slow turning
props moving a lot of air.
If you do not increase the horsepower of the Model-A, 37 HP, you will still want
to design a prop to be in the 1600-1700 rpm range and well within the peak torque
range of the engine.
It flies better with this combination.
Let me know if you still would like the drawing and some pictures of my prop.
"Keep the Dream"
Keri-Ann
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142463#142463
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Egan <johnegan99(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aluminum struts-what size? |
Piet Builders,
See below for the phone number to Sky-Tek. The phone number is buried deeper
in a link on thier website. My apoligies for not spelling the name correctly earlier.
"Our phone number is (U.S.A.) 1-330-426-3934
times if we are available. There is always an answering machine or answering
service to take your message when we are away. If you get the machine, please
be sure to leave us the important information like your name and how to contact
you!"
John
in Greenville, Wi (measured and magnafluxed my second corvair crank and found
it to be a good one... the first one was bad.)
layke wrote:
John, can you provide a link for aluminum streamline tubing? I can't find any reference
by Googling Skytec......... all I get is lightweight starters.
Thanks, Doug
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142398#142398
__________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Aluminum struts-what size? |
| From: | "Bill Church" <eng(at)canadianrogers.com> |
Dan,
Go to the ORDER page on Sky-Tek's website.
or just click this link:
http://www.sky-tek.com/order.html
it's all there.
Bill C.
________________________________
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
HelsperSew(at)aol.com
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 8:31 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Aluminum struts-what size?
Eric,
Do you have an email address or phone for Carlson's? I can't find
either on their websight anywhere.
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Grega GN-1 Biplane Questions |
| From: | "jimd" <jlducey(at)hotmail.com> |
Thought of screws, however everything I read said don't use screws on aircraft
woodwork, rather to look at the brads/nails as temporary clamps for holding while
the glue drys.
Didn't see glue for the leading edge that came loose, so I mentioned it.
Does give me a chance to really clean out the area that will be enclosed and get
the dust out first, so its probably a good thing.
Think I will put some kind of extra cloth tape over the brads to make the covering
cloth look better and make it less likely they will rise and look ugly.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142489#142489
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | HelsperSew(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Cowling- What alloy? |
Hi Guys,
What are people using for cowling material? Please advise. Thanks.
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Cowling- What alloy? |
| From: | "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinalhealth.com> |
=2E025" 2024-T3 aluminum
Jack Phillips
Raleigh, NC
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
HelsperSew(at)aol.com
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 10:31 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Cowling- What alloy?
Hi Guys,
What are people using for cowling material? Please advise. Thanks.
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
_____
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
===========
_________________________________________________
This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privilege
d, proprietary
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please
notify the sender
immediately and delete the original. Any other use of the email by you is p
rohibited.
Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese - Nederlands - N
orsk - Portuguese
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Would like to join your discussion group |
| From: | "Mark M." <mmcfi(at)juno.com> |
Steve,
Thanks for pointing out the piet. I have seen others on the net as well, but
I think if I am going to do this, I want to do it 100%.
Mark
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142501#142501
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gene Hubbard <enhubbard(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Cowling- What alloy? |
I used annealed .050 3003 for the nosebowl and .032 6061T6 for the
flatwork. I got a cowling plan from the Cub Club and adapted it to the
specific shape of
the Piet and of my engine mount.
Gene
HelsperSew(at)aol.com wrote:
> Hi Guys,
>
> What are people using for cowling material? Please advise. Thanks.
>
> Dan Helsper
> Poplar Grove, IL.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Singleton" <slsingleton(at)cvalley.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Would like to join your discussion group |
Hi Mark. I don't blame you i'm the same way. I might buy one but would
continue to build the one i started. Lots of enjoyment to see small pieces
come togeather to make large ones. Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark M." <mmcfi(at)juno.com>
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 9:47 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Would like to join your discussion group
>
> Steve,
> Thanks for pointing out the piet. I have seen others on the net as well,
> but I think if I am going to do this, I want to do it 100%.
> Mark
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142501#142501
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ryan Mueller <rmueller23(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Basic plans reading question |
Ok, as an example of how little I know when it comes to building....
Looking at the plans raises this question: how do you read the dimensions?
(I am literate, so please reserve the Hooked on Phonics responses, har har. :P)
For example, with the ribs. 1/2" x 1/4". I'm assuming that is width by height.
If that is the case, does that carry throughout the plans? For the horizontal
stab diagonal braces, they are drawn as 3/4" x 1/2". If the plan dimensions are
listed as width by height, that would be 3/4" wide by 1/2" high. Is this the
case.
I feel stupid for asking this, as it should be a simple thing, but this is probably
the first time I can recall building from scratch via plans. I checked that
archives, but didn't see any question/answer addressing this, I'm sure because
I can't really figure out what to search for on this topic.
Thanks,
Ryan
__________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
----=_NextPart_000_0149_01C81A0E.B9C949A0--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Glenn Thomas" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com> |
I was thinking I could get by without a planer (as much as I've wanted to buy one)
and thought of a reason I might be able to justify the purchase. I was recently
given 4 rough-cut Sitka Spruce boards 2" x 6" x approx. 14'. I was hoping
to use them for longerons but they have a bit of a warp in them. Would the
wood still be usable if I were to cut it in to smaller pieces (suitable for
tail feathers, compression struts, etc.) and clamp the smaller pieces into a perfectly
straight jig that would hold them in a fixed position as I plane off
any warpage by passing the whole piece in the jig through a planer? The pieces
are not badly warped, just not perfect, and if I used them for small pieces,
what I call warpage might even be acceptable for some folks without planing.
I could just buy more spruce but I'm sure I'd find uses for the planer in the
future. Has anybody heard of using a planer for this?
Thanks
--------
Glenn Thomas
N?????
http://www.flyingwood.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142637#142637
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dale Johnson" <ddjohn(at)earthlink.net> |
Glenn
Cut the boards on the table saw first a little over size.Then run them
through the planer.
A lot less waist and you get square corners.
Dale in Mpls
> [Original Message]
> From: Glenn Thomas <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com>
> To:
> Date: 10/29/2007 7:34:59 PM
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Planer Question
>
>
> I was thinking I could get by without a planer (as much as I've wanted to
buy one) and thought of a reason I might be able to justify the purchase.
I was recently given 4 rough-cut Sitka Spruce boards 2" x 6" x approx. 14'.
I was hoping to use them for longerons but they have a bit of a warp in
them. Would the wood still be usable if I were to cut it in to smaller
pieces (suitable for tail feathers, compression struts, etc.) and clamp the
smaller pieces into a perfectly straight jig that would hold them in a
fixed position as I plane off any warpage by passing the whole piece in the
jig through a planer? The pieces are not badly warped, just not perfect,
and if I used them for small pieces, what I call warpage might even be
acceptable for some folks without planing. I could just buy more spruce
but I'm sure I'd find uses for the planer in the future. Has anybody heard
of using a planer for this?
>
> Thanks
>
> --------
> Glenn Thomas
> N?????
> http://www.flyingwood.com
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142637#142637
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dick Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Planer Question |
Glenn
I would use them if the grain is right. You are going to be bending them
for the fuse anyway.
Dick N.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Glenn Thomas" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com>
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 7:30 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Planer Question
>
>
> I was thinking I could get by without a planer (as much as I've wanted to
> buy one) and thought of a reason I might be able to justify the purchase.
> I was recently given 4 rough-cut Sitka Spruce boards 2" x 6" x approx.
> 14'. I was hoping to use them for longerons but they have a bit of a warp
> in them. Would the wood still be usable if I were to cut it in to smaller
> pieces (suitable for tail feathers, compression struts, etc.) and clamp
> the smaller pieces into a perfectly straight jig that would hold them in a
> fixed position as I plane off any warpage by passing the whole piece in
> the jig through a planer? The pieces are not badly warped, just not
> perfect, and if I used them for small pieces, what I call warpage might
> even be acceptable for some folks without planing. I could just buy more
> spruce but I'm sure I'd find uses for the planer in the future. Has
> anybody heard of using a planer for this?
>
> Thanks
>
> --------
> Glenn Thomas
> N?????
> http://www.flyingwood.com
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142637#142637
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <catdesigns(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Planer Question |
Glenn
I have a Delta 12 1/2-inch planer. Its simple and inexpensive. I like it a
lot and it come in very handy when I need a board reduced to a specific
thickness. If you own one, a hole new world opens up to you. You can buy
ruff-cut board (cheaper) and make then into beautiful wood. You would be
surprised what an ugly looking 2x4 will turn into after you run it through a
planer. As for taking the twist out, it will not do that. It will only
make the two side parallel. If it goes in twisted it comes out twisted. But
I think you already know this. If it were me, I would cut them into
longerons and see if the twist is that bad once you get them machined down
to 1x1. Cut one side on the table saw then cut the other on the table saw
or jointer to 90 degrees to the first, then run through the planer. I would
bet that starting with a 2x2 you would have usable 1x1s by the time your
done. You can always use them for smaller pieces if it doesn't work out.
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
Website at http://www.WestCoastPiet.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Glenn Thomas" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com>
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 5:30 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Planer Question
>
>
> I was thinking I could get by without a planer (as much as I've wanted to
> buy one) and thought of a reason I might be able to justify the purchase.
> I was recently given 4 rough-cut Sitka Spruce boards 2" x 6" x approx.
> 14'. I was hoping to use them for longerons but they have a bit of a warp
> in them. Would the wood still be usable if I were to cut it in to smaller
> pieces (suitable for tail feathers, compression struts, etc.) and clamp
> the smaller pieces into a perfectly straight jig that would hold them in a
> fixed position as I plane off any warpage by passing the whole piece in
> the jig through a planer? The pieces are not badly warped, just not
> perfect, and if I used them for small pieces, what I call warpage might
> even be acceptable for some folks without planing. I could just buy more
> spruce but I'm sure I'd find uses for the planer in the future. Has
> anybody heard of using a planer for this?
>
> Thanks
>
> --------
> Glenn Thomas
> N?????
> http://www.flyingwood.com
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142637#142637
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack T. Textor" <jtextor(at)thepalmergroup.com> |
Hi Glenn,
How have you been? I concur with all the other comments and have
another thought. Wood has many forces that get unleashed after cutting.
I had a beautiful piece of spruce 2"x8"x15', strait tight grain. About
a week after ripping into 1 1/2" strips for my longerons, they warped so
badly that I wasn't comfortable using them. I clamped them together
hoping they would straighten out, but no luck. I guess my point is, rip
them and see what you have, then go from there. Although it may be
easier to purchase wood finished, I did get a lot of satisfaction
milling it myself. Good luck!
Jack Textor
www.textors.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | HelsperSew(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Planer Question |
Glenn,
Your idea of using a "sled" is correct for getting the warp out of the
boards by running it through the planer that way. I would recommend getting a
planer. I have used mine many many times to make numerable parts. Also, I would
recommend to anyone ordering the "bargain bag" of spruce that ACS and Wicks
offers. Very cheap and you can get many smaller parts out of it.
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Stabilizer Gussets |
| From: | <harvey.rule(at)bell.ca> |
I'm just given ya a hard time.I can't build anything and I envy you guys
who can, no matter how long it takes ya!
________________________________
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill
Church
Sent: October 25, 2007 12:08 PM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Stabilizer Gussets
Harvey,
What do you think I've been doing for the past year and a half of not
building??? If I start building any slower, I'll be taking things apart.
just kidding...
Actually, what happened was that when I first received my plans, I
studied them, then started redrawing them using CAD (exactly as drawn by
Orrin Hoopman). When the time came to start building again, I plotted
out the drawing I had done a few years ago, and plopped it down on my
building board, and used it to start cutting my parts. I was perfectly
satisfied with my progress until I happened to look at a few photos of
work done by others, and upon seeing differences compared to what I had
done, I had a moment of panic. A quick check back to the plans revealed
that all was okay - I was building to the plans - others had chosen to
use a different technique.
I guess my point was that photos of other's work can be very helpful,
but they don't always show things the way they are in the plans - which
is fine. In fact, quite often, the photos may show an improved method.
As far as visual appearance goes, personally, I like the looks of the
modified gusset attachment with mitered joints, but for ease of
construction, the plans method is much easier. In the end, this
beautiful woodwork all gets covered up anyway.
Bill C
________________________________
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
harvey.rule(at)bell.ca
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 7:15 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Stabilizer Gussets
It might not be a bad idea to check the pictures and previous letters on
this web page before you do anything in the future.It will slow things
down but it will give you a better idea of what's been done before.Sort
of like a highway in the sky.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Kraut" <brian.kraut(at)engalt.com> |
I have a long straight board with clamps on it that I use for making tapered
spars. I also have a 10' long aluminum channel that I can clamp down to my
saw to make an extra long rip fence. With a setup like that you can clamp a
weird twisted piece of wood to the flat straight board and run it through
the saw to get one side perfectly straight and flat. Put that side down
through the planer and you will wind up with two parallel sides and can get
the other two sides done on the table saw. You can get away without the
long rip fence, but it makes it a lot easier for cutting long boards. I
also clamp pieces of plywood on the bottom of the long fence and get nice
long infeed and outfeed tables. It is hard to keep a long board flat on a
short table and rip fence unless you have two people doing it.
I love my planer and they are not that expensive. I made my son a very nice
water bed using cheap Home Depot 2 X 8s and getting the sides smooth and
flat on the planer. Some stain and varnish and it looks as good as
expensive wood.
Brian Kraut
Engineering Alternatives, Inc.
www.engalt.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Glenn Thomas" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Planer Question |
Thanks everyone.
I'm going for the planer this week. Dan captured the essence of my real
question with the "sled". Didn't know if that is something any of you had
ever tried, ...so I guess it's feasible. The only way I could think to get
rid of a bow in the wood is to fix it to something long and straight and
keep shaving off the bow, then flip and do the other side. Then perhaps put
into the sled sideways and do the sides. should also work on twists if the
board can be fixed in the sled. I'll let you know how it works.
I can put a face to all but one of the group that responded and reflected
upon some good times at Brodhead. Thanks again. Chris, you must go to
Brodhead next year. ...your gallery is a fantastic source of ideas and
information.
Thanks
On 10/30/07, HelsperSew(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> Glenn,
> Your idea of using a "sled" is correct for getting the warp out of the
> boards by running it through the planer that way. I would recommend getting
> a planer. I have used mine many many times to make numerable parts. Also, I
> would recommend to anyone ordering the "bargain bag" of spruce that ACS and
> Wicks offers. Very cheap and you can get many smaller parts out of it.
> Dan Helsper
> Poplar Grove, IL.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
--
Glenn Thomas
Storrs, CT
http://www.flyingwood.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Glenn Thomas" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Planer Question |
Thanks,
I think I can pick up extruded square tubing at the place I have been buy
steel from for pretty cheap. I'll try that.
Looking forward to making chips again. It's been a while.
Thanks
On 10/30/07, Brian Kraut wrote:
>
> brian.kraut(at)engalt.com>
>
> I have a long straight board with clamps on it that I use for making
> tapered
> spars. I also have a 10' long aluminum channel that I can clamp down to
> my
> saw to make an extra long rip fence. With a setup like that you can clamp
> a
> weird twisted piece of wood to the flat straight board and run it through
> the saw to get one side perfectly straight and flat. Put that side down
> through the planer and you will wind up with two parallel sides and can
> get
> the other two sides done on the table saw. You can get away without the
> long rip fence, but it makes it a lot easier for cutting long boards. I
> also clamp pieces of plywood on the bottom of the long fence and get nice
> long infeed and outfeed tables. It is hard to keep a long board flat on a
> short table and rip fence unless you have two people doing it.
>
> I love my planer and they are not that expensive. I made my son a very
> nice
> water bed using cheap Home Depot 2 X 8s and getting the sides smooth and
> flat on the planer. Some stain and varnish and it looks as good as
> expensive wood.
>
>
> Brian Kraut
> Engineering Alternatives, Inc.
> www.engalt.com
>
>
--
Glenn Thomas
Storrs, CT
http://www.flyingwood.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Planer Question |
I wouldn't do without a planer when building anything. I have a portable Delta
planer. It achieves more things than just making 2 sides parrallel. The small
carry around style planers run at much faster rpm than big planers and they use
less hook angle on the cutting blades, leaving a finish on the wood that requires
no further finish work. When you run all of your pieces of the same size
thru it at the same setting (like all of the longerons), they are all precisely
the same thickness, plus or minus a few thousandths. This helps big time when
you cut all of your pieces to length with a power miter saw using a stop on
a fence to achieve precise lengths that are within plus or minus a few thousandths.
Think of the huge time savings doing this versus the old "cut it with a
bandsaw and then sand it to the line" style of building. I plane the full board
down to within 1/16 (.060) of the finish size, rip the pieces to 1/16 over
the size that you want making sure that your table
saw is set absolutely square, and then set the planer to run all of pieces through
on one side before you adjust the planer down to plane the next side . taking
off .030 per side to get the finished piece. I use a dial caliper to measure
the thickness and you soon learn how much a half of a crank on the planer
takes off. If you do too much planing after you rip your pieces, you start to
loose squareness. If you do not do any sanding then your glue joints will be
much stronger as well.
Del
Glenn Thomas wrote:
I was thinking I could get by without a planer (as much as I've wanted to buy one)
and thought of a reason I might be able to justify the purchase. I was recently
given 4 rough-cut Sitka Spruce boards 2" x 6" x approx. 14'. I was hoping
to use them for longerons but they have a bit of a warp in them. Would the wood
still be usable if I were to cut it in to smaller pieces (suitable for tail
feathers, compression struts, etc.) and clamp the smaller pieces into a perfectly
straight jig that would hold them in a fixed position as I plane off any
warpage by passing the whole piece in the jig through a planer? The pieces are
not badly warped, just not perfect, and if I used them for small pieces, what
I call warpage might even be acceptable for some folks without planing. I could
just buy more spruce but I'm sure I'd find uses for the planer in the future.
Has anybody heard of using a planer for this?
Thanks
--------
Glenn Thomas
N?????
http://www.flyingwood.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142637#142637
Del-New Richmond, Wi
"farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com"
__________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Planer Question |
If your boards have such a slight bow that you could take it out with a "sled"
then you are wasting your time, because when you get them cut down to size they
are flexible anyway, or you will be cutting them into short enough pieces that
the bow will not have any effect on anything.
Del
Glenn Thomas wrote:
Thanks everyone.
I'm going for the planer this week. Dan captured the essence of my real question
with the "sled". Didn't know if that is something any of you had ever tried,
...so I guess it's feasible. The only way I could think to get rid of a
bow in the wood is to fix it to something long and straight and keep shaving off
the bow, then flip and do the other side. Then perhaps put into the sled sideways
and do the sides. should also work on twists if the board can be fixed
in the sled. I'll let you know how it works.
I can put a face to all but one of the group that responded and reflected upon
some good times at Brodhead. Thanks again. Chris, you must go to Brodhead
next year. ...your gallery is a fantastic source of ideas and information.
Thanks
On 10/30/07, HelsperSew(at)aol.com wrote: Glenn,
Your idea of using a "sled" is correct for getting the warp out of the boards
by running it through the planer that way. I would recommend getting a planer.
I have used mine many many times to make numerable parts. Also, I would recommend
to anyone ordering the "bargain bag" of spruce that ACS and Wicks offers.
Very cheap and you can get many smaller parts out of it.
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
---------------------------------
--
Glenn Thomas
Storrs, CT
http://www.flyingwood.com
Del-New Richmond, Wi
"farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com"
__________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eric Williams <ewilliams805(at)msn.com> |
I'm thinking what you really need for this operation is a jointer. Read th
is link:
http://www.wisegeek.com/how-is-a-jointer-used-in-woodworking.htm
Eric> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Planer Question> From: glennthomas@flyingwoo
d.com> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 17:30:43 -0700> To: pietenpol-list@matronics.
yingwood.com>> > I was thinking I could get by without a planer (as much as
I've wanted to buy one) and thought of a reason I might be able to justify
the purchase. I was recently given 4 rough-cut Sitka Spruce boards 2" x 6"
x approx. 14'. I was hoping to use them for longerons but they have a bit
of a warp in them. Would the wood still be usable if I were to cut it in to
smaller pieces (suitable for tail feathers, compression struts, etc.) and
clamp the smaller pieces into a perfectly straight jig that would hold them
in a fixed position as I plane off any warpage by passing the whole piece
in the jig through a planer? The pieces are not badly warped, just not perf
ect, and if I used them for small pieces, what I call warpage might even be
acceptable for some folks without planing. I could just buy more spruce bu
t I'm sure I'd find uses for the planer in the future. Has anybody heard of
using a planer for this?> > Thanks> > --------> Glenn Thomas> N?????> http
://www.flyingwood.com> > > > > Read this topic online here:> > http://forum
=========> > >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Barry Davis" <bed(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Grega GN-1 Biplane Questions |
To glue down the leading edge, try sanding the glue joint and using Liquid
Nail.(make sure that you get it in place the first time) After all, the
fabric will hold it down in place.
Barry
----- Original Message -----
From: "jimd" <jlducey(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 10:08 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Grega GN-1 Biplane Questions
>
> Thought of screws, however everything I read said don't use screws on
> aircraft woodwork, rather to look at the brads/nails as temporary clamps
> for holding while the glue drys.
>
> Didn't see glue for the leading edge that came loose, so I mentioned it.
>
> Does give me a chance to really clean out the area that will be enclosed
> and get the dust out first, so its probably a good thing.
>
> Think I will put some kind of extra cloth tape over the brads to make the
> covering cloth look better and make it less likely they will rise and look
> ugly.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142489#142489
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Grega GN-1 Biplane Questions |
| From: | "jimd" <jlducey(at)hotmail.com> |
Thanks for the suggestion. I tried tapping the little brass brad/nails in and while
it works they really didn't seem to hold all that well, so I am going to
have to do something more than that to get them to stay put.
Once that is done on the top wings they should be ready to be covered. Watched
the Poly-Fiber video and read the book, wow its going to be fun. Have a lot of
work ahead. The bottom wings need a front spar and leading edge then they will
be ready to cover.
Not sure how you deal with covering the wing walk part of the lower wing, but a
forum of high wing plane people probably isn't the ideal place to ask.
Think I will call the Poly-Fiber support line, had some other questions for them
anyway.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142832#142832
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter W Johnson" <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au> |
Hi Guys,
Some discussion in my hangar has rasied some questions about landing gear
geometry. Our local crop duster pilot flies a Cessna 188 AgWagon and has the
U/C set with toe in. I was talking to a Gere Biplane builder who has the U/C
set with toe out (about 2 degrees overall). With the straight gear Pietenpol
(and mine with J3 type gear) there is no toe in or out. The Agwagon has a
tailwheel whilst the Gere has a tail skid.
Any ideas on the pro's and con's of the different methods?
Cheers
Peter
Wonthaggi Australia
http://www.cpc-world.com
4:43 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gordon Bowen" <gbowen(at)ptialaska.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Landing Gear |
Peter,
I put in a slight toe-in. Theory--keep the gear from wanting to squat
like a duck when landing hard or taxiing with heavy load. Used laser
levels to sight out about 40 feet in front of edge of each wheel. Made
the distance between outside edges of wheels very slightly more narrow
at 40' (about 1/2inch) as compared to directly in front of the wheels.
Set in about 0.25 degree toe-in, using thin washers.
Gordon
----- Original Message -----
From: Peter W Johnson
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 3:23 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
Hi Guys,
Some discussion in my hangar has rasied some questions about landing
gear geometry. Our local crop duster pilot flies a Cessna 188 AgWagon
and has the U/C set with toe in. I was talking to a Gere Biplane builder
who has the U/C set with toe out (about 2 degrees overall). With the
straight gear Pietenpol (and mine with J3 type gear) there is no toe in
or out. The Agwagon has a tailwheel whilst the Gere has a tail skid.
Any ideas on the pro's and con's of the different methods?
Cheers
Peter
Wonthaggi Australia
http://www.cpc-world.com
Release Date: 9/10/2007 4:43 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Landing Gear |
In a message dated 10/30/2007 7:38:35 PM Central Daylight Time,
gbowen(at)ptialaska.net writes:
Peter,
I put in a slight toe-in. Theory--keep the gear from wanting to squat like a
duck when landing hard or taxiing with heavy load. Used laser levels to sight
out about 40 feet in front of edge of each wheel. Made the distance between
outside edges of wheels very slightly more narrow at 40' (about 1/2inch) as
compared to directly in front of the wheels. Set in about 0.25 degree toe-in,
using thin washers.
Gordon
Peter,
I agree totally with Gordon and his reasons.
Originally, my split axle gear had too much toe - in. It would splay the
gear apart when pulling it backward, and pushing 'er forward you could feel
the tires slipping. Early on in my test period, I was landing in a pretty
nasty right crosswind, so I put down the upwind (right) gear on the ground first,
and it very nearly groundlooped to the left, because that was the direction
that wheel was pointing. That was the closest I've ever come to groundlooping
my plane. If not for the excellent rudder authority of the Pietenpol, even at
low speeds, the tail would surely have went on around. To fix the problem, I
pulled one wheel at a time, and removed the wheel bearings and all grease.
Tied the tail and gear off to the structure of the hanger, and heated up the
lower vee of the gear with a Rosebud torch, while a helper slipped a 10 foot
piece of pipe over the axle and bent it back till we ended up with just a very
slight toe - in, all the while maintaining the camber angle. I've also modified
the gear from bunji's to springs, and the gear has worked very well ever
since. Close to 350 hrs on 'er now !!
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter W Johnson" <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au> |
Thanks Guys,
I may put a bit of toe-in on mine.
Cheers
Peter
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, 31 October 2007 1:20 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
In a message dated 10/30/2007 7:38:35 PM Central Daylight Time,
gbowen(at)ptialaska.net writes:
Peter,
I put in a slight toe-in. Theory--keep the gear from wanting to squat like a
duck when landing hard or taxiing with heavy load. Used laser levels to
sight out about 40 feet in front of edge of each wheel. Made the distance
between outside edges of wheels very slightly more narrow at 40' (about
1/2inch) as compared to directly in front of the wheels. Set in about 0.25
degree toe-in, using thin washers.
Gordon
Peter,
I agree totally with Gordon and his reasons.
Originally, my split axle gear had too much toe - in. It would splay
the gear apart when pulling it backward, and pushing 'er forward you could
feel the tires slipping. Early on in my test period, I was landing in a
pretty nasty right crosswind, so I put down the upwind (right) gear on the
ground first, and it very nearly groundlooped to the left, because that was
the direction that wheel was pointing. That was the closest I've ever come
to groundlooping my plane. If not for the excellent rudder authority of the
Pietenpol, even at low speeds, the tail would surely have went on around.
To fix the problem, I pulled one wheel at a time, and removed the wheel
bearings and all grease. Tied the tail and gear off to the structure of the
hanger, and heated up the lower vee of the gear with a Rosebud torch, while
a helper slipped a 10 foot piece of pipe over the axle and bent it back till
we ended up with just a very slight toe - in, all the while maintaining the
camber angle. I've also modified the gear from bunji's to springs, and the
gear has worked very well ever since. Close to 350 hrs on 'er now !!
Chuck G.
NX770CG
_____
See what's new at
"http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List"http://www.matronics.com/
Navigator?Pietenpol-List
"http://forums.matronics.com"http://forums.matronics.com
6:26 PM
6:26 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Landing Gear |
| From: | hvandervoo(at)aol.com |
Peter,
In my opinion you should have a slight toe-in.
See attached drawing for explanation, this assumes both wheels on the ground
.
Of course during a crosswind touchdown one wing will be low and that wheel w
ill control the direction in the first few seconds.
Thus too much Toe in could be bad in this few seconds, so keep toe-in to a m
inimum
The only reason I see that some airplanes have toe-out is in a unloaded situ
ation.
Does the Gere Biplane have toe-out at gross load ?
Hans
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter W Johnson <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au>
Sent: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 6:23 pm
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
Hi Guys,
=C2-
Some discussion in my hangar has rasied some questions about landing gear ge
ometry. Our local crop duster pilot flies a Cessna 188 AgWagon and has the U
/C set with toe in. I was talking to a Gere Biplane builder who has the U/C
set with toe out (about 2 degrees overall). With the straight gear Pietenpol
(and mine with J3 type gear) there is no toe in or out. The Agwagon has a t
ailwheel whilst the Gere has a tail skid.
=C2-
Any ideas on the pro=99s and con=99s of the different methods?
=C2-
Cheers
=C2-
Peter
Wonthaggi Australia
http://www.cpc-world.com
=C2-
=C2-
Release Date: 9/10/2007 4:43 PM
-= - The Pietenpol-List Email Forum -
-= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse
-= the many List utilities such as the Subscriptions page,
-= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
-= Photoshare, and much much more:
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
-========================
-= - NEW MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
-= Same great content now also available via the Web Forums!
-= --> http://forums.matronics.com
-========================
________________________________________________________________________
Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http
://mail.aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gordon Bowen" <gbowen(at)ptialaska.net> |
| Subject: | Technique for setting wheel toe-in |
Had a couple emails for builder's interested in laser method to set the
wheel's toe-in. Rather than repeating, thought I'd write up and post as
attachment for anyone who may be interested. Hope it's helpful.
Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter W Johnson" <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au> |
| Subject: | Technique for setting wheel toe-in |
Gordon/Hans,
Thanks for the info. What/where am I trying to shim? The only way I can see
to adjust things is to get the gas torch out (like Chuck)
Cheers
Peter
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gordon Bowen
Sent: Thursday, 1 November 2007 8:10 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Technique for setting wheel toe-in
Had a couple emails for builder's interested in laser method to set the
wheel's toe-in. Rather than repeating, thought I'd write up and post as
attachment for anyone who may be interested. Hope it's helpful.
Gordon
6:26 PM
6:26 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gordon Bowen" <gbowen(at)ptialaska.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Technique for setting wheel toe-in |
Sorry 'bout that Peter,
I have a cub style type bungeed gear, also Cessna wheels, brakes and
axle. I can shim up behind the axle backing plate.
Gordon
----- Original Message -----
From: Peter W Johnson
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 1:32 PM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Technique for setting wheel toe-in
Gordon/Hans,
Thanks for the info. What/where am I trying to shim? The only way I
can see to adjust things is to get the gas torch out (like Chuck)
Cheers
Peter
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gordon
Bowen
Sent: Thursday, 1 November 2007 8:10 AM
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Technique for setting wheel toe-in
Had a couple emails for builder's interested in laser method to set
the wheel's toe-in. Rather than repeating, thought I'd write up and
post as attachment for anyone who may be interested. Hope it's helpful.
Gordon
30/10/2007 6:26 PM
30/10/2007 6:26 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gene Rambo" <GeneRambo(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Technique for setting wheel toe-in |
I don't know about using lasers and such . . . just spin the wheels and
make a chalk line on each wheel, then make the distance exactly the same
on the front and back of the wheels. Can't get much simpler than that.
Gene
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter W Johnson" <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au> |
Hans,
I=92m not too sure of the geometry on a Gere but the builder was adamant
about
toe out. I think it is fixed whether loaded or not. Again this would be
the
same as the Piet. It should only change the camber when the load is
changed.
Cheers
Peter.
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
hvandervoo(at)aol.com
Sent: Thursday, 1 November 2007 1:03 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
Peter,
In my opinion you should have a slight toe-in.
See attached drawing for explanation, this assumes both wheels on the
ground.
Of course during a crosswind touchdown one wing will be low and that
wheel
will control the direction in the first few seconds.
Thus too much Toe in could be bad in this few seconds, so keep toe-in to
a
minimum
The only reason I see that some airplanes have toe-out is in a unloaded
situation.
Does the Gere Biplane have toe-out at gross load ?
Hans
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter W Johnson <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au>
Sent: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 6:23 pm
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
Hi Guys,
Some discussion in my hangar has rasied some questions about landing
gear
geometry. Our local crop duster pilot flies a Cessna 188 AgWagon and has
the
U/C set with toe in. I was talking to a Gere Biplane builder who has the
U/C
set with toe out (about 2 degrees overall). With the straight gear
Pietenpol
(and mine with J3 type gear) there is no toe in or out. The Agwagon has
a
tailwheel whilst the Gere has a tail skid.
Any ideas on the pro=92s and con=92s of the different methods?
Cheers
Peter
Wonthaggi Australia
HYPERLINK "http://www.cpc-world.com/" \nhttp://www.cpc-world.com
Release Date: 9/10/2007 4:43 PM
target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
://forums.matronics.com
_____
size=2 width="100%" align=center>
Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free HYPERLINK
"http://o.aolcdn.com/cdn.webmail.aol.com/mailtour/aol/en-us/index.htm?nci
d=A
OLAOF00020000000970" \nAOL Mail!
30/10/2007
6:26 PM
31/10/2007
4:38 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Clif Dawson <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Bowers Pietenpol Article |
Finaly I've rediscovered this article so here's the missing page
Clif
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Winter" <twinter1(at)unl.edu>
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 12:47 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Bowers Pietenpol Article
>
> Cliff, Thank you! But there appears to be a page missing. Page 61?
> button 1 gives p. 56.
> Button 2. gives p. 57.
> 3. p. 58.
> 4. p. 59. Text ends "...built by"
> 5. No page number: pictures and caption only. Apparently page 60.
> 6. "Continued from page 61." Text begins "and gussets by ..."
> 7. PIETENPOLS, Continued. p. 88.
> 8. p. 89.
> 9. p. 90.
>
>
> --
> 269.11.17/951 - Release Date: 8/13/2007 10:15 AM
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Clif Dawson <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Landing Gear |
I'm looking at the Gere in the 1933 Flying Manual. The landing gear is
is drawn and discussed in some detail but there is no mention at all
of toe in or out.
Clif
----- Original Message -----
From: Peter W Johnson
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 10:18 PM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
Hans,
I=92m not too sure of the geometry on a Gere but the builder was
adamant about toe out. I think it is fixed whether loaded or not. Again
this would be the same as the Piet. It should only change the camber
when the load is changed.
Cheers
Peter.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
hvandervoo(at)aol.com
Sent: Thursday, 1 November 2007 1:03 AM
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
Peter,
In my opinion you should have a slight toe-in.
See attached drawing for explanation, this assumes both wheels on the
ground.
Of course during a crosswind touchdown one wing will be low and that
wheel will control the direction in the first few seconds.
Thus too much Toe in could be bad in this few seconds, so keep toe-in
to a minimum
The only reason I see that some airplanes have toe-out is in a
unloaded situation.
Does the Gere Biplane have toe-out at gross load ?
Hans
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter W Johnson <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au>
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 6:23 pm
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
Hi Guys,
Some discussion in my hangar has rasied some questions about landing
gear geometry. Our local crop duster pilot flies a Cessna 188 AgWagon
and has the U/C set with toe in. I was talking to a Gere Biplane builder
who has the U/C set with toe out (about 2 degrees overall). With the
straight gear Pietenpol (and mine with J3 type gear) there is no toe in
or out. The Agwagon has a tailwheel whilst the Gere has a tail skid.
Any ideas on the pro=92s and con=92s of the different methods?
Cheers
Peter
Wonthaggi Australia
http://www.cpc-world.com
Release Date: 9/10/2007 4:43 PM
target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List://forum
s.matronics.com size=2 width="100%" align=center>
Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail!
30/10/2007 6:26 PM
31/10/2007 4:38 PM
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
10/31/2007 4:38 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter W Johnson" <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au> |
Clif,
I had a long conversation with the builder at our local SAAA National
Convention over the weekend. He was quite adamant that it should be toe
out
and not toe in. He runs a skate board wheel in his tail skid to protect
the
pavement on hard runways.
Bye the way, this particular Gere Sport has won our Concours d Elegance
and
has been Grand Champion for two years. A beautiful aircraft now sporting
a
Rotec radial on the front!
I=92ll try the toe-in first and see how it goes.
Cheers
Peter
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Clif
Dawson
Sent: Thursday, 1 November 2007 5:50 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
I'm looking at the Gere in the 1933 Flying Manual. The landing gear is
is drawn and discussed in some detail but there is no mention at all
of toe in or out.
Clif
----- Original Message -----
From: HYPERLINK "mailto:vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au"Peter W Johnson
"mailto:pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com"pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 10:18 PM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
Hans,
I=92m not too sure of the geometry on a Gere but the builder was adamant
about
toe out. I think it is fixed whether loaded or not. Again this would be
the
same as the Piet. It should only change the camber when the load is
changed.
Cheers
Peter.
_____
From: HYPERLINK
"mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com"owner-pietenpol-list-se
rve
r(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On
Behalf
Of hvandervoo(at)aol.com
Sent: Thursday, 1 November 2007 1:03 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
Peter,
In my opinion you should have a slight toe-in.
See attached drawing for explanation, this assumes both wheels on the
ground.
Of course during a crosswind touchdown one wing will be low and that
wheel
will control the direction in the first few seconds.
Thus too much Toe in could be bad in this few seconds, so keep toe-in to
a
minimum
The only reason I see that some airplanes have toe-out is in a unloaded
situation.
Does the Gere Biplane have toe-out at gross load ?
Hans
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter W Johnson <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au>
Sent: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 6:23 pm
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
Hi Guys,
Some discussion in my hangar has rasied some questions about landing
gear
geometry. Our local crop duster pilot flies a Cessna 188 AgWagon and has
the
U/C set with toe in. I was talking to a Gere Biplane builder who has the
U/C
set with toe out (about 2 degrees overall). With the straight gear
Pietenpol
(and mine with J3 type gear) there is no toe in or out. The Agwagon has
a
tailwheel whilst the Gere has a tail skid.
Any ideas on the pro=92s and con=92s of the different methods?
Cheers
Peter
Wonthaggi Australia
HYPERLINK "http://www.cpc-world.com/" \nhttp://www.cpc-world.com
Release Date: 9/10/2007 4:43 PM
target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List"http://www.matronics.c
om/
Navigator?Pietenpol-List
the Web
"http://forums.matronics.com"http://forums.matronics.com
===========
31/10/2007
4:38 PM
31/10/2007
4:38 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | November is Matronics Email List Fund Raiser Month! |
Dear Listers,
You've probably noticed that there are no banner ads or pop-up windows or spam
from any of the List and Forum services at Matronics. These include, for example:
The Email List Postings - http://www.matronics.com/listbrowse
The Email List Forum Site - http://forums.matronics.com
The List Wiki - http://wiki.matronics.com
The List Search Engine - http://www.matronics.com/search
This is because I have always enjoyed a List experience that was completely about
the sport we enjoy - airplanes - and not about advertising!
But running a high performance, highly available service like this isn't free and
a fair amount of money in terms of computer upgrades, business-class Internet
connectivity, and electricity. Consequently, many similar sites turn to advertising
to support these costs. Advertising that you have to look at each and
every time you read an email message or browse the their web site.
Rather than subject my List community to another constant commercial bombardment,
I have chosen to hold a PBS-like fund raiser each year in November to support
the continued operation and upgrade of the List services. It's solely through
the Contributions of List members that the Lists and Forums continue to be
possible!
During the month, I will be sending out a Fund Raiser reminder message every few
days and I ask for your patience and understanding during the month throughout
these regular messages. Think of them as PBS' Pledge Breaks... :-)
To minimize the impact of the Fund Raiser on the List community, I implemented
a new feature late last year specifically related to making Contributions. If
you are an Email List subscriber, once you make a Contribution using the online
web site, you will no longer receive the email from me regarding the Fund Raiser!
There are a couple of exceptions to this, however. If someone replies
to a Contribution message I've sent, you might receive that. Additionally, the
messages will always be posted to the Forums site. To a first order, however,
once you make a Contribution, you won't get my email messages about the Fund
Raiser for the rest of the month. For Contributions by check, the squelch
will take effect once the check is received.
There is a whole new line up of really great Contribution gifts this year! When
you make a qualifying Contribution, you can select one of the many free gifts
that are available during the Fund Raiser. These gifts are provided through
the generous support of a number of our industry's leading supporters including:
Bob Nuckolls - AeroElectric - http://www.aeroelectric.com
Andy Gold - Builder's Bookstore - http://www.buildersbooks.com
Jon Croke - HomebuiltHELP - http://www.homebuilthelp.com
Please visit these guy's respective sites, as they have some great products to
offer and are generously supporting the Matronics List Fund Raiser.
You can make your List Contribution using any one of three secure methods this
year including using a credit card, PayPal, or by personal check. From the Contribution
site, you can select any one of this year's free gifts with a qualifying
Contribution amount. The Contribution page is pretty loooonnnnng this year
in order to list great selection of great gifts available so be sure to scroll
all the way to the bottom of the web page to see everything that's available!
Please make a List Support Contribution:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
I would like to thank everyone in advance for their generous support! Your Contributions
truely keep this operation afloat!
Thank you,
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Forum Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Landing Gear |
| From: | hvandervoo(at)aol.com |
Peter,
Because the hinge points are not parrallel (on the piet) at the fuselage the
re is=C2-a difference in Toe-in under load and no load.
No load condition is more Toe-in than at loaded, it is a small difference bu
t it is there.
Cheers
Hans
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter W Johnson <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au>
Sent: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 12:18 am
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
Hans,
=C2-
I=99m not too sure of the geometry on a Gere but the builder was adama
nt about toe out. I think it is fixed whether loaded or not. Again this woul
d be the same as the Piet. It should only change the camber when the load is
changed.
=C2-
Cheers
=C2-
Peter.
=C2-
=C2-
=C2-
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list
-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of hvandervoo(at)aol.com
Sent: Thursday, 1 November 2007 1:03 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
=C2-
Peter,
In my opinion you should have a slight toe-in.
See attached drawing for explanation, this assumes both wheels on the ground
.
Of course during a crosswind touchdown one wing will be low and that wheel w
ill control the direction in the first few seconds.
Thus too much Toe in could be bad in this few seconds, so keep toe-in to a m
inimum
The only reason I see that some airplanes have toe-out is in a unloaded situ
ation.
Does the Gere Biplane have toe-out at gross load ?
Hans
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter W Johnson <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au>
Sent: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 6:23 pm
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
Hi Guys,
=C2-
Some discussion in my hangar has rasied some questions about landing gear ge
ometry. Our local crop duster pilot flies a Cessna 188 AgWagon and has the U
/C set with toe in. I was talking to a Gere Biplane builder who has the U/C
set with toe out (about 2 degrees overall). With the straight gear Pietenpol
(and mine with J3 type gear) there is no toe in or out. The Agwagon has a t
ailwheel whilst the Gere has a tail skid.
=C2-
Any ideas on the pro=99s and con=99s of the different methods?
=C2-
Cheers
=C2-
Peter
Wonthaggi Australia
http://www.cpc-world.com
=C2-
=C2-
Release Date: 9/10/2007 4:43 PM
=C2-
=C2-
target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
://forums.matronics.com
=C2-
size=2 width="100%" align=center>
Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail!
=C2-
30/10/2007 6:26 PM
31/10/2007 4:38 PM
-= - The Pietenpol-List Email Forum -
-= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse
-= the many List utilities such as the Subscriptions page,
-= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
-= Photoshare, and much much more:
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
-========================
-= - NEW MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
-= Same great content now also available via the Web Forums!
-= --> http://forums.matronics.com
-========================
________________________________________________________________________
Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http
://mail.aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James" <jthursby(at)tampabay.rr.com> |
Toe out will cause a taildragger to dart back and forth like a drunken
squirrel! Even in a slight crosswind the wheels load and unload a
little
and toe out will cause the plane to dart back and forth.
Anyone recommending toe out either has not flown a properly set up
plane,
or likes to watch people sweat landings. A slight toe in will impart
directional stability. Straight is good also.
Jim T.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
hvandervoo(at)aol.com
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 9:52 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
Peter,
Because the hinge points are not parrallel (on the piet) at the fuselage
there is a difference in Toe-in under load and no load.
No load condition is more Toe-in than at loaded, it is a small
difference
but it is there.
Cheers
Hans
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter W Johnson <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au>
Sent: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 12:18 am
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
Hans,
I'm not too sure of the geometry on a Gere but the builder was adamant
about
toe out. I think it is fixed whether loaded or not. Again this would be
the
same as the Piet. It should only change the camber when the load is
changed.
Cheers
Peter.
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
] On Behalf Of
hvandervoo(at)aol.com
Sent: Thursday, 1 November 2007 1:03 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
Peter,
In my opinion you should have a slight toe-in.
See attached drawing for explanation, this assumes both wheels on the
ground.
Of course during a crosswind touchdown one wing will be low and that
wheel
will control the direction in the first few seconds.
Thus too much Toe in could be bad in this few seconds, so keep toe-in to
a
minimum
The only reason I see that some airplanes have toe-out is in a unloaded
situation.
Does the Gere Biplane have toe-out at gross load ?
Hans
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter W Johnson <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au>
Sent: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 6:23 pm
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
Hi Guys,
Some discussion in my hangar has rasied some questions about landing
gear
geometry. Our local crop duster pilot flies a Cessna 188 AgWagon and has
the
U/C set with toe in. I was talking to a Gere Biplane builder who has the
U/C
set with toe out (about 2 degrees overall). With the straight gear
Pietenpol
(and mine with J3 type gear) there is no toe in or out. The Agwagon has
a
tailwheel whilst the Gere has a tail skid.
Any ideas on the pro's and con's of the different methods?
Cheers
Peter
Wonthaggi Australia
http://www.cpc-world.com
Release Date: 9/10/2007 4:43 PM
target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
://forums.matronics.com
_____
size=2 width="100%" align=center>
Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail
<http://o.aolcdn.com/cdn.webmail.aol.com/mailtour/aol/en-us/index.htm?nci
d=A
OLAOF00020000000970> !
31/10/2007 4:38 PM
target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
://forums.matronics.com
_____
Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail
<http://o.aolcdn.com/cdn.webmail.aol.com/mailtour/aol/en-us/index.htm?nci
d=A
OLAOF00020000000970> !
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter W Johnson" <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au> |
Hans,
Good point, I never thought of that.
Cheers
Peter.
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
hvandervoo(at)aol.com
Sent: Friday, 2 November 2007 12:52 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
Peter,
Because the hinge points are not parrallel (on the piet) at the fuselage
there is a difference in Toe-in under load and no load.
No load condition is more Toe-in than at loaded, it is a small
difference
but it is there.
Cheers
Hans
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter W Johnson <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au>
Sent: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 12:18 am
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
Hans,
I=92m not too sure of the geometry on a Gere but the builder was adamant
about
toe out. I think it is fixed whether loaded or not. Again this would be
the
same as the Piet. It should only change the camber when the load is
changed.
Cheers
Peter.
_____
From: HYPERLINK
"mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com"owner-pietenpol-list-se
rve
r(at)matronics.com [HYPERLINK
"mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com?"mailto:owner-pietenpol
-li
st-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of HYPERLINK
"mailto:hvandervoo(at)aol.com"hvandervoo(at)aol.com
Sent: Thursday, 1 November 2007 1:03 AM
"mailto:pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com"pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
Peter,
In my opinion you should have a slight toe-in.
See attached drawing for explanation, this assumes both wheels on the
ground.
Of course during a crosswind touchdown one wing will be low and that
wheel
will control the direction in the first few seconds.
Thus too much Toe in could be bad in this few seconds, so keep toe-in to
a
minimum
The only reason I see that some airplanes have toe-out is in a unloaded
situation.
Does the Gere Biplane have toe-out at gross load ?
Hans
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter W Johnson <HYPERLINK
"mailto:vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au"vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au>
"mailto:pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com"pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 6:23 pm
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
Hi Guys,
Some discussion in my hangar has rasied some questions about landing
gear
geometry. Our local crop duster pilot flies a Cessna 188 AgWagon and has
the
U/C set with toe in. I was talking to a Gere Biplane builder who has the
U/C
set with toe out (about 2 degrees overall). With the straight gear
Pietenpol
(and mine with J3 type gear) there is no toe in or out. The Agwagon has
a
tailwheel whilst the Gere has a tail skid.
Any ideas on the pro=92s and con=92s of the different methods?
Cheers
Peter
Wonthaggi Australia
HYPERLINK "http://www.cpc-world.com/" \nhttp://www.cpc-world.com
Release Date: 9/10/2007 4:43 PM
target=_blank>HYPERLINK
"http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List"
\nhttp://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
://forums.matronics.com
_____
size=2 width="100%" align=center>
Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free HYPERLINK
"http://o.aolcdn.com/cdn.webmail.aol.com/mailtour/aol/en-us/index.htm?nci
d=A
OLAOF00020000000970" \nAOL Mail!
31/10/2007 4:38 PM
target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
://forums.matronics.com
_____
Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free HYPERLINK
"http://o.aolcdn.com/cdn.webmail.aol.com/mailtour/aol/en-us/index.htm?nci
d=A
OLAOF00020000000970" \nAOL Mail!
"http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List"http://www.matronics.c
om/
Navigator?Pietenpol-List
"http://forums.matronics.com"http://forums.matronics.com
31/10/2007
4:38 PM
31/10/2007
4:38 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Skip Gadd" <skipgadd(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | New Piet on the block |
The FAA came to our field yesterday and certified two new homebuilts. One was Dave
Stephens Corvair Piet. If you went to Brodhead 2005 you saw Dave's Piet as
a bare-bones fuselage. Now we have two Piets at Hales Landing and two more Piet
projects. Will try to send a picture next week.
Skip
skipgadd(at)earthlink.net
EarthLink Revolves Around You.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Clif Dawson <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Prop drawing |
Alright! I've tried three times to send this stuff and been
rejected as too large. I even cut the image size way down.
So here's the first installment.
Clif
Hello everyone!
I will carve a prop for a model A (maybe a 76 x42), but firstly I need
to find some drawings.
Santiago
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Clif Dawson <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Prop drawing |
Part deux , Clif
Santiago
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Clif Dawson <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Prop drawing |
Part last, Clif
Santiago
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Kraut" <brian.kraut(at)engalt.com> |
Very good information. I have been wanting something like that for a while.
If anyone has any references for higher horsepower prop design I would love
to have it.
Brian Kraut
Engineering Alternatives, Inc.
www.engalt.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Clif Dawson
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 11:10 PM
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Prop drawing
Alright! I've tried three times to send this stuff and been
rejected as too large. I even cut the image size way down.
So here's the first installment.
Clif
Hello everyone!
I will carve a prop for a model A (maybe a 76 x42), but firstly I need
to find some drawings.
Santiago
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Church" <eng(at)canadianrogers.com> |
About a year ago, Paul Poberezny announced that the magazine published
by the Sport Aviation Association, "To Fly" was ceasing publication. At
that time they offered all the left-over back issues at very low prices.
I ordered a full set of whatever they had left. I wish I had been aware
of this magazine earlier. It was a really good magazine. Now,
unfortunately, even the SAA is disbanded.
Anyway, last night I was flipping through one of the back issues (Summer
2005) and I came across an article that caught my eye (based on recent
discussions here on the List). Up until last night I was convinced by
Hans' explanation as to why Toe-in was the preferred set-up.
Well, just to throw another wrench in the works (or in Peter's case,
spanner), here's another view on the matter of Toe-in/Toe-out. (see
attached files).
When I scanned the pages, the images would not reproduce correctly (too
dark) so I got out the scissors and cut out the parts I needed, and
glued them to some white paper, and re-drew the lines and arrows, and
pasted the new illustration over the original.
I sure am glad I'll be building the straight-axle landing gear, so I
won't have to try to figure this one out.
Bill C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Barry Davis" <bed(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: New Piet on the block |
Hey Skip, Looks like ya'll are starting a Piet Haven. This may be good
enough for a flight up there one Saturday
Barry Davis
----- Original Message -----
From: Skip Gadd
To: pietenpol-list
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 8:38 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: New Piet on the block
The FAA came to our field yesterday and certified two new homebuilts.
One was Dave Stephens Corvair Piet. If you went to Brodhead 2005 you saw
Dave's Piet as a bare-bones fuselage. Now we have two Piets at Hales
Landing and two more Piet projects. Will try to send a picture next
week.
Skip
skipgadd(at)earthlink.net
EarthLink Revolves Around You.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Willis <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net> |
I am about to varnish ribs, and need some guidance. I am trying to optimize the
process, avoid making a mess, and get the best finished product.
My plan is to built a temporary tank and immerse each rib in a single coat of polyurethane
varnish, thinned with turpentine. However, I believe I have read
on this site that we need to have the portions of the ribs that glue to the spars
bare for best adhesion, and that the top and bottom surfaces of the ribs--
where the fabric goes-- should have epoxy varnish, so that the fabric "dope"
does not melt the varnish there.
I think that since the ribs are entirely covered, a single coat such as I would
get from the dip would be enough varnish (except on the end ribs). I am wondering
if covering the surfaces I want to leave bare with 3M blue masking tape
will work well. That is what I plan to do on the spar-attach surfaces.
However, I am also wondering if I could go ahead and coat the tops and bottom surfaces
of the ribs with this first coat, then go back over them with a brushed-on
second coat of epoxy varnish. Is this workable? Would this require sanding
between coats to make it stick? Should I instead epoxy varnish the top and
bottom surfaces first, then cover them with tape before they go in the tank?
What have you done, and what would you suggest?
Tim in central TX
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Eldredge <steve(at)byu.edu> |
Good plan. When they are dry epoxy coat only the fabric contact points.
Steve E.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Willis
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 9:13 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Varnishing ribs
I am about to varnish ribs, and need some guidance. I am trying to optimize the
process, avoid making a mess, and get the best finished product.
My plan is to built a temporary tank and immerse each rib in a single coat of polyurethane
varnish, thinned with turpentine. However, I believe I have read
on this site that we need to have the portions of the ribs that glue to the spars
bare for best adhesion, and that the top and bottom surfaces of the ribs--
where the fabric goes-- should have epoxy varnish, so that the fabric "dope"
does not melt the varnish there.
I think that since the ribs are entirely covered, a single coat such as I would
get from the dip would be enough varnish (except on the end ribs). I am wondering
if covering the surfaces I want to leave bare with 3M blue masking tape
will work well. That is what I plan to do on the spar-attach surfaces.
However, I am also wondering if I could go ahead and coat the tops and bottom surfaces
of the ribs with this first coat, then go back over them with a brushed-on
second coat of epoxy varnish. Is this workable? Would this require sanding
between coats to make it stick? Should I instead epoxy varnish the top and
bottom surfaces first, then cover them with tape before they go in the tank?
What have you done, and what would you suggest?
Tim in central TX
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinalhealth.com> |
Tim,
Varnishing options will generate nearly as many opinions as will what
glue to use, or if Douglas Fir is better or worse than Sitka Spruce.
Having said that, I'll offer a few opinions:
1. The need for epoxy varnish on the rib caps depends largely on what
you are going to use to cover. If you are using Stits' PolyFiber's
process, I would at least recommend that you try some test pieces with
whatever polyurethane varnish you are planning to use and paint over
that with some polytak and polybrush to make sure they won't lift your
varnish. If using dope, this may not be a problem.
2. I would not glue the ribs to the spars (therefore, I would not try
to mask off any part of the ribs). A small nail through the upright
into the spar, or through the capstrips into the spar (not preferred by
the FAA, but that's what I did) will hold the rib in place but allow
some flexing when you trammel the wing to get everything square. If you
glue the ribs in place, trammeling will be more difficult, and if you
can't get the wing absolutely square, it will be very difficult to rig
the plane to fly straight.
3. I used epoxy varnish on everything in my Pietenpol. If you do, it
is best to thin the first coat about 50% with reducer to get good
penetration into the wood grain. Then go with full strength varnish for
the second coat. Polyurethane is probably fine - lot's of Piets have
been built with it and it is certainly cheaper, but epoxy varnish is
nearly bulletproof and offers maximum protection for those parts of your
plane that can never be inspected once assembled.
Good luck,
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh, NC
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim
Willis
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 11:13 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Varnishing ribs
-->
I am about to varnish ribs, and need some guidance. I am trying to
optimize the process, avoid making a mess, and get the best finished
product.
My plan is to built a temporary tank and immerse each rib in a single
coat of polyurethane varnish, thinned with turpentine. However, I
believe I have read on this site that we need to have the portions of
the ribs that glue to the spars bare for best adhesion, and that the top
and bottom surfaces of the ribs-- where the fabric goes-- should have
epoxy varnish, so that the fabric "dope" does not melt the varnish
there.
I think that since the ribs are entirely covered, a single coat such as
I would get from the dip would be enough varnish (except on the end
ribs). I am wondering if covering the surfaces I want to leave bare
with 3M blue masking tape will work well. That is what I plan to do on
the spar-attach surfaces.
However, I am also wondering if I could go ahead and coat the tops and
bottom surfaces of the ribs with this first coat, then go back over them
with a brushed-on second coat of epoxy varnish. Is this workable?
Would this require sanding between coats to make it stick? Should I
instead epoxy varnish the top and bottom surfaces first, then cover them
with tape before they go in the tank?
What have you done, and what would you suggest?
Tim in central TX
_________________________________________________
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please notify
the sender
Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese - Nederlands - Norsk
- Portuguese
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Varnishing ribs |
Before you varnish any ribs there is another operation which I failed to
tell you concerning the wing ribs.
Along the lower cap strip ( bottom) at each cluster and gusset there is a
possibility of the gathering of moisture whether it be from wet weather while
flying on instruments or possibly condensation while parked. On 41CC I drilled
a small hole on either side for drainage.( 1/8 drill ) at the lowest point.
I at one time I was a small boat sailor and builder, Snipe, Thistle and
Lightning. Dry wood was a must.
Drill, sand and then varnish with a brush. Dipping is like trying to wash a
plate from eggs by running cold water on it. You'll get the high spots but the
cavities will not be coated.
My 10 sense.
Corky
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Kraut" <brian.kraut(at)engalt.com> |
Any particular reason not to just use an epoxy varnish everywhere?
Brian Kraut
Engineering Alternatives, Inc.
www.engalt.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Steve
Eldredge
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 11:35 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Varnishing ribs
Good plan. When they are dry epoxy coat only the fabric contact points.
Steve E.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Willis
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 9:13 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Varnishing ribs
I am about to varnish ribs, and need some guidance. I am trying to optimize
the process, avoid making a mess, and get the best finished product.
My plan is to built a temporary tank and immerse each rib in a single coat
of polyurethane varnish, thinned with turpentine. However, I believe I have
read on this site that we need to have the portions of the ribs that glue to
the spars bare for best adhesion, and that the top and bottom surfaces of
the ribs-- where the fabric goes-- should have epoxy varnish, so that the
fabric "dope" does not melt the varnish there.
I think that since the ribs are entirely covered, a single coat such as I
would get from the dip would be enough varnish (except on the end ribs). I
am wondering if covering the surfaces I want to leave bare with 3M blue
masking tape will work well. That is what I plan to do on the spar-attach
surfaces.
However, I am also wondering if I could go ahead and coat the tops and
bottom surfaces of the ribs with this first coat, then go back over them
with a brushed-on second coat of epoxy varnish. Is this workable? Would
this require sanding between coats to make it stick? Should I instead epoxy
varnish the top and bottom surfaces first, then cover them with tape before
they go in the tank?
What have you done, and what would you suggest?
Tim in central TX
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Kraut" <brian.kraut(at)engalt.com> |
| Subject: | RE: gluing ribs to spars/was: Varnishing ribs |
I had thought about weather the correct method was gluing the ribs or
nailing them a while ago. My thinking was that if you glue them and
sometime in the future you need to replace a spar you will have one hell of
a job in front of you salvaging all the ribs. Obviously, gluing the ribs
makes the rib attachment much stronger, but I don't know that you
necessarily need the strength there and it is pretty common to nail metal
ribs to wood spars. What is the norm here, glue or nails?
Brian Kraut
Engineering Alternatives, Inc.
www.engalt.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Phillips,
Jack
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 11:45 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Varnishing ribs
Tim,
Varnishing options will generate nearly as many opinions as will what
glue to use, or if Douglas Fir is better or worse than Sitka Spruce.
Having said that, I'll offer a few opinions:
2. I would not glue the ribs to the spars (therefore, I would not try
to mask off any part of the ribs). A small nail through the upright
into the spar, or through the capstrips into the spar (not preferred by
the FAA, but that's what I did) will hold the rib in place but allow
some flexing when you trammel the wing to get everything square. If you
glue the ribs in place, trammeling will be more difficult, and if you
can't get the wing absolutely square, it will be very difficult to rig
the plane to fly straight.
plane that can never be inspected once assembled.
Good luck,
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh, NC
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim
Willis
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 11:13 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Varnishing ribs
-->
I am about to varnish ribs, and need some guidance. I am trying to
optimize the process, avoid making a mess, and get the best finished
product.
My plan is to built a temporary tank and immerse each rib in a single
coat of polyurethane varnish, thinned with turpentine. However, I
believe I have read on this site that we need to have the portions of
the ribs that glue to the spars bare for best adhesion, and that the top
and bottom surfaces of the ribs-- where the fabric goes-- should have
epoxy varnish, so that the fabric "dope" does not melt the varnish
there.
I think that since the ribs are entirely covered, a single coat such as
I would get from the dip would be enough varnish (except on the end
ribs). I am wondering if covering the surfaces I want to leave bare
with 3M blue masking tape will work well. That is what I plan to do on
the spar-attach surfaces.
However, I am also wondering if I could go ahead and coat the tops and
bottom surfaces of the ribs with this first coat, then go back over them
with a brushed-on second coat of epoxy varnish. Is this workable?
Would this require sanding between coats to make it stick? Should I
instead epoxy varnish the top and bottom surfaces first, then cover them
with tape before they go in the tank?
What have you done, and what would you suggest?
Tim in central TX
_________________________________________________
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please
notify the sender
Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese - Nederlands -
Norsk - Portuguese
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Landing Gear |
| From: | hvandervoo(at)aol.com |
Bill,
Interesting reading specially about the Luscombe and the Cessna perhaps that proves
my point and not the writers:-)
Cessnas are notorious for easy ground handling.
A lot of ground loop problems have more to do with the CG distance from the wheels,
the longer the distance the higher the chance for a ground loop
I do fly my Piet with a slight Toe in and yet have to experience any ground loop
tendency
Another aircraft with Toe in: http://www.extraaircraft.com/Tech-Manuals/MM300200/CH32.pdf
Hans
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Church <eng(at)canadianrogers.com>
Sent: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 9:35 am
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
About a year ago, Paul Poberezny announced that the magazine published by the Sport
Aviation Association,?"To Fly" was ceasing publication. At that time they
offered all the left-over back issues at very low prices. I ordered a full set
of whatever they had left. I wish I had been aware of this magazine earlier.
It was a really good magazine. Now, unfortunately, even the SAA is disbanded.
Anyway, last night I was flipping through one of the back issues (Summer 2005)
and I came across an article that caught my eye (based on recent discussions here
on the List). Up until last night I was convinced by Hans' explanation as
to why Toe-in was the preferred set-up.
Well, just to throw another wrench?in the works (or in Peter's case, spanner),
here's another view on the matter of Toe-in/Toe-out. (see attached files).
?
When I scanned the pages, the images would not reproduce correctly (too dark) so
I got out the scissors and cut out the parts I needed, and glued them to some
white paper, and?re-drew the lines and arrows, and pasted the new illustration
over the original.?
?
I sure am glad I'll be building the straight-axle landing gear, so I won't have
to try to figure this one out.
?
?
Bill C.
________________________________________________________________________
Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Varnishing ribs |
Brian,
Just that it's quite a regimin to mix the epoxy and go thru the rest
period and then varnish.
I found that the best time to varnish was on one of those days where you
weren't sure what you wanted to work on, so you went to the "Airplane
Factory" to do busy work. Varnishing is the best busy work,,,,,you can do
it and think about other stuff that you look around at.
In my opinion,,,you only need epoxy varnish where the fabric will be
attaching.
Walt Evans
NX140DL
"No one ever learned anything by talking"
If you lend someone $20 and never see that person again, it was probably
worth it
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Kraut" <brian.kraut(at)engalt.com>
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 11:54 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Varnishing ribs
>
>
> Any particular reason not to just use an epoxy varnish everywhere?
>
> Brian Kraut
> Engineering Alternatives, Inc.
> www.engalt.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Steve
> Eldredge
> Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 11:35 AM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Varnishing ribs
>
>
> Good plan. When they are dry epoxy coat only the fabric contact points.
>
> Steve E.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Willis
> Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 9:13 AM
> To: matronics piet site
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Varnishing ribs
>
>
>
> I am about to varnish ribs, and need some guidance. I am trying to
> optimize
> the process, avoid making a mess, and get the best finished product.
>
> My plan is to built a temporary tank and immerse each rib in a single coat
> of polyurethane varnish, thinned with turpentine. However, I believe I
> have
> read on this site that we need to have the portions of the ribs that glue
> to
> the spars bare for best adhesion, and that the top and bottom surfaces of
> the ribs-- where the fabric goes-- should have epoxy varnish, so that the
> fabric "dope" does not melt the varnish there.
>
> I think that since the ribs are entirely covered, a single coat such as I
> would get from the dip would be enough varnish (except on the end ribs).
> I
> am wondering if covering the surfaces I want to leave bare with 3M blue
> masking tape will work well. That is what I plan to do on the spar-attach
> surfaces.
>
> However, I am also wondering if I could go ahead and coat the tops and
> bottom surfaces of the ribs with this first coat, then go back over them
> with a brushed-on second coat of epoxy varnish. Is this workable? Would
> this require sanding between coats to make it stick? Should I instead
> epoxy
> varnish the top and bottom surfaces first, then cover them with tape
> before
> they go in the tank?
>
> What have you done, and what would you suggest?
>
> Tim in central TX
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter W Johnson" <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au> |
Now I=92m totally confused.
Perhaps dead straight is best after all.
Peter.
Wonthaggi Australia
HYPERLINK "http://www.cpc-world.com/"http://www.cpc-world.com
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
hvandervoo(at)aol.com
Sent: Saturday, 3 November 2007 4:24 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
Bill,
Interesting reading specially about the Luscombe and the Cessna perhaps
that
proves my point and not the writers:-)
Cessnas are notorious for easy ground handling.
A lot of ground loop problems have more to do with the CG distance from
the
wheels, the longer the distance the higher the chance for a ground loop
I do fly my Piet with a slight Toe in and yet have to experience any
ground
loop tendency
Another aircraft with Toe in: HYPERLINK
"http://www.extraaircraft.com/Tech-Manuals/MM300200/CH32.pdf"http://www.e
xtr
aaircraft.com/Tech-Manuals/MM300200/CH32.pdf
Hans
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Church <eng(at)canadianrogers.com>
Sent: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 9:35 am
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
About a year ago, Paul Poberezny announced that the magazine published
by
the Sport Aviation Association, "To Fly" was ceasing publication. At
that
time they offered all the left-over back issues at very low prices. I
ordered a full set of whatever they had left. I wish I had been aware of
this magazine earlier. It was a really good magazine. Now,
unfortunately,
even the SAA is disbanded.
Anyway, last night I was flipping through one of the back issues (Summer
2005) and I came across an article that caught my eye (based on recent
discussions here on the List). Up until last night I was convinced by
Hans'
explanation as to why Toe-in was the preferred set-up.
Well, just to throw another wrench in the works (or in Peter's case,
spanner), here's another view on the matter of Toe-in/Toe-out. (see
attached
files).
When I scanned the pages, the images would not reproduce correctly (too
dark) so I got out the scissors and cut out the parts I needed, and
glued
them to some white paper, and re-drew the lines and arrows, and pasted
the
new illustration over the original.
I sure am glad I'll be building the straight-axle landing gear, so I
won't
have to try to figure this one out.
Bill C.
_____
size=2 width="100%" align=center>
Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free HYPERLINK
"http://o.aolcdn.com/cdn.webmail.aol.com/mailtour/aol/en-us/index.htm?nci
d=A
OLAOF00020000000970" \nAOL Mail!
"http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List"http://www.matronics.c
om/
Navigator?Pietenpol-List
"http://forums.matronics.com"http://forums.matronics.com
1/11/2007
6:47 PM
1/11/2007
6:47 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: gluing ribs to spars/was: Varnishing ribs |
Brian,
Sorry, but never building my Piet did I worry about the day I'd have to
replace a spar.
Nailed pieces move,,,best to glue everything.
Remember to Trammel the wings.
Walt Evans
NX140DL
"No one ever learned anything by talking"
If you lend someone $20 and never see that person again, it was probably
worth it
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Kraut" <brian.kraut(at)engalt.com>
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 12:35 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: RE: gluing ribs to spars/was: Varnishing ribs
>
>
> I had thought about weather the correct method was gluing the ribs or
> nailing them a while ago. My thinking was that if you glue them and
> sometime in the future you need to replace a spar you will have one hell
> of
> a job in front of you salvaging all the ribs. Obviously, gluing the ribs
> makes the rib attachment much stronger, but I don't know that you
> necessarily need the strength there and it is pretty common to nail metal
> ribs to wood spars. What is the norm here, glue or nails?
>
> Brian Kraut
> Engineering Alternatives, Inc.
> www.engalt.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Phillips,
> Jack
> Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 11:45 AM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Varnishing ribs
>
>
>
>
> Tim,
>
> Varnishing options will generate nearly as many opinions as will what
> glue to use, or if Douglas Fir is better or worse than Sitka Spruce.
> Having said that, I'll offer a few opinions:
>
> 2. I would not glue the ribs to the spars (therefore, I would not try
> to mask off any part of the ribs). A small nail through the upright
> into the spar, or through the capstrips into the spar (not preferred by
> the FAA, but that's what I did) will hold the rib in place but allow
> some flexing when you trammel the wing to get everything square. If you
> glue the ribs in place, trammeling will be more difficult, and if you
> can't get the wing absolutely square, it will be very difficult to rig
> the plane to fly straight.
> plane that can never be inspected once assembled.
>
> Good luck,
>
> Jack Phillips
> NX899JP
> Raleigh, NC
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim
> Willis
> Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 11:13 AM
> To: matronics piet site
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Varnishing ribs
>
> -->
>
> I am about to varnish ribs, and need some guidance. I am trying to
> optimize the process, avoid making a mess, and get the best finished
> product.
>
> My plan is to built a temporary tank and immerse each rib in a single
> coat of polyurethane varnish, thinned with turpentine. However, I
> believe I have read on this site that we need to have the portions of
> the ribs that glue to the spars bare for best adhesion, and that the top
> and bottom surfaces of the ribs-- where the fabric goes-- should have
> epoxy varnish, so that the fabric "dope" does not melt the varnish
> there.
>
> I think that since the ribs are entirely covered, a single coat such as
> I would get from the dip would be enough varnish (except on the end
> ribs). I am wondering if covering the surfaces I want to leave bare
> with 3M blue masking tape will work well. That is what I plan to do on
> the spar-attach surfaces.
>
> However, I am also wondering if I could go ahead and coat the tops and
> bottom surfaces of the ribs with this first coat, then go back over them
> with a brushed-on second coat of epoxy varnish. Is this workable?
> Would this require sanding between coats to make it stick? Should I
> instead epoxy varnish the top and bottom surfaces first, then cover them
> with tape before they go in the tank?
>
> What have you done, and what would you suggest?
>
> Tim in central TX
>
>
> _________________________________________________
>
> or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please
> notify the sender
>
> Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese - Nederlands -
> Norsk - Portuguese
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ryan Mueller <rmueller23(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: gluing ribs to spars/was: Varnishing ribs |
An excerpt from a Tony Bingelis article found on page 90 of the book "EAA Aircraft
Building Techniques: Wood" states:
---------------------
How Do You Attach The Ribs To The Spars?
One piece wing ribs are simply slipped onto the spars to previously marked locations
and nailed and glued into place. The rib openings for the spars must not
be a press fit. Allow .010" to .015" tolerance for glue and the swelling of the
wood from the moist glue.
Do not drive nails through the top or bottom capstrip when attaching the wing ribs
to the spar. The proper attachment is always by means of glue, using cement
coated or brass aircraft nails driven through the rib upright member, on each
side of the spar. A couple of nails through each upright should do the job.
------------------------------
That's the only reference material I can find at the moment. I flipped through
AC 43.13 briefly, but if it's in there I didn't see it. I would think Tony B is
a good source though. Hope that helps,
Ryan
I had thought about weather the correct method was gluing the ribs or
nailing them a while ago. My thinking was that if you glue them and
sometime in the future you need to replace a spar you will have one hell of
a job in front of you salvaging all the ribs. Obviously, gluing the ribs
makes the rib attachment much stronger, but I don't know that you
necessarily need the strength there and it is pretty common to nail metal
ribs to wood spars. What is the norm here, glue or nails?
Brian Kraut
Engineering Alternatives, Inc.
www.engalt.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Phillips,
Jack
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 11:45 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Varnishing ribs
Tim,
Varnishing options will generate nearly as many opinions as will what
glue to use, or if Douglas Fir is better or worse than Sitka Spruce.
Having said that, I'll offer a few opinions:
2. I would not glue the ribs to the spars (therefore, I would not try
to mask off any part of the ribs). A small nail through the upright
into the spar, or through the capstrips into the spar (not preferred by
the FAA, but that's what I did) will hold the rib in place but allow
some flexing when you trammel the wing to get everything square. If you
glue the ribs in place, trammeling will be more difficult, and if you
can't get the wing absolutely square, it will be very difficult to rig
the plane to fly straight.
plane that can never be inspected once assembled.
Good luck,
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh, NC
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim
Willis
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 11:13 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Varnishing ribs
-->
I am about to varnish ribs, and need some guidance. I am trying to
optimize the process, avoid making a mess, and get the best finished
product.
My plan is to built a temporary tank and immerse each rib in a single
coat of polyurethane varnish, thinned with turpentine. However, I
believe I have read on this site that we need to have the portions of
the ribs that glue to the spars bare for best adhesion, and that the top
and bottom surfaces of the ribs-- where the fabric goes-- should have
epoxy varnish, so that the fabric "dope" does not melt the varnish
there.
I think that since the ribs are entirely covered, a single coat such as
I would get from the dip would be enough varnish (except on the end
ribs). I am wondering if covering the surfaces I want to leave bare
with 3M blue masking tape will work well. That is what I plan to do on
the spar-attach surfaces.
However, I am also wondering if I could go ahead and coat the tops and
bottom surfaces of the ribs with this first coat, then go back over them
with a brushed-on second coat of epoxy varnish. Is this workable?
Would this require sanding between coats to make it stick? Should I
instead epoxy varnish the top and bottom surfaces first, then cover them
with tape before they go in the tank?
What have you done, and what would you suggest?
Tim in central TX
_________________________________________________
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please
notify the sender
Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese - Nederlands -
Norsk - Portuguese
__________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: New Piet on the block |
Or Piet Heaven. Soon you will have more Piets than Broadhead. I am jealous,
would love to find an air park as nice are yours one of these days.
Rick
On 11/2/07, Barry Davis wrote:
>
> Hey Skip, Looks like ya'll are starting a Piet Haven. This may be good
> enough for a flight up there one Saturday
> Barry Davis
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Skip Gadd
> *To:* pietenpol-list
> *Sent:* Thursday, November 01, 2007 8:38 PM
> *Subject:* Pietenpol-List: New Piet on the block
>
> The FAA came to our field yesterday and certified two new homebuilts. One
> was Dave Stephens Corvair Piet. If you went to Brodhead 2005 you saw Dave's
> Piet as a bare-bones fuselage. Now we have two Piets at Hales Landing and
> two more Piet projects. Will try to send a picture next week.
> Skip
>
>
> skipgadd(at)earthlink.net
> EarthLink Revolves Around You.
>
>
> *
>
> 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
ObjectAge Ltd.
Castle Rock, Colorado
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | santiago morete <moretesantiago(at)yahoo.com.ar> |
GRACIAS Clif!! Very interesting. You have a high-resolution version? if you have
it, please send it to my email. Thanks
Saludos
Santiago
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Noticias
Todo lo que tens que saber sobre Elecciones Presidenciales 2007 encontralo en Yahoo!
Noticias.
http://ar.news.yahoo.com/elecciones2007/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Clif Dawson <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Prop drawing |
How high do you want? The original rez was 150 which
made for 800 kb images. I can scan them again at that.
Clif
----- Original Message -----
From: santiago morete
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2007 11:12 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Prop drawing
GRACIAS Clif!! Very interesting. You have a high-resolution version?
if you have it, please send it to my email. Thanks
Saludos
Santiago
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Yahoo! Noticias
Todo lo que ten=E9s que saber sobre Elecciones Presidenciales 2007
encontralo en Yahoo! Noticias.
http://ar.news.yahoo.com/elecciones2007/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
11/3/2007 11:22 AM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | List Fund Raiser |
Dear Listers,
Just a reminder that November is the Matronics Email List Fund Raiser month. I've
got a bunch of really nice incentive gifts this year. There's really something
for everyone!
Please make a Contribution today:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | santiago morete <moretesantiago(at)yahoo.com.ar> |
Yes Clif, 800kb would be ok, if you don't mind. Thanks a lot for your help.
Saludos
Santiago
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Noticias
Todo lo que tens que saber sobre Elecciones Presidenciales 2007 encontralo en Yahoo!
Noticias.
http://ar.news.yahoo.com/elecciones2007/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <catdesigns(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Tail Instalation |
Now that my landing gear is mostly done I am working on the fittings for
installing the tail group. I have not covered anything yet and was wondering
if installing the uncover tail (horizontal and vertical) to an uncovered
fuselage will cause a fit problem after I add the covering to the tail and
fuselage? Basically will my bolt holes be slightly off and the tail no
longer fit properly?
Thanks
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, Ca
Website at http://www.WestCoastPiet.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Fisher <mfisher(at)gci.net> |
| Subject: | Lawyers versus Carburetors |
"http://www.precisionairmotive.com/pr-carbdiscon.htm"
Pietenpol Aviation Friends,
Operators of carburetted aircraft engines are in for difficult and
costly times. The link above explains why. The price of injection system components
will also rise, since that is now the only option other than turbine power.
Shops and owners can expect a flood of bogus and foreign parts and assemblies,
some of them dangerous.
It's an ill wind that blows anyone no good. Experimental and
ultralight aircraft will flourish.
Happy landings,
Mike Fisher
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rob Stapleton, Jr." <foto(at)alaska.net> |
| Subject: | Lawyers versus Carburetors |
http://www.precisionairmotive.com/
The info is on their website too. Big, bummer. Watch what parts are left go
through the roof at distributors...
Rob
Building a Pietenpol in Anchorage, AK. www.eaa42.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael
Fisher
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 10:07 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Lawyers versus Carburetors
"http://www.precisionairmotive.com/pr-carbdiscon.htm"
Pietenpol Aviation Friends,
Operators of carburetted aircraft engines are in for difficult
and costly times. The link above explains why. The price of injection
system components will also rise, since that is now the only option other
than turbine power. Shops and owners can expect a flood of bogus and foreign
parts and assemblies, some of them dangerous.
It's an ill wind that blows anyone no good. Experimental
and ultralight aircraft will flourish.
Happy landings,
Mike Fisher
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Landing Gear |
If my memory serves me correctly, getting the split axles streight shouldn't be
any harder than getting it streight on the strieght axle (wooden gear). I think
what Dad did was get his axles, and a piece of steel tubing that fit thrugh
the inside of the axles, made a jig that was the same as his fuselage fittings,
and welded the axles on the gear legs with the tube inside the axles. This
results in 0 degree toe , streight axles. And after welding the axles on take
the long piece of tubing out of the axles.
1. weld up legs in flat jig (like a steel fuselage)
2. weld pivot points on legs where gear attatches to fuselage
3. make a Mock-up (jig) of bottom of fuselage and bolt the landing gear legs
to it. Jigging it up in the inverted position (as if the airplane was on it's
back) will be eaiser.
4. when your ready to weld on the axles, slide them on a long piece of tubing
and clamp in place and weld them on. Do all the welding, (tacking, AND FINNISHING
with the tube in place), or it can warp, and get crooked.
Hope this helps .
Happy building and flying
Shad Bell
NX92GB
__________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Landing Gear |
That's the way I did it, using my mock fuselage laid upside down on the
floor with landing gear fittings installed for a jig (yet another reason to
build a mock fuselage). Due to a lack of self confidence in my fabrication
abilities I went for the bolt on axles so I can modify the alignment with
shims if necessary.
Rick
On 11/4/07, shad bell wrote:
>
>
> *If my memory serves me correctly, getting the split axles streight
> shouldn't be any harder than getting it streight on the strieght axle
> (wooden gear). I think what Dad did was get his axles, and a piece of
> steel tubing that fit thrugh the inside of the axles, made a jig that was
> the same as his fuselage fittings, and welded the axles on the gear legs
> with the tube inside the axles. This results in 0 degree toe , streight
> axles. And after welding the axles on take the long piece of tubing out of
> the axles. *
> *1. weld up legs in flat jig (like a steel fuselage)*
> *2. weld pivot points on legs where gear attatches to fuselage*
> *3. make a Mock-up (jig) of bottom of fuselage and bolt the landing gear
> legs to it. Jigging it up in the inverted position (as if the airplane was
> on it's back) will be *
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
--
Rick Holland
ObjectAge Ltd.
Castle Rock, Colorado
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter W Johnson" <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au> |
Shad,
That=92s what I did. I=92m not sure if there are any changes to the
geometry on
Load or No Load conditions. I=92m going to measure mine and see what
happens.
Cheers
Peter
Wonthaggi Australia
HYPERLINK "http://www.cpc-world.com/"http://www.cpc-world.com
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of shad
bell
Sent: Monday, 5 November 2007 9:26 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
If my memory serves me correctly, getting the split axles streight
shouldn't
be any harder than getting it streight on the strieght axle (wooden
gear).
I think what Dad did was get his axles, and a piece of steel tubing
that
fit thrugh the inside of the axles, made a jig that was the same as his
fuselage fittings, and welded the axles on the gear legs with the tube
inside the axles. This results in 0 degree toe , streight axles. And
after
welding the axles on take the long piece of tubing out of the axles.
1. weld up legs in flat jig (like a steel fuselage)
2. weld pivot points on legs where gear attatches to fuselage
3. make a Mock-up (jig) of bottom of fuselage and bolt the landing gear
legs
to it. Jigging it up in the inverted position (as if the airplane was
on
it's back) will be
"http://www.matronics.com/contribution"http://www.matronics.com/contribut
ion
"http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List"http://www.matronics.c
om/
Navigator?Pietenpol-List
"http://forums.matronics.com"http://forums.matronics.com
3/11/2007
9:42 PM
3/11/2007
9:42 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Lawyers versus Carburetors |
Rob,
The one bit of good news is this will not effect the Stromberg carbs used on
continental 65/75/85's
Gene
>
>
> --
> 10/27/2007 11:02 AM
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Tail Instalation |
| From: | "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com> |
Hi Chris,
I assembled my tail completely without covering. Rigged it just as it would be
after covering. There may be a little tightness in some areas but it shouldn't
be a problem. In fact just before covering I did one long day outside and
completely assembled and rigged the ship, then loosened all turnbuckles the same
amount of turns and disassembled everything for covering. To me it was a lot
easier to rig with access to spars and longerons. After covering all turnbuckles
were tightened back the same number of turns.
Don Emch
NX899DE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=143859#143859
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Landing Gear |
Peter
As far as adjusting the gear for the loaded condition, I built a Cub (GN-1)
style gear with die springs. I was told after I finished the gear that the
springs should be pre-loaded before finish welding them (loaded by how much
I don't know). Anyhow mine are setup so the wheels are vertical with just
the fuselage and my weight, how it's going to work with the engine and wing
weight I will soon find out.
gday
Rick
On 11/4/07, Peter W Johnson wrote:
>
> Shad,
>
>
> That's what I did. I'm not sure if there are any changes to the geometry
> on Load or No Load conditions. I'm going to measure mine and see what
> happens.
>
>
> Cheers
>
>
> Peter
>
> Wonthaggi Australia
>
> http://www.cpc-world.com
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]
> *On Behalf Of *shad bell
> *Sent:* Monday, 5 November 2007 9:26 AM
> *To:* pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> *Subject:* Re: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
>
>
> *If my memory serves me correctly, getting the split axles streight
> shouldn't be any harder than getting it streight on the strieght axle
> (wooden gear). I think what Dad did was get his axles, and a piece of
> steel tubing that fit thrugh the inside of the axles, made a jig that was
> the same as his fuselage fittings, and welded the axles on the gear legs
> with the tube inside the axles. This results in 0 degree toe , streight
> axles. And after welding the axles on take the long piece of tubing out of
> the axles. *
>
> *1. weld up legs in flat jig (like a steel fuselage)*
>
> *2. weld pivot points on legs where gear attatches to fuselage*
>
> *3. make a Mock-up (jig) of bottom of fuselage and bolt the landing gear
> legs to it. Jigging it up in the inverted position (as if the airplane was
> on it's back) will be *
>
> * *
>
> * *
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> *http://www.matronics.com/contribution*
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> *
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List*
>
> **
>
> *
> http://forums.matronics.com*
>
> * *
>
>
> 3/11/2007 9:42 PM
>
> 3/11/2007 9:42 PM
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
--
Rick Holland
ObjectAge Ltd.
Castle Rock, Colorado
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dick Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Tail Instalation |
Chris
It did cause a problem for me. Things didnt line up after installing
fabric, re-enforcing tapes and paint. I would wait to drill till after.
Dick N.
----- Original Message -----
From: <catdesigns(at)att.net>
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 11:23 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Tail Instalation
>
> Now that my landing gear is mostly done I am working on the fittings for
> installing the tail group. I have not covered anything yet and was
> wondering if installing the uncover tail (horizontal and vertical) to an
> uncovered fuselage will cause a fit problem after I add the covering to
> the tail and fuselage? Basically will my bolt holes be slightly off and
> the tail no longer fit properly?
>
> Thanks
> Chris Tracy
> Sacramento, Ca
> Website at http://www.WestCoastPiet.com
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Tail Instalation |
In a message dated 11/4/2007 11:25:14 AM Central Standard Time,
catdesigns(at)att.net writes:
Basically will my bolt holes be slightly off and the tail no
longer fit properly?
Yes, the holes will be off a little. You could shim with the number of
fabric layers that will be installed on the fuse, and the stabs, then drill the
holes. Before drilling for the lower rudder hinge, you should also shim with the
number of fabric layers, too.
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter W Johnson" <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au> |
Rick,
Thanks.
Cheers
Peter.
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rick Holland
Sent: Monday, 5 November 2007 1:57 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
Peter
As far as adjusting the gear for the loaded condition, I built a Cub (GN-1)
style gear with die springs. I was told after I finished the gear that the
springs should be pre-loaded before finish welding them (loaded by how much
I don't know). Anyhow mine are setup so the wheels are vertical with just
the fuselage and my weight, how it's going to work with the engine and wing
weight I will soon find out.
gday
Rick
On 11/4/07, Peter W Johnson wrote:
Shad,
That's what I did. I'm not sure if there are any changes to the geometry on
Load or No Load conditions. I'm going to measure mine and see what happens.
Cheers
Peter
Wonthaggi Australia
HYPERLINK "http://www.cpc-world.com/" \nhttp://www.cpc-world.com
_____
From: HYPERLINK "mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com"
\nowner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:HYPERLINK
"mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com" \n
owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of shad bell
Sent: Monday, 5 November 2007 9:26 AM
\npietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
If my memory serves me correctly, getting the split axles streight shouldn't
be any harder than getting it streight on the strieght axle (wooden gear).
I think what Dad did was get his axles, and a piece of steel tubing that
fit thrugh the inside of the axles, made a jig that was the same as his
fuselage fittings, and welded the axles on the gear legs with the tube
inside the axles. This results in 0 degree toe , streight axles. And after
welding the axles on take the long piece of tubing out of the axles.
1. weld up legs in flat jig (like a steel fuselage)
2. weld pivot points on legs where gear attatches to fuselage
3. make a Mock-up (jig) of bottom of fuselage and bolt the landing gear legs
to it. Jigging it up in the inverted position (as if the airplane was on
it's back) will be
HYPERLINK "http://www.matronics.com/contribution"
\nhttp://www.matronics.com/contribution
HYPERLINK "http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List" \n
HYPERLINK "http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List" \n
HYPERLINK "http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List"
\nhttp://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
HYPERLINK "http://forums.matronics.com" \n
HYPERLINK "http://forums.matronics.com" \n
HYPERLINK "http://forums.matronics.com" \nhttp://forums.matronics.com
3/11/2007 9:42 PM
3/11/2007 9:42 PM
HYPERLINK "http://www.matronics.com/contribution"
\nhttp://www.matronics.com/contribution
HYPERLINK "http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List"
\nhttp://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
HYPERLINK "http://forums.matronics.com" \nhttp://forums.matronics.com
"http://www.matronics.com/contribution"http://www.matronics.com/contribution
"http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List"http://www.matronics.com/
Navigator?Pietenpol-List
9:37 PM
7:11 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dick Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net> |
Hey all
My neighbor is principal of a local high school and she has been talking
to me about working with her JROTC students on building a plane at her
school. I pretty much have told her I would do it and am looking at
what to build. Having done 2 Piets already I need something different
now. Has anyone built a Skyscout? I have the Flying Glider manual
plans. I would order a full size set. I am interested in comments on
how it flies and comparisions and whatever.
Dick N.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Kraut" <brian.kraut(at)engalt.com> |
I am working on one. I have not flown a Piet or Scout so I can't comment on
flying, but I do have some general comments.
I started with a fusalage already done. The previous owner built a Piet and
took the wings and tail off of this scout and put them on the Piet. Since
they are basically the same there is not a huge difference in the cost or
time to build the Piet vs. the Scout which is probably why there are tons of
Piets and only a few Scouts out there. A Scout is unique, but probably not
worth as much as a Piet. I don't really know for sure because I have never
found a flying Scout for sale.
Being a school I don't know what liability issues you have and if the plan
is for the plane to ever fly. The Scout should cost a lot less to insure
with no second seat. Of course, you won't be able to give rides to any of
the kids that helped build it. Being someone that has wanted to build and
fly a plane since I was in diapers I can tell you that the thought of
someday being able to fly in the plane they are working on is a big
motivation to a lot of kids.
Oh, and reach over and pat yourself on the back for what you are doing.
Wish you were my principal's neighbor when I was in school.
Brian Kraut
Engineering Alternatives, Inc.
www.engalt.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Dick Navratil
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2007 2:42 AM
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Pietenpol-List: sky scout
Hey all
My neighbor is principal of a local high school and she has been talking
to me about working with her JROTC students on building a plane at her
school. I pretty much have told her I would do it and am looking at what to
build. Having done 2 Piets already I need something different now. Has
anyone built a Skyscout? I have the Flying Glider manual plans. I would
order a full size set. I am interested in comments on how it flies and
comparisions and whatever.
Dick N.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dale Johnson" <ddjohn(at)earthlink.net> |
Dick
How auout a primary glider.
Dale
----- Original Message -----
From: Dick Navratil
Sent: 11/6/2007 1:47:09 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: sky scout
Hey all
My neighbor is principal of a local high school and she has been talking to me
about working with her JROTC students on building a plane at her school. I pretty
much have told her I would do it and am looking at what to build. Having
done 2 Piets already I need something different now. Has anyone built a Skyscout?
I have the Flying Glider manual plans. I would order a full size set.
I am interested in comments on how it flies and comparisions and whatever.
Dick N.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dick Navratil" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net> |
Thanks Brian and Dale for the comments. I was thinking of the Sky Scout
in particular because it is a fiamiliar design to me. I also considered
a VP-2 and other simple designs. The deal I would make with the school
is to move my shop tools into the school workshop, I will supply all
materials and supplies and then the plane will be mine.
The school would have no expense except for a teacher from the Physics
class who would put it into the class schedule.
Dick
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "KMHeide, BA, CPO, FAAOP" <kmheidecpo(at)yahoo.com> |
Hey Dick..... Every looked at any of the kit planes at Fisher Flying Products since
they are of wooden build? Just a thought.......
Sincerely,
Village idiot.
Dick Navratil wrote:
Thanks Brian and Dale for the comments. I was thinking of the Sky Scout
in particular because it is a fiamiliar design to me. I also considered a
VP-2 and other simple designs. The deal I would make with the school is to move
my shop tools into the school workshop, I will supply all materials and supplies
and then the plane will be mine.
The school would have no expense except for a teacher from the Physics class who
would put it into the class schedule.
Dick
Kenneth M. Heide, BA, CPO, FAAOP
__________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "KMHeide, BA, CPO, FAAOP" <kmheidecpo(at)yahoo.com> |
Here is a listing for a prop carver....
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/AIRPLANE-PROPELLER-CARVING-Make-Your-Own-Props_W0QQitemZ140173607460QQcmdZViewItem?hash=item140173607460
Kenneth M. Heide, BA, CPO, FAAOP
__________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | What Listers Are Saying... |
November is Matronics List Fund Raiser month and a number people been sending some
really nice comments regarding the Lists. I thought I'd share a few below.
The Lists are completely supported by your Contributions. All of the bills for
new hardware, connectivity, and electricity are paid by the generous support
of the List members.
Please make your Contribution today to support the continued operation of the List
and Forums:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
================= What Listers Are Saying ================
Flying and building is much safer with this List!!
Robert D.
Thanks for having and maintaining such a great resource to
all of us builders and flyers.
Wayne E.
Love the fact that you haven't caved to advertising!
Peter J.
..a great resource!!
Robert C.
Not building at the moment, but the Lists keeps me right
up to date with what's going on.
Chris D.
The web forum has been running great.
James O.
I enjoy this [List] site very much...
Paul C.
This is a great list!
Albert G.
..a valuable resource!
Roger C.
I am deployed to Pakistan right now, and being able
to go on-line and keep up with the aircraft discussions
helps keep the aircraft building dream alive in my mind!
Gregory C.
..fantastic service!
Roger M.
..clearly a work of passion!
Mike C.
It is a great service to us!
Kevin C.
The list is a wonderful resource...
Ralph O.
[The Lists] have been the single greatest resource in
building my RV-9A and now my RV-10.
Albert G.
..a valuable and always improving service.
Dick S.
STILL THE BEST BARGAIN AROUND!!
Owen B.
..such a valuable tool.
Jon M.
[The Lists] have been an invaluable resource for me
as a Zenith homebuilder.
David G.
The opportunity to meet (on line at least) many other
interesting builders and to make some new friends is
truly appreciated.
Albert G.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Willis <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: sky scout -- FISHER |
Ken and Dick,
I just looked at the Fisher site. Today they offer PLANS ONLY for all models,
and moreover, they have pricing for only a few models that they show, as well.
That 7/8 scale wooden Tiger Moth is available in plans, though, and looks
really cool. There's not a "Piet builders board" equivalent for it, though,
I'll bet-- a major asset for us Pieters.
It looks like they are tyring to return to strong builder roots, and I for
one hope Fisher completes its plans to make both plans and kits available. My
local (Austin) EAA chapter has one bloke building a Skybolt, another a Cozy on
a very long-term build, and my halting Piet efforts. ALL the others are RVs--
14,400 rivets. What's the fun in that?
Tim in central TX
-----Original Message-----
>From: "KMHeide, BA, CPO, FAAOP" <kmheidecpo(at)yahoo.com>
>Sent: Nov 6, 2007 11:19 PM
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: sky scout
>
>Hey Dick..... Every looked at any of the kit planes at Fisher Flying Products
since they are of wooden build? Just a thought.......
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Village idiot.
>
>Dick Navratil wrote:
> Thanks Brian and Dale for the comments. I was thinking of the Sky Scout
in particular because it is a fiamiliar design to me. I also considered
a VP-2 and other simple designs. The deal I would make with the school is to move
my shop tools into the school workshop, I will supply all materials and supplies
and then the plane will be mine.
>The school would have no expense except for a teacher from the Physics class who
would put it into the class schedule.
> Dick
>
>
>
>Kenneth M. Heide, BA, CPO, FAAOP
>
> __________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Willis <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: sky scout -- FISHER |
Maybe I looked at an old website for Fisher. Other data show they do have kits,
esp. the Tiger Moth. Google it.
-----Original Message-----
>From: Tim Willis <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net>
>Sent: Nov 7, 2007 8:39 AM
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: sky scout -- FISHER
>
>Ken and Dick,
> I just looked at the Fisher site. Today they offer PLANS ONLY for all models,
and moreover, they have pricing for only a few models that they show, as
well. That 7/8 scale wooden Tiger Moth is available in plans, though, and looks
really cool. There's not a "Piet builders board" equivalent for it, though,
I'll bet-- a major asset for us Pieters.
> It looks like they are tyring to return to strong builder roots, and I for
one hope Fisher completes its plans to make both plans and kits available. My
local (Austin) EAA chapter has one bloke building a Skybolt, another a Cozy
on a very long-term build, and my halting Piet efforts. ALL the others are RVs--
14,400 rivets. What's the fun in that?
>
>Tim in central TX
>
>-----Original Message-----
>>From: "KMHeide, BA, CPO, FAAOP" <kmheidecpo(at)yahoo.com>
>>Sent: Nov 6, 2007 11:19 PM
>>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: sky scout
>>
>>Hey Dick..... Every looked at any of the kit planes at Fisher Flying Products
since they are of wooden build? Just a thought.......
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> Village idiot.
>>
>>Dick Navratil wrote:
>> Thanks Brian and Dale for the comments. I was thinking of the Sky
Scout in particular because it is a fiamiliar design to me. I also considered
a VP-2 and other simple designs. The deal I would make with the school is to
move my shop tools into the school workshop, I will supply all materials and supplies
and then the plane will be mine.
>>The school would have no expense except for a teacher from the Physics class
who would put it into the class schedule.
>> Dick
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Kenneth M. Heide, BA, CPO, FAAOP
>>
>> __________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com> |
Hi Guys,
I've always wanted a Falcon prop for my Piet. I finally found one that I like.
It sounds kind of stupid but I'm putting it on the plane for sentimental/nostalgic
reasons. Anyway I have to clear out the props that I have. They are both
for an A-65 Continental. One is a Hegy 72 x 44. It has about 140 hours on
it and is in nice shape. It performed really well on my plane. The other is
a Sterba 76 x 38. This size was decided on after talking with several prop
carvers. I really like it's performance. It is about 6 months old. It has about
45 hours on it. I've really enjoyed trying different props on my plane,
but I want to put the Falcon on for those strange sentimental/nostalgic reasons.
Anyway I'd like to get $325 out of the Hegy and $500 out of the Sterba. I'm
going to put them on ebay but I thought it would be cool if they went on a
Piet. If anyone is interested they can email me at
EmchAir(at)aol.com
or call me at (330) 429-5265
If you hurry and you're close by you can go for a ride behind the Sterba because
it's still on the plane!
Don Emch
NX899DE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=144461#144461
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "KMHeide, BA, CPO, FAAOP" <kmheidecpo(at)yahoo.com> |
Members of the list:
I am in search of an aluminum filler neck for my fuel tank. I have found a few
abut need one with some height and a threaded fuel cap. Anyone in Pietenpol
land have a supplier for this aluminum filler neck for my gas tank under construction?
Also, are most using the cork type visual wire fuel indicator or the
mechanical gage?
Ken H.
Kenneth M. Heide, BA, CPO, FAAOP
__________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Scott Schreiber" <got22b(at)subarubrat.com> |
| Subject: | Leading edge sheet issue, and getting ready to solo! |
Per the plans it can be 1/16 ply or cardboard, I read about oatmeal cans
being used, so clearly it isn't structural. I bought 45degree ply on the
advice of an EAA senior member. Trying to use it seems impossible. It
just won't conform and wants to warp and roll every way and doesn't
remotely look like the shape of the ribs when tacked down in place. I am
thinking I should have gone with 1/16 90 degree with the grain running
parallel with the wing. I have a few feet of that laying around and it
seems to conform and shape nicely. Another senior member and technical
advisor recomended using 1/32 for a number of reasons. I have some of
that as well from models and it conforms like a champ, but of course is
thinner, and I don't know how it would hold it's shape against fabric.
Other than that, my wings are ready to cover, and if the fuse can get
covered and the control system done over the winter then I am looking
good for a Piet summer.
Also, I am about a week out from doing my first solo as it looks. Man I
can't wait.
-Scott
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Leading edge sheet issue, and getting ready to solo! |
| From: | "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com> |
1/16" 90 degree plywood with the grain running parallel to the wing is pretty much
the norm. It conforms fairly well to the airfoil. When glued down to the
ribs it does tend to bow up between the ribs. However once the wings are covered,
the fabric pulls that same bowed up plywood down slightly between the ribs
and gives the wing a nice smooth shape.
Don Emch
NX899DE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=144534#144534
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Clif Dawson <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Fw: Low Mars - Lake Elsinore |
You want low and slow?
I give you low and slow!
Clif
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 8 Msgs - 11/07/07 |
Got the latest Sport Aviation magazine yesterday -- says that Kermit Pietenpol
has passed away. I never met him or talked to him, but we should all acknowledge
his passing.
Fred B.
La Crosse, WI
________________________________________________________________________
Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Horn angles (rudder & elevators) |
| From: | "Jack T. Textor" <jtextor(at)thepalmergroup.com> |
Morning from chilly Des Moines,
I saw plenty of discussion of whether or not to angle the horns or leave
them straight in the archives, but no mention of the amount. I plan on
angling the elevator horns in 12 degrees and the rudder horn down 13
degrees. Does this seem appropriate?
Thanks,
Jack Textor
www.textors.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | HelsperSew(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Horn angles (rudder & elevators) |
Jack,
I waited to mount those horns until I could clamp all the surfaces in place
so I could just pull a string and see what those angles were.
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Horn angles (rudder & elevators) |
Agreed, I did what Dan did. Just have to wait till your fuselage (and rear
controls) are mostly done before drilling the holes. Then you can get the
angle exact.
Rick
On Nov 8, 2007 8:34 AM, wrote:
> Jack,
>
> I waited to mount those horns until I could clamp all the surfaces in
> place so I could just pull a string and see what those angles were.
> Dan Helsper
> Poplar Grove, IL.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
--
Rick Holland
ObjectAge Ltd.
Castle Rock, Colorado
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
Ken wrote-
>Anyone in Pietenpol land have a supplier for this aluminum filler neck for
my gas tank under construction?
When in doubt, go to the automotive guys. Check out Summit Racing or Jeg's
... they both carry parts and pieces for fabricating tanks and radiators th
at use filler necks with and without overflow. "Moroso" is one brand of fi
ller necks and caps that you'll find there. I bought one from Summit Racin
g to fabricate the filler neck for my smoke tank out of (not yet complete).
>are most using the cork type visual wire fuel indicator or the mechanical
gage?
41CC has the good old float rod system and it works great. I sometimes won
der what kind of moonshine jugs Corky got the two big corks off of that he
made the float out of, but they seem to float fine. Corky also used brass
rod for the float rod and filed small notches in the rod to mark off each g
allon. You can't see the notches from the cockpit (or at least my old eyes
can't), but there really isn't much need to know exact quantity anyway. S
he's either got fuel or she ain't, and if you have to count notches you pro
bably should have been looking for a landing spot a while ago anyway ;o)
Oscar ZunigaSan Antonio, TXmailto: taildrags@hotmail.comwebsite at http://w
ww.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com> |
ACS has one with a screw in neck and cap on a chain, worked fine on my AL
tank. Surprisingly inexpensive also.
Rick
On Nov 8, 2007 9:49 AM, Oscar Zuniga wrote:
> Ken wrote-
>
> >Anyone in Pietenpol land have a supplier for this aluminum filler neck
> for my gas tank under construction?
>
> When in doubt, go to the automotive guys. Check out Summit Racing or
> Jeg's... they both carry parts and pieces for fabricating tanks and
> radiators that use filler necks with and without overflow. "Moroso" is one
> brand of filler necks and caps that you'll find there. I bought one from
> Summit Racing to fabricate the filler neck for my smoke tank out of (not yet
> complete).
>
> >are most using the cork type visual wire fuel indicator or the mechanical
> gage?
>
> 41CC has the good old float rod system and it works great. I sometimes
> wonder what kind of moonshine jugs Corky got the two big corks off of that
> he made the float out of, but they seem to float fine. Corky also used
> brass rod for the float rod and filed small notches in the rod to mark off
> each gallon. You can't see the notches from the cockpit (or at least my old
> eyes can't), but there really isn't much need to know exact quantity
> anyway. She's either got fuel or she ain't, and if you have to count
> notches you probably should have been looking for a landing spot a while ago
> anyway ;o)
>
> Oscar Zuniga
> San Antonio, TX
> mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
> website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
--
Rick Holland
ObjectAge Ltd.
Castle Rock, Colorado
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Kerley <tuutuutango(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 8 Msgs - 11/07/07 |
I have tried to UNSUBSCIBE from the Matronics list on several occasions (going
to the UNSUBSCRIBE section at the MATRONICS main website, but I am having no luck
in getting off the distribution.
MATT PLEASE MAKE IT EASIER TO UNSUBSCRIBE.
I can fly an airplane at night in a thunderstorm by myself, but I sure as heck
can't unsubscribe from MATRONICS!
Pietenpol-List Digest Server wrote: *
=================================================
Online Versions of Today's List Digest Archive
=================================================
Today's complete Pietenpol-List Digest can also be found in either of the
two Web Links listed below. The .html file includes the Digest formatted
in HTML for viewing with a web browser and features Hyperlinked Indexes
and Message Navigation. The .txt file includes the plain ASCII version
of the Pietenpol-List Digest and can be viewed with a generic text editor
such as Notepad or with a web browser.
HTML Version:
http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=html&Chapter 07-11-07&Archive=Pietenpol
Text Version:
http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=txt&Chapter 07-11-07&Archive=Pietenpol
===============================================
EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive
===============================================
----------------------------------------------------------
Pietenpol-List Digest Archive
---
Total Messages Posted Wed 11/07/07: 8
----------------------------------------------------------
Today's Message Index:
----------------------
0. 12:18 AM - What Listers Are Saying... (Matt Dralle)
1. 06:43 AM - Re: sky scout -- FISHER (Tim Willis)
2. 06:49 AM - Re: sky scout -- FISHER (Tim Willis)
3. 12:10 PM - Props for sale (Don Emch)
4. 03:32 PM - Filler neck (KMHeide, BA, CPO, FAAOP)
5. 07:24 PM - Leading edge sheet issue, and getting ready to solo! (Scott
Schreiber)
6. 07:45 PM - Re: Leading edge sheet issue, and getting ready to solo! (Don
Emch)
7. 10:39 PM - Fw: Low Mars - Lake Elsinore (Clif Dawson)
________________________________ Message 0 _____________________________________
From: Matt Dralle
Subject: Pietenpol-List: What Listers Are Saying...
November is Matronics List Fund Raiser month and a number people been sending some
really nice comments regarding the Lists. I thought I'd share a few below.
The Lists are completely supported by your Contributions. All of the bills for
new hardware, connectivity, and electricity are paid by the generous support
of the List members.
Please make your Contribution today to support the continued operation of the List
and Forums:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
================= What Listers Are Saying ===============
Flying and building is much safer with this List!!
Robert D.
Thanks for having and maintaining such a great resource to
all of us builders and flyers.
Wayne E.
Love the fact that you haven't caved to advertising!
Peter J.
..a great resource!!
Robert C.
Not building at the moment, but the Lists keeps me right
up to date with what's going on.
Chris D.
The web forum has been running great.
James O.
I enjoy this [List] site very much...
Paul C.
This is a great list!
Albert G.
..a valuable resource!
Roger C.
I am deployed to Pakistan right now, and being able
to go on-line and keep up with the aircraft discussions
helps keep the aircraft building dream alive in my mind!
Gregory C.
..fantastic service!
Roger M.
..clearly a work of passion!
Mike C.
It is a great service to us!
Kevin C.
The list is a wonderful resource...
Ralph O.
[The Lists] have been the single greatest resource in
building my RV-9A and now my RV-10.
Albert G.
..a valuable and always improving service.
Dick S.
STILL THE BEST BARGAIN AROUND!!
Owen B.
..such a valuable tool.
Jon M.
[The Lists] have been an invaluable resource for me
as a Zenith homebuilder.
David G.
The opportunity to meet (on line at least) many other
interesting builders and to make some new friends is
truly appreciated.
Albert G.
________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________
From: Tim Willis
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: sky scout -- FISHER
Ken and Dick,
I just looked at the Fisher site. Today they offer PLANS ONLY for all models,
and moreover, they have pricing for only a few models that they show, as well.
That 7/8 scale wooden Tiger Moth is available in plans, though, and looks
really cool. There's not a "Piet builders board" equivalent for it, though,
I'll bet-- a major asset for us Pieters.
It looks like they are tyring to return to strong builder roots, and I for
one hope Fisher completes its plans to make both plans and kits available. My
local (Austin) EAA chapter has one bloke building a Skybolt, another a Cozy on
a very long-term build, and my halting Piet efforts. ALL the others are RVs--
14,400 rivets. What's the fun in that?
Tim in central TX
-----Original Message-----
>From: "KMHeide, BA, CPO, FAAOP"
>Sent: Nov 6, 2007 11:19 PM
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: sky scout
>
>Hey Dick..... Every looked at any of the kit planes at Fisher Flying Products
since they are of wooden build? Just a thought.......
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Village idiot.
>
>Dick Navratil wrote:
> Thanks Brian and Dale for the comments. I was thinking of the Sky Scout
in particular because it is a fiamiliar design to me. I also considered
a VP-2 and other simple designs. The deal I would make with the school is to move
my shop tools into the school workshop, I will supply all materials and supplies
and then the plane will be mine.
>The school would have no expense except for a teacher from the Physics class who
would put it into the class schedule.
> Dick
>
>
>
>Kenneth M. Heide, BA, CPO, FAAOP
>
> __________________________________________________
________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________
From: Tim Willis
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: sky scout -- FISHER
Maybe I looked at an old website for Fisher. Other data show they do have kits,
esp. the Tiger Moth. Google it.
-----Original Message-----
>From: Tim Willis
>Sent: Nov 7, 2007 8:39 AM
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: sky scout -- FISHER
>
>Ken and Dick,
> I just looked at the Fisher site. Today they offer PLANS ONLY for all models,
and moreover, they have pricing for only a few models that they show, as
well. That 7/8 scale wooden Tiger Moth is available in plans, though, and looks
really cool. There's not a "Piet builders board" equivalent for it, though,
I'll bet-- a major asset for us Pieters.
> It looks like they are tyring to return to strong builder roots, and I for
one hope Fisher completes its plans to make both plans and kits available. My
local (Austin) EAA chapter has one bloke building a Skybolt, another a Cozy
on a very long-term build, and my halting Piet efforts. ALL the others are RVs--
14,400 rivets. What's the fun in that?
>
>Tim in central TX
>
>-----Original Message-----
>>From: "KMHeide, BA, CPO, FAAOP"
>>Sent: Nov 6, 2007 11:19 PM
>>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: sky scout
>>
>>Hey Dick..... Every looked at any of the kit planes at Fisher Flying Products
since they are of wooden build? Just a thought.......
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> Village idiot.
>>
>>Dick Navratil wrote:
>> Thanks Brian and Dale for the comments. I was thinking of the Sky
Scout in particular because it is a fiamiliar design to me. I also considered
a VP-2 and other simple designs. The deal I would make with the school is to
move my shop tools into the school workshop, I will supply all materials and supplies
and then the plane will be mine.
>>The school would have no expense except for a teacher from the Physics class
who would put it into the class schedule.
>> Dick
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Kenneth M. Heide, BA, CPO, FAAOP
>>
>> __________________________________________________
________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Props for sale
From: "Don Emch"
Hi Guys,
I've always wanted a Falcon prop for my Piet. I finally found one that I like.
It sounds kind of stupid but I'm putting it on the plane for sentimental/nostalgic
reasons. Anyway I have to clear out the props that I have. They are both
for an A-65 Continental. One is a Hegy 72 x 44. It has about 140 hours on
it and is in nice shape. It performed really well on my plane. The other is
a Sterba 76 x 38. This size was decided on after talking with several prop
carvers. I really like it's performance. It is about 6 months old. It has about
45 hours on it. I've really enjoyed trying different props on my plane,
but I want to put the Falcon on for those strange sentimental/nostalgic reasons.
Anyway I'd like to get $325 out of the Hegy and $500 out of the Sterba. I'm
going to put them on ebay but I thought it would be cool if they went on a
Piet. If anyone is interested they can email me at
EmchAir(at)aol.com
or call me at (330) 429-5265
If you hurry and you're close by you can go for a ride behind the Sterba because
it's still on the plane!
Don Emch
NX899DE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=144461#144461
________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________
From: "KMHeide, BA, CPO, FAAOP"
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Filler neck
Members of the list:
I am in search of an aluminum filler neck for my fuel tank. I have found a few
abut need one with some height and a threaded fuel cap. Anyone in Pietenpol
land have a supplier for this aluminum filler neck for my gas tank under construction?
Also, are most using the cork type visual wire fuel indicator or the
mechanical gage?
Ken H.
Kenneth M. Heide, BA, CPO, FAAOP
__________________________________________________
________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________
From: "Scott Schreiber"
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Leading edge sheet issue, and getting ready to solo!
Per the plans it can be 1/16 ply or cardboard, I read about oatmeal cans
being used, so clearly it isn't structural. I bought 45degree ply on the
advice of an EAA senior member. Trying to use it seems impossible. It
just won't conform and wants to warp and roll every way and doesn't
remotely look like the shape of the ribs when tacked down in place. I am
thinking I should have gone with 1/16 90 degree with the grain running
parallel with the wing. I have a few feet of that laying around and it
seems to conform and shape nicely. Another senior member and technical
advisor recomended using 1/32 for a number of reasons. I have some of
that as well from models and it conforms like a champ, but of course is
thinner, and I don't know how it would hold it's shape against fabric.
Other than that, my wings are ready to cover, and if the fuse can get
covered and the control system done over the winter then I am looking
good for a Piet summer.
Also, I am about a week out from doing my first solo as it looks. Man I
can't wait.
-Scott
________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Leading edge sheet issue, and getting ready to solo!
From: "Don Emch"
1/16" 90 degree plywood with the grain running parallel to the wing is pretty much
the norm. It conforms fairly well to the airfoil. When glued down to the
ribs it does tend to bow up between the ribs. However once the wings are covered,
the fabric pulls that same bowed up plywood down slightly between the ribs
and gives the wing a nice smooth shape.
Don Emch
NX899DE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=144534#144534
________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________
From: Clif Dawson
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fw: Low Mars - Lake Elsinore
You want low and slow?
I give you low and slow!
Clif
__________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Kraut" <brian.kraut(at)engalt.com> |
I just welded one of those into a tank for my Piet also. It is an aluminum
flange that you weld to the tank and a steel filler neck that screws into
the flange.
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/appages/bayonetfuelcaps.php
Brian Kraut
Engineering Alternatives, Inc.
www.engalt.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Rick Holland
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 12:26 PM
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: filler neck
ACS has one with a screw in neck and cap on a chain, worked fine on my AL
tank. Surprisingly inexpensive also.
Rick
On Nov 8, 2007 9:49 AM, Oscar Zuniga < taildrags(at)hotmail.com> wrote:
Ken wrote-
>Anyone in Pietenpol land have a supplier for this aluminum filler neck
for my gas tank under construction?
When in doubt, go to the automotive guys. Check out Summit Racing or
Jeg's... they both carry parts and pieces for fabricating tanks and
radiators that use filler necks with and without overflow. "Moroso" is one
brand of filler necks and caps that you'll find there. I bought one from
Summit Racing to fabricate the filler neck for my smoke tank out of (not yet
complete).
>are most using the cork type visual wire fuel indicator or the
mechanical gage?
41CC has the good old float rod system and it works great. I sometimes
wonder what kind of moonshine jugs Corky got the two big corks off of that
he made the float out of, but they seem to float fine. Corky also used
brass rod for the float rod and filed small notches in the rod to mark off
each gallon. You can't see the notches from the cockpit (or at least my old
eyes can't), but there really isn't much need to know exact quantity anyway.
She's either got fuel or she ain't, and if you have to count notches you
probably should have been looking for a landing spot a while ago anyway ;o)
Oscar Zuniga
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
--
Rick Holland
ObjectAge Ltd.
Castle Rock, Colorado
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | HelsperSew(at)aol.com |
Weldable filler necks----------I believe are available from WAG AERO, in
Wis.
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Cont. cam followers |
Looking for some cam followers for Cont. A65/75. Several of the ones on th
e 75 core that I bought are pitted and rather than try to grind/polish them
out, my mechanic thinks we should try to find some. P/N 21608. Thanks!Os
car ZunigaSan Antonio, TXmailto: taildrags@hotmail.comwebsite at http://www
.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Dallas: Aircraft Engine & Accessory: cam followers |
| From: | "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov> |
Oscar-- I sent all my Continental parts here and when some didn't meet
spec the guys there fixed me up with either
serviceable used/reconditioned for a good price or new at a decent
price. I don't know what kind of operation they run
these days but in the mid 90's they were fantastic to work with. They
knew small engine Continentals very well.
http://www.aea-precision.com/
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Kraut" <brian.kraut(at)engalt.com> |
| Subject: | Cont. cam followers |
Are they the same ones on the 85 and O-200? I have a ton of parts for them.
Brian Kraut
Engineering Alternatives, Inc.
www.engalt.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Oscar Zuniga
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 3:07 PM
To: Pietenpol List
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Cont. cam followers
Looking for some cam followers for Cont. A65/75. Several of the ones on
the 75 core that I bought are pitted and rather than try to grind/polish
them out, my mechanic thinks we should try to find some. P/N 21608.
Thanks!
Oscar Zuniga
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Kraut" <brian.kraut(at)engalt.com> |
| Subject: | Sky Scout for sale |
I have a divorce coming up and I need to lighten my load a little. I have a
very nice Sky Scout for sale. The fusalage and engine are from a previously
flying plane and are complete and ready to go. The wings and tail were
taken for another Piet project. I do have a complete new tail ready to
cover though. I also have a complete set of GN-1 ribs already completed. I
have the center section spars done and the spruce for the outboard wing
spars. I just welded up a very nice aluminum center section wing tank. All
metal fittings are completed. I have the drag wires, pulleys, etc. All you
will need to buy to finish this project is the spruce leading edge for the
wing, plywood or sheet metal to cover the leading edge, material for the
struts, aileron cables, and covering supplies. Should be well under $500
for everything to complete and can be done in probably a few months time. I
do also have the covering materials and would sell them with the project,
but I have another plane I can use them on also.
The engine is a Chrysler 2.2 and it has electric start. It has a very nice
wood prop, starter, and alternator.
First $6,500 takes it all. I am still working on the plane a few times a
week and price will go up as it gets nearer to completion. This is really a
steal. Craftsmanship on the plane is very good. The work was done by a guy
that built several other Piets.
My number is 904-536-1780. The Plane is in Jacksonville, FL.
Brian Kraut
Engineering Alternatives, Inc.
www.engalt.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "KMHeide, BA, CPO, FAAOP" <kmheidecpo(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Sky Scout for sale |
Brian,
I have been down that road.....keep you faith and take the high road. Teflon
comes to mind. After the smoke clears, you realize everything can grow again,
your heart, mind and spirit. I lost everything, and I mean everything. Stick to
your values that were taught to you and soon enough, you will be back in the
air ready to live life again....Life teaches some very hard lesson....now go
find your happiness.
Sincerely,
Best wishes....Kenneth M. Heide
Brian Kraut wrote:
.hmmessage P { PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px;
MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px } BODY.hmmessage { FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY:
Tahoma } I have a divorce coming up and I need to lighten my load
a little. I have a very nice Sky Scout for sale. The fusalage and engine
are from a previously flying plane and are complete and ready to go. The wings
and tail were taken for another Piet project. I do have a complete new tail
ready to cover though. I also have a complete set of GN-1 ribs already completed.
I have the center section spars done and the spruce for the outboard wing
spars. I just welded up a very nice aluminum center section wing tank. All
metal fittings are completed. I have the drag wires, pulleys, etc. All you
will need to buy to finish this project is the spruce leading edge for the wing,
plywood or sheet metal to cover the leading edge, material for the struts,
aileron cables, and covering supplies. Should be
well under $500 for everything to complete and can be done in probably a few months
time. I do also have the covering materials and would sell them with the
project, but I have another plane I can use them on also.
The engine is a Chrysler 2.2 and it has electric start. It has a very nice wood
prop, starter, and alternator.
First $6,500 takes it all. I am still working on the plane a few times a week
and price will go up as it gets nearer to completion. This is really a steal.
Craftsmanship on the plane is very good. The work was done by a guy that
built several other Piets.
My number is 904-536-1780. The Plane is in Jacksonville, FL.
Brian Kraut
Engineering Alternatives, Inc.
www.engalt.com
Kenneth M. Heide, BA, CPO, FAAOP
__________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "gcardinal" <gcardinal(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Horn angles (rudder & elevators) |
The angled rudder horn might cause some trim issues. Twist the ends of
the horn down to meet the rudder cable angle. You will also discover
just how strong the plans built control horns are when you try to twist
them.
Greg Cardinal
----- Original Message -----
From: Jack T. Textor
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 8:59 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Horn angles (rudder & elevators)
Morning from chilly Des Moines,
I saw plenty of discussion of whether or not to angle the horns or
leave them straight in the archives, but no mention of the amount. I
plan on angling the elevator horns in 12 degrees and the rudder horn
down 13 degrees. Does this seem appropriate?
Thanks,
Jack Textor
www.textors.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Skip Gadd" <skipgadd(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: New Piet on the block |
Rick,
We have one runway lot for sale and one across the runway from us may be on the
market soon, the rest are sold, there are currently 5 hangar or hangar/apartments
under construction. You would love it here, density altitude way less than
you have out west ;o)
Skip
----- Original Message -----
From: Rick Holland
Sent: 11/2/2007 9:39:04 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: New Piet on the block
Or Piet Heaven. Soon you will have more Piets than Broadhead. I am jealous, would
love to find an air park as nice are yours one of these days.
Rick
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Eldredge <steve(at)byu.edu> |
| Subject: | Fw: Low Mars - Lake Elsinore |
Wow. Wow. Wow!
Thanks for sending these along!!!
Steve E.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Clif Dawson
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 11:38 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fw: Low Mars - Lake Elsinore
You want low and slow?
I give you low and slow!
Clif
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Skip Gadd" <skipgadd(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: New Piet on the block |
Barry,
Let me know when, we will crank up the chili machine.
Skip
----- Original Message -----
From: Barry Davis
Sent: 11/2/2007 10:17:16 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: New Piet on the block
Hey Skip, Looks like ya'll are starting a Piet Haven. This may be good enough for
a flight up there one Saturday
Barry Davis
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Cont. cam followers |
Oscar,
Some of the best prices I found when I rebuilt my A65 was with Woody
Herman at 1800-279-3168.
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: Oscar Zuniga
To: Pietenpol List
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 2:07 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Cont. cam followers
Looking for some cam followers for Cont. A65/75. Several of the ones
on the 75 core that I bought are pitted and rather than try to
grind/polish them out, my mechanic thinks we should try to find some.
P/N 21608. Thanks!
Oscar Zuniga
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
11/8/2007 9:29 AM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | If You Got This Email, You Haven't Made A Contribution |
Yet! :-)
Dear Listers,
If you received this particular Matronics List Email message, its because you haven't
yet made a Contribution to support your Lists! Implemented for the first
time last year, the Matronics system selectively sends out the Contribution
messages to those that forgot to whip out the 'ol credit card this year to support
the continued operation and upgrade of the Matronics Email Lists! Don't
you wish PBS worked that way? :-)
You heard that right. Once you make your Contribution, these support requests
messages during November will suddenly stop coming to your personal email inbox!
I wanted to implement something like this for a number of years, but it was
always such a daunting task to modify the back-end List processing code, that
I just kept putting it off. Finally last year, I just decided to bite the bullet
and put the code-pounding time it to make it work. A few days later, bam!
A working system!
I really do appreciate each and every one of your individual Contributions to support
the Lists. It is your support that enables me to upgrade the hardware
and software that are required to run a List Site like this. It also goes to
pay for the commercial-grade Internet connection and to pay the rather huge electric
bill to keep the computer gear running and the air conditioner powered
up. I run ALL of the Matronics Email List and Forums sites here locally which
allows me to control and monitor every aspect of the system for the utmost in
reliably and performance.
Your personal Contribution matters because when combined with other Listers such
as yourself, it pays the bills to keep this site up and running. I accept exactly
ZERO advertising dollars for the Matronics Lists sites. I can't stand
the pop-up ads and all other commercialism that is so prevalent on the Internet
these days and I particularly don't want to have it on my Email List site.
If you appreciate the ad-free, grass-roots, down-home feel of the Matronics Email
Lists, please make a Contribution to keep it that way!!
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
[Please note the following regarding the selective posting system. There are certain
circumstances where you might still see a Contribution related message.
These situations include if someone replies to one of the messages, or when
using the List Browse feature, or when accessing List message via the Forum.
Since most of these are anonymous public access methods, there is no simple way
to filter them.]
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Glenn Thomas" <glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Planer Question |
Eric,
I believe you're right!
A woman I work with has a husband that does cabinets and high-end
woodworking for a living and I managed to get to spend some time in his shop
today. He asked me to bring my spruce planks down and he would show me both
tools (jointer and planer).
We looked down the plank from the end, looking for a "smile". The board
that was least straight was the one we worked with first. He said with the
board in the smile position, we would start a couple feet past the cutting
blade on the board only taking off a small amount. As the piece went
through the jointer the first pass established a base plane in the wood. As
he pushed the smile over the cutter working the piece through applying all
the pressure to step it thorugh on the *out-feed* table. This shaves the
flat plane into the bottom of the smile.
Then he made 2 more passes. That was all it took and the board was
completely straight. Then we took it to the planer and finished
the opposite side to make it exactly parallel with the freshly cut bottom
done on the jointer. In 2 passes we got 2 faces of the board parallel and
straight.
He did 3 of my boards and I did the last one. Very simple once you've done
it once.
His recommendations were that the jointer was the heart of his woodshop. He
has 3 and although we did my boards on his ultra high-end jointer, he said
his 8" jointer from Grizzly is perfect for what I'm doing. It's a 3 blade
machine and has never given him a single problem (replacement knives are
about $35 and he has them resharpened). He said it cost $650/delivered 2
years ago. I asked about their 6" and he said because the infeed/outfeed
tables are shorter it would be difficult to work with long boards in the 13
- 16 foot range. His final recommendation was that I probably go with the
Grizzly 8" jointer and get an inexpensive Delta planer.
I'm going with the Grizzly 8" planer now. Nothing beats some hands-on time.
Hope this helps somebody else who is also endlessly shopping for tools! I
would hazard a guess that, so far, 80 - 90% of the project expense has been
in tools. That is OK since I never feel like money spent on a tool is money
wasted (unless the tool breaks).
He said my previous sled idea using only a planer might work but it would be
much easier and reliable to get a good jointer.
Anyway,
Thanks Eric!
On 10/30/07, Eric Williams wrote:
>
> I'm thinking what you really need for this operation is a jointer. Read
> this link:
> http://www.wisegeek.com/how-is-a-jointer-used-in-woodworking.htm
>
> Eric
>
> > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Planer Question
> > From: glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com
> > Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 17:30:43 -0700
> > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> >
> glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com>
> >
> > I was thinking I could get by without a planer (as much as I've wanted
> to buy one) and thought of a reason I might be able to justify the purchase.
> I was recently given 4 rough-cut Sitka Spruce boards 2" x 6" x approx. 14'.
> I was hoping to use them for longerons but they have a bit of a warp in
> them. Would the wood still be usable if I were to cut it in to smaller
> pieces (suitable for tail feathers, compression struts, etc.) and clamp the
> smaller pieces into a perfectly straight jig that would hold them in a fixed
> position as I plane off any warpage by passing the whole piece in the jig
> through a planer? The pieces are not badly warped, just not perfect, and if
> I used them for small pieces, what I call warpage might even be acceptable
> for some folks without planing. I could just buy more spruce but I'm sure
> I'd find uses for the planer in the future. Has anybody heard of using a
> planer for this?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > --------
> > Glenn Thomas
> > N?????
> > http://www.flyingwood.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=142637#142637
> > *>
> >
> >
>
>
> *
>
--
Glenn Thomas
Storrs, CT
http://www.flyingwood.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Whaley" <MerlinFAC(at)cfl.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Happy Veteran's Day! |
I know this is a little off the topic of Piets...
To all the folks out there who served in the military in any capacity
whatsoever... I just wanted to say THANK YOU for your service to defend the
freedom we all enjoy!
Oooh-rah, Bravo Zulu, Aim High and Hoo-ahh to you all!
-Mike
Mike Whaley merlin@ov-10bronco.net
Webmaster, OV-10 Bronco Association
http://www.ov-10bronco.net/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
Awfully quiet on the list lately. I've been on vacation for more than two
weeks myself and really missed not flying, but today made up for that. I f
inished changing out the tail brace wires on 41CC from galvanized to stainl
ess and took it up for a test flight. Good day for it, too... gusty, bumpy
, windy. I operated it off the grass and had a great time. Couple of more
hours I'll keep checking the brace wire tension and tweak the turnbuckles
once everything stretches in.
Tomorrow two gents are coming out to see the airplane and try it on. They
have ordered plans from Pietenpol but our EAA Tech Counselor suggested that
they see how they fit in mine before getting too far into the project. Th
ey are a father & son team, with the son being a Southwest Airlines captain
and the father being a retired high-time military fighter pilot. We'll se
e how they fit!Oscar ZunigaSan Antonio, TXmailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.comwebs
ite at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | NX92GB Still runnin good "Knock Knock" |
Hello guys, stil flying the piet, although much more bundled up. Flew for about
an hour today with temps about 45-50 degrees. It climbs like a bat out of hell
but I'm a lot colder than Hell, ( must be because I'm climbing closer to Heaven).
I am pretty comfortable with long johns, and a warm ski mask and heavy
gloves for 40 min or so, then my feet go numb. I found a few deer hunters out
in the woods today, easy to spot with the trees bare of leaves. So far I have
put about 30-35 hrs on her since august, and dad with 10 or so more. I think
we finnaly got our Corvair figured out. Hopefully the weather holds out
and we will be flying to Brodhead this next year. For all you Corvair builders
don't be discouraged from our experiance, 2 complete engines for under $3000
ain't too bad( try that with a Continental), just make sure you use 1965 and
later engines and a good reputable shop for your machine work. Looking back I'm
glad it all happened and turnned out OK, I'm a
better pilot for it and a better mechanic having trouble shot some goofy problems.
I still look for a field to put her down at all times and have an "out"
when ever doing the some times "nessasary" buzz jobs. Now all I need is to have
some snow flying around so I can stay in my shop (insted of flying) and get
my Jungstet 1 done. Happy buiding and flying
Shad Bell
NX92GB
__________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: A 65 exhaust |
Steve,
Finally finished up my exhaust. Went with 18" straight stacks for the back
and 161/2" for the front cylinders. Used stainless pipe from ACS and heat
muffs (put one on each side) from Wicks. They look and sounds great. I had
contacted robbinswings and he told me they don't make muffs for 11/2'
exhaust so I went with Wicks.
Gene
N502R
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Egan <johnegan99(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: NX92GB Still runnin good "Knock Knock" |
Shad,
Thank you for your continued reports regarding your Piet. People on this list
such as yourself who share the difficulties as well as the successes are those
who generate drive for me. Keep up the good work, congratulations on your progress,
and Thank you. See you at Brodhead.
John (found a good shop to tap the crankshaft) Egan
Greenville, WI
----- Original Message ----
From: shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2007 1:07:37 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: NX92GB Still runnin good "Knock Knock"
Hello guys, stil flying the piet, although much more bundled up. Flew for about
an hour today with temps about 45-50 degrees. It climbs like a bat out of hell
but I'm a lot colder than Hell, ( must be because I'm climbing closer to Heaven).
I am pretty comfortable with long johns, and a warm ski mask and heavy
gloves for 40 min or so, then my feet go numb. I found a few deer hunters out
in the woods today, easy to spot with the trees bare of leaves. So far I have
put about 30-35 hrs on her since august, and dad with 10 or so more. I think
we finnaly got our Corvair figured out. Hopefully the weather holds out
and we will be flying to Brodhead this next year. For all you Corvair builders
don't be discouraged from our experiance, 2 complete engines for under $3000
ain't too bad( try that with a Continental), just make sure you use 1965 and
later engines and a good reputable shop for your machine work. Looking
__________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gardiner Mason" <airlion(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | strut attach point |
OK guys, another question from the integrity nut. I have the 36"
center section, and I want to know the correct attach point for my wing
struts. Right now I put them as per plans with the regular center
section. By using the 36" section does that automatically place them at
the correct position? Also, where to put the jury struts? Gardiner Mason
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Leading Edge spar .. how do you shape it? |
| From: | "jimd" <jlducey(at)hotmail.com> |
I have leading edges that need wood spars with the wings airfoil shape. How do
you guys create a spar with the shape you need, at a reasonable cost, in a reasonable
amount of time?
Not being much of a woodworker, each idea I have had seems problematic;
Router; have one, never used it. Could try to make a jig to make repeated cuts
to approximate shape of airfoil. Getting something that would hold the position
precisely, in many different positions seems dicey.
Spar is about 3 inches wide, so no way my router could do it in less than 3-4 passes,
and getting profile right would be tough, don't think it would match any
normal router bits exactly.
Shaper; there are companies that make custom shaper cutters that would make one
for that shape. Very expensive and I don't have a shaper.
CNC; companies will make about anything you want if you provide info. Only need
two spars and would rather do it self somehow.
Don't do it as one big piece.. thought about putting plywood airfoil shaped pieces
on each rib, with about a one inch square opening for a piece of wood, then
I could use longeron stock. Would end up lighter, could do with jigsaw and files.
However it wouldn't provide much support to the leading edge skin as it
would only make contact at each rib.
This is for a GN-1 Biplane, which confuses the issue a little. The top wings are
complete, they have a .026 aluminum wrapped leading edge with a square 1" spar
that touches the leading edge in two spots the full length of the wings. (The
square part is along the very front of each rib) so it provides some support.)
The lower wing is what needs the spars, and then to be skinned with something.
My plans show a single piece of wood shaped to match the airfoil profile, attached
via flat head machine screws/bolts, at each rib.
There is no indication of wood or aluminum for leading edge skin. Since my top
wings have aluminum, and I am comfortable working with it I was leaning toward
skinning it with aluminum.
Preference would be to follow plans, which would be to make up an airfoil shaped
spar. How did you guys do this?
I have a picture (not my plane, but same exact kind of shaped piece) as an example
of what I think I need.
Any help would be appreciated.
Jim
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145066#145066
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/leadingedge_389.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "DJ Vegh" <dj(at)veghdesign.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Leading Edge spar .. how do you shape it? |
this is something you can do like they did in the "old days" I would do it
by hand with a large jack plane. Keep the knife sharp and it'll shave off
Spruce like butter. Just get the profile close with the plane and then make
yourself a 16" sanding block with something like 80 grit to round it off and
then some 150 grit by hand.
Just keep the knife sharp! and don't cut into the grain.
DJ
----- Original Message -----
From: "jimd" <jlducey(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2007 8:23 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Leading Edge spar .. how do you shape it?
>
> I have leading edges that need wood spars with the wings airfoil shape.
> How do you guys create a spar with the shape you need, at a reasonable
> cost, in a reasonable amount of time?
>
> Not being much of a woodworker, each idea I have had seems problematic;
>
> Router; have one, never used it. Could try to make a jig to make repeated
> cuts to approximate shape of airfoil. Getting something that would hold
> the position precisely, in many different positions seems dicey.
> Spar is about 3 inches wide, so no way my router could do it in less than
> 3-4 passes, and getting profile right would be tough, don't think it would
> match any normal router bits exactly.
>
> Shaper; there are companies that make custom shaper cutters that would
> make one for that shape. Very expensive and I don't have a shaper.
>
> CNC; companies will make about anything you want if you provide info. Only
> need two spars and would rather do it self somehow.
>
> Don't do it as one big piece.. thought about putting plywood airfoil
> shaped pieces on each rib, with about a one inch square opening for a
> piece of wood, then I could use longeron stock. Would end up lighter,
> could do with jigsaw and files. However it wouldn't provide much support
> to the leading edge skin as it would only make contact at each rib.
>
> This is for a GN-1 Biplane, which confuses the issue a little. The top
> wings are complete, they have a .026 aluminum wrapped leading edge with a
> square 1" spar that touches the leading edge in two spots the full length
> of the wings. (The square part is along the very front of each rib) so it
> provides some support.)
>
> The lower wing is what needs the spars, and then to be skinned with
> something. My plans show a single piece of wood shaped to match the
> airfoil profile, attached via flat head machine screws/bolts, at each rib.
> There is no indication of wood or aluminum for leading edge skin. Since my
> top wings have aluminum, and I am comfortable working with it I was
> leaning toward skinning it with aluminum.
>
> Preference would be to follow plans, which would be to make up an airfoil
> shaped spar. How did you guys do this?
>
> I have a picture (not my plane, but same exact kind of shaped piece) as an
> example of what I think I need.
>
> Any help would be appreciated.
>
> Jim
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145066#145066
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/leadingedge_389.jpg
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Kraut" <brian.kraut(at)engalt.com> |
| Subject: | Leading Edge spar .. how do you shape it? |
Several cuts on a table saw with the blade at various angles or different
router bits on a router table should also be able to get it close.
Brian Kraut
Engineering Alternatives, Inc.
www.engalt.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of DJ Vegh
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2007 11:40 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Leading Edge spar .. how do you shape it?
this is something you can do like they did in the "old days" I would do it
by hand with a large jack plane. Keep the knife sharp and it'll shave off
Spruce like butter. Just get the profile close with the plane and then make
yourself a 16" sanding block with something like 80 grit to round it off and
then some 150 grit by hand.
Just keep the knife sharp! and don't cut into the grain.
DJ
----- Original Message -----
From: "jimd" <jlducey(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2007 8:23 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Leading Edge spar .. how do you shape it?
>
> I have leading edges that need wood spars with the wings airfoil shape.
> How do you guys create a spar with the shape you need, at a reasonable
> cost, in a reasonable amount of time?
>
> Not being much of a woodworker, each idea I have had seems problematic;
>
> Router; have one, never used it. Could try to make a jig to make repeated
> cuts to approximate shape of airfoil. Getting something that would hold
> the position precisely, in many different positions seems dicey.
> Spar is about 3 inches wide, so no way my router could do it in less than
> 3-4 passes, and getting profile right would be tough, don't think it would
> match any normal router bits exactly.
>
> Shaper; there are companies that make custom shaper cutters that would
> make one for that shape. Very expensive and I don't have a shaper.
>
> CNC; companies will make about anything you want if you provide info. Only
> need two spars and would rather do it self somehow.
>
> Don't do it as one big piece.. thought about putting plywood airfoil
> shaped pieces on each rib, with about a one inch square opening for a
> piece of wood, then I could use longeron stock. Would end up lighter,
> could do with jigsaw and files. However it wouldn't provide much support
> to the leading edge skin as it would only make contact at each rib.
>
> This is for a GN-1 Biplane, which confuses the issue a little. The top
> wings are complete, they have a .026 aluminum wrapped leading edge with a
> square 1" spar that touches the leading edge in two spots the full length
> of the wings. (The square part is along the very front of each rib) so it
> provides some support.)
>
> The lower wing is what needs the spars, and then to be skinned with
> something. My plans show a single piece of wood shaped to match the
> airfoil profile, attached via flat head machine screws/bolts, at each rib.
> There is no indication of wood or aluminum for leading edge skin. Since my
> top wings have aluminum, and I am comfortable working with it I was
> leaning toward skinning it with aluminum.
>
> Preference would be to follow plans, which would be to make up an airfoil
> shaped spar. How did you guys do this?
>
> I have a picture (not my plane, but same exact kind of shaped piece) as an
> example of what I think I need.
>
> Any help would be appreciated.
>
> Jim
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145066#145066
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/leadingedge_389.jpg
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Leading Edge spar ..go to your local lumber yard |
One easy and cheap way to make the leading edges for the piet is to buy a piece
of 3/4 round hand rail (like used on a staircase, with one short edge side on
bottom) , then rip it at the widest part to fit your ribs, and use glue and
small "pocket screws" wich means couter bore them and put a plug back in to fill
the resulting hole. The glue is what holds it togeather, the screws just
make it easy to clamp and hold in place. Remember to try to buy the lightest
species of wood you can, the leading edge is not a main structural member, but
yes it does stiffin up the leading edge consiterably. The nice part of the hand
rail is there is a nice very smooth curve with out hours of sanding, planing,
or expensive router bits.
Shad Bell
NX92GB
__________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | Post Mortem - Matronics List Pummeled By Spam... |
Dear Listers,
Over a 3-day period, Thursday 11/8 though Saturday 11/10, the Matronics Lists were
pummeled with over 450,000 spam emails causing posting delays and a few duplicate
messages. Yeah, I really said nearly half a million spams! The good
news is that I don't believe a single one of them actually made it to the Lists
thanks to the aggressive List filtering code and the Barracuda spam filter.
The bad news was that it caused quite a back log of email messages starting Friday
and continuing until late Saturday when I noticed that delivery seemed a bit
sluggish. By about 11pm on Saturday night, I had managed to get the backlog
cleared out of the spam filter by temporarily adjusting some of the filtering.
A check of the queues this morning, and everything looks like its working great
and there are no incoming filtering delays and spam levels appear to be back
to "normal".
There were a number of people asking what was going on, so I thought that I'd send
out a follow up post mortem on the event...
November is the annual List Fund Raiser. Your contribution directly enables me
to buy systems like the Barracuda spam filter that keep the List free of that
garbage. Please make a contribution to support your Lists!
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "KMHeide, BA, CPO, FAAOP" <kmheidecpo(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: A 65 exhaust |
Gene,
Can you post some photos...
Ken
Gene & Tammy wrote:
Steve,
Finally finished up my exhaust. Went with 18" straight stacks for the back
and 161/2" for the front cylinders. Used stainless pipe from ACS and heat
muffs (put one on each side) from Wicks. They look and sounds great. I had
contacted robbinswings and he told me they don't make muffs for 11/2'
exhaust so I went with Wicks.
Gene
N502R
Kenneth M. Heide, BA, CPO, FAAOP
__________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Leading Edge spar ..go to your local lumber yard |
| From: | "jimd" <jlducey(at)hotmail.com> |
That is probably what I will do. Looked at some of the profiles for hand rails,
and it looks like there are some douglas fir ones that are almost 4" wide, have
about the right shape and come in 12 foot lengths. Ripped in the right way
it would be pretty close, could get it the rest the way with a belt sander or
plane and sandpaper.
Thanks, I had been think about bannister railing, but they were way off on profile,
and shorter.
JimD
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145236#145236
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Darrel Jones <wd6bor(at)vom.com> |
| Subject: | Corvair College #11 |
A big thanks to William Wynne, Michael Heintz, Lori, Doug and all the
rest of the nice folks from Quality Sports Planes at Cloverdale airport
in Cloverdale, California and FlyCorvair from rainy old Florida for
putting on another excellent weekend event full of education,
encouragement and good companionship.
I missed the Friday workshop because of work, but Saturday when I
arrived I found Michael's hangar full of Zenith aircraft and tables full
of Corvair engines in various states of dress and undress.
I've been to the Corvair College in Hanford hosted by Pat Panzerra, and
was able to get a lot of great engine conversion application information
and encouragement both times. William had his latest developments on
hand for us to see and fondle, including his new oil system components,
hub and distributor. Also available was the new Corvair engine
installation manual for the Zodiac CH 601 XL kit plane. After looking
through it, I bought one even though I am putting the Corvair back in a
Pietenpol variant called the Pfeifer Sport because the manual had a lot
of great firewall-forward information for the Corvair engine.
I was also able to hook up with Jim Boyer, whom I had met at Hanford and
who lives about twenty miles away. Jim is putting together a group of
crankshafts to be nitrated at a local shop that will remain nameless to
protect the innocent. I also met with Mike from the Sacramento area and
we stopped by Jim's house on the way home and looked at his beautiful
Piet project coming right along. We also talked about an informal
Pietenpol/Corvaircraft get together in Sonoma, CA for the people in the
area. Walt Bowe has his incredible Model A powered Piet back in the air
after an engine rebuild and has it based at Sonoma Skypark Airport.
I was able to visit with William, who is a great story teller, and we
compared the relative humidity of Florida to that of California, since
it rained all day Saturday Sunday showed bright and sunny though, and
Michael spent the morning hopping rides in the demo Corvair powered 601
while William did more demonstrations and everyone visited. I finally
met Woody Harris of Vacaville, who is building a Corvair powered 601,
and am looking forward to getting over to his hangar to see his progress.
All in all, a great weekend. I met a lot of great people and had a ball!
I'll sleep well tonight, and maybe get busy on the Corvair engine again.
Check out the Quality Sport Planes website at
http://www.qualitysportplanes.com/
Darrel Jones
Pfeifer Sport Ser. # 2
Sonoma, CA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Willis <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Leading airfoil shape-- scalloped back edge |
While we are discussing putting thin plywood on the face of the wings to shape
the airfoil, what about the scalloped rear edge of any such plywood skins?
I know this is a long way in sophistication from Mother's Oats stuff first used
by BP, but is it a real improvment? What does it really do? I understand the
concept of the fabric lifting between the scallops while in flight, but what
do the scallops really do?
I plan to put 1/16" or 1.5mm ply skin on the airfoil face, but I'd like to avoid
effecting these scallops unless they really change performance. Your comments,
pls.
(I hope I am being clear enough in describing this.)
Tim in central TX
===========================================
>> [EXCERPT-- Tim]
>> Don't do it as one big piece.. thought about putting plywood airfoil
>> shaped pieces on each rib, with about a one inch square opening for a
>> piece of wood, then I could use longeron stock. Would end up lighter,
>> could do with jigsaw and files. However it wouldn't provide much support
>> to the leading edge skin as it would only make contact at each rib.
>>
>> This is for a GN-1 Biplane, which confuses the issue a little. The top
>> wings are complete, they have a .026 aluminum wrapped leading edge with a
>> square 1" spar that touches the leading edge in two spots the full length
>> of the wings. (The square part is along the very front of each rib) so it
>> provides some support.)
>>
>> The lower wing is what needs the spars, and then to be skinned with
>> something. My plans show a single piece of wood shaped to match the
>> airfoil profile, attached via flat head machine screws/bolts, at each rib.
>> There is no indication of wood or aluminum for leading edge skin. Since my
>> top wings have aluminum, and I am comfortable working with it I was
>> leaning toward skinning it with aluminum.
>>
>> Preference would be to follow plans, which would be to make up an airfoil
>> shaped spar. How did you guys do this?
>>
>> I have a picture (not my plane, but same exact kind of shaped piece) as an
>> example of what I think I need.
>>
>> Any help would be appreciated.
>>
>> Jim
>>
>>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Leading airfoil shape-- scalloped back edge |
| From: | "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinalhealth.com> |
No need to scallop the plywood between the ribs. Just leave the rear
edge of the plywood straight. The fabric will pull the plywood down
nicely as it shrinks. I've attached a photo showing my right wing with
a coat of white paint before applying the finish color. If you look
towards the wingtip you can see how the plywood has been pulled down
slightly by the fabric, making a nice smooth transition. The only way
to tell definitely where the leading edge stops is by noting where the
rib stitching begins.
Jack Phillips
Raleigh, NC
Enjoyed the nice weather yesterday flying the Pietenpol in 50 deg F
temperatures. Need to enjoy such flying weather while it lasts.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim
Willis
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 8:39 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Leading airfoil shape-- scalloped back edge
-->
While we are discussing putting thin plywood on the face of the wings to
shape the airfoil, what about the scalloped rear edge of any such
plywood skins?
I know this is a long way in sophistication from Mother's Oats stuff
first used by BP, but is it a real improvment? What does it really do?
I understand the concept of the fabric lifting between the scallops
while in flight, but what do the scallops really do?
I plan to put 1/16" or 1.5mm ply skin on the airfoil face, but I'd like
to avoid effecting these scallops unless they really change performance.
Your comments, pls.
(I hope I am being clear enough in describing this.)
Tim in central TX
==================
>> [EXCERPT-- Tim]
>> Don't do it as one big piece.. thought about putting plywood airfoil
>> shaped pieces on each rib, with about a one inch square opening for a
>> piece of wood, then I could use longeron stock. Would end up lighter,
>> could do with jigsaw and files. However it wouldn't provide much
>> support to the leading edge skin as it would only make contact at
each rib.
>>
>> This is for a GN-1 Biplane, which confuses the issue a little. The
>> top wings are complete, they have a .026 aluminum wrapped leading
>> edge with a square 1" spar that touches the leading edge in two spots
>> the full length of the wings. (The square part is along the very
>> front of each rib) so it provides some support.)
>>
>> The lower wing is what needs the spars, and then to be skinned with
>> something. My plans show a single piece of wood shaped to match the
>> airfoil profile, attached via flat head machine screws/bolts, at each
rib.
>> There is no indication of wood or aluminum for leading edge skin.
>> Since my top wings have aluminum, and I am comfortable working with
>> it I was leaning toward skinning it with aluminum.
>>
>> Preference would be to follow plans, which would be to make up an
>> airfoil shaped spar. How did you guys do this?
>>
>> I have a picture (not my plane, but same exact kind of shaped piece)
>> as an example of what I think I need.
>>
>> Any help would be appreciated.
>>
>> Jim
>>
>>
>
_________________________________________________
This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privilege
d, proprietary
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please
notify the sender
immediately and delete the original. Any other use of the email by you is p
rohibited.
Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese - Nederlands - N
orsk - Portuguese
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | HelsperSew(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Leading airfoil shape-- scalloped back edge |
Jack,
Did you apply a 2" tape over the edge of the plywood? I can't see any but
it is not clear. I supported the edge of the plywood with a piece of spruce
glued on to the top of the spar, so I would have something to nail to. I then
nailed down that edge on the entire wing. Maybe I made a mistake and just
should have left it for the fabric to pull it down.
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Leading airfoil shape-- scalloped back edge |
| From: | "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinalhealth.com> |
Yes, I applied 2" tape over the rear edge of the plywood, and over
ANYTHING that was directly underlying the fabric, even things that were
not normally in contact with it. The fabric can move during flight and
will quickly chafe if not reinforced.
Probably un-necessary to have added the spruce under the plywood between
the ribs, but it shouldn't hurt anything (other than adding weight).
Can't wait to see your Pietenpol at Brodhead. Will it be there this
year?
Jack Phillips
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
HelsperSew(at)aol.com
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 9:22 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Leading airfoil shape-- scalloped back
edge
Jack,
Did you apply a 2" tape over the edge of the plywood? I can't see any
but it is not clear. I supported the edge of the plywood with a piece of
spruce glued on to the top of the spar, so I would have something to
nail to. I then nailed down that edge on the entire wing. Maybe I made a
mistake and just should have left it for the fabric to pull it down.
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
_____
our
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
===========
_________________________________________________
This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privilege
d, proprietary
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please
notify the sender
immediately and delete the original. Any other use of the email by you is p
rohibited.
Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese - Nederlands - N
orsk - Portuguese
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | HelsperSew(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Leading airfoil shape-- scalloped back edge |
Jack,
Don't know if I'll make it there with my Piet next year or not. Too early
to tell, and you know how that goes. Everything takes longer than you think. I
am making wing struts and cowling now. Having lots of fun, that's for sure!
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "MICHAEL SILVIUS" <M.Silvius(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Corvair College #11 |
Hi Darrel:
A quick web immage search for "Pfeifer Sport" turns up little other than
this photo of you:
http://www.experimental-aviation.com/Corvair/Images/WCCC/Event/DarrelnDJ.jpg
and
http://www.aerofiles.com/pfeifer-1937.jpg
looks like a Piet with short/spalyed cabanes and and diferent profile
empenage?
do you have any other photos or links detaling a bit on what this plane is
looks interesting.
Michael Silvius
Scarborough, Maine
----- Original Message -----
From: "Darrel Jones" <wd6bor(at)vom.com>
> I am putting the Corvair back in a
> Pietenpol variant called the Pfeifer Sport because the manual had a lot
> of great firewall-forward information for the Corvair engine.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Willis <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Leading airfoil shape-- scalloped back edge |
Jack,
Thanks for the answer and the pic. Looks good. Was that masking tape underneath,
or something else?
I have a test piece of scrap 1.5mm plywood that I have wetted in very hot water,
bent and clamped to a couple of loose ribes. Not glued-- just a test-- waiting
to see how it dries out.
Tim in central TX
-----Original Message-----
>From: "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinalhealth.com>
>Sent: Nov 12, 2007 8:46 AM
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Leading airfoil shape-- scalloped back edge
>
>Yes, I applied 2" tape over the rear edge of the plywood, and over
>ANYTHING that was directly underlying the fabric, even things that were
>not normally in contact with it. The fabric can move during flight and
>will quickly chafe if not reinforced.
>
>Probably un-necessary to have added the spruce under the plywood between
>the ribs, but it shouldn't hurt anything (other than adding weight).
>
>Can't wait to see your Pietenpol at Brodhead. Will it be there this
>year?
>
>Jack Phillips
>
> _____
>
>From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>HelsperSew(at)aol.com
>Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 9:22 AM
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Leading airfoil shape-- scalloped back
>edge
>
>
>Jack,
>
>Did you apply a 2" tape over the edge of the plywood? I can't see any
>but it is not clear. I supported the edge of the plywood with a piece of
>spruce glued on to the top of the spar, so I would have something to
>nail to. I then nailed down that edge on the entire wing. Maybe I made a
>mistake and just should have left it for the fabric to pull it down.
>
>Dan Helsper
>Poplar Grove, IL.
>
>
> _____
>
>
>our
>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
>===========
>
>_________________________________________________
>
>or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please notify
the sender
>
>Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese - Nederlands - Norsk
- Portuguese
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Leading airfoil shape-- scalloped back edge |
| From: | "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinalhealth.com> |
You shouldn't need to soak it. I just glued mine with T-88 and used
nailing strips like Tony Bingelis describes to hold it down to the ribs
until the glue dried. I did it in roughly 4' sections, and filled in
the cracks with SuperFill.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim
Willis
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 11:29 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Leading airfoil shape-- scalloped back
edge
-->
Jack,
Thanks for the answer and the pic. Looks good. Was that masking tape
underneath, or something else?
I have a test piece of scrap 1.5mm plywood that I have wetted in very
hot water, bent and clamped to a couple of loose ribes. Not glued--
just a test-- waiting to see how it dries out.
Tim in central TX
-----Original Message-----
>From: "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinalhealth.com>
>Sent: Nov 12, 2007 8:46 AM
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Leading airfoil shape-- scalloped back
>edge
>
>Yes, I applied 2" tape over the rear edge of the plywood, and over
>ANYTHING that was directly underlying the fabric, even things that were
>not normally in contact with it. The fabric can move during flight and
>will quickly chafe if not reinforced.
>
>Probably un-necessary to have added the spruce under the plywood
>between the ribs, but it shouldn't hurt anything (other than adding
weight).
>
>Can't wait to see your Pietenpol at Brodhead. Will it be there this
>year?
>
>Jack Phillips
>
> _____
>
>From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>HelsperSew(at)aol.com
>Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 9:22 AM
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Leading airfoil shape-- scalloped back
>edge
>
>
>Jack,
>
>Did you apply a 2" tape over the edge of the plywood? I can't see any
>but it is not clear. I supported the edge of the plywood with a piece
>of spruce glued on to the top of the spar, so I would have something to
>nail to. I then nailed down that edge on the entire wing. Maybe I made
>a mistake and just should have left it for the fabric to pull it down.
>
>Dan Helsper
>Poplar Grove, IL.
>
>
> _____
>
>
>our
>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
>==========
>
>_________________________________________________
>
>or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error,
>please notify the sender
>
>Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese - Nederlands
>- Norsk - Portuguese
_________________________________________________
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please notify
the sender
Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese - Nederlands - Norsk
- Portuguese
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed G." <flyboy_120(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Leading Edge spar .. how do you shape it? |
I cut four facets out of a 1" X 2 1/4" spruce board on my inexpensive table
saw. It leaves very little sanding or planeing to finish it. I cut a piece
of scrap to the same size, marked out the shape of the leading edge on the
end of it and used it to set and try the blade angels before makeing the
cuts on the real thing..Worked great for me..Ed G.
>From: "jimd" <jlducey(at)hotmail.com>
>Reply-To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: Leading Edge spar .. how do you shape it?
>Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 07:23:21 -0800
>
>
>I have leading edges that need wood spars with the wings airfoil shape. How
>do you guys create a spar with the shape you need, at a reasonable cost, in
>a reasonable amount of time?
>
>Not being much of a woodworker, each idea I have had seems problematic;
>
>Router; have one, never used it. Could try to make a jig to make repeated
>cuts to approximate shape of airfoil. Getting something that would hold the
>position precisely, in many different positions seems dicey.
>Spar is about 3 inches wide, so no way my router could do it in less than
>3-4 passes, and getting profile right would be tough, don't think it would
>match any normal router bits exactly.
>
>Shaper; there are companies that make custom shaper cutters that would make
>one for that shape. Very expensive and I don't have a shaper.
>
>CNC; companies will make about anything you want if you provide info. Only
>need two spars and would rather do it self somehow.
>
>Don't do it as one big piece.. thought about putting plywood airfoil shaped
>pieces on each rib, with about a one inch square opening for a piece of
>wood, then I could use longeron stock. Would end up lighter, could do with
>jigsaw and files. However it wouldn't provide much support to the leading
>edge skin as it would only make contact at each rib.
>
>This is for a GN-1 Biplane, which confuses the issue a little. The top
>wings are complete, they have a .026 aluminum wrapped leading edge with a
>square 1" spar that touches the leading edge in two spots the full length
>of the wings. (The square part is along the very front of each rib) so it
>provides some support.)
>
>The lower wing is what needs the spars, and then to be skinned with
>something. My plans show a single piece of wood shaped to match the airfoil
>profile, attached via flat head machine screws/bolts, at each rib.
>There is no indication of wood or aluminum for leading edge skin. Since my
>top wings have aluminum, and I am comfortable working with it I was leaning
>toward skinning it with aluminum.
>
>Preference would be to follow plans, which would be to make up an airfoil
>shaped spar. How did you guys do this?
>
>I have a picture (not my plane, but same exact kind of shaped piece) as an
>example of what I think I need.
>
>Any help would be appreciated.
>
>Jim
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145066#145066
>
>
>Attachments:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com//files/leadingedge_389.jpg
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Leading Edge spar .. how do you shape it? |
| From: | "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinalhealth.com> |
I did the same thing - cut a couple of angles on a 13' piece of spruce
to give it a trapezoidal cross-section, then glued and bolted it to the
ribs. Then I finished shaping it with a block plane, walking down the
length of the wing as I planed, rolling up the neatest little curleques
of spruce as I went. As I recall it only took about 6 or 8 passes per
side to get it to shape (spruce works so nicely) and was one of the most
satisfying tasks on the entire project.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ed G.
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 1:45 PM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Leading Edge spar .. how do you shape it?
I cut four facets out of a 1" X 2 1/4" spruce board on my inexpensive
table saw. It leaves very little sanding or planeing to finish it. I cut
a piece of scrap to the same size, marked out the shape of the leading
edge on the end of it and used it to set and try the blade angels before
makeing the cuts on the real thing..Worked great for me..Ed G.
>From: "jimd" <jlducey(at)hotmail.com>
>Reply-To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: Leading Edge spar .. how do you shape it?
>Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 07:23:21 -0800
>
>
>I have leading edges that need wood spars with the wings airfoil shape.
>How do you guys create a spar with the shape you need, at a reasonable
>cost, in a reasonable amount of time?
>
>Not being much of a woodworker, each idea I have had seems problematic;
>
>Router; have one, never used it. Could try to make a jig to make
>repeated cuts to approximate shape of airfoil. Getting something that
>would hold the position precisely, in many different positions seems
dicey.
>Spar is about 3 inches wide, so no way my router could do it in less
>than
>3-4 passes, and getting profile right would be tough, don't think it
>would match any normal router bits exactly.
>
>Shaper; there are companies that make custom shaper cutters that would
>make one for that shape. Very expensive and I don't have a shaper.
>
>CNC; companies will make about anything you want if you provide info.
>Only need two spars and would rather do it self somehow.
>
>Don't do it as one big piece.. thought about putting plywood airfoil
>shaped pieces on each rib, with about a one inch square opening for a
>piece of wood, then I could use longeron stock. Would end up lighter,
>could do with jigsaw and files. However it wouldn't provide much
>support to the leading edge skin as it would only make contact at each
rib.
>
>This is for a GN-1 Biplane, which confuses the issue a little. The top
>wings are complete, they have a .026 aluminum wrapped leading edge with
>a square 1" spar that touches the leading edge in two spots the full
>length of the wings. (The square part is along the very front of each
>rib) so it provides some support.)
>
>The lower wing is what needs the spars, and then to be skinned with
>something. My plans show a single piece of wood shaped to match the
>airfoil profile, attached via flat head machine screws/bolts, at each
rib.
>There is no indication of wood or aluminum for leading edge skin. Since
>my top wings have aluminum, and I am comfortable working with it I was
>leaning toward skinning it with aluminum.
>
>Preference would be to follow plans, which would be to make up an
>airfoil shaped spar. How did you guys do this?
>
>I have a picture (not my plane, but same exact kind of shaped piece) as
>an example of what I think I need.
>
>Any help would be appreciated.
>
>Jim
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=145066#145066
>
>
>Attachments:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com//files/leadingedge_389.jpg
>
>
_________________________________________________
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please notify
the sender
Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese - Nederlands - Norsk
- Portuguese
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Leading Edge spar .. how do you shape it? |
When one builds AND flies his own aeronautical creation down discount the
favors the angels might provide.
Corky 1:13
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Leading airfoil shape-- scalloped back edge |
I don't think anywhere in the plans it calls out to scallop the skin.
It was said that just the straight trailing edge of the thin ply pulls down
nicely when covered.
If you stiffen the trailing edge you'll create a step.
Mine came out very well un scalloped and unsupported
walt evans
NX140DL
"No one ever learned anything by talking"
Ben Franklin
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Willis" <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net>
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 8:39 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Leading airfoil shape-- scalloped back edge
>
>
> While we are discussing putting thin plywood on the face of the wings to
> shape the airfoil, what about the scalloped rear edge of any such plywood
> skins?
> I know this is a long way in sophistication from Mother's Oats stuff first
> used by BP, but is it a real improvment? What does it really do? I
> understand the concept of the fabric lifting between the scallops while in
> flight, but what do the scallops really do?
>
> I plan to put 1/16" or 1.5mm ply skin on the airfoil face, but I'd like to
> avoid effecting these scallops unless they really change performance.
> Your comments, pls.
>
> (I hope I am being clear enough in describing this.)
>
> Tim in central TX
>
> ===========================================
>>> [EXCERPT-- Tim]
>>> Don't do it as one big piece.. thought about putting plywood airfoil
>>> shaped pieces on each rib, with about a one inch square opening for a
>>> piece of wood, then I could use longeron stock. Would end up lighter,
>>> could do with jigsaw and files. However it wouldn't provide much support
>>> to the leading edge skin as it would only make contact at each rib.
>>>
>>> This is for a GN-1 Biplane, which confuses the issue a little. The top
>>> wings are complete, they have a .026 aluminum wrapped leading edge with
>>> a
>>> square 1" spar that touches the leading edge in two spots the full
>>> length
>>> of the wings. (The square part is along the very front of each rib) so
>>> it
>>> provides some support.)
>>>
>>> The lower wing is what needs the spars, and then to be skinned with
>>> something. My plans show a single piece of wood shaped to match the
>>> airfoil profile, attached via flat head machine screws/bolts, at each
>>> rib.
>>> There is no indication of wood or aluminum for leading edge skin. Since
>>> my
>>> top wings have aluminum, and I am comfortable working with it I was
>>> leaning toward skinning it with aluminum.
>>>
>>> Preference would be to follow plans, which would be to make up an
>>> airfoil
>>> shaped spar. How did you guys do this?
>>>
>>> I have a picture (not my plane, but same exact kind of shaped piece) as
>>> an
>>> example of what I think I need.
>>>
>>> Any help would be appreciated.
>>>
>>> Jim
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Leading airfoil shape-- scalloped back edge |
Here's pics of mine.
Cut strips of a kitty litter bottle, or can use clorox bottle. Staple thru
it. when dry pull off the strips. Glue doesn't stick to the strips.
walt evans
NX140DL
"No one ever learned anything by talking"
Ben Franklin
----- Original Message -----
From: "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 4:44 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Leading airfoil shape-- scalloped back edge
>
> I don't think anywhere in the plans it calls out to scallop the skin.
> It was said that just the straight trailing edge of the thin ply pulls
> down nicely when covered.
> If you stiffen the trailing edge you'll create a step.
> Mine came out very well un scalloped and unsupported
> walt evans
> NX140DL
>
> "No one ever learned anything by talking"
> Ben Franklin
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tim Willis" <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 8:39 AM
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Leading airfoil shape-- scalloped back edge
>
>
>>
>>
>> While we are discussing putting thin plywood on the face of the wings to
>> shape the airfoil, what about the scalloped rear edge of any such
>> plywood skins?
>> I know this is a long way in sophistication from Mother's Oats stuff
>> first used by BP, but is it a real improvment? What does it really do?
>> I understand the concept of the fabric lifting between the scallops while
>> in flight, but what do the scallops really do?
>>
>> I plan to put 1/16" or 1.5mm ply skin on the airfoil face, but I'd like
>> to avoid effecting these scallops unless they really change performance.
>> Your comments, pls.
>>
>> (I hope I am being clear enough in describing this.)
>>
>> Tim in central TX
>>
>> ===========================================
>>>> [EXCERPT-- Tim]
>>>> Don't do it as one big piece.. thought about putting plywood airfoil
>>>> shaped pieces on each rib, with about a one inch square opening for a
>>>> piece of wood, then I could use longeron stock. Would end up lighter,
>>>> could do with jigsaw and files. However it wouldn't provide much
>>>> support
>>>> to the leading edge skin as it would only make contact at each rib.
>>>>
>>>> This is for a GN-1 Biplane, which confuses the issue a little. The top
>>>> wings are complete, they have a .026 aluminum wrapped leading edge with
>>>> a
>>>> square 1" spar that touches the leading edge in two spots the full
>>>> length
>>>> of the wings. (The square part is along the very front of each rib) so
>>>> it
>>>> provides some support.)
>>>>
>>>> The lower wing is what needs the spars, and then to be skinned with
>>>> something. My plans show a single piece of wood shaped to match the
>>>> airfoil profile, attached via flat head machine screws/bolts, at each
>>>> rib.
>>>> There is no indication of wood or aluminum for leading edge skin. Since
>>>> my
>>>> top wings have aluminum, and I am comfortable working with it I was
>>>> leaning toward skinning it with aluminum.
>>>>
>>>> Preference would be to follow plans, which would be to make up an
>>>> airfoil
>>>> shaped spar. How did you guys do this?
>>>>
>>>> I have a picture (not my plane, but same exact kind of shaped piece) as
>>>> an
>>>> example of what I think I need.
>>>>
>>>> Any help would be appreciated.
>>>>
>>>> Jim
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gene Rambo" <GeneRambo(at)msn.com> |
Who do we have in the Greensboro area? I will be there tomorrow, and
then Greenville-Spartanburg on Thursday. I'd like to visit anyone in
those areas if possible.
Gene
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Leading airfoil shape-- scalloped back edge |
In a message dated 11/12/2007 7:41:07 AM Central Standard Time,
timothywillis(at)earthlink.net writes:
While we are discussing putting thin plywood on the face of the wings to
shape the airfoil, what about the scalloped rear edge of any such plywood skins?
I know this is a long way in sophistication from Mother's Oats stuff first
used by BP, but is it a real improvment? What does it really do? I understand
the concept of the fabric lifting between the scallops while in flight, but
what do the scallops really do?
Tim,
The scallops are not needed in the 1/16" plywood leading edge material. It
doesn't do anything. When the fabric is shrunk to spec., it pulls the aft edge
of the plywood down very nicely. Cutting scallops DOES require much more
work. I don't believe the fabric ever lifts between the ribs, however, the only
time the fabric could possibly lift between the ribs, might be in a very high
G load maneuver...probably more than the airframe can even handle. Stick to
the plans, and 'Git 'er done' !!
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Kraut" <brian.kraut(at)engalt.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Leading airfoil shape-- wood vs. metal |
The GN-1 plans show .013" aluminum sheet on the leading edge. The aluminum
will cost less and be easier to install. Aluminum leading edges also get
dented up a lot easier than the plywood. Any opinions on which is better?
Brian Kraut
Engineering Alternatives, Inc.
www.engalt.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Leading airfoil shape-- wood vs. metal |
In a message dated 11/12/2007 9:17:39 PM Central Standard Time,
brian.kraut(at)engalt.com writes:
The GN-1 plans show .013" aluminum sheet on the leading edge. The aluminum
will cost less and be easier to install. Aluminum leading edges also get
dented up a lot easier than the plywood. Any opinions on which is better?
Brian,
I still much prefer the plywood, because I don't think it is any more
difficult to install than aluminum, it is more durable than aluminum - as you
mentioned, and because wood and aluminum have different expansion rates with
temperature changes - which may cause some wavy looks, or loosen the nails in the
aluminum.
Chuck G.
NX770CG
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | List of Contributors |
Each year at the end of the List Fund Raiser, I post a message acknowledging everyone
that so generously made a Contribution to support the Lists. Its sort of
my way of publicly thanking everyone that took a minute to show their appreciation
for the Lists.
Won't you take a moment and assure that your name is on that List of Contributors
(LOC)? As a number of members have pointed out over the years, the List seems
at least - if not a whole lot more - valuable as a building/flying/recreating/entertainment
tool as your typical magazine subscription!
Please take minute and assure that your name is on this year's LOC! Show others
that you appreciate the Lists. Making a Contribution to support the Lists is
fast and easy using your Credit card or Paypal on the Secure Web Site:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
or by popping a personal check in the mail to:
Matt Dralle / Matronics
PO Box 347
Livermore CA 94551-0347
I would like to thank everyone that has so generously made a Contribution thus
far in this year's List Fund Raiser! Remember that its YOUR support that keeps
these Lists going and improving! Don't forget to include a little comment about
how the Lists have helped you!
Best regards,
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | HelsperSew(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Leading airfoil shape-- scalloped back edge |
Guys,
Since I tried to "make it better" by supporting and nailing down the aft
edge of the 1/16" plywood, I think I will cut the scalloped edge, simply because
it will be easier to cut away my "improvement"! This was done before I
discovered this list. Very helpful!!!
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Leading airfoil shape-- scalloped back edge |
| From: | "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinalhealth.com> |
Neat idea with the Clorox bottle strips, Walt. I cut thin strips of
spruce and nailed through them, and they were a pain in the butt. They
split easily, and I had to use waxed paper to keep the glue from
sticking to them. Your idea is much better.
Jack Phillips
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of walt
evans
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 6:03 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Leading airfoil shape-- scalloped back
edge
Here's pics of mine.
Cut strips of a kitty litter bottle, or can use clorox bottle. Staple
thru
it. when dry pull off the strips. Glue doesn't stick to the strips.
walt evans
NX140DL
"No one ever learned anything by talking"
Ben Franklin
----- Original Message -----
From: "walt evans" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 4:44 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Leading airfoil shape-- scalloped back
edge
>
> I don't think anywhere in the plans it calls out to scallop the skin.
> It was said that just the straight trailing edge of the thin ply pulls
> down nicely when covered.
> If you stiffen the trailing edge you'll create a step.
> Mine came out very well un scalloped and unsupported
> walt evans
> NX140DL
>
> "No one ever learned anything by talking"
> Ben Franklin
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tim Willis" <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 8:39 AM
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Leading airfoil shape-- scalloped back
edge
>
>
>>
>>
>> While we are discussing putting thin plywood on the face of the wings
to
>> shape the airfoil, what about the scalloped rear edge of any such
>> plywood skins?
>> I know this is a long way in sophistication from Mother's Oats stuff
>> first used by BP, but is it a real improvment? What does it really
do?
>> I understand the concept of the fabric lifting between the scallops
while
>> in flight, but what do the scallops really do?
>>
>> I plan to put 1/16" or 1.5mm ply skin on the airfoil face, but I'd
like
>> to avoid effecting these scallops unless they really change
performance.
>> Your comments, pls.
>>
>> (I hope I am being clear enough in describing this.)
>>
>> Tim in central TX
>>
>> ===========================================
>>>> [EXCERPT-- Tim]
>>>> Don't do it as one big piece.. thought about putting plywood
airfoil
>>>> shaped pieces on each rib, with about a one inch square opening for
a
>>>> piece of wood, then I could use longeron stock. Would end up
lighter,
>>>> could do with jigsaw and files. However it wouldn't provide much
>>>> support
>>>> to the leading edge skin as it would only make contact at each rib.
>>>>
>>>> This is for a GN-1 Biplane, which confuses the issue a little. The
top
>>>> wings are complete, they have a .026 aluminum wrapped leading edge
with
>>>> a
>>>> square 1" spar that touches the leading edge in two spots the full
>>>> length
>>>> of the wings. (The square part is along the very front of each rib)
so
>>>> it
>>>> provides some support.)
>>>>
>>>> The lower wing is what needs the spars, and then to be skinned with
>>>> something. My plans show a single piece of wood shaped to match the
>>>> airfoil profile, attached via flat head machine screws/bolts, at
each
>>>> rib.
>>>> There is no indication of wood or aluminum for leading edge skin.
Since
>>>> my
>>>> top wings have aluminum, and I am comfortable working with it I was
>>>> leaning toward skinning it with aluminum.
>>>>
>>>> Preference would be to follow plans, which would be to make up an
>>>> airfoil
>>>> shaped spar. How did you guys do this?
>>>>
>>>> I have a picture (not my plane, but same exact kind of shaped
piece) as
>>>> an
>>>> example of what I think I need.
>>>>
>>>> Any help would be appreciated.
>>>>
>>>> Jim
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
_________________________________________________
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please notify
the sender
Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese - Nederlands - Norsk
- Portuguese
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Leading airfoil shape-- wood vs. metal |
| From: | "Phillips, Jack" <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinalhealth.com> |
Chuck is absolutely right. Aluminum is actually more difficult to
install than the plywood, adds nothing to the strength and gets dented
easier. It is also heavier. Other than all those items, it is great.
I seriously considered aluminum for my leading edge. I used aluminum
trailing edges and wish I had used wood like the plans show. Build it
per the plans and you won't be sorry. "Improve it" and it might be
better, but probably will be heavier and more difficult to build.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 10:25 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Leading airfoil shape-- wood vs. metal
In a message dated 11/12/2007 9:17:39 PM Central Standard Time,
brian.kraut(at)engalt.com writes:
The GN-1 plans show .013" aluminum sheet on the leading edge.
The aluminum will cost less and be easier to install. Aluminum leading
edges also get dented up a lot easier than the plywood. Any opinions on
which is better?
Brian,
I still much prefer the plywood, because I don't think it is any more
difficult to install than aluminum, it is more durable than aluminum -
as you mentioned, and because wood and aluminum have different expansion
rates with temperature changes - which may cause some wavy looks, or
loosen the nails in the aluminum.
Chuck G.
NX770CG
_____
See what's new at
our
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
===========
_________________________________________________
This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privilege
d, proprietary
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please
October 21, 2007 - November 13, 2007
Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-gf