I tried using a variety of hand planes and couldn't get something consistent enough
to be able to attach plywood the full length of it and have it smooth enough
for a leading edge.
Ended up getting a custom molding shop to make a cutter to do the work. Then had
two perfect pieces made. Cost about $240, but its exactly right. (I am building
a biplane variant of the piet, and it was for the lower wing's leading edges,
so the size is a bit smaller, else I would point to the shop that did it for
me, as most the cost was the custom cutter.)
Have Okume plywood from Boulter's ($23 a sheet) to cover it, and hope to get that
done soon as part of my Christmas break.
JimD
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=218225#218225
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Bill Church" <eng(at)canadianrogers.com>
Subject:
TV Program
Date:
Dec 08, 2008
Alan,
The scenes you mentioned were, indeed, featuring a Pietenpol Air Camper
(magically flying a dozen or so years before it was even designed). A couple
of years ago, the owner/pilot, Shawn Wolk posted a message to the list,
saying that he was asked to fly his Piet for the filming of this documentary
film. Shawn's Piet is one of (if not THE) oldest Pietenpols flying in Canada
- originally built in 1933. Here's a couple of links to the postings:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?t=17317
<http://www.matronics.com/searching/getmsg_script.cgi?INDEX=48481057?KEYS=wo
lk?LISTNAME=Pietenpol?HITNUMBER=14?SERIAL=08480120908?SHOWBUTTONS=YES>
and
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?t=18380
Bill C.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 08, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Re: Leading edge material
Bill, that half round idea is just that, an idea. I haven't settled on anything
yet. Open to any/all ideas as always. I do have another question about leading
edges that I will post soon. Thanks for the info.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 08, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
More leading edge questions/ideas
Well, thinking about leading edges and how to make them, led me to my half-
round idea in my other post. I am now wondering why we need such an item. N
ow hold on, let me explain. It seems to me the way the Piet leading edge is
made now is so that all the ribs are tied together at the front and so the
re is a nice lead-in for the airflow over the wing. This is then covered by
the 1/16" ply wood.
-
I see most, if not all, go all the way up to the front spar with the ply. W
hy so far? I can understand wanting something on that frontal area other th
en just fabric, but to go so far back seems a bit much. I guess if I did no
t go that far back, that maybe the fabric would pull the ply wood down some
at-the back edge, giving a little sunken in area between the ribs, but t
he fabric sags between the ribs anyway.
-
Thinking about this plywood and the-leading edge itself, I wonder why bot
h? Why not wrap the ribs with the ply only and allow the ply to form the le
ading edge shape/form? Would this not be a strong enough frontal area? Woul
d this not tie all the rib fronts together properly? -Picture what you ma
y have now, and picture removing only the hard leading edge inside the ply.
What has changed? What have you lost?- Maybe some type of conncetor piec
e(s) can be made to go between each rib at the front, or a-flat piece att
ached to the front of all the ribs, then wrap the plywood to form the leadi
ng edge.
-
I know this may seem odd to some, but I like to hear what you guys think. I
am considering this path for my leading edge construction and wonder if it
makes sense. Thanks.
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Rob Stapleton, Jr." <foto(at)alaska.net>
Subject:
Anchorage School Looking for Airplane Project
Date:
Dec 08, 2008
If anyone has a project that they would like to donate on this list please
contact me. The Begich Middle School here in Anchorage wants to start,
build, rebuild or repair an aircraft project as part of a hands on aviation
project in conjunction with the local Chapter 42 EAA, and the FAA.
According to the FAA Aviation Education outreach contact that I have any
donation is tax deductible.
I am building a Pietenpol and can advise them of their progress as I make
mine.
Thanks!
Rob
EAA Chapter 42 Newsletter Editor
Anchorage, AK
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Scott Knowlton <flyingscott_k(at)hotmail.com>
Subject:
Anchorage School Looking for Airplane Project
Date:
Dec 08, 2008
Another option for the school if they have no luck with a donation would be
the Primary Glider. Plans and kits from Wag Aero are well supported.
Scott Knowlton
From: foto(at)alaska.netTo: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.comSubject: Pietenpol-Lis
t: Anchorage School Looking for Airplane ProjectDate: Mon=2C 8 Dec 2008 09:
If anyone has a project that they would like to donate on this list please
contact me. The Begich Middle School here in Anchorage wants to start=2C bu
ild=2C rebuild or repair an aircraft project as part of a hands on aviation
project in conjunction with the local Chapter 42 EAA=2C and the FAA.
According to the FAA Aviation Education outreach contact that I have any do
nation is tax deductible.
I am building a Pietenpol and can advise them of their progress as I make m
ine.
Thanks!
Rob
EAA Chapter 42 Newsletter Editor
Anchorage=2C AK
_________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Gary Boothe" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net>
Subject:
More leading edge questions/ideas
Date:
Dec 08, 2008
Michael,
Interesting questions. Reaching waaaay back to my A&P training, I recall
discussion about how important it is to maintain the leading edge profile,
plus offer sturdy design (can you imagine the effect of a tear in the fabric
on the leading edge?). The Taylorcrafts (& Cubs and Aeronca's too, I
imagine) used wood spars, aluminum ribs, and a thin sheet of aluminum over
the nose of the ribs, from the bottom of the spar to the top of the spar,
covered with fabric.
I guess aluminum could be used on a Piet, but I'm not sure how it could be
best attached.
Gary Boothe
Cool, Ca.
Pietenpol
WW Corvair Conversion
Tail done, working on fuselage (endless metal parts!)
(12 ribs down.)
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael
Perez
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 9:48 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: More leading edge questions/ideas
Well, thinking about leading edges and how to make them, led me to my
half-round idea in my other post. I am now wondering why we need such an
item. Now hold on, let me explain. It seems to me the way the Piet leading
edge is made now is so that all the ribs are tied together at the front and
so there is a nice lead-in for the airflow over the wing. This is then
covered by the 1/16" ply wood.
I see most, if not all, go all the way up to the front spar with the ply.
Why so far? I can understand wanting something on that frontal area other
then just fabric, but to go so far back seems a bit much. I guess if I did
not go that far back, that maybe the fabric would pull the ply wood down
some at the back edge, giving a little sunken in area between the ribs, but
the fabric sags between the ribs anyway.
Thinking about this plywood and the leading edge itself, I wonder why both?
Why not wrap the ribs with the ply only and allow the ply to form the
leading edge shape/form? Would this not be a strong enough frontal area?
Would this not tie all the rib fronts together properly? Picture what you
may have now, and picture removing only the hard leading edge inside the
ply. What has changed? What have you lost? Maybe some type of conncetor
piece(s) can be made to go between each rib at the front, or a flat piece
attached to the front of all the ribs, then wrap the plywood to form the
leading edge.
I know this may seem odd to some, but I like to hear what you guys think. I
am considering this path for my leading edge construction and wonder if it
makes sense. Thanks.
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Scott Knowlton <flyingscott_k(at)hotmail.com>
Subject:
Anchorage School Looking for Airplane Project
Date:
Dec 08, 2008
My mistake=2C kits are supplied by Wicks.
Scott K
From: flyingscott_k(at)hotmail.comTo: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.comSubject: RE:
Pietenpol-List: Anchorage School Looking for Airplane ProjectDate: Mon=2C
Another option for the school if they have no luck with a donation would be
the Primary Glider. Plans and kits from Wag Aero are well supported. Scot
t Knowlton
From: foto(at)alaska.netTo: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.comSubject: Pietenpol-Lis
t: Anchorage School Looking for Airplane ProjectDate: Mon=2C 8 Dec 2008 09:
If anyone has a project that they would like to donate on this list please
contact me. The Begich Middle School here in Anchorage wants to start=2C bu
ild=2C rebuild or repair an aircraft project as part of a hands on aviation
project in conjunction with the local Chapter 42 EAA=2C and the FAA.
According to the FAA Aviation Education outreach contact that I have any do
nation is tax deductible.
I am building a Pietenpol and can advise them of their progress as I make m
ine.
Thanks!
Rob
EAA Chapter 42 Newsletter Editor
Anchorage=2C AK
ww.matronics.com/contribution
st">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
ronics.com
Win a trip with your 3 best buddies. Enter today.
_________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 08, 2008
From:
Owen Davies <owen5819(at)comcast.net>
Subject:
Re: More leading edge questions/ideas
> Thinking about this plywood and the leading edge itself, I wonder why
both?
Wouldn't surprise me if it was because the original leading edge was
made from cardboard. Given how many other airplanes use only the plywood
D-cell, it should be plenty strong enough.
Note that my opinion is worth exactly what you paid for it. I'm not an
engineer or an A&P.
Owen
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Bill Church" <eng(at)canadianrogers.com>
Subject:
More leading edge questions/ideas
Date:
Dec 08, 2008
Michael,
The leading edge is an important part of the airfoil. Change the leading
edge profile, and you change the airfoil. Change the airfoil and you change
the performance of the plane.
So, while it may be possible to build your ribs with a full airfoil shape
(as opposed to the flat front ribs, with a seperate leading edge, per the
plans), and then wrap the front section with plywood, you would still want
to put something behind that plywood, for strength and resistance to impact
(like say, flying into a bird). This could be, like you say, some kind of
connector piece between each rib. So now, the question becomes "Why would
you want to do this?" Sounds like a whole bunch of extra work, with
absolutely no obvious benefit (unless I'm missing something here).
Usually design changes like this are investigated and carried out by someone
with a strong background in aircraft design. That ain't me. I think this is
an example of "Do what you know, and know what you do." I wouldn't do this
one.
Bill C.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 08, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
More leading edge questions/ideas
I do not believe, that wrapping plywood around the front of the ribs-chan
ges the shape from having a leading edge in there. I believe if the plywood
is epoxied to the bottom of the rib, then bent up around to the top and ep
oxied the whole way to the front spar, that would automatically form a nice
flowing leading edge that blends perfectly with the bottom and top angles
of the rib cap strips. (Preform the plywood-somewhat like we did our rib
cap strips.) Epoxy this plywood to each rib, every 12" or so, (rib spacing)
the same way, and I would bet it will be as strong as having the extra len
gth of leading edge wood strip in there. Impact resistance I wonder about.
Anything can happen, but if we planned for everything then our planes would
be made of sheet steel. Has anyone had a bird strike with their Piet.? (Or
any other in air impact? That would be quite the story!
-
Again, not trying to argue, just sharing my thoughts. I may make up a full
size mock up with my spare ribs and try to put this together and see how it
measures up. I am curious to see how strong 1/16" plywood bent like this s
tands up to frontal abuse.
-
Thanks Bill.
-
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 08, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Re: More leading edge questions/ideas
Thanks Owen. I wondered if any other planes may use this open D cell type leading
edge. My ribs are built to plans so I have the flat up front for the leading
edge to attach to. I am curious if I can just wrap with the plywood and not
use the leading edge piece. Bill C. alluded to making full shape ribs, this is
not my plan. I would use the ribs as is, with the plywood only. Curious...
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Thomas Bernie <tsbernie(at)earthlink.net>
Subject:
Re: More leading edge questions/ideas
Date:
Dec 08, 2008
Guys,
I did the aluminum method -- leading edge material from AS. Very
difficult getting it formed around the leading edge, but cargo straps
helped. Attached with small PK screws.
Regards,
Tom Bernie
Gloucester, Mass
On Dec 8, 2008, at 1:28 PM, Gary Boothe wrote:
> Michael,
>
> Interesting questions. Reaching waaaay back to my A&P training, I
> recall discussion about how important it is to maintain the leading
> edge profile, plus offer sturdy design (can you imagine the effect
> of a tear in the fabric on the leading edge?). The Taylorcrafts (&
> Cubs and Aeronca=92s too, I imagine) used wood spars, aluminum ribs,
> and a thin sheet of aluminum over the nose of the ribs, from the
> bottom of the spar to the top of the spar, covered with fabric.
>
> I guess aluminum could be used on a Piet, but I=92m not sure how it
> could be best attached.
>
> Gary Boothe
> Cool, Ca.
> Pietenpol
> WW Corvair Conversion
> Tail done, working on fuselage (endless metal parts!)
> (12 ribs down=85)
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> ] On Behalf Of Michael Perez
> Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 9:48 AM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: More leading edge questions/ideas
>
> Well, thinking about leading edges and how to make them, led me to
> my half-round idea in my other post. I am now wondering why we need
> such an item. Now hold on, let me explain. It seems to me the way
> the Piet leading edge is made now is so that all the ribs are tied
> together at the front and so there is a nice lead-in for the airflow
> over the wing. This is then covered by the 1/16" ply wood.
>
> I see most, if not all, go all the way up to the front spar with the
> ply. Why so far? I can understand wanting something on that frontal
> area other then just fabric, but to go so far back seems a bit much.
> I guess if I did not go that far back, that maybe the fabric would
> pull the ply wood down some at the back edge, giving a little sunken
> in area between the ribs, but the fabric sags between the ribs anyway.
>
> Thinking about this plywood and the leading edge itself, I wonder
> why both? Why not wrap the ribs with the ply only and allow the ply
> to form the leading edge shape/form? Would this not be a strong
> enough frontal area? Would this not tie all the rib fronts together
> properly? Picture what you may have now, and picture removing only
> the hard leading edge inside the ply. What has changed? What have
> you lost? Maybe some type of conncetor piece(s) can be made to go
> between each rib at the front, or a flat piece attached to the front
> of all the ribs, then wrap the plywood to form the leading edge.
>
> I know this may seem odd to some, but I like to hear what you guys
> think. I am considering this path for my leading edge construction
> and wonder if it makes sense. Thanks.
>
Thomas Bernie
tsbe
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Jim Markle" <jim_markle(at)mindspring.com>
Subject:
Leading edge shaping....
Date:
Dec 08, 2008
With a couple of cuts on a table saw (2 on top, 2 on bottom) the LE can
really easily be preshaped for sanding and planing. Additionally, I lowered
the saw blade and cut one last notch on the top surface, about 1/16" deep to
allow the 1/16" ply to fit into.
Attached pic isn't too good but maybe the idea comes across. Seemed like a
really simple way to give the ply a spot to attach and keep a nice clean
airfoil (like my flying skills will require a perfect airfoil!).
I laminted the entire LE from scraps of Spruce as can be seen in the dark
glue line.
My .02
Jim in Pryor OK
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Michael Silvius" <silvius(at)gwi.net>
Subject:
Re: More leading edge questions/ideas
Date:
Dec 08, 2008
Michael:
FWIW, my Flaconar F-12 is done just like that and cruises just about
twice as fast as the Piet.
Michael in Maine
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Perez
Well, thinking about leading edges and how to make them, led me to my
half-round idea in my other post. I am now wondering why we need such an
item. Now hold on, let me explain. It seems to me the way the Piet
leading edge is made now is so that all the ribs are tied together at
the front and so there is a nice lead-in for the airflow over the wing.
This is then covered by the 1/16" ply wood.
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Bill Church" <eng(at)canadianrogers.com>
Subject:
More leading edge questions/ideas
Date:
Dec 08, 2008
So, how would one maintain the shape of the leading edge plywood if it is
unsupported?
I agree that the plywood would automatically form "a shape". Smooth, yes,
but would that shape be the shape you want/need? Without a former to hold
the shape, you're at the mercy of however the wood bends. That was the
reason why I mentioned the full profile wing rib - then you would have
something for the wood to wrap around.
I'm not trying to argue either. I just don't see any advantage to what
you're proposing. I would imagine that cost savings (if any) would be
minimal. It definitely sounds like more work to me.
Just a side note here, but the original Pietenpol plans do not have plywood
sheeting on the bottom of the rib leading edge - just on the top side. Not
sure what the requirements are in the US, but up in Canada, if the ply was
installed top and bottom, back to the spar, a builder would have to have a
separate inspection done before closing in that area (like a box beam) in
addition to the pre-cover inspection. That extra inspection will cost the
builder a few hundred bucks.
If you do build a mock-up to test the bent plywood for impact resistance,
remember to throw the seagull at the leading edge at about 75 mph.
Bill C.
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael
Perez
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 2:14 PM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: More leading edge questions/ideas
I do not believe, that wrapping plywood around the front of the ribs changes
the shape from having a leading edge in there. I believe if the plywood is
epoxied to the bottom of the rib, then bent up around to the top and epoxied
the whole way to the front spar, that would automatically form a nice
flowing leading edge that blends perfectly with the bottom and top angles of
the rib cap strips. (Preform the plywood somewhat like we did our rib cap
strips.) Epoxy this plywood to each rib, every 12" or so, (rib spacing) the
same way, and I would bet it will be as strong as having the extra length of
leading edge wood strip in there. Impact resistance I wonder about. Anything
can happen, but if we planned for everything then our planes would be made
of sheet steel. Has anyone had a bird strike with their Piet.? (Or any other
in air impact? That would be quite the story!
Again, not trying to argue, just sharing my thoughts. I may make up a full
size mock up with my spare ribs and try to put this together and see how it
measures up. I am curious to see how strong 1/16" plywood bent like this
stands up to frontal abuse.
Thanks Bill.
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Steve Singleton" <slsingleton(at)cvalley.net>
Subject:
A-65 A75 parts for sale
Date:
Dec 08, 2008
Since we sold our Champ and i'm going to concentrate on building the
Piet i'm going to sell some spare motor parts i have. I'll be useing a
Model A so want to sell these to help finance the Piet. If anyone is
interested in 4 good steel cylinders (good cores)only have the steel
valves, a good tapered shaft prop hub, a set of bushings for a McCaulley
prop, Crankshaft and camshaft gears, The prop hub is good, we had to
replace the crank and was able to find a good flanged crank so don't
need the hub. My A/P motor guy felt that these clyinders would just need
Honed along with checking the seats and guides. I'm sure i have some
more misc. parts but will need to look. I'm located in northern MO.
Would gladly trade for Birch plywood for the Piet. I still have the
Crank but it would have to go twenty under to be any good. Since i'm
into the Piet i thought i'd make these available to the Piet crowd
first. Let me know if you'd like to make an offer on these. I can email
pics. 660 565 2936----Cell 660 214 0029, please leave a message if i
don't answer. Steve Singleton
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 08, 2008
From:
"walt" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Subject:
Re: to fly or build?
Boyce,
I'm only responding to your email cause I saw yours first.
I've been a PPSEL since 1966.
Didn't get into the building thing till my kids were grown.
And I have 3 of the greatest kids in the world.
Now I have a beautiful Pietenpol in the hanger that I can fly anytime
I'm divorced, and my Ex left, so I raised my kids from young, and with
all the housework and grocerys, and overtime, I missed the time I should
have had with my kids.
Now that I have 4 going on 5 Grandchildren. I cherish my time with my
grandkids.
Guess my point is,,,there's plenty of time to build when the kids are
grown.
Don't Plan time away to build,,,,Only build when there is nothing else
to do, or the kids are asleep and the wife is shopping.
POINT...You can never relive time with your kids!
If I came off like a nut,,sorry.
I'm done with my soapbox.....:^)
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: RAMPEYBOY(at)aol.com
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 7:52 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: to fly or build?
I'm in a similar position as you. I have three kids, 4,3, 1 yrs
old. I have been building a Mustang II kit since 2004. I'm about 60%
done with airframe. I keep thinking if I had it to do over, I'd just buy
a 152, and enjoy it while I can. I honestly don't know how many times I
will pass the medical, and at the rate I'm going, I may not even get the
plane done before my medical is no longer valid.
The kids are too young to be of any help. The wife though she said
she was all in to begin with, is not really all in. Even though I
explained I needed to work on it 10-15 hours per week (which I have yet
to do), she had no apparent idea what 10-15 hours per week meant. In
fact if I do 8 hours a week, she starts getting grumpy.
So, not to rain on your parade, but I think if I were to do it
again, I'd buy a flying airplane, and just enjoy it. On the other hand,
you are well along with the Pietenpol, since you're in this deep, go
ahead and finish it. You did mention IFR, you're not of course planning
on IFR in the Pietenpol? Good luck with whatever decision you make.
Boyce
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 08, 2008
From:
Ben Charvet <bcharvet(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject:
Re: Dacron fabric, 1.8 oz
I got mine from Wicks, just a few months ago. 7 inches wide, non
certified 1.7 oz. Try this link:
http://www.wicksaircraft.com/catalog/product_detail.php?pid=12003
The part # is SF104ANON, $5.85 a yard
Ben Charvet
John Franklin wrote:
>
> Piet list,
>
> Does anyone know of a source for 1.8 oz dacron fabric in widths greater than
60" ? Aircraft Spruce only has it in 60" width, which isn't quite wide enough
for the wing chord on my GN-1. I'm pretty sure Michael Cuy covered his Piet
with 1.8 oz fabric.
>
> Regards,
> John F.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 08, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
More leading edge questions/ideas
I believe the top cap strip and the bottom cap strip of the ribs, when the
ply wood is epoxied and held in place, will automatically form the leading
edge curve. We are not talking about a large unsupported area here. It is o
nly the space between the top and bottom cap strips, forward. The angles of
these strips dictate how the plywood curves around the front top and botto
m.- This gets repeated every 12" or so across the entire wing. I would th
ink that would be pretty strong. If at the front of the ribs, say you have
a 2.5" flat area as I do. (top cap strip to bottom cap strip.) If you take
a piece of plywood and secure it along the top cap strip of the rib from th
e spar forward, as you would anyway, then bend it around that 2.5" flat, an
d secure it to the bottom cap strip a few inches along the rib, how differe
nt can the shape be? The cap strip angles, dictate that curve. We all have
the plans, so we could slide the ply forward/back to get the curve
that matches the prints, yes? Now you have this plywood bent so that-it
curves out forward into the on coming air. What type of impact will be requ
ired to smash it backwards? I am not sure, I think whatever hits it may jus
t come apart.
-
If no one has had a midair in a Pietenpol of any sort, how do we know how a
normal leading edge holds up? If a seagull were to hit a Piet at 75 MPH, w
hat happens to it?- (the leading edge/wing, not the bird.) I would think
it would not be much different then a plywood only leading edge. If there i
s no data/info. on the current leading edge design and midair impacts, how
do you argue with a new design being not as good? How can one or the other
be proved better/worse if there is no current info. on hand to compare? Wha
t if, just maybe, that leading edge piece is overkill and not needed...
-
What one may do is make a mock up of each set up and hit them from the fron
t with a seagull size hammer until they break the leading edge of each and
make notes on how/when they break.
-
My point for thinking about this was the weight savings in omitting the lea
ding edge wood, as well as foregoing-the work required to form the leadin
g edge and drilling, bolting, nailing, (more weight) etc., it in place.-
Whatever work/time was involved to make and install that leading edge is no
w gone. Just go right to the wrapping of the ply.- No extra work involved
here. If one feels it necessary, I guess they could make that leading edge
and use it as a form for the ply, then slide it out once the plywood is se
t. These small savings in weight along the way all add up in the end.
-
You say the Piet. plans show no ply under the ribs for the leading edge wra
p, only on top. My Riblett plan is the same. I had no intention on going to
the spar on the bottom. I was wondering why it is even necessary to go all
the way to the spar on top? Seems like a waste once you have that good fro
ntal area covered to continue on back so far. If I were to go this non-lead
ing edge ply route, I would only wrap the ply as far as needed along the bo
ttom to get enough epoxy area to hold it.
-
-
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
RAMPEYBOY(at)aol.com
Date:
Dec 08, 2008
Subject:
Re: to fly or build?
Thanks Walt! I guess that's why after 4 yrs of building from a kit I'm only
60% done with the airframe. I try to put everything else first, as frustrating
as that feels now, later on I'll be glad I did. I average about 15 hours per
month of airplane work. I may go three weeks without touching it, then put
in a couple long days in the shop. Definitely not the best way of getting it
built, but it is the best I can do for now. And, I will say I enjoy the work.
But, if I were to do it over, I'd probably buy a flying plane so that I could
enjoy it now. Being as far into the project as I am, I will see it through.
Anyone else have stories of there builds and the obstacles they ran into?
Boyce
In a message dated 12/8/2008 5:54:13 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
waltdak(at)verizon.net writes:
Boyce,
I'm only responding to your email cause I saw yours first.
I've been a PPSEL since 1966.
Didn't get into the building thing till my kids were grown.
And I have 3 of the greatest kids in the world.
Now I have a beautiful Pietenpol in the hanger that I can fly anytime
I'm divorced, and my Ex left, so I raised my kids from young, and with all
the housework and grocerys, and overtime, I missed the time I should have had
with my kids.
Now that I have 4 going on 5 Grandchildren. I cherish my time with my
grandkids.
Guess my point is,,,there's plenty of time to build when the kids are grown.
Don't Plan time away to build,,,,Only build when there is nothing else to
do, or the kids are asleep and the wife is shopping.
POINT...You can never relive time with your kids!
If I came off like a nut,,sorry.
I'm done with my soapbox.....:^)
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: _RAMPEYBOY(at)aol.com_ (mailto:RAMPEYBOY(at)aol.com)
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 7:52 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: to fly or build?
I'm in a similar position as you. I have three kids, 4,3, 1 yrs old. I have
been building a Mustang II kit since 2004. I'm about 60% done with airframe.
I keep thinking if I had it to do over, I'd just buy a 152, and enjoy it
while I can. I honestly don't know how many times I will pass the medical, and
at
the rate I'm going, I may not even get the plane done before my medical is
no longer valid.
The kids are too young to be of any help. The wife though she said she
was all in to begin with, is not really all in. Even though I explained I
needed to work on it 10-15 hours per week (which I have yet to do), she had no
apparent idea what 10-15 hours per week meant. In fact if I do 8 hours a week,
she starts getting grumpy.
So, not to rain on your parade, but I think if I were to do it again,
I'd buy a flying airplane, and just enjoy it. On the other hand, you are well
along with the Pietenpol, since you're in this deep, go ahead and finish it.
You did mention IFR, you're not of course planning on IFR in the Pietenpol?
Good luck with whatever decision you make.
Boyce
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/chref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.matronics.com/Na
vigator?Pietenpol-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
AMsafetyC(at)aol.com
Date:
Dec 08, 2008
Subject:
Re: to fly or build?
I think we all have obstacles to deal with or overcome from family and
social obligation discouraging and un encouraging significant others, Yard work,
home maintenance, work and travel schedules and the ever popular financial
dilemma, changing medical conditions and a host of other things. I think if you
can name I am certain someone has experienced it, even my favorite Builders
block.
I stay on the project by and through contact with friends I have made on the
board, along with the inspirational pictures I have hanging in my shop and
the time I get to visit other builders at Brodhead and on business trips.
Most inspiring is my grandson of 4 years old who has claimed the front pit
as his seat and knowing the back seat belongs to his poppop and that one day he
and I will fly our completed project together!
Just something about that is enough to keep me going, building against all
the obstacles life continues to throw at me. And when its all said and done I
still get the joy of the build experience and a great hand made airplane which
beats the hell out of anything else I can imagine.
John
**************Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and
favorite sites in one place. Try it now.
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
AMsafetyC(at)aol.com
Date:
Dec 08, 2008
Subject:
Re: timely topics
While I am getting ready to do some metal work, my spars are on order and I
need to get my varnishing going the cloth part is on my list of soon
considerations as far as purchases and applications. To that end does anyone have
any
suggestions for material amounts to order for cthe covering process even if
its an opening order. I just want an idea of what to expect to encounter in
the not too distant future.
I will be on vacation from December 13 through the 5th of January 2009 that
means a bunch of 10 hour build days will soon begin and I am getting ready for
buildapalooza 08. So I been making contacts ordering stuff and planning
the next almost 3 weeks of building allowing 4 hours for Christmas and New Years
combined. I figure that should be more than enough time off.
John
**************Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and
favorite sites in one place. Try it now.
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject:
Anchorage School Looking for Airplane Project
Date:
Dec 08, 2008
Rob;
Is this school looking for a project in Alaska? It makes a huge difference!
Unless you know of someone in the trucking business or who is just plumb helpful
and wants to drag a trailer up the highway, getting something from "here" to "there"
could be a problem.
Reason I ask is that there is an "Aerial" project in Santa Fe, New Mexico that
may be a candidate. The "Aerial" is basically a biplane GN-1 and is the brainchild
of Chad Wille. It has larger tail surface areas and of course two sets of wings.
Let me know if you want more info on this. The project consists of completed
fuselage, tail surfaces, and wings... no covering, nothing firewall forward, no
main landing gear.
Oscar Zuniga
Air Camper NX41CC
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject:
to fly or build?
Date:
Dec 08, 2008
No discussion as far as I'm concerned; if it comes to a choice between
getting a dozen hours of dual instrument time or continuing a Piet project build
in your annual budget, build wins hands-down. You can always go back and brush
up
on IFR skills but building and flying something like a Piet is something that you
may never do again in your life but will always value and remember as long as
you live. And sometimes you will even be introduced (by your son, daughter, or
grandchild) as someone who built and flies his own airplane. Talk about an
ice-breaker at parties!
Not to sound like a "top gun" or anything, but earlier this year I was very
fortunate to get time in a EA-6B Prowler simulator at NAS Whidbey Island. I had
not
flown anything with that many instruments or controls in many years, and yet it's
not
about the knobs and dials; it's about your confidence in command of the aircraft.
Did I goof up? Sure; and I was overwhelmed by all the gadgets and procedures,
but
I had stick, rudder, and throttle and all the rest was just gravy. With those
three
controls in VERY familiar places, I was able to fly some pretty decent maneuvers.
I flew simulated instrument approaches, approaches to an aircraft carrier deck,
and
just plain old maneuvers... in an airplane that was about as different from a Piet
as you can get.
There is nothing more valuable than basic, honest flying skills and judgement...
and
the Pietenpol can teach and maintain those skills every minute that you are at
the controls. At 4 gal./hr. fuel consumption and do-it-yourself service, there
is
simply nothing as affordable to own or fly than one of these basic experimentals.
Go hop in a 172 or an Arrow or a Diamond after flying a Piet for a while and it
will
feel like you're flying a leather couch on rails by comparison. And you even get
cabin heat at the pull of a knob, something that Piet pilots wish they had but
can't buy at any price ;o)
Oscar Zuniga
Air Camper NX41CC
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject:
A-65 A75 parts for sale
Date:
Dec 08, 2008
How much are you asking for the Prop hub?
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh, NC
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Steve
Singleton
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 5:50 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: A-65 A75 parts for sale
Since we sold our Champ and i'm going to concentrate on building the Piet
i'm going to sell some spare motor parts i have. I'll be useing a Model A so
want to sell these to help finance the Piet. If anyone is interested in 4
good steel cylinders (good cores)only have the steel valves, a good tapered
shaft prop hub, a set of bushings for a McCaulley prop, Crankshaft and
camshaft gears, The prop hub is good, we had to replace the crank and was
able to find a good flanged crank so don't need the hub. My A/P motor guy
felt that these clyinders would just need Honed along with checking the
seats and guides. I'm sure i have some more misc. parts but will need to
look. I'm located in northern MO. Would gladly trade for Birch plywood for
the Piet. I still have the Crank but it would have to go twenty under to be
any good. Since i'm into the Piet i thought i'd make these available to the
Piet crowd first. Let me know if you'd like to make an offer on these. I can
email pics. 660 565 2936----Cell 660 214 0029, please leave a message if i
don't answer. Steve Singleton
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Clif Dawson" <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject:
Re: to fly or build?
Date:
Dec 08, 2008
Yes, put your money into building. But who says you can't hang around
the
airfield once in a while. Just practice the old " sad puppydog who wants
a ride"
look and maybe someone will take pity on you. :-)
Clif
So, I've been posing this question of hanging it up (temporarily
hopefully) for quite a while now internally. I guess I just needed to
hear it from other people, I don't know why.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Pieterse: doing the math
From:
amsafetyc(at)aol.com
Date:
Dec 09, 2008
I have been working on getting my paperwork in ordrer. Build logs receipts and
costs into a spread sheet. When all of a sudden what I thought cost me a few bucks
and a few hours actually turned out to be more than I estimated. Get ready
here comes the qiuestion: has anyone calculated a material direct purchase cost
per hour of build time logged? I would be curioius to learn your ratio for
comparison purposes. I am wondering if I am working as efficiently and cost effective
as the list average. Not for any particular purppose other than comparison
value is all
John
------Original Message------
From: Oscar Zuniga
Sender: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
ReplyTo: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Dec 8, 2008 9:22 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Anchorage School Looking for Airplane Project
Rob;
Is this school looking for a project in Alaska? It makes a huge difference!
Unless you know of someone in the trucking business or who is just plumb helpful
and wants to drag a trailer up the highway, getting something from "here" to "there"
could be a problem.
Reason I ask is that there is an "Aerial" project in Santa Fe, New Mexico that
may be a candidate. The "Aerial" is basically a biplane GN-1 and is the brainchild
of Chad Wille. It has larger tail surface areas and of course two sets of wings.
Let me know if you want more info on this. The project consists of completed
fuselage, tail surfaces, and wings... no covering, nothing firewall forward, no
main landing gear.
Oscar Zuniga
Air Camper NX41CC
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Rob Stapleton, Jr." <foto(at)alaska.net>
Subject:
Anchorage School Looking for Airplane Project
Date:
Dec 08, 2008
Oscar,
This sounds good. Yes, I have a trucking company (owned by a bunch of
Alaskan pilots) and several air cargo outfits that I can tap into. What are
the details?
Rob Stapleton, Photojournalist
Anchorage, Alaska
907-230-9425
KL2AN
Skype:rob.stapleton.jr
IM Windows Live Messenger: foto(at)alaska.net
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Oscar Zuniga
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 5:23 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Anchorage School Looking for Airplane Project
Rob;
Is this school looking for a project in Alaska? It makes a huge difference!
Unless you know of someone in the trucking business or who is just plumb
helpful
and wants to drag a trailer up the highway, getting something from "here" to
"there"
could be a problem.
Reason I ask is that there is an "Aerial" project in Santa Fe, New Mexico
that
may be a candidate. The "Aerial" is basically a biplane GN-1 and is the
brainchild
of Chad Wille. It has larger tail surface areas and of course two sets of
wings.
Let me know if you want more info on this. The project consists of
completed
fuselage, tail surfaces, and wings... no covering, nothing firewall forward,
no
main landing gear.
Oscar Zuniga
Air Camper NX41CC
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Rob Stapleton, Jr." <foto(at)alaska.net>
Subject:
Anchorage School Looking for Airplane Project
Date:
Dec 08, 2008
Thanks, I will check out the prospects.
RS
Rob Stapleton, Photojournalist
Anchorage, Alaska
907-230-9425
KL2AN
Skype:rob.stapleton.jr
IM Windows Live Messenger: foto(at)alaska.net
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott
Knowlton
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 9:32 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Anchorage School Looking for Airplane Project
My mistake, kits are supplied by Wicks.
Scott K
_____
From: flyingscott_k(at)hotmail.com
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Anchorage School Looking for Airplane Project
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2008 13:16:06 -0500
Another option for the school if they have no luck with a donation would be
the Primary Glider. Plans and kits from Wag Aero are well supported.
Scott Knowlton
_____
From: foto(at)alaska.net
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Anchorage School Looking for Airplane Project
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2008 09:03:17 -0900
If anyone has a project that they would like to donate on this list please
contact me. The Begich Middle School here in Anchorage wants to start,
build, rebuild or repair an aircraft project as part of a hands on aviation
project in conjunction with the local Chapter 42 EAA, and the FAA.
According to the FAA Aviation Education outreach contact that I have any
donation is tax deductible.
I am building a Pietenpol and can advise them of their progress as I make
mine.
Thanks!
Rob
EAA Chapter 42 Newsletter Editor
Anchorage, AK
ww.matronics.com/contribution
st">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
ronics.com
_____
Win a trip with your 3 best buddies. Enter
<http://www.messengerbuddies.ca/?ocid=BUDDYOMATICENCA19> today.
ww.matronics.com/contribution
st">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
ronics.com
_____
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Clif Dawson" <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject:
Re: More leading edge questions/ideas
Date:
Dec 09, 2008
>From what I understand, the leading edge comes out just
fine. The trailing edge, however, gets chewed up pretty bad.
I don't think a true D cell would save all that much weight and
the practical hands on forming would be harder than glueing
a narrow piece of ply to a stick of wood on the nose.
Clif
"Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when
there is nothing left to take away." Antoine de Saint-Exupery
From: Michael Perez
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 11:14 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: More leading edge questions/ideas
anyone had a bird strike with their Piet.? (Or any other in air
impact? That would be quite the story!
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
RAMPEYBOY(at)aol.com
Date:
Dec 09, 2008
Subject:
Re: to fly or build?
well said John!
In a message dated 12/8/2008 8:46:47 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
AMsafetyC(at)aol.com writes:
I think we all have obstacles to deal with or overcome from family and
social obligation discouraging and un encouraging significant others, Yard work,
home maintenance, work and travel schedules and the ever popular financial
dilemma, changing medical conditions and a host of other things. I think if you
can name I am certain someone has experienced it, even my favorite Builders
block.
I stay on the project by and through contact with friends I have made on the
board, along with the inspirational pictures I have hanging in my shop and
the time I get to visit other builders at Brodhead and on business trips.
Most inspiring is my grandson of 4 years old who has claimed the front pit
as his seat and knowing the back seat belongs to his poppop and that one day
he and I will fly our completed project together!
Just something about that is enough to keep me going, building against all
the obstacles life continues to throw at me. And when its all said and done I
still get the joy of the build experience and a great hand made airplane
which beats the hell out of anything else I can imagine.
John
____________________________________
Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and favorite sites in
one place. _Try it now_ (http:010) .
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List)
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
LE ply reasoning on top
Date:
Dec 09, 2008
From:
"Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <Michael.D.Cuy(at)nasa.gov>
I believe the reason for the plywood just aft of the leading edge nose
block is to keep the fabric from touching
the top of the front spar as it 'sucks down' after taughtening.
My only concern with an all-plywood LE would be possible waviness as
thin plywood likes to take on sometimes less
than flat contours when steamed/soaked and bent but then again weren't
Spitfires and other planes like the Spruce Goose
sheeted in plywood in some parts ?
The aluminum LE's on Champs and such will dent readily if you bang them
into another wing (hangar rash) or the corner
of your hangar walls or doors and I'm sure the plywood would react much
the same and both would need repair.
The solid nose block LE certainly would have much higher impact
resistance than either alum. or ply sheeting but youse
takes your chances I suppose and hope for the best. All three methods
to me are acceptable.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 09, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Re: More leading edge questions/ideas
Cliff, but after that piece of ply stick, don't you then follow with the ply sheet
as well? What I am saying is remove that stick. (X2 and save that weight)
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 09, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Re: LE ply reasoning on top
Mike, I guess the problem I have is that from what I hear, no one has any r
eal proof about this leading edge. Some planes had the solid wood, some use
only ply or aluminum. I wonder what a ply only leading edge can take. It d
oesn't seem like anyone knows what the "stock" Pietenpol leading edge can h
andle, but are quick to disregard a ply only one.
-
I will do more research on this and MAY, make a model. Anyone have some har
d numbers/facts/info.tests on a stock leading edge and it's durability? I q
uestion the need for such a leading edge.
--- On Tue, 12/9/08, Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC] wrote:
From: Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC] <Michael.D.Cuy(at)nasa.gov>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: LE ply reasoning on top
Date: Tuesday, December 9, 2008, 7:24 AM
I believe the reason for the plywood just aft of the leading edge nose bloc
k is to keep the fabric from touching
the top of the front spar as it 'sucks down' after taughtening.
-
My only concern with an all-plywood LE would be possible waviness as thin p
lywood likes to take on sometimes less
than flat contours when steamed/soaked and bent but then again weren't Spit
fires and other planes like the Spruce Goose
sheeted in plywood in some parts ?
-
The aluminum LE's on Champs and such will dent readily if you bang them int
o another wing (hangar rash) or the corner
of your hangar walls or doors and I'm sure the plywood would react much the
same and both would need repair.-
The solid nose block LE certainly would have much higher impact resistance
than either alum. or ply sheeting but youse
takes your chances I suppose and hope for the best.-- All three methods
to me are acceptable.-
-
Mike C.
-
-
-
-
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject:
LE ply reasoning on top
Date:
Dec 09, 2008
Mikee- didn't your Corby Starlet have plywood LE and/or wing covering? Not
that you banged it around in the hangar=2C
but what was your take on the Starlet wings if they had plywood leading edg
es? A low-winger will sure get a lot more
bumps than a high-winger...Oscar Zuniga
Air Camper NX41CC
San Antonio=2C TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Starlet LE
Date:
Dec 09, 2008
From:
"Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <Michael.D.Cuy(at)nasa.gov>
Oscar,
My Starlet did have an all-plywood LE but the nose end of the ribs was a
complete airfoil curvature which you could glue/nail
to. I see no reason why you couldn't simply glue contoured nose blocks
on each rib (or maybe even just where you had ply butt joints)
and wrap with plywood if you wanted to. I personally didn't want to go
thru the work of doing that and in fact never even considered
the possibility but other a/c are in fact built this way and/or w/
aluminum LE's.
Mike C.
PS-- I did once bang the LE of my Starlet wing with my side-swinging
cargo door on a small SUV and it only resulted in a paint
nick.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 09, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Re: Starlet LE
I don't see a need for a nose block at every rib. This would be more work a
nd may end up being as time consuming as just making the wood stick leading
edge. However, a nose block at each butt joint of the plywood may be good.
-
This is why I post these ideas of mine; to get feedback like this that help
s evolve my original idea. Mike C. and I have talked about this idea and di
d some sketches, drawings, etc. I am glad I have daily access to him for sh
aring thoughts and drawings.
-
When I get to this point in my wing construction, I will be able to test so
me ideas and see if in fact, it can be done. My major concern now is the pr
e-forming of the plywood. I am GUESSING I will need about 12" or so of widt
h and 4' long. Not sure how easy it will be to pre-form plywood of this siz
e. When I get there, I'll figure it out.
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Dick N." <horzpool(at)goldengate.net>
Subject:
Re: Pieterse: doing the math
Date:
Dec 09, 2008
John
Don't forget to include that pile of parts that didn't work out that sit in
the corner. Also you have to add in the value of the experience that you
have have gained. I wonder if anyone has ever written that down and
received college credits for that. Also how about the value of becoming a
member of a tiny group in the history of modern man who has completed a
flying machine. Then you have to also add the value of flying your machine
around all of the factory made aircraft and know what they must be thinking.
The Piet is a hit at every Fly in and draws a crowd at every FBO I pull
into. So what if your time came to 15 cents per hour in building.
Dick N.
----- Original Message -----
From: <amsafetyc(at)aol.com>
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 9:23 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Pieterse: doing the math
I have been working on getting my paperwork in ordrer. Build logs receipts
and costs into a spread sheet. When all of a sudden what I thought cost me a
few bucks and a few hours actually turned out to be more than I estimated.
Get ready here comes the qiuestion: has anyone calculated a material direct
purchase cost per hour of build time logged? I would be curioius to learn
your ratio for comparison purposes. I am wondering if I am working as
efficiently and cost effective as the list average. Not for any particular
purppose other than comparison value is all
John
------Original Message------
From: Oscar Zuniga
Sender: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
ReplyTo: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Dec 8, 2008 9:22 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Anchorage School Looking for Airplane Project
Rob;
Is this school looking for a project in Alaska? It makes a huge difference!
Unless you know of someone in the trucking business or who is just plumb
helpful
and wants to drag a trailer up the highway, getting something from "here" to
"there"
could be a problem.
Reason I ask is that there is an "Aerial" project in Santa Fe, New Mexico
that
may be a candidate. The "Aerial" is basically a biplane GN-1 and is the
brainchild
of Chad Wille. It has larger tail surface areas and of course two sets of
wings.
Let me know if you want more info on this. The project consists of
completed
fuselage, tail surfaces, and wings... no covering, nothing firewall forward,
no
main landing gear.
Oscar Zuniga
Air Camper NX41CC
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
AMsafetyC(at)aol.com
Date:
Dec 09, 2008
Subject:
Re: Pieterse: doing the math
Dick,
All great and highly valuable points for which there is no good way to
estimate the benefit vs cost. Just on base number of hard cash spent and direct
hours of gluing sticks together my expense to work hour comes out to 4.86:1.
There is no way to estimate the value of lessons learned, skills acquired,
band aids applied or the sheer enjoyment and love of the process nor the end
result which is after all the value of a hand made custom built flying
aircraft which all out weigh the costs associated with the project.
John
In a message dated 12/9/2008 11:11:59 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
horzpool(at)goldengate.net writes:
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Dick N."
John
Don't forget to include that pile of parts that didn't work out that sit in
the corner. Also you have to add in the value of the experience that you
have have gained. I wonder if anyone has ever written that down and
received college credits for that. Also how about the value of becoming a
member of a tiny group in the history of modern man who has completed a
flying machine. Then you have to also add the value of flying your machine
around all of the factory made aircraft and know what they must be thinking.
The Piet is a hit at every Fly in and draws a crowd at every FBO I pull
into. So what if your time came to 15 cents per hour in building.
Dick N.
----- Original Message -----
From: <amsafetyc(at)aol.com>
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 9:23 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Pieterse: doing the math
I have been working on getting my paperwork in ordrer. Build logs receipts
and costs into a spread sheet. When all of a sudden what I thought cost me a
few bucks and a few hours actually turned out to be more than I estimated.
Get ready here comes the qiuestion: has anyone calculated a material direct
purchase cost per hour of build time logged? I would be curioius to learn
your ratio for comparison purposes. I am wondering if I am working as
efficiently and cost effective as the list average. Not for any particular
purppose other than comparison value is all
John
------Original Message------
From: Oscar Zuniga
Sender: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
ReplyTo: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Dec 8, 2008 9:22 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Anchorage School Looking for Airplane Project
Rob;
Is this school looking for a project in Alaska? It makes a huge difference!
Unless you know of someone in the trucking business or who is just plumb
helpful
and wants to drag a trailer up the highway, getting something from "here" to
"there"
could be a problem.
Reason I ask is that there is an "Aerial" project in Santa Fe, New Mexico
that
may be a candidate. The "Aerial" is basically a biplane GN-1 and is the
brainchild
of Chad Wille. It has larger tail surface areas and of course two sets of
wings.
Let me know if you want more info on this. The project consists of
completed
fuselage, tail surfaces, and wings... no covering, nothing firewall forward,
no
main landing gear.
Oscar Zuniga
Air Camper NX41CC
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
**************Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and
favorite sites in one place. Try it now.
________________________________________________________________________________
Michael,
No, I don't know of any data regarding the current design and midair
impacts. I would imagine that flying into a seagull (or a seagull shaped
hammer) with either design would likely be catastrophic. The data we DO have
is that the existing design as per the plans works (and has done so for
eighty years). Period.
As an engineer, when deciding on the feasibility of a design change, one
does a cost/benefit analysis. You systematically look at all of the costs
involved (this includes financial as well as incidental costs, among others)
and you also look at the benefits that would be a result of the change. In
doing a very preliminary analysis, I don't really see any benefits - It
doesn't look like any less work (wait till you try to pre-form the plywood),
or financial cost - there is maybe a slight potential weight saving. On the
risk side I see potentially large risks - making a design change based on "I
would think that would be pretty strong", or "I may build a mock-up".
I'm not saying that it is not possible to design and build a Pietenpol wing
that has no solid leading edge, and just a plywood skin. However, I still
maintain that you would need something to hold the shape. If you look at the
Grega rib design you see that the leading edge is a much smaller stick of
wood, but the rib construction is more complicated and the rib profile is
complete, not chopped off flat like the Piet rib. The Grega wing is also
designed to use an aluminum skin, rather than plywood, which wraps around
the bottom as well.
In order to determine the net worth of your proposal, one would really need
to have a background in aircraft design. I don't have that. I'm going to
build to the plans. But, I don't think you have that background, either. I
think you are treading on shaky ground here. You are suggesting making
structural changes to an aircraft, without really knowing why the thing is
designed the way it is. You say you would "only wrap the ply as far as
needed". How are you going to figure out how far that is? I'm worried that
you are taking the term "experimental" a little too literally. All I have to
say is "Be careful".
Bill C.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Super strong, super simple leading edge
From:
"Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com>
Date:
Dec 09, 2008
I don't mean to continue to stir the pot, but... it would be tough to come up with
a much simpler, stronger leading edge than what is on the plans. It is such
a simple concept to take a piece of spruce, run it through the table saw then
glue and bolt it to the leading edge of the ribs and plane it down to shape.
Then what could be stronger than simply gluing a piece of 1/16" plywood to
it and the ribs, no steaming or forming necessary. It creates an incredibly strong
and lightweight leading edge with no complex steaming, forming or bending
required.
I have a really great airplane friend who suffers from a condition known as "Over-Analysis
Paralysis". It gets in the way of his airplane building. I know
everyone's idea of building an airplane is different, and some people may enjoy
having this type of condition, but look at those plans, digest it, then enjoy
building it, then you can really enjoy FLYING IT! Off the soapbox now.......
:D
Don Emch
NX899DE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=218548#218548
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 09, 2008
From:
Tim Verthein <minoxphotographer(at)yahoo.com>
Subject:
Re: to fly or build?
Just thought I'd toss a fe more thoughts out here on this topic.
The theory that if you love to fly rather than build to "go out and buy an old
150" is not a valid option. If you can't afford to build, you ertainly can't afford
to go buy an old 15o, or Champ, or whatever. Soon as you buy a certified
plane you've also squired the required expenses that go with it. Random check
of used 150 prices puts 'em right around $20,000 for a decent used one (you can
spend more, you can spend less, but for the sake or argument). Now, I don't
know a heck of a lot about airplane financing but 20,000 on a 5 year loan at
7% (numbers completely chosen at random) makes about a $400 a month payment.
That will buy a lot of rental time, or a lot of Piet lumber. And You know that
finance outfit is going to require some fancy insurance, and there's gonna be
a lot of expensive paperwork. Not t o mention that yo now have a certified airplane
that you can't work on yourself, that's going to require expensive annuals,
expensive overhauls, and
the list goes on. And those payments for the plane and the insurance company gotta
get paid whether you fly or not. I've figured that unless you can afford
several hundred dollars a month to afford an "old used plane", flying it or not,
you better stay away from certified planes!
This is one reason I'm going to build a Piet. My project is going way more slowly
than I ever expected. But it's grown from having plans and nothing else to
having an engine conversion manual, lots of research, and a rib jig under construction.
So, someday. I enjoy building things. Never built a plane. Lots of
flying models however. But building it myself makes it affordable and you get
the benefit of having done it yourself, meeting a heck of a lot of good folks
along the way, and being able to take care of it yourself. Certified planes
are for people with money. At least, people with more money than I.
And the idea that as you get older you'll have more time hasn't proven to be true
for me yet. My 4 kids have grown up and moved out. Now I have them, PLUS 4
grandkids. And they've all moved away, so now time is spent traveling around visiting
them! I'm only 50, and still working of course, but it seems there are
always more and more things to do. One grandson is 4, and completely 100% enamored
with airplanes. he has been since he was under 2. Nothing will make him
more excited than to see a Piet taking shape in Grandpa's garage. Vacation time
that used to be used to go to Oshkosh or Broadhead, or other places we used
to always go, are now taken to go with the kids. Not complaining mind you but
you need to be aware that this is gonna happen if you have kids.
So, there's some random thoughts anyway.
tim in Bovey
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 09, 2008
From:
Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu>
Subject:
latest Piet video from 2GA9
New video of me flying our newly- and nearly-restored Piet:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvoExE6CcW4
Be sure to click on the "watch in high quality" link at the lower
right of the video frame.
--
---
Jeffrey H. Boatright, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Ophthalmology
Emory University School of Medicine
Editor-in-Chief
Molecular Vision
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Clif Dawson" <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject:
Re: More leading edge questions/ideas
Date:
Dec 09, 2008
I know what you mean but I would think that to properly utilize
ply only, you would need to cover from just above the spar on
top to the spar again on the bottom to get a dependable curve.
If you made a jig and steamed( or wet) the ply and formed it
over that then applied it to the plane after it dries in shape You
might not have to go so far back on the bottom. And being preformed it
would be significantly easier to apply.
In the traditional way you have a small amount of ply and a
stick. The stick can be any light wood except maybe balsa.
This narrow piece of ply would be easy to glue down and
shaping the nose is really not that hard. Think about the
things you've already done. Was shaping the leading and
trailing edges of the tail an onerous task ??
To use the ply requires a lot more ply without the stick so I
don't see any worthwhile weight saving. I think you'll find
that the work load, although different, isn't going to be any
less than sticking to the plans.
In the end it boils down to what you're either more
comfortable doing or appeals to your nature.
Clif
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Perez
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2008 5:52 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: More leading edge questions/ideas
Cliff, but after that piece of ply stick, don't you then follow
with the ply sheet as well? What I am saying is remove that stick. (X2
and save that weight)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
12/8/2008 6:16 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
I agree with you completely, Don. It took me less time to make the leading
edge per the plans (including the plywood) than this thread has occupied o
n the list.
When I had a forced landing in my Pietenpol and ended up in a ditch four ye
ars ago, the right wingtip, including about 2 feet of the leading edge, imp
acted a ditch. Net result of the impact to the leading edge was a small de
nt in the spruce and a tear in the fabric. I repaired that easily with a b
it of Superfil epoxy filler to fill the dent and a simple patch on the fabr
ic. Had I made the leading edge a hollow box of plywood, I would have had
to scarf in a rounded patch, and the repair of just that area would have ta
ken weeks of work (ask Matt Paxton what it took to repair the leading edge
of his Bellanca when he hit a buzzard on the way to Oshkosh a few years ago
).
Over the years I have observed a number of people on this list try to impro
ve the basic design of the Pietenpol. Almost always, the results are infer
ior to the original design. Bernard Pietenpol was a true genius in design.
With no formal education, he came up with a design that many have tried t
o improve and few have actually improved upon.
If those who insist on "improving" the design would spend more time buildin
g to the plans and less time re-designing, there would be a lot more Pieten
pols in the air.
Just my 2=A2 worth.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh, NC
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-lis
t-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Don Emch
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2008 6:13 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Super strong, super simple leading edge
I don't mean to continue to stir the pot, but... it would be tough to come
up with a much simpler, stronger leading edge than what is on the plans. I
t is such a simple concept to take a piece of spruce, run it through the ta
ble saw then glue and bolt it to the leading edge of the ribs and plane it
down to shape. Then what could be stronger than simply gluing a piece of 1
/16" plywood to it and the ribs, no steaming or forming necessary. It crea
tes an incredibly strong and lightweight leading edge with no complex steam
ing, forming or bending required.
I have a really great airplane friend who suffers from a condition known as
"Over-Analysis Paralysis". It gets in the way of his airplane building.
I know everyone's idea of building an airplane is different, and some peopl
e may enjoy having this type of condition, but look at those plans, digest
it, then enjoy building it, then you can really enjoy FLYING IT! Off the s
oapbox now....... :D
Don Emch
NX899DE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=218548#218548
_________________________________________________
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
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 10, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
More leading edge questions/ideas
I appriciate you input Bill. These ideas are just that at the moment. When I get
there, I'll figure it out.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 10, 2008
From:
John Egan <johnegan99(at)yahoo.com>
Subject:
gas tank filler neck options
Hi builders,=0A=0AI have been looking for a gas tank filler neck to extend
the hieght of my gas cap.- I can not find what I want, and I wonder if yo
u guys know if this item is out there some where?=0A=0AI am using a J-3 sty
le fuel tank located in the nose.- Because the top of the tank is limited
in roundness, I can only locate the stock tank so the gas cap is not quite
-sticking out of the cowling.- I would like another inch or 1-1/2" high
er cap location.- I am therefor looking for a longer filler neck or coupl
ing to to thread on to the tank and raise the cap hieght. The J-3 style tan
k is from Wag-Aero (E-316-000).- I notice Wag-Aero sells a steel filler n
eck that looks taller in thier picture, however when I called Wag-Aero to i
nquire on the hieght of the neck-and if it has threads, they can not answ
er my questions because they do not typically stock that part.- If I can
not find an easy solution, I could modify (cut and weld)-a short piece of
steel tube to the existing neck.- I'll attach a photo of the tank. So, I
'm wondering if anyone knows if I can get a longer threaded filler neck for
this tank?=0A=0AAlso, regarding the leading edge of the wing discussion, I
bought a 14' long douglas fir 2x8 for $9.- I ripped-it down the length
at the center line at-the appropriate angle to mount to the wing, then r
an-each piece through the table saw to rough out the shape.- I then att
ached it to the wing and shaped it using a hand plane as Jack P described
-in his post.- Very fun. I'll attach a photo.=0A=0AThanks all,=0A=0AJoh
n E=0Atoo cold in the shop these days - Greenville, Wi=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject:
Re: gas tank filler neck options
Date:
Dec 10, 2008
Aircraft Spruce has them. Page 170 P/N05-01060
Gene in wet Tennessee
----- Original Message -----
From: John Egan
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 9:18 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: gas tank filler neck options
Hi builders,
I have been looking for a gas tank filler neck to extend the hieght of
my gas cap. I can not find what I want, and I wonder if you guys know
if this item is out there some where?
I am using a J-3 style fuel tank located in the nose. Because the top
of the tank is limited in roundness, I can only locate the stock tank so
the gas cap is not quite sticking out of the cowling. I would like
another inch or 1-1/2" higher cap location. I am therefor looking for a
longer filler neck or coupling to to thread on to the tank and raise the
cap hieght. The J-3 style tank is from Wag-Aero (E-316-000). I notice
Wag-Aero sells a steel filler neck that looks taller in thier picture,
however when I called Wag-Aero to inquire on the hieght of the neck and
if it has threads, they can not answer my questions because they do not
typically stock that part. If I can not find an easy solution, I could
modify (cut and weld) a short piece of steel tube to the existing neck.
I'll attach a photo of the tank. So, I'm wondering if anyone knows if I
can get a longer threaded filler neck for this tank?
Also, regarding the leading edge of the wing discussion, I bought a
14' long douglas fir 2x8 for $9. I ripped it down the length at the
center line at the appropriate angle to mount to the wing, then ran each
piece through the table saw to rough out the shape. I then attached it
to the wing and shaped it using a hand plane as Jack P described in his
post. Very fun. I'll attach a photo.
Thanks all,
John E
too cold in the shop these days - Greenville, Wi
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Checked by AVG.
12/10/2008 9:30 AM
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject:
Re: gas tank filler neck options
Date:
Dec 10, 2008
Sorry, guess I should have read further. Not sure Aircraft Spruce can
help you.
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: John Egan
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 9:18 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: gas tank filler neck options
Hi builders,
I have been looking for a gas tank filler neck to extend the hieght of
my gas cap. I can not find what I want, and I wonder if you guys know
if this item is out there some where?
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 10, 2008
From:
Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu>
Subject:
Re: gas tank filler neck options
John,
Try speed shops like summit racing. They have filler necks for
various applications. Something like Summit SUM-290200 might work,
but it is not cheap.
See at: http://tinyurl.com/69rrgq
HTH,
Jeff
>Hi builders,
>
>I have been looking for a gas tank filler neck to extend the hieght
>of my gas cap. I can not find what I want, and I wonder if you guys
>know if this item is out there some where?
...
--
_____________________________________________________________
Jeffrey H. Boatright, PhD
Associate Professor, Emory Eye Center, Atlanta, GA, USA
Senior Editor, Molecular Vision, http://www.molvis.org/molvis
mailto:jboatri(at)emory.edu
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject:
gas tank filler neck options
Date:
Dec 10, 2008
Not sure if you're willing to cut off the neck that you have and weld in a new
one,
but that could definitely be done. Another way would be to cut off the top part
of your existing neck with a tubing cutter or hacksaw, then weld in an extension.
It sounds like you're looking for something that could be screwed right into your
existing neck to bring it a bit higher but you'd have to make your own.
You can get a neck from an auto junkyard by cutting the neck off an old fuel tank
but it would have to be an older vehicle
without the screw-in cap. Or browse Summit Racing or Moroso- they have all kinds
of filler necks available for building your own tanks. I got the filler neck for
my smoke oil tank from Summit but it's for a radiator cap, not a fuel filler cap.
Search their website on "filler neck" or something like that.
Oscar Zuniga
Air Camper NX41CC
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 10, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Leaing ege follow up
I appreciate the responses I have received about my leading edge posts. If
I did not want to hear what others think, I would not ask. So thanks to you
all.
-
I do feel that some of you miss the point from time to time. Quite a few re
sponded with how they made their leading edge stick and commented on how ea
sy it is. That's fine, but I never asked how to make one or whether or not
it was difficult. It seemed people assumed that because I was leaning away
from a leading edge stick that-I did not know how to make one or that I d
id not want to use/invest in hand tools to do it. Not the case.
-
It also seems that quite often-many respond with artificial facts or thou
ghts that don't exist. Almost like putting words in my mouth. From what I u
nderstand, plywood sheet needs to be used with a stick leading edge. I am n
ot sure how not using one leads to more work. No one had any problems makin
g a pre bend jig for the ribs, why is making a jig for the plywood now too
involved or complex? I never mentioned making a steamer. I used a 4" piece
of PVC filled with water for my cap strips, I know my bath tub will soak my
plywood just fine. I have no intention on hurrying my build just to have i
t done when some think it should. I believe the time I spend tweaking thing
s is an education and time well spent. If I don't contribute to adding to t
he number of Pietenpols in the air anytime soon, so be it.
-
Many speak about Mr. Pietenpol not having a formal education. But yet he ma
de a plane proven to fly. Who is to say that myself, or any of us are in th
e same situation? How did we go from Model A to Continental?- Then there
are those that cut out an access in the wing for the pilot to get in and ou
t. Wow, talk about a design change! Not on the plan, but someone thought of
it and it worked. I doubt that everyone who ever made a change to the Piet
enpol has an aeronautical degree.
-
I, personally, do not want a cookie cutter Piet. I want it to be different
more then just with paint, even if the changes will never be seen. I want t
o save weight everywhere I can and I don't feel that the research, question
ing and time are a waste. I am just wired that way, I need to tweak. Buildi
ng by the book if fine, seems most of you go that way, it is just not my wa
y.
-
So, to wrap this up, I ask to be mind full of what is really being asked an
d limit the assumptions when responding.
-
Thanks again.
-
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Mike Whaley" <MerlinFAC(at)cfl.rr.com>
Subject:
Old PopSci's available from 1930s via Google
Date:
Dec 10, 2008
I figured if anyone would appreciate this, the Piet group would...
Google has just made various historic magazine archives available (for
free!!!), including Popular Science. This isn't in their "regular" google
search but in the "Books" search (on their homepage, click the "more" link
and go to "Books"). As many of you know, Pop Sci and related magazines
during the 1920s and 1930s was full of interesting, bizzarre, and some
now-classic ideas in the aviation world, everything from "How I set my
glider records" by Mr. Bowlus (with a stunning 1,500 feet above the takoff
point!) to stories about boat-car-submarine-spaceships. Here's a link to get
started...
http://books.google.com/books?id=gSkDAAAAMBAJ&source=gbs_all_issues_r&cad=2_
2
Enjoy!
-Mike
Mike Whaley
MerlinFAC(at)cfl.rr.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
AMsafetyC(at)aol.com
Date:
Dec 10, 2008
Subject:
Re: gas tank construction
I have been looking at this product for quite some time in considering
building my gas tank does anyone have experience with the Super alloy 5. Seems
a
bit pricey but it it works as well as the demo video shows I may give it a
shot.
_http://www.muggyweld.com/5clip2.html_ (http://www.muggyweld.com/5clip2.html)
Has anyone tried this stuff?
John
In a message dated 12/10/2008 11:48:21 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
taildrags(at)hotmail.com writes:
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Oscar Zuniga
Not sure if you're willing to cut off the neck that you have and weld in a
new one,
but that could definitely be done. Another way would be to cut off the top
part
of your existing neck with a tubing cutter or hacksaw, then weld in an
extension.
It sounds like you're looking for something that could be screwed right into
your
existing neck to bring it a bit higher but you'd have to make your own.
You can get a neck from an auto junkyard by cutting the neck off an old fuel
tank
but it would have to be an older vehicle
without the screw-in cap. Or browse Summit Racing or Moroso- they have all
kinds
of filler necks available for building your own tanks. I got the filler
neck for
my smoke oil tank from Summit but it's for a radiator cap, not a fuel filler
cap.
Search their website on "filler neck" or something like that.
Oscar Zuniga
Air Camper NX41CC
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
**************Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and
favorite sites in one place. Try it now.
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Bill Church" <eng(at)canadianrogers.com>
Subject:
Old PopSci's available from 1930s via Google
Date:
Dec 10, 2008
Too Cool.
People were apparently a lot more self-sufficient way back when.
I could spend hours looking through those old magazines.
Now, how am I going to find time to build.
Thanks for the link, Mike.
Bill C.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 10, 2008
From:
"walt" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Subject:
Re: gas tank construction
John,
Yeah, I have some.
Takes a little knack to use. But the big thing is,,,(good or bad) is
that it's somekind of lower melting temp aluminum stick with a flux
attached.
The end result is two pieces of aluminum that is kind of "soldered"
together.
The TIG process actually melts the two pieces, and the filler into one
piece.
Where this "solders" the two together.
To me,,,this falls under the thoughts of "what don't I want to fail
while at 5000ft." Probably the fuel tank would be on the top of the
list.
I ordered my alum sheet from ACS&S, along with the filler neck and drain
fittings.
Cut out the patterns for sides and ends and bottom, drilled all the
holes for all fittings.
Then "built" the tank by drilling tiny holes about every 4 inches along
the edges so I could put little wire loops to hold the tank together.
(this way the welder doesn't have to restle with pieces).
If using steel wire, they can tack all over and remove the wire. Then
final weld.
Actually I tried to TIG myself, but being a TIG novice, the leak test
proved to be a watering can effect.
Had a friend reweld both tanks with beautiful results, for $50.00.
10 gal tank in the center section. And a 14 gallon tank in the nose. As
per my mentor,,,no baffles in either.
The attached pic is of my first attempt. The design was sound but leaky
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: AMsafetyC(at)aol.com
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 1:25 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: gas tank construction
I have been looking at this product for quite some time in considering
building my gas tank does anyone have experience with the Super alloy 5.
Seems a bit pricey but it it works as well as the demo video shows I may
give it a shot.
http://www.muggyweld.com/5clip2.html
Has anyone tried this stuff?
John
In a message dated 12/10/2008 11:48:21 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
taildrags(at)hotmail.com writes:
Not sure if you're willing to cut off the neck that you have and
weld in a new one,
but that could definitely be done. Another way would be to cut off
the top part
of your existing neck with a tubing cutter or hacksaw, then weld in
an extension.
It sounds like you're looking for something that could be screwed
right into your
existing neck to bring it a bit higher but you'd have to make your
own.
You can get a neck from an auto junkyard by cutting the neck off an
old fuel tank
but it would have to be an older vehicle
without the screw-in cap. Or browse Summit Racing or Moroso- they
have all kinds
of filler necks available for building your own tanks. I got the
filler neck for
my smoke oil tank from Summit but it's for a radiator cap, not a
fuel filler cap.
Search their website on "filler neck" or something like that.
Oscar Zuniga
Air Camper NX41CC
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at sp; (And Get Some AWESOME FREE find you for
-Matt Dralle, List e the es y - MATRONICS
WEB FORUMS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and favorite sites
in one ncid=emlcntaolcom00000010">Try it now.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 11, 2008
From:
Mike Tunnicliffe <zk-owl(at)CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Subject:
gas tank filler neck options
Hi John, you should be able to get a piece of tube turned up that will
thread into the tank, and be threaded for the cap at the other end, to
extend the filler without welding. Alternatively you could make a recess in
the front deck to accommodate the filler, perhaps it could have a flush
cover. Regards, Mike T.
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Egan
Sent: Thursday, 11 December 2008 4:18 a.m.
Subject: Pietenpol-List: gas tank filler neck options
Hi builders,
I have been looking for a gas tank filler neck to extend the hieght of my
gas cap. I can not find what I want, and I wonder if you guys know if this
item is out there some where?
I am using a J-3 style fuel tank located in the nose. Because the top of
the tank is limited in roundness, I can only locate the stock tank so the
gas cap is not quite sticking out of the cowling. I would like another inch
or 1-1/2" higher cap location. I am therefor looking for a longer filler
neck or coupling to to thread on to the tank and raise the cap hieght. The
J-3 style tank is from Wag-Aero (E-316-000). I notice Wag-Aero sells a
steel filler neck that looks taller in thier picture, however when I called
Wag-Aero to inquire on the hieght of the neck and if it has threads, they
can not answer my questions because they do not typically stock that part.
If I can not find an easy solution, I could modify (cut and weld) a short
piece of steel tube to the existing neck. I'll attach a photo of the tank.
So, I'm wondering if anyone knows if I can get a longer threaded filler neck
for this tank?
Also, regarding the leading edge of the wing discussion, I bought a 14' long
douglas fir 2x8 for $9. I ripped it down the length at the center line at
the appropriate angle to mount to the wing, then ran each piece through the
table saw to rough out the shape. I then attached it to the wing and shaped
it using a hand plane as Jack P described in his post. Very fun. I'll
attach a photo.
Thanks all,
John E
too cold in the shop these days - Greenville, Wi
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject:
soapboxes
Date:
Dec 10, 2008
Soapboxes... hmmm... I wonder if you could flatten them out like old
Quaker Oats cartons and use them to make the leading edges of your wings?
(Sorry, Mikee- I couldn't stand to listen to your singing in the shower
so I had to throw out something to laugh at).
I will have to say in all honesty that the leading edges of 41CC catch
their share of bumps and knocks and I'm glad there is solid wood there.
The paint is a bit chafed here and there along the LE of both wings from
various things, not to mention the dust-up four years ago Veterans Day
when the airplane went over on its back, but still sound as can be and
I didn't touch the wings after the nose-over incident.
One of these days I'll pull out the yellow Poly-Tone and a brush and
touch up the wings, I guess.
Oscar Zuniga
Air Camper NX41CC
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Gene Rambo" <generambo(at)msn.com>
Subject:
Re: Leaing ege follow up
Date:
Dec 10, 2008
Guys:
This leading edge thing is getting wayyyy out of hand.
The leading edge on the Pietenpol wing, as designed, is not structural.
The ribs give it an airfoil shape, and the nose piece of wood holds the
front of the ribs together. Bernie (supposedly) used cardboard for the
covering WHICH GOES ONLY FROM THE LEADING EDGE TO THE TOP OF THE SPAR!
We could also use cardboard, aluminum, plywood, or nothing at all with
equal success and would lose no structural strength whatsoever. A
number of the old biplanes (such as the Travel Air and pretty much
everything from WWI) used nothing at all, just the fabric. You can see
this in any photo where the fabric is scalloped between the nose ribs.
This causes no loss of aerodynamics or strength, and I have never heard
of a bird strike bringing down an airplane. And yes, I have hit birds
with the Travel Air, they just bounce off.
Wrapping plywood all the way around the leading edge from spar to spar
would create, as many have pointed out, a "D box" spar for no good
purpose that I can think of. It would be strong as a bridge where it is
not necessary, it would be a b**ch to build (wrapping ply on that sharp
radius at the nose is going to be damned difficult, and it could well
shift a bunch of loads into an area where they were not meant to be.
The only airplanes I have ever seen with a wooden D box front spar are
cantilever wings (Cessna Airmaster, Fokker D VII, etc) Now, if you are
going for a cantilever Pietenpol, I'd love to see it!!
Anyway, Mike, have a beer and chill. No one is trying to put words into
your mouth. By the way, the wing cut out for the pilot to enter the
cockpit was in the original design, so when you "talk about a design
change", you might want to use another example.
Gene
working on my Model A engine
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Peter W Johnson" <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au>
Subject:
Leaing ege follow up
Date:
Dec 11, 2008
Gene,
The PFA (now LAA) in the UK "require" a D section on the leading edge of the
wing. I did mine that way and have no regrets.
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 Gene Rambo
Sent: Thursday, 11 December 2008 1:59 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Leaing ege follow up
Guys:
This leading edge thing is getting wayyyy out of hand.
The leading edge on the Pietenpol wing, as designed, is not structural. The
ribs give it an airfoil shape, and the nose piece of wood holds the front of
the ribs together. Bernie (supposedly) used cardboard for the covering
WHICH GOES ONLY FROM THE LEADING EDGE TO THE TOP OF THE SPAR! We could also
use cardboard, aluminum, plywood, or nothing at all with equal success and
would lose no structural strength whatsoever. A number of the old biplanes
(such as the Travel Air and pretty much everything from WWI) used nothing at
all, just the fabric. You can see this in any photo where the fabric is
scalloped between the nose ribs. This causes no loss of aerodynamics or
strength, and I have never heard of a bird strike bringing down an airplane.
And yes, I have hit birds with the Travel Air, they just bounce off.
Wrapping plywood all the way around the leading edge from spar to spar would
create, as many have pointed out, a "D box" spar for no good purpose that I
can think of. It would be strong as a bridge where it is not necessary, it
would be a b**ch to build (wrapping ply on that sharp radius at the nose is
going to be damned difficult, and it could well shift a bunch of loads into
an area where they were not meant to be. The only airplanes I have ever
seen with a wooden D box front spar are cantilever wings (Cessna Airmaster,
Fokker D VII, etc) Now, if you are going for a cantilever Pietenpol, I'd
love to see it!!
Anyway, Mike, have a beer and chill. No one is trying to put words into
your mouth. By the way, the wing cut out for the pilot to enter the cockpit
was in the original design, so when you "talk about a design change", you
might want to use another example.
Gene
working on my Model A engine
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Gene Rambo" <generambo(at)msn.com>
Subject:
Re: Leaing ege follow up
Date:
Dec 11, 2008
Peter:
I would have to see what the requirement is. What are we actually
talking about, a full D section structural leading edge, or just
wrapping the leading edge material (such as aluminum) all the way
around? I would be very surprised if they actually required a major
structural alteration such as an actual D box.
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: Peter W Johnson<mailto:vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au>
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 10:31 PM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Leaing ege follow up
Gene,
The PFA (now LAA) in the UK "require" a D section on the leading edge
of the wing. I did mine that way and have no regrets.
Peter
Wonthaggi Australia
http://www.cpc-world.com>
________________________________________________________________________________
Although I'm not done with my project yet, I did shoot some primer into the interior
through the opening that's left at the attachment area. I figured I should
coat the bare metal with something in there.
Did anyone rust protect the inside of the the formed control horns so they don't
rust from the inside out? If so what did you use?
Chris
Sacramento, CA
--------
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, CA
WestCoastPiet.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=218952#218952
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 11, 2008
From:
"TOM STINEMETZE" <TOMS(at)mcpcity.com>
Subject:
Re: Formed Control Horns
>Did anyone rust protect the inside of the the formed control horns so
they don't rust from the inside out? If so what did you use?
>Chris
>Sacramento, CA
Chris:
I haven't built any control horns yet but plan to protect them on the
outside with Zinc Oxide purchased from Aircraft Spruce in the typical
rattle can. I have used this successfully with all my metal parts so far
- just obey the safety instructions as this can be nasty stuff. A.S.
carries both Zinc Chromate and Zinc Oxide in rattle cans. As for the
inside of the part - since it will have holes drilled into both ends it
should be possible to slosh oil in there just like you would a tubing
framework. Help me out list members, isn't this normally linseed oil? I
don't believe that you would want to spray the part with the Zinc product
prior to welding as this would contaminate the weld and probably produce
some gasses you don't want to inhale.
Tom Stinemetze
McPherson, KS.
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Mandy & Michael Green" <mmml(at)bigpond.com>
Subject:
Re: Formed Control Horns
Date:
Dec 12, 2008
Chris,
I used LPS3, but I guess any rust preventitive compound will work well.
Mike Green
Australia
----- Original Message -----
From: "Catdesigns" <Catdesigns(at)att.net>
Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 7:44 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Formed Control Horns
>
> Did anyone rust protect the inside of the the formed control horns so they
> don't rust from the inside out? If so what did you use?
>
> Chris
> Sacramento, CA
>
> --------
> Chris Tracy
> Sacramento, CA
> WestCoastPiet.com
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=218952#218952
>
>
> __________ NOD32 3682 (20081210) Information __________
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Gene,
I built my Piet to Jim Will's PFA approved plans. They include the shaped
spruce leading edge (nose piece) covered from the top of the front spar,
around the leading edge nose spruce and all the way to the bottom of the
front spar. This forms a structural D section forward of the front spar. All
the nose ribs and top and bottom spar contact points are glued.
Cheers
Peter
Wonthaggi
http://www.cpc-world.com (check out "Airframe
Construction" -> "Wings" -> "Outer Sections"
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gene Rambo
Sent: Friday, 12 December 2008 12:51 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Leaing ege follow up
I believe that I said wrapping the material (aluminum, cardboard, etc) all
the way around. that was the point of my initial post, too many on here are
using terms interchangably and not being specific whether the "leading edge"
refers just to the wooden "stick" on the rib noses or the entire area in
front of the spar. I may not have been clear enough, but read as a whole, I
was stating that there is a difference between merely wrapping aluminum all
the way around, and forming plywood and glueing it all the way around and to
the spars, creating a D box.
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: Ryan Mueller <mailto:rmueller23(at)gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2008 8:17 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Leaing ege follow up
Gene,
Sorry, couldn't resist....
In your first email in this thread you state: "Wrapping plywood all the way
around the leading edge from spar to spar would create, as many have pointed
out, a "D box" spar...."
In your reply to Peter you ask whether he is talking about an actual "D
box", or just wrapping the leading edge material all the way around. This
implies that just wrapping the leading edge material all the way around does
not create a "D box", which is contrary to your previous post.
Which is it? ;)
Have a good morning,
Ryan
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 7:00 AM, Gene Rambo wrote:
Peter:
I would have to see what the requirement is. What are we actually talking
about, a full D section structural leading edge, or just wrapping the
leading edge material (such as aluminum) all the way around? I would be
very surprised if they actually required a major structural alteration such
as an actual D box.
Gene
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/ctitle
=http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.matronic
s.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Formed Control Horns
From:
"Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com>
Date:
Dec 11, 2008
Chris,
I did. I used boiled linseed oil. It just seems like that would be an area for
moisture to collect.
Don Emch
NX899DE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=219003#219003
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Clif Dawson" <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject:
Re: Old PopSci's available from 1930s via Google
Date:
Dec 11, 2008
RE: Pietenpol-List: Old PopSci's available from 1930s via GoogleAnd then
there's these;
http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.aspx?c=1&p=42563&cat=1,46096,461
00
Our ancestors came up with some truly outragious stuff.
Clif
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Church
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 11:16 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Old PopSci's available from 1930s via
Google
Too Cool.
People were apparently a lot more self-sufficient way back when.
I could spend hours looking through those old magazines.
Now, how am I going to find time to build.
Thanks for the link, Mike.
Bill C.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
12/10/2008 6:53 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Formed Control Horns
From:
"Catdesigns" <Catdesigns(at)att.net>
Date:
Dec 12, 2008
Thanks all.
Chris
--------
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, CA
WestCoastPiet.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=219065#219065
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Attention Corvair Builders
From:
"Brady" <brady(at)magnificentmachine.com>
Date:
Dec 12, 2008
To Whom it may concern:
We have updated our website, www.magnificentmachine.com, with some technical articles that are aimed at answering the most common questions relating to our products and the Corvair.
Also these articles address some of the more common engine issues and some of the
ways in which we address them.
This section is called Tech Talk and is where we will post all of our Products
Testing Data.
The articles are written by "Uncle Mike" because he is a far better writer than
I am and his engine building experience goes far back to the days of Flat head
engines and probably back to the days of wooden spokes though he won't admit
it. Smile
The First Forged 4340 crankshaft sample is now in an engine case with a cam shaft
and will be running before too long.
This engine will be equipped with our entirely NEW rotating assembly as well as
the rest of our newest products.
The first set of all aluminum Nikasil Cylinders will be installed and tested on
this engine as well.
We will have this engine at the upcoming Corvair College #13 being held In Livermore,
CA.
For further details of the Corvair College #13 event see
www.flycorvair.com or
www.flaglvk.com
Thank you,
--------
Brady McCormick
Poulsbo, WA
www.magnificentmachine.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=219116#219116
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 12, 2008
From:
Ben Charvet <bcharvet(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject:
Corvair Pietenpol Insurance Question
Hi all,
There is a guy in my EAA chapter with a complete Piet with Corvair
powerplant that he finished a few years ago. The plane has flown for 3
or 4 hours and he is looking for some people to fly the test period time
off. He hasn't been able to polish up his skills to the level where he
would be comfortable flying it yet. My question is.. when I was
checking into insurance for my Piet project I couldn't find anyone that
would insure it with a Corvair engine, hence my decision to go with a
Continental. I'd love to get in some Piet time in this guy's airplane,
but I don't feel comfortable flying without insurance. Anyone have any
ideas of insurance companies I could call to try to get a policy to
cover non-owner pilots in this situation?
Ben Charvet
(hope to have my Piet finished next summer)
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 12, 2008
From:
Lawrence Williams <lnawms(at)yahoo.com>
Subject:
Leading edge question
Sorry gang, I've been out of touch for a while and it soundss like the fish
erman didn't go to Belize after all!!!
-
My leading edge consists of an aluminum tube and no plywood, just false rib
s between the full ribs to keep the approximate airfoil up front. There, th
e cat's out of the bag. I realize that this admission denies me the right t
o call my airplane a Pietenpol since I have deviated horribly from the plan
s. Just another "snowflake" I guess.
-
The skys over central AR remain clear of evil-doers as of 2230Z this day.
-
Merry Christmas to Y'all and to y'all a good night.
-
Larry Williams- xcg, xcmr, epp=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
John Hofmann <jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc.com>
Subject:
Re: Corvair Pietenpol Insurance Question
Date:
Dec 12, 2008
Ben,
Check Falcon Insurance.
http://www.falconinsurance.com/
They run EAA's insurance plan as well as are really good brokers and
decent people for that matter. They hold my insurance on the Cub and
have been great to work with. If you try them through the EAA website
you actually call to Oshkosh and the connect you to Falcon.
Best of luck,
-john-
John Hofmann
Vice-President, Information Technology
The Rees Group, Inc.
2810 Crossroads Drive, Ste 3800
Madison, WI 53718
Phone: 608.443.2468 ext 150
Fax: 608.443.2474
Email: jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc.com
On Dec 12, 2008, at 5:15 PM, Ben Charvet wrote:
> >
>
> Hi all,
>
> There is a guy in my EAA chapter with a complete Piet with Corvair
> powerplant that he finished a few years ago. The plane has flown
> for 3 or 4 hours and he is looking for some people to fly the test
> period time off. He hasn't been able to polish up his skills to the
> level where he would be comfortable flying it yet. My question is..
> when I was checking into insurance for my Piet project I couldn't
> find anyone that would insure it with a Corvair engine, hence my
> decision to go with a Continental. I'd love to get in some Piet
> time in this guy's airplane, but I don't feel comfortable flying
> without insurance. Anyone have any ideas of insurance companies I
> could call to try to get a policy to cover non-owner pilots in this
> situation?
>
> Ben Charvet
> (hope to have my Piet finished next summer)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Ben, I believe Falcon is who Dad's Piet is insured with (I supply a free ha
nger, and he buys the insurance).- But I don't know what good it is, othe
r than liability insurance.- He can only get non moving hull insurance, a
nd So many thousand liabillity.- If we tear up the airplane it is not cov
ered, just the property , crops, etc we "ruin".- I think it is somewhere
in the $1000-$1200 per year range.- However, I think it is covered if it
is parked on a ramp and someone hits it with a vehicle, airplane etc for $1
2000.- So in 10 years you would pay for it twice, When I get my Jungster
1 done, liabillity is all I think I am going to carry.
-
Shad
Hi all,
There is a guy in my EAA chapter with a complete Piet with Corvair powerpla
nt that he finished a few years ago. -The plane has flown for 3 or 4 hour
s and he is looking for some people to fly the test period time off. -He
hasn't been able to polish up his skills to the level where he would be com
fortable flying it yet. -My question is.. when I was checking into insura
nce for my Piet project I couldn't find anyone that would insure it with a
Corvair engine, hence my decision to go with a Continental. -I'd love to
get in some Piet time in this guy's airplane, but I don't feel comfortable
flying without insurance. -Anyone have any ideas of insurance companies I
could call to try to get a policy to cover non-owner pilots in this situat
ion?
Ben Charvet
=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Dick N." <horzpool(at)goldengate.net>
Subject:
Re: Corvair Pietenpol Insurance Question
Date:
Dec 13, 2008
I have insurance with AOPA and that is thru Global Aerospace. The problem
with insurance companies is the restrict to the owner as the insured pilot.
Others have to be approved. They don't allow you to add on too many pilots
or they will call you a club. I dropped my hull ins and just kept
liability. That saves quite a bit.
Dick N.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ben Charvet" <bcharvet(at)bellsouth.net>
Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 5:15 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Corvair Pietenpol Insurance Question
>
> Hi all,
>
> There is a guy in my EAA chapter with a complete Piet with Corvair
> powerplant that he finished a few years ago. The plane has flown for 3 or
> 4 hours and he is looking for some people to fly the test period time off.
> He hasn't been able to polish up his skills to the level where he would be
> comfortable flying it yet. My question is.. when I was checking into
> insurance for my Piet project I couldn't find anyone that would insure it
> with a Corvair engine, hence my decision to go with a Continental. I'd
> love to get in some Piet time in this guy's airplane, but I don't feel
> comfortable flying without insurance. Anyone have any ideas of insurance
> companies I could call to try to get a policy to cover non-owner pilots in
> this situation?
>
> Ben Charvet
> (hope to have my Piet finished next summer)
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 14, 2008
From:
Tim Verthein <minoxphotographer(at)yahoo.com>
Subject:
OT Santa Airplane Joke
Every morning on my radio show I read a "Joke for the day" and they are pretty
much always pretty bad jokes, either form my collectin of really old joke books,
or sent in, emailed in from listeners, etc. Friday, I received this joke and
used it on the show and thought that this was a good one to share with other
flying minded individuals. So, hopefully you haven't heard this one yet and
don't mind the OT post. Here we go-
Santa Claus, like all pilots, gets regular visits from the Federal Aviation Administration,
and the FAA examiner, Orton, arrived last week for the pre-Christmas
check ride.
In preparation, Santa had his elves wash the sled and bathe all the reindeer.
Santa got his logbook out and made sure all his paperwork was in order. He knew
they would examine all his equipment and truly put Santa's flying skills to the
test.
The examiner walked slowly around the sled. He checked all the reindeer harnesses,
the landing gear, and even Rudolph's nose.
He painstakingly reviewed Santa's weight and balance calculations for sled's enormous
payload.
Finally, they were ready for the check ride. Santa got in and fastened his seat
belt and shoulder harness and checked the compass.
Then the FAA examiner hopped in carrying, to Santa's surprise, a shotgun.
"What's that for!?" asked Santa incredulously.
The FAA examiner winked and said, "I'm not supposed to tell you this ahead of time,"
as he leaned over to whisper in Santa's ear,
"but you're gonna lose an engine on takeoff."
Here in beautiful Bovey, MN, looking for 14 inches of new snow between now (Sunday
morning) and Monday morning. And since I'm the morning radio guy, and my wife
is a nurse, we pretty much have to make it to work in the morning, so we're
busy keeping the driveway clear and the truck and car pointed toward the road!
Tim in Bovey
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 14, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Wing drag cables and fittings
I am confused with how cables, turnbuckles and fittings are rated. I see th
at 3/32 GALV. 7X19 cable is rated at 1000. An appropriate turnbuckle is rat
ed at 1600. 4130 is rated around 97,000 PSI and T6061-T6 about 45,000 PSI t
ensile. I can't figure out what these numbers really mean. I understand the
load numbers but am lost with the PSI tensile. How does PSI compare to-p
ounds as-used in the cables and turnbuckles?-(It's not as easy as divid
ing PSI by 144 is it?)
-
How much force does the wing drag cables see besides the tension put on the
m at assembly?
-
It seems to me that the steel cable and .080 4130 is overkill. Unless there
are loads at work that I just don't "see".
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 15, 2008
From:
Mike Tunnicliffe <zk-owl(at)CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Subject:
Wing drag cables and fittings
Hi Michael, psi is pounds per square inch, if a piece of 4130 has a cross
sectional area of .1 square inch it will be able to carry up to 9,700 pounds
before it fails, ie: 97,000 psi x .1 square inch = 9,700 pounds. Normally
you would allow a safety factor which may be 50%, so the safe maximum load
on the .1 square inch piece of steel would be 6466 pounds. Hope this
clarifies things Mike T.
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael
Perez
Sent: Monday, 15 December 2008 6:51 a.m.
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Wing drag cables and fittings
I am confused with how cables, turnbuckles and fittings are rated. I see
that 3/32 GALV. 7X19 cable is rated at 1000. An appropriate turnbuckle is
rated at 1600. 4130 is rated around 97,000 PSI and T6061-T6 about 45,000 PSI
tensile. I can't figure out what these numbers really mean. I understand the
load numbers but am lost with the PSI tensile. How does PSI compare to
pounds as used in the cables and turnbuckles? (It's not as easy as dividing
PSI by 144 is it?)
How much force does the wing drag cables see besides the tension put on them
at assembly?
It seems to me that the steel cable and .080 4130 is overkill. Unless there
are loads at work that I just don't "see".
D========================
=========
D========================
=========
D========================
=========
D========================
=========
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 14, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Wing drag cables and fittings
So, say-a wing strut fitting is 1" X 10" X .080. Would the cross sectiona
l area be-.080? square inches?- If this is right, then that piece made
of 4130 would be able to carry, (97,000 X .080) about 7,760lbs? If that fit
ting was doubled, as the wing strut fittings are, (one-piece each side of
the spar) then the total load capability of the fitting would be around 15
,520 lbs? Or would it still be "rated" at 7,760 because that is when one si
de could fail and render the entire fitting failed?
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Steve Singleton" <slsingleton(at)cvalley.net>
Subject:
A65 parts for sale
Date:
Dec 14, 2008
Hi everyone. We sold our Champ and will be getting started back on
building the Piet so i thought i'd offer a few extra A65 motor parts
that i have collected for sale to the Piet group if anyone is
interested. I plan on useing a Model A (tough decision). Its
embarrassing to say how little i've accomplished on it so i won't. I
have four good cylinders(steel) that will make good cores. My A/P motor
guy thought they would not need to be chromed. Two Camshafts that are
not yellow tagged but my A/p told me to make sure and not pitch them.
Crankshaft and camshaft gears. Four rods and caps that would need
rebushed i'm sure. Four valve covers. A good Taper Shaft Prop Hub( were
useing it untill overhaul when i found a good Flanged Crank). A set of
bushings for a McCaully Prop. Also have the taper shaft crank but it
will need to go Twenty under to be worth anything. I may have a few
other small parts but thats about it. Most of what i have is not high
dollar items but Cylinders, Prop Hub, and bushing i'd expect current
market valve. Make me an offer if anyone is interested. Would be willing
to spilt up parts. Thanks. I'm located (Hale MO) 50 miles north of I-70.
Not home much so try my cell 660 214 0029
________________________________________________________________________________
Yes, those calculations are right BUT that's not the place to
calculate from. Remember, you have a bolt holding the
fitting and strut together. That's a hole in the strap.
If the strap is 1" wide and the hole is 1/4" for instance, then
the material you have to work with is 3/4". So your strength
is now 0.75 X 0.080 X 97000.
Any failure is going to be at the weakest point. One of the
four 3/8" sides at the holes. An example of a weak point
is a nick at the edge of a hole. That's why it's important to
ease the edges by deburring them and rounding them in
the process.
Each of those four outer strut connections takes a portion
of the entire weight of the airplane. The front ones take
more than the rear. A 1200 lb aircraft in level flight has
each wing panel holding up 600 lb. Depending on the
airfoil and location of the spars, the front one is likely to
see 325 to 375 lb. That's upward force at 90=B0 to the
wing surface. The strut is at an angle so the tension on
it is quite a bit more than that upward force. Now the
wing is attached to the rest of the plane by both the outer
struts and, in our case, the inner struts. The inner ones
take only a small portion of the load though. How much
depends on the exact location of the outer ones, the
aspect ratio and the planform of the wing, is it Hershy
Bar, Tapered, Elliptical, etc..
Once you have figured out that static load then you need
to take into account turning loads,gust loads etc.
Taking the above figures, the strap, at the hole location, has
a tensile strength of 5820 lb. The two straps then, 11640 lb.
Quite a bit stronger than needed in our application when
using 4130. You must keep in mind the Piet was originaly
designed for, and built with mild steel. In fact a lot of certified
small aircraft had mild steel in their frames.
Clif
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Perez
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2008 3:40 PM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Wing drag cables and fittings
So, say a wing strut fitting is 1" X 10" X .080. Would the cross
sectional area be .080? square inches? If this is right, then that
piece made of 4130 would be able to carry, (97,000 X .080) about
7,760lbs? If that fitting was doubled, as the wing strut fittings are,
(one piece each side of the spar) then the total load capability of the
fitting would be around 15,520 lbs? Or would it still be "rated" at
7,760 because that is when one side could fail and render the entire
fitting failed?
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
12/14/2008 12:28 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Gene Rambo" <generambo(at)msn.com>
Subject:
Re: Wing drag cables and fittings
Date:
Dec 15, 2008
All of the math is interesting and correct, but to answer the original
post, you can rest assured that this airplane is grossly overbuilt!
Also to your original question, the drag/anti-drag wires in the wing
take very little load, especially as compared to things like lift
struts. There is no need to tighten them very much, either. once they
are drawn snug, they are doing their job. They are holding a particular
dimension and will not stretch. You can, however, do damage or add
stress by overtightening, which accomplishes nothing.
One point that may draw the wrath of the real engineers on here, but in
a setup like the lift struts, I do not think you calculate that each
strut is carrying half of the load. In a triangular setup like that,
each side carrys the entire load. I know for a fact when doing
hoisting, such as if you were lifting a steel I-beam (horizontally)with
a crane where a cable is attached to each end of the beam forming a
triangle with the crane's cable (just picture it, bear with me), each of
the two "legs" of the triangle is carrying the entire load, not half.
Gene
(ducking for cover)
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
drag and anti-drag cables
Date:
Dec 15, 2008
From:
"Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <Michael.D.Cuy(at)nasa.gov>
This is no place to try to save weight. Use 1/8" cables, brass
turnbuckles, and per-plans 4130 steel fittings.
You get disoriented on a very hazy summer day in rapidly decreasing
visibility on your way back to the airport
and enter a rain shower, loose your horizon and find yourself passing
thru Vne and into the 100 mph zone and
you'll wish you hadn't tried to re-engineer this part of the airplane.
This is nothing to be messed with !
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 15, 2008
From:
Lawrence Williams <lnawms(at)yahoo.com>
Subject:
wing drag cables and fittings
Mike-
-
I guess you've finished your leading edges and are now trammelling your win
g and making up the fittings. I know it's been alluded to before but if you
-follow the plans as far as the cables and metal gages go, you can't go w
rong. I know that Mike Cuy and others advocate lengthening some of the fitt
ings for more clearance and easier bolt insertion but I can't remember anyo
ne changing the thickness. Ask anyone about airframe failures in a plans-bu
ilt Piet and you'll get a lot of blank stares......there have been none.
-
Get on with your building......Brodhead is still 8 months away and at your
pace you should be able to fly in.
-
And pictures, WE WANT PICTURES!!!
-
Larry W.- xcg, xcmr, epp=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 15, 2008
From:
del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com>
Subject:
Piet project for a song
if anyone is interested in a piet project that is well on its way to becoming a
beautiful flying machine. Mine is for sale for only $2000
Del
Del-New Richmond, Wi
farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com
________________________________________________________________________________
Thanks guys. Good stuff! I thought for sure that the hole in the end of the
strap played a factor, I just did not think it through and do the proper m
ath. I have no intention on changing the hardware for the wing struts. I wa
s mostly curious as to the forces on the drag wires in the wings and used t
he strut fittings as an example to help me with the math.
-
It seemed to me that those cables didn't see much tension and that once the
y were in place, they would not see much in the form of other loads.
-
Mike has talked with me off list as well, so believe I have a good handle o
n it all now.
-
Lawrence, still working on the right wing. I wanted to have the actual flig
ht fittings in place temporarily to run my strings to represent the cables.
Then I can place my ribs and epoxy. So, I still just have the ribs on the
spars loose waiting for hardware to be made.
-
-
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Wing drag cables and fittings
Date:
Dec 15, 2008
From:
"Jack T. Textor" <jtextor(at)thepalmergroup.com>
Mike,
Good idea on the string...I did it on my second wing and it allowed all
the ribs to clear the cable. It also helps when doing the cross braces.
One more note...when you do the compression struts, make sure they don't
rise above or below your ribs.
Jack
www.textors.com
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
for Larry Williams
Date:
Dec 15, 2008
From:
"Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <Michael.D.Cuy(at)nasa.gov>
Larry-- can you post any photos to us of your wing tubing setup before
cover ?
You know you could have capped that baby off on either end, welded in a
drain fitting and used it
as your fuel tank leaving your wing center section free for baggage
space.
I'm very proud of you for coming out of the closet about how you did
your wing----you were holding back
on us man !
Mike C.
<>
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 15, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Wing drag cables and fittings
Good note on the compression struts Jack! Thanks.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 15, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Wing drag fitting math
Group, I have done some math on these fittings. I am sure some of you may h
ave done it before, but I want to show what I did and see what you think.
-
>From what I found, 4130 has a tensile strength of 79,000 PSI. T6061-T6 alum
inum is rated at 45,000.
-
The smallest cross sectional area fitting for the wing drag cables is 5/8"
wide by .080. (the thickness of the 4130 steel.)
-
Here is what I came up with using the 3/16" hole as in the prints:
-
.625 - .1875 = .4375 (5/8" wide minus the 3/16" hole)
.4375 X .080 = .035 (cross sectional area of that 5/8" fitting with a 3/1
6" hole)
.035 X 79,000 = 2,765 pounds.
-
-
Next I did that same fitting made out of .125 aluminum.
.625 - .1875 = .4375
.4375 X .125 = .0546875 (cross sectional area of the 5/8" aluminum with t
he same hole)
.0546875 X 45,000 = 2,460.938 lbs.
-
The 1/8" galv. 7 X 19 cable at A.S. is rated at 2,000 lbs.
-
If I did the math right with the right formulas, would aluminum be a good s
ubstitute for these fittings? The other drag wire fittings are 3/4" wide. I
f all were made 3/4" wide, then the rating is closer to 3,000 lbs.
-
I would be concerned with hole elongation of the fitting. Anyone know how t
o figure out THOSE numbers?- Thanks all.
________________________________________________________________________________
Jack's tip on holding the compression struts in place reminded me of
what I did on mine. I made little plywood sockets out of 1/8" plywood,
just large enough for the end of the compression strut ti fit inside the
socket. I glued the sockets in place on the spar where the compression
struts would go. The struts then just nest inside the sockets and are
held in place by the compression applied by the drag and anti-drag
wires. No nails or glue hold the struts in place. The sockets were
just a way to hold them until the wires were tensioned, and to keep them
from slipping sideways due to shock loads. I don't have a good picture
showing exactly what I did but you can see the end of the bottom right
inboard compression strut sitting in its socket in this picture:
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh, NC
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael
Perez
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2008 12:54 PM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Wing drag cables and fittings
Good note on the compression struts Jack! Thanks.
_________________________________________________
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
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 15, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Wing drag cables and fittings
Thanks Jack. I had seen that type of setup before and nay use it as well.
________________________________________________________________________________
If I did the math right with the right formulas, would aluminum be a
good substitute for these fittings? The other drag wire fittings are
3/4" wide. If all were made 3/4" wide, then the rating is closer to
3,000 lbs.
I would be concerned with hole elongation of the fitting. Anyone know
how to figure out THOSE numbers? Thanks all.
It depends on the edge distance from the hole to the edge of the piece.
Fittings like this typically fail in shear - the bolt will plull
sideways through the metal fitting, shearing out a plug of material the
width of the bolt and the length of whatever edge distance the fitting
was made with. Typically, the edge distance should be twice the hole
diameter (edge distance being measured from the edge of the part to the
centerline of the hole) or more. In this case, using your example of
.125" aluminum, with a #10 bolt (AN3) the edge distance would be 3/8".
After subtracting half the bolt diameter (since that distance was
measured to the centerline of the bolt), you are left with .375" -
.188"/2, or .281". This gives a shear area of .281" x .125" (material
thickness) or .035 sq. inches of shear area. Since most metals will
fail in shear at about half their tensile strength, the actual failure
will occur when the metal reaches a shear stress of 22,500 psi (half of
the 45,000 psi you have in tensile strength). This means that the load
required for the fitting to fail in shear is 22,500 x .035 sq in., or
790 lbs. Note that this also does not apply ANY safety factor. Of
course, any scratch or imperfection will induce a stress concentration
making the actual failure load even lower than this. This is why you
should always have a safety factor of at least 1.5 applied to any
engineering loading
It is generally good design to make the fittings and hardware at least
as strong as the cable so that if the plane is overloaded, the cable
will stretch a bit, rather than have parts fail that are more difficult
to replace.
And don't think that the only loads those drag wire and anti-drag wires
will see are the initial installation loads. The primary purpose of the
drag wires is to resist the wind loads on the wing. The force of the
wind produced by airspeed is generally calculated by the formula
F=AxPxCd, where A is the frontal area in sq. feet, P is the wind
pressure in psf and Cd is the drag coefficient. For the sake of
argument, accept that generally wind pressure is taken as 0.00256 V2,
where V is the airspeed in mph. Cd is 2.0 for a flat plate, for a high
drag airfoil like a Pietenpol let's assume that at worst case (High
angle of attack) it is about .5 (makes the calculations easier). If you
just take the frontal area of the wing it is roughly 6" thick and 13'
(per panel) long for a total area of 6.5 sq ft. At 100 mph, with a Cd
of 0.5, this would give a total drag force per wing panel of F = 6.5 x
.00256 (100)x (100) x .5 or 83.2 lbs. Not much load. However, while
Bernard Pietenpol was a genius on most things, he didn't do us any
favors with the design of the drag wires. Most planes space the
fittings for drag wires about as far apart as the spars are separated,
so the angle of the drag wires to the spars is about 45 degrees. On the
Pietenpol, there are only two bays per panel, so the angle is pretty
sharp - about 19 degrees. This means that for the cables to resist an
83 lb load chordwise load, the load in the cable is actually 254 lbs (F
= Load/sine 19deg). Note that this 254 lb load is in addition to
whatever tensile load is present in the cable at rest. This is why Gene
Rambo's comment to not make the cable any tighter than necessary is good
advice. It doesn't take much preloading to get the cable up to several
hundred pounds of tension, and then the flight loads can exceed the
strength of the drag wires, and the wing will fold up.
Note also that increasing the speed from 100 mph to 110 causes the drag
load to go from 83 lbs to 100 lbs per panel, which causes the cable load
to go from 254 to 309 lbs. And this is assuming that all the drag of
the wing is produced by the airfoil, but all the drag of the lift struts
and the bracing wires is also carried by the drag wires(and to a small
extent by the flying wires between the struts), so the actual loads are
higher than shwon.
Sorry - long answer to why you don't want to use aluminum for your wing
fittings. It also should convince you that you really want 1/8" cable
here and in any high load areas, and use 3/32" for areas of lesser load.
3/32" cable has less than half the strength of 1/8".
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael
Perez
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2008 1:12 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Wing drag fitting math
Group, I have done some math on these fittings. I am sure some of you
may have done it before, but I want to show what I did and see what you
think.
>From what I found, 4130 has a tensile strength of 79,000 PSI. T6061-T6
aluminum is rated at 45,000.
The smallest cross sectional area fitting for the wing drag cables is
5/8" wide by .080. (the thickness of the 4130 steel.)
Here is what I came up with using the 3/16" hole as in the prints:
.625 - .1875 = .4375 (5/8" wide minus the 3/16" hole)
.4375 X .080 = .035 (cross sectional area of that 5/8" fitting with a
3/16" hole)
.035 X 79,000 = 2,765 pounds.
Next I did that same fitting made out of .125 aluminum.
.625 - .1875 = .4375
.4375 X .125 = .0546875 (cross sectional area of the 5/8" aluminum with
the same hole)
.0546875 X 45,000 = 2,460.938 lbs.
The 1/8" galv. 7 X 19 cable at A.S. is rated at 2,000 lbs.
If I did the math right with the right formulas, would aluminum be a
good substitute for these fittings? The other drag wire fittings are
3/4" wide. If all were made 3/4" wide, then the rating is closer to
3,000 lbs.
I would be concerned with hole elongation of the fitting. Anyone know
how to figure out THOSE numbers? Thanks all.
_________________________________________________
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
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 15, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Wing drag fitting math
Thanks Jack! That was what I was looking for. I had asked in one of my earl
ier posts what the load/tension was on the drag cables as installed. I also
knew of flight loads, but no one responded with any numbers.
-
I appreciate your time very much. I enjoy learning these type of things as
they apply in other areas other then aviation.
-
--- On Mon, 12/15/08, Phillips, Jack wro
te:
From: Phillips, Jack <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinalhealth.com>
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Wing drag fitting math
Date: Monday, December 15, 2008, 2:52 PM
If I did the math right with the right formulas, would aluminum be a good s
ubstitute for these fittings? The other drag wire fittings are 3/4" wide. I
f all were made 3/4" wide, then the rating is closer to 3,000 lbs.
-
I would be concerned with hole elongation of the fitting. Anyone know how t
o figure out THOSE numbers?- Thanks all.
-
It depends on the edge distance from the hole to the edge of the piece.-
Fittings like this typically fail in shear ' the bolt will plull sideways
through the metal fitting, shearing out a plug of material the width of th
e bolt and the length of whatever edge distance the fitting was made with.
- Typically, the edge distance should be twice the hole diameter (edge di
stance being measured from the edge of the part to the centerline of the ho
le) or more.- In this case, using your example of .125=94 aluminum, with
a #10 bolt (AN3) the edge distance would be 3/8=94.- After subtracting ha
lf the bolt diameter (since that distance was measured to the centerline of
the bolt), you are left with .375=94 - .188=94/2, or .281=94.- This give
s a shear area of .281=94 x .125=94 (material thickness) or .035 sq. inches
of shear area.- Since most metals will fail in shear at about half their
tensile strength, the actual failure will occur when the metal reaches a
shear stress of 22,500 psi (half of the 45,000 psi you have in tensile str
ength).- This means that the load required for the fitting to fail in she
ar is 22,500 x .035 sq in., or 790 lbs.- Note that this also does not app
ly ANY safety factor.- Of course, any scratch or imperfection will induce
a stress concentration making the actual failure load even lower than this
.- This is why you should always have a safety factor of at least 1.5 app
lied to any engineering loading
-
It is generally good design to make the fittings and hardware at least as s
trong as the cable so that if the plane is overloaded, the cable will stret
ch a bit, rather than have parts fail that are more difficult to replace.
-
And don=92t think that the only loads those drag wire and anti-drag wires w
ill see are the initial installation loads.- The primary purpose of the d
rag wires is to resist the wind loads on the wing.- The force of the wind
produced by airspeed is generally calculated by the formula-- F=AxPx
Cd, where A is the frontal area in sq. feet, P is the wind pressure in psf
and Cd is the drag coefficient.- For the sake of argument, accept that ge
nerally wind pressure is taken as 0.00256 V2, where V is the airspeed in mp
h.- Cd is 2.0 for a flat plate, for a high drag airfoil like a Pietenpol
let=92s assume that at worst case (High angle of attack) it is about .5 (ma
kes the calculations easier).- If you just take the frontal area of the w
ing it is roughly 6=94 thick and 13=92 (per panel) long for a total area of
6.5 sq ft.- At 100 mph, with a Cd of 0.5, this would give a total drag f
orce per wing panel of F = 6.5 x .00256 (100)x (100) x .5 or 83.2 lbs.-
Not
much load.- However, while Bernard Pietenpol was a genius on most things
, he didn=92t do us any favors with the design of the drag wires.- Most p
lanes space the fittings for drag wires about as far apart as the spars are
separated, so the angle of the drag wires to the spars is about 45 degrees
.- On the Pietenpol, there are only two bays per panel, so the angle is p
retty sharp ' about 19 degrees.- This means that for the cables to resi
st an 83 lb load chordwise load, the load in the cable is actually 254 lbs
(F = Load/sine 19deg).- Note that this 254 lb load is in addition to wh
atever tensile load is present in the cable at rest.- This is why Gene Ra
mbo=92s comment to not make the cable any tighter than necessary is good ad
vice.- It doesn=92t take much preloading to get the cable up to several h
undred pounds of tension, and then the flight loads can exceed the strength
of the drag wires, and the wing will fold up.
-
Note also that increasing the speed from 100 mph to 110 causes the drag loa
d to go from 83 lbs to 100 lbs per panel, which causes the cable load to go
from 254 to 309 lbs.- And this is assuming that all the drag of the wing
is produced by the airfoil, but all the drag of the lift struts and the br
acing wires is also carried by the drag wires(and to a small extent by the
flying wires between the struts), so the actual loads are higher than shwon
.
-
Sorry ' long answer to why you don=92t want to use aluminum for your wing
fittings.- It also should convince you that you really want 1/8=94 cable
here and in any high load areas, and use 3/32=94 for areas of lesser load.
- 3/32=94 cable has less than half the strength of 1/8=94.
-
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
-
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-lis
t-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael Perez
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2008 1:12 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Wing drag fitting math
-
Group, I have done some math on these fittings. I am sure some of you may h
ave done it before, but I want to show what I did and see what you think.
-
>From what I found, 4130 has a tensile strength of 79,000 PSI. T6061-T6 alum
inum is rated at 45,000.
-
The smallest cross sectional area fitting for the wing drag cables is 5/8"
wide by .080. (the thickness of the 4130 steel.)
-
Here is what I came up with using the 3/16" hole as in the prints:
-
.625 - .1875 = .4375 (5/8" wide minus the 3/16" hole)
.4375 X .080 = .035 (cross sectional area of that 5/8" fitting with a 3/1
6" hole)
.035 X 79,000 = 2,765 pounds.
-
-
Next I did that same fitting made out of .125 aluminum.
.625 - .1875 = .4375
.4375 X .125 = .0546875 (cross sectional area of the 5/8" aluminum with t
he same hole)
.0546875 X 45,000 = 2,460.938 lbs.
-
The 1/8" galv. 7 X 19 cable at A.S. is rated at 2,000 lbs.
-
If I did the math right with the right formulas, would aluminum be a good s
ubstitute for these fittings? The other drag wire fittings are 3/4" wide. I
f all were made 3/4" wide, then the rating is closer to 3,000 lbs.
-
I would be concerned with hole elongation of the fitting. Anyone know how t
o figure out THOSE numbers?- Thanks all.
-
_________________________________________________
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
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 15, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Wing drag fitting math
Jack, I just read your post again, what good stuff. I believe you answered
all my questions.- Thanks.
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Bill Church" <eng(at)canadianrogers.com>
Subject:
Wing drag cables and fittings
Date:
Dec 15, 2008
Gene,
Let's just say that the plane is "safely overbuilt". Making a statement like
"grossly overbuilt" could lead someone who does not possess the necessary
knowledge to assume that they could safely reduce the size of almost any (or
all) component(s) of the plane. This simply is not the case. Since the plans
were drawn in an age where mild steel was the norm for aircraft
construction, and today considerably stronger 4130 is the norm, there are
some areas where there is potential to safely modify certain components
(again, assuming that one has the requisite knowledge to do the necessary
calculations). But, in general, if built to the plans, everything should
work fine. I agree that the drag/anti-drag wires do not carry much load -
when the plane is sitting on the ground. When in flight (particularily at
the upper end of the speed range), the draggy old Piet wing may very well
witness significant loads. The cables wouldn't be where they are, and sized
as they are for no reason. Your point about not overtightening the wires is
a very good one. The cables are there to carry loads imposed on them by the
drag induced by flight. No sense in pre-stressing the wires or the airframe.
They should be snug, but not overtightened.
As for your statements regarding the load distribution on the lift struts,
instead of drawing "wrath", all you're going to draw from me is "math". Your
example of a steel beam being lifted with a cable attached to each end is an
interesting one. Let's assume the beam weighs 1000 pounds. In an ideal
world, the cables attached to each end of the beam would be infinitely long,
which would result in the cables running vertically, so there would be zero
horizontal component to the load. Since all that leaves is the vertical
load, each cable takes half, or 500 pounds. Unfortunately, most of us live
in the real world, and we cannot use infinitely long cables. In order to
make use of limited space, the cables are shortened, resulting in a
triangular set-up, as you mentioned. When the arrangement changes from
vertical cables to angled cables, horizontal loads are imposed. The vertical
component remains at 1000 pounds (due to gravity), but the horizontal
component increases with each degree that the cable moves off of vertical.
These horizontal forces are ADDED to the vertical forces, to give a
resultant force, which acts along the length of the cable. Typically, in
practice, the angle formed between the beam and the cable is not less than
30 degrees. At 30 degrees, the resultant force acting on the cable is
exactly twice the vertical component. For this reason, each of the cables
used to lift a 1000 pound beam needs to be rated for 1000 pounds, since each
end will actually be loaded at 1000 pounds. If the angle is less than 30
degrees, the load goes up even higher. For instance, if the angle is only 20
degrees, the resultant load will be almost 1500 pounds. If the angle is only
10 degrees, the resultant load is almost 3000 pounds. These calculations are
not complicated, just using basic trigonometry (sine).
So, in practical terms, if you're lifting a beam with cables arranged at 30
degrees, each of the cables does need to be strong enough to carry the full
weight of the beam, since that IS the (resultant) load each cable will be
loaded to. BUT... each of the cables is still only carrying half the load -
the difference is that the resultant load is actually twice the weight of
the beam (in this case).
I've attached a simple sketch showing the three cases mentoned above (30, 20
and 10 degrees). By carefully drawing accurate triangles to scale, it is
possible to calculate the resultant loads without dredging up unpleasant
(for many) memories of high school trigonometry.
Bill C.
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gene Rambo
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2008 7:42 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wing drag cables and fittings
All of the math is interesting and correct, but to answer the original post,
you can rest assured that this airplane is grossly overbuilt! Also to your
original question, the drag/anti-drag wires in the wing take very little
load, especially as compared to things like lift struts. There is no need
to tighten them very much, either. once they are drawn snug, they are doing
their job. They are holding a particular dimension and will not stretch.
You can, however, do damage or add stress by overtightening, which
accomplishes nothing.
One point that may draw the wrath of the real engineers on here, but in a
setup like the lift struts, I do not think you calculate that each strut is
carrying half of the load. In a triangular setup like that, each side
carrys the entire load. I know for a fact when doing hoisting, such as if
you were lifting a steel I-beam (horizontally)with a crane where a cable is
attached to each end of the beam forming a triangle with the crane's cable
(just picture it, bear with me), each of the two "legs" of the triangle is
carrying the entire load, not half.
Gene
(ducking for cover)
________________________________________________________________________________
Hi John I'm not sure what other builders have done with their compression
struts but I left mine free until after I did a pre-trammel of the wing pan
el ( 3 piece wing) and then glued them in with T-88.
The airleron has a seperate spar set which is shown in cross section in t
he lower left hand corner of drawing five of the plans. I hope I understo
od your question correctly and this is of some help. Ed G.
es and fittingsFrom: amsafetyc(at)aol.comDate: Tue=2C 16 Dec 2008 04:15:21 +00
00Sorry guys obviously I am not in a position to offer advice as I am still
looking at drawings while I wait for my spar material to come in. Please b
are with me for what may appear foolish or premature questions: Are compres
sion struts supposed to be free floating and not securely fastened glued or
nailed?The aileron cut: does that cut include a rip of the spar or is ther
e another piece that gets is added that runs along the spar? Where does tha
t part of the aileron come from? For some reason I am not seeing where that
part comes from and I don't see a call out for that part in the drawings.
What am I missing?ThanksJohn
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
From: "Phillips=2C Jack" Date: Mon=2C 15 Dec 2008 13:10:32 -0500To: <pieten
pol-list(at)matronics.com>Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Wing drag cables and fi
ttings
Jack=92s tip on holding the compression struts in place reminded me of what
I did on mine. I made little plywood sockets out of 1/8=94 plywood=2C jus
t large enough for the end of the compression strut ti fit inside the socke
t. I glued the sockets in place on the spar where the compression struts w
ould go. The struts then just nest inside the sockets and are held in plac
e by the compression applied by the drag and anti-drag wires. No nails or
glue hold the struts in place. The sockets were just a way to hold them un
til the wires were tensioned=2C and to keep them from slipping sideways due
to shock loads. I don=92t have a good picture showing exactly what I did
but you can see the end of the bottom right inboard compression strut sitti
ng in its socket in this picture:
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh=2C NC
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-lis
t-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael PerezSent: Monday=2C December
15=2C 2008 12:54 PMTo: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.comSubject: RE: Pietenpol-L
ist: Wing drag cables and fittings
Good note on the compression struts Jack! Thanks.
http://www.matronics.com/contributionhttp://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-Listhttp://forums.matronics.com
_________________________________________________ This message is for the
designated recipient only and may contain privileged=2C proprietary or othe
rwise private information. If you have received it in error=2C please notif
y the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use of the emai
l by you is prohibited. Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano -
============= =B7=9B~=89=ED=B2=2C=DE=D9=CA%=A2
=BD4=D3M4}=A7=1Er=8B=AB=89=EA=E7{=07(=BA=B8=9E=AC=F9^j=C7=92=BA=9Ah=AE=D6(
=BA=B2=B2=DB=13=86+ =A2{a=02wFz=D4=A8=99=E0=16=11#=8C=10TD=10h=9F=B6=C3h
=BD=E9=9Bz=B8=AC=B6=17=9E{=9A=94=B8=AC=B4[=A7u=16=A2=B1=EA=C2''$=A2{ax
*'=B6=B8=9B=BA=D8=A8=9EX=A7=91=B7=A5=A3 h~)=DD=A2=EBf=A2=B7=9An=8B=AD=B6=18
=AC=C9=E6=AB=B17=AB=AE'pZ=DEx=89=DCz{b=BD=E1=A2~=DB =8A=CBB=A2{k=89=BB
=AD=8A=89=D6y=B4=A2=B5=E6=A1=AD=E7=E1=B6=DA=7F=FF 0=99=ABk=A2x=9C=B1=CA&=FD
=CA'=B6=B8=9B=BA=D8=A8=9E=1Bm=A7=FF=F0=C3 =9A=B6=BA'=89=CB=1C=A2o=DC=A2{k
=89=BB=AD=8A=89=FFi8Z=9EL=A8=B9=FA+=CA=8B=AB=81=E9=DE=AE=8B=AC=B2=EAi=A2=BB
Lj=DBC=AD=A9ex=B8=AC=B4=07f=8At=E1x=F8=9E=B5=E9=E9=A2R=B2=D1&j)E=A2=BB
R=C7=AD=85=E3=1A=B6=BA'=89=CB =8A=CBEy=ABn=AD=EB j=F8 j=DA+=B6=86=EB=A3
=1E=B6=17j|=8B=8A=CBn=B6)b=B6'=AC=B2=E7!j=C2=B2=D5'=FD+=9B=B1=CA
=D8=A8=9C =DC=86+=DEI=E6=ABr=10=E8=C2yhi=DE=C3k k=A3 =1E =16=AD=14=04=0F
=86=8Bh=B2=16=ABy=A9=DD=9A=E7!=9A=E7!=9A=8A=DEj=1A=DE~=1Bm=A7=FF=F0=C3 =9A
=B6=BA'=89=CB=1C=A2o=CDj=F8 j=DA+>'=ADzzh=94=B8=AC=B6=1Bm=A7=FF=F0=C3 =9A
=B6=BA'=89=CB=1C=A2o=CDj=F8 j=DA+>'=ADzzh=94=B8=AC=B7=F6=8C=014N4=92X@E9
=15 I&z =DEj=D7(=9E=D7=A7=B5=A9l=A1=AB=DA=8AV=9B-=EBj=D8^Y=E6=C5=A2
=BB=B1=A8ky=F8m=B6=9F=FF~=8A=EE=9A=C9=9A=B6=BA'=89=CB=1C=A2hm=B6=9F=FF~
=8A=EE=9A=C9=9A=B6=BA'=89=CB=1C=A2o=DA=FD=DF=A2{=7F=B7n=87r=FE=1Bf
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Wing drag cables and fittings
Date:
Dec 16, 2008
From:
"Jack T. Textor" <jtextor(at)thepalmergroup.com>
John,
The struts can be handled either way, I glued mine. I attached a
picture of the aileron (inboard side). You add 3 pieces span wise. The
first will end up being the spar that the aileron attaches to, the
middle one is the aileron front spar and the last is the aileron rear
spar. The piece lying on top is the inboard side of the aileron. Hope
this helps.
Jack
www.textors.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Michael Silvius" <silvius(at)gwi.net>
Subject:
Re: gas tank filler neck options
Date:
Dec 16, 2008
John:
Sory for the dealyed reply as we have been without power here for a few
days.
I have the Wag Aero filler neck in aluminum cat # E-448-000 and it is
1.25 inch tall.
I also have a mild steel one cat # E-323-000 and is the same height and
is threaded and fits in to flange Cat # E-322-000
Michael in Maine
----- Original Message -----
From: John Egan
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 10:18 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: gas tank filler neck options
Hi builders,
I have been looking for a gas tank filler neck to extend the hieght of
my gas cap. I can not find what I want, and I wonder if you guys know
if this item is out there some where?
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 17, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Wing tip bow
I am curious as to what function a curved wing tip serves. I wonder why I c
an't put a flat tip on with no curve.- Thanks.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: hit the jackpot
From:
amsafetyc(at)aol.com
Date:
Dec 17, 2008
Wow buildapalooza is coming together. The lumber yard called for me to pick up
my spar material, my metal has arrived and I varnish sealer I ordered from Richard
Schreiber has just arrived.
With vacation now underway I am gonna pick up my spars and get the building process
moving.
Its all about the build
Buildapalooza 08, 09 is now in process
John
------Original Message------
From: Michael Perez
Sender: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
ReplyTo: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Dec 17, 2008 10:59 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Wing tip bow
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
________________________________________________________________________________
It just wouldn't look like a Pietenpol. Other than that, there is no
reason.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael
Perez
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 11:00 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Wing tip bow
I am curious as to what function a curved wing tip serves. I wonder why
I can't put a flat tip on with no curve. Thanks.
_________________________________________________
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
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 17, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Wing tip bow
Copy that. Thanks Jack.
It just wouldn=A2t look like a Pietenpol.- Other than that, there is no r
eason.
-
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
-
-
________________________________________________________________________________
Looking through the archives, I see enough cable posts to confuse me even f
urther. From what I gather, SS should only be used-in "static" conditions
and galvanized in "dynamic" conditions. 1/8" for the bracing and 3/32" for
the controls. My plan is this:
-
1/8" SS 7/7 for wing drag cables
3/32" galv. 7/19 for controls
-
I have not thought through-for the rest of the plane, as I am only workin
g on one wing now. However, since I am buying the cable, I might as well ge
t what I can for the whole plane. Is there a standard for Pietenpol cable;
size, material, strand makeup, and use location? What cable makes the most
sense at what locations? I would think that SS would be used outside the pl
ane more then galv., but that doesn't seem to be the case.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 18, 2008
From:
shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com>
Subject:
Re: Cable type/material
Either one is ok, SS or galvanized.- both have been used on certified air
planes, SS is the more perfered on newer production aircraft due to its res
istance to corrosion.- However using SS for the cabane brace wires has th
e bennifit of being non ferrous, and not interfering with your mag compass.
Shad=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
I agree with Shad. I used Stainless throughout on my Pietenpol. Just
make sure it is aircraft grade. Aircraft Grade cable has lubricants
added to allow it to flex without chafing that commercial grade cable
does not.
I used 1 x 19 1/8" stainless for the drag and anti-drag wires, the
cabane (roll) wires, and for the undercarriage bracing wires. I used 7
x 19 3/32" for the control cables and the tail brace wires, as well as
the flying wires between the lift struts. 1 x 19 is the strongest, but
it is a bear to put thimbles on.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of shad
bell
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2008 10:48 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Cable type/material
Either one is ok, SS or galvanized. both have been used on certified
airplanes, SS is the more perfered on newer production aircraft due to
its resistance to corrosion. However using SS for the cabane brace
wires has the bennifit of being non ferrous, and not interfering with
your mag compass.
Shad
_________________________________________________
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
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 18, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Re: Cable type/material
See, that is a great tip...electrical interference...never thought of that.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 18, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Cable type/material
Understood Jack. I was aware of the lube in AC quality cables. A lot of pla
ces call their cable AC grade, but it is not lubed. To be clear, 3/32" is a
GO for the flying struts? Thanks.
-
--- On Thu, 12/18/08, Phillips, Jack wro
te:
From: Phillips, Jack <Jack.Phillips(at)cardinalhealth.com>
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Cable type/material
Date: Thursday, December 18, 2008, 11:06 AM
I agree with Shad.- I used Stainless throughout on my Pietenpol.- Just
make sure it is aircraft grade.- Aircraft Grade cable has lubricants adde
d to allow it to flex without chafing that commercial grade cable does not.
-
I used 1 x 19 1/8=94 stainless for the drag and anti-drag wires, the cabane
(roll) wires, and for the undercarriage bracing wires.- I used 7 x 19
-3/32=94 for the control cables and the tail brace wires, as well as the
flying wires between the lift struts.- 1 x 19 is the strongest, but it is
a bear to put thimbles on.
-
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
-
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-lis
t-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of shad bell
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2008 10:48 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Cable type/material
-
Either one is ok, SS or galvanized.- both have been used on certified air
planes, SS is the more perfered on newer production aircraft due to its res
istance to corrosion.- However using SS for the cabane brace wires has th
e bennifit of being non ferrous, and not interfering with your mag compass.
Shad
-
_________________________________________________
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
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 18, 2008
From:
Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu>
Subject:
Re: Cable type/material
We have this exact problem with out Piet. It's quite a challenge.
Maybe I'll suck it up and replace the cabane braces with ss. Good
idea.
>...planes, SS is the more perfered on newer production aircraft due
>to its resistance to corrosion. However using SS for the cabane
>brace wires has the bennifit of being non ferrous, and not
>interfering with your mag compass.
>Shad
--
---
Jeffrey H. Boatright, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Ophthalmology
Emory University School of Medicine
Editor-in-Chief
Molecular Vision
________________________________________________________________________________
That's why Waco Biplanes used wooden joysticks. It's really not a
problem as long as you remember to hold the stick at the "neutral"
position while swinging the compass. Anytime the stick is not at
neutral in flight, the compass is going to be spinning anyway.
By stirring the stick around like I was stirring a pot, I can make my
compass do a complete circle.
Incidentally, I have compasses in both cockpits and on a long trip I
find that I tend to use the one in the front cockpit much more than the
one in the rear. I can see it easier without having to duck my head.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
-----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, December 18, 2008 2:06 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: mag compass interference
As I mentioned in an earlier post, my compass swings noticeably when I
move the steel tube
control stick forward and aft, particularly as the stick goes forward
from the neutral
position. A hardwood control stick would not introduce this effect. I
have never considered
the cabane braces to be a factor, assuming that Corky probably swung
that error out of
the compass when he set up the deviation card.
I have never found the mag compass on 41CC to be a problem to use,
despite its limitations
and mine. Like a Tahitian dancer, it jiggles and sways as we fly along
but we always have
a general idea of where we're going. When I turn the airplane, the
compass does its turn
and dip error things and I don't bother with trying to turn to a
specific heading because
roads and fences are much better for that purpose and they don't jiggle,
dip, bob, and
overshoot. I have never flown with a GPS or NAV in the airplane and
have never been
more than slightly lost.
'Course then again, I've never flown the airplane more than about 75
miles in the same
direction anyway, so there hasn't been a need to hold any certain
heading for more than
an hour or so. Looking at the compass in the airplane though, I notice
that I should probably
refinish the face and service the fluid. Might as well swing the
compass again, too, since a
number of things have changed on the airplane and the deviation card is
all but unreadable.
I think I'll try to get a little bit lost again this weekend, if this
fog lifts by then.
Oscar Zuniga
Air Camper NX41CC
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
_________________________________________________
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: Piet project for a song
From:
"Tom Anderson" <tomanderson_nc(at)yahoo.com>
Date:
Dec 18, 2008
I can sing! :D
Is it the std. or long fuselage version?
--------
Location: Wilson, NC
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=220006#220006
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Gene Rambo" <generambo(at)msn.com>
Subject:
Re: mag compass interference
Date:
Dec 18, 2008
Jack:
I am not sure that is "why" Waco used wooden sticks, lots of others did
too (Jenny, etc), but just as many did not (Travel Air, etc). It got a
friend of mine killed in a Waco when the stick broke off. If the stick
is affecting the compass, one could always get it de-magnetized. The
effect of something like the roll wires can be adjusted out with the
compensators, because they are not moving, as you pointed out, like the
stick.
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: Phillips, Jack<mailto:Jack.Phillips(at)cardinalhealth.com>
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2008 2:19 PM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: mag compass interference
That's why Waco Biplanes used wooden joysticks. It's really not a
problem as long as you remember to hold the stick at the "neutral"
position while swinging the compass. Anytime the stick is not at
neutral in flight, the compass is going to be spinning anyway.
By stirring the stick around like I was stirring a pot, I can make my
compass do a complete circle.
Incidentally, I have compasses in both cockpits and on a long trip I
find that I tend to use the one in the front cockpit much more than
the
one in the rear. I can see it easier without having to duck my head.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
-----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, December 18, 2008 2:06 PM
To: Pietenpol List
Subject: Pietenpol-List: mag compass interference
>
As I mentioned in an earlier post, my compass swings noticeably when I
move the steel tube
control stick forward and aft, particularly as the stick goes forward
from the neutral
position. A hardwood control stick would not introduce this effect.
I
have never considered
the cabane braces to be a factor, assuming that Corky probably swung
that error out of
the compass when he set up the deviation card.
I have never found the mag compass on 41CC to be a problem to use,
despite its limitations
and mine. Like a Tahitian dancer, it jiggles and sways as we fly
along
but we always have
a general idea of where we're going. When I turn the airplane, the
compass does its turn
and dip error things and I don't bother with trying to turn to a
specific heading because
roads and fences are much better for that purpose and they don't
jiggle,
dip, bob, and
overshoot. I have never flown with a GPS or NAV in the airplane and
have never been
more than slightly lost.
'Course then again, I've never flown the airplane more than about 75
miles in the same
direction anyway, so there hasn't been a need to hold any certain
heading for more than
an hour or so. Looking at the compass in the airplane though, I
notice
that I should probably
refinish the face and service the fluid. Might as well swing the
compass again, too, since a
number of things have changed on the airplane and the deviation card
is
all but unreadable.
I think I'll try to get a little bit lost again this weekend, if this
fog lifts by then.
Oscar Zuniga
Air Camper NX41CC
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net>
_________________________________________________
This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain
privileged, proprietary
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error,
please notify the sender
immediately and delete the original. Any other use of the email by you
is prohibited.
Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese -
Nederlands - Norsk - Portuguese
________________________________________________________________________________
Jack, you just reminded me that I had thought about putting a "civilian" compass
up front for the very reasons you mention. I think I'll see if I can find an old
nautical one with brass trim, on a gimbal ;o) Better yet, maybe hung from the
underside of the wing centersection. The bigger, the better... I'm getting
to be "old weak-eyes".
Oscar Zuniga
Air Camper NX41CC
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 18, 2008
From:
"walt" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Subject:
Re: Wing tip bow
My gut feeling would be that , since the further out toward the end of
the wing you go, the more subtle things affect the flying, I would
assume the tip also "flies".
Think that I read somewhere , an article about how the wingtip is alot
more than just looking good.
What if you build another wingtip and when you test fly it, on a power
off stall, it's almost unrecoverable?? Then what do you do?
My Piet built to plans stalled wery nicely at 37MPH indicated.
The curved tip is a snap to make
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Perez
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 10:59 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Wing tip bow
I am curious as to what function a curved wing tip serves. I
wonder why I can't put a flat tip on with no curve. Thanks.
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Gene Rambo" <generambo(at)msn.com>
Subject:
Re: Wing tip bow
Date:
Dec 18, 2008
The wingtip accounts for a large percentage of the drag of the wing, as
the higher pressure air on the bottom tries to get to the top by going
around the tip rather than all the way to the trailing edge. Anything
you can do to change the shape of the tip to reduce the drag is to your
advantage. On a Piet, that may not matter that much because it is such
a draggy airplane, but it reduces the effective lifting area around the
tip. That is why jets have winglets. They use the airflow coming
around the tip across another airfoil (the winglet) to produce
additional lift in a forward direction, i.e. additional thrust. Anyway,
everything from ath Cub, Piet, etc, which need all the advantage they
can get, have shaped wingtips to reduce drag.
Gene
(now the engineers can give exact numbers)
----- Original Message -----
From: walt<mailto:waltdak(at)verizon.net>
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2008 6:49 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wing tip bow
My gut feeling would be that , since the further out toward the end of
the wing you go, the more subtle things affect the flying, I would
assume the tip also "flies".
Think that I read somewhere , an article about how the wingtip is alot
more than just looking good.
What if you build another wingtip and when you test fly it, on a power
off stall, it's almost unrecoverable?? Then what do you do?
My Piet built to plans stalled wery nicely at 37MPH indicated.
The curved tip is a snap to make
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Perez<mailto:speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
To:
pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 10:59 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Wing tip bow
I am curious as to what function a curved wing tip serves. I
wonder why I can't put a flat tip on with no curve. Thanks.
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
href='3D"http://www.matronics.com/contribution"'>http://www.matronics.c
om/contribution
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
href='3D"http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List"'>http://www
.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
href='3D"http://forums.matronics.com"'>http://forums.matronics.com
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
on>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
m/Navigator?Pietenpol-List>
________________________________________________________________________________
Flat tips have been done, and seemed to work. Mr. Weise flew this plane for a
long long time with some rather interesting changes to it.
http://www.westcoastpiet.com/n3513.htm
chris
--------
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, CA
WestCoastPiet.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=220167#220167
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 19, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Re: Wing tip bow
Those are quite the pictures. I like the brakes and the gold metal on the nose.
The all wood struts are different too.
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Ed G." <flyboy_120(at)hotmail.com>
Subject:
Re: Wing tip bow
Date:
Dec 19, 2008
I've seen Allan Weise's Piet many times and it flew great for 40 some years
. I guess a picture IS worth a thousand words. I thought the discussion was
about replacing the bowed wing tip bow with a straight piece of wood and i
t just wasn't working for me. Thanks for the pic. Ed> Subject: Pietenpol-L
ist: Re: Wing tip bow> From: Catdesigns(at)att.net> Date: Fri=2C 19 Dec 2008 1
ge posted by: "Catdesigns" > > Flat tips have been done
=2C and seemed to work. Mr. Weise flew this plane for a long long time with
some rather interesting changes to it.> > http://www.westcoastpiet.com/n35
13.htm> > > chris> > --------> Chris Tracy> Sacramento=2C CA> WestCoastPiet
.com> > > > > Read this topic online here:> > http://forums.matronics.com/v
======> > >
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject:
Alan Weise's Piet
Date:
Dec 19, 2008
Ha-! He solved the problem of mag compass interference by using wooden con
trol sticks alright... SQUARE wooden sticks=2C no less!
I tell you=2C it's the simplest ones that seem to fly the most hours and sp
end the least amount of time in the hangar.Oscar Zuniga
Air Camper NX41CC
San Antonio=2C TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Wing tip bow
From:
"Pieti Lowell" <Lowellcfrank(at)yahoo.com>
Date:
Dec 19, 2008
The wing tip bow wasn't on my first Piet, it was a flat board, not good looking,
but made a nice place for advertising, etc. She still flew and handled OK. I
flew that bird from Florida to Wisconsin, and a bunch of years after. That also
was my first Piet flown to Brodhead in the mid 70,s.
There were a number of wings built with a square end and all flew well.
Pieti Lowell
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=220192#220192
________________________________________________________________________________
Very nice! Looks like a flat board wing tip, wheel pants, modified turtle deck,
(I think that is what that is called) and a solid rod type control on the elevator.
Some of you guys must be pulling out your hair! Thanks for the pics Chris.
--- On Fri, 12/19/08, Catdesigns wrote:
From: Catdesigns <Catdesigns(at)att.net>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing tip bow
Date: Friday, December 19, 2008, 6:45 PM
This one was at Broadhead 2007.
http://www.westcoastpiet.com/pete_smith.htm
--------
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, CA
WestCoastPiet.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
HelsperSew(at)aol.com
Date:
Dec 19, 2008
Subject:
wing tip bows
these variations from the plans.........can't take it anymore.
Flat board wing tips....I have two words for you, just two
words.........UGH...LEE
If you want to build a different airplane, tune to another site! ......spare
us
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
**************One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail,
Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now.
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject:
Re: wing tip bows
Date:
Dec 19, 2008
TIME OUT EVERYONE!! I can't believe what I'm reading. Because someone
asked questions or suggested he might do things differently he's told to
go to another site? Unless this is some kind of joke.......
Up to this date this has been the very best building site on the web.
The most helpful, the most patience shown toward new and lost builders
and just good old fashion camaraderie.
Of all the people involved, I believe B. Pietenpol would be the most
vocal for change.
I haven't built a Piet (I bought mine) but if I were to build one I
would change a few things. I would make the dash slope toward the front
so I could read the instruments better and I would make the cockpit
wider for comfort.
A lot of changes others talk about I just roll my eyes at and wonder why
their building a Piet. But....it's their airplane, they can do as they
please. There's room here for all of us and I for one learn from all of
you.
If, somehow, I'm misunderstanding all of this and this is just good
humor among friends, then I apologize to all for getting on my soapbox.
Gene in windy Tennessee
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Dick N." <horzpool(at)goldengate.net>
Subject:
Re: wing tip bows
Date:
Dec 19, 2008
Good post, Gene. Winter takes a toll on everyone.
Dick N.
----- Original Message -----
From: Gene & Tammy
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2008 7:52 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: wing tip bows
TIME OUT EVERYONE!! I can't believe what I'm reading. Because
someone asked questions or suggested he might do things differently he's
told to go to another site? Unless this is some kind of joke.......
Up to this date this has been the very best building site on the web.
The most helpful, the most patience shown toward new and lost builders
and just good old fashion camaraderie.
Of all the people involved, I believe B. Pietenpol would be the most
vocal for change.
I haven't built a Piet (I bought mine) but if I were to build one I
would change a few things. I would make the dash slope toward the front
so I could read the instruments better and I would make the cockpit
wider for comfort.
A lot of changes others talk about I just roll my eyes at and wonder
why their building a Piet. But....it's their airplane, they can do as
they please. There's room here for all of us and I for one learn from
all of you.
If, somehow, I'm misunderstanding all of this and this is just good
humor among friends, then I apologize to all for getting on my soapbox.
Gene in windy Tennessee
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"bike.mike" <bike.mike(at)comcast.net>
Subject:
Re: Wing tip bow
Date:
Dec 18, 2008
Michael,
This list is a warm and friendly home to all types of enthusiasts.
Most of us here are type B, building pretty much to plan but changing a
few things to suit us and our budgets and operational reality. (If it
looks somewhat like a Piet, then it is a Piet.)
There are the type A, who build exactly to the plans as they were drawn
in 1933, or was it 1934, and published in the Flying and Glider manual,
or sold by the third and/or fourth generation of Pietenpol descenants.
These plans are an exact representation of BHP's airplane as it was
right between his 101st and 102nd modifications. (If it has an aluminum
head on the Model A engine, then it isn't a Pietenpol. A three-piece
wing is suspect.) (and it's "Bernard", never "Bernie")
Then there are the type C. These are the folks who believe that
building an experimental airplane is a learning experience. They want
to enjoy the same process and progress that BHP did. They want to
experiment with available materials, like BHP did. They want to try new
things, like BHP did.
Bernard Pietenpol built a number of airplanes, no two of them exactly
alike. He was able to learn a lot from his building and flying, you
should too. (It's rumored that his first one did not have seatbelts).
The guys here who say you should build to plan are right, if you want to
fly soon in an airplane whose experimentation was enjoyed more than 75
years ago. If you want a replica of an historical airplane, you have to
add in some knowledge gained from old photographs and written history.
But if you want to learn a lot, experiment, using some of the answers
you get here as a guide to keep you out of trouble.
And don't ever think that experimenting just like BHP did is in any way
belittling what he accomplished.
Mike
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Perez
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2008 4:08 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wing tip bow
Sorry Walt, I will build my plane the way I want to. Sorry you
interpret my questions as a negative.
For the others, thanks or the posts and the link to those great
pictures. I was not thinking of a flat boeard as the pictures show, I
was going to use a tip, just not curved. We'll see, not quite there yet.
--- On Fri, 12/19/08, walt wrote:
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 20, 2008
From:
zk-owl <zk-owl(at)CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Subject:
Re: Wing tip bow
Hi Michael. a straight piece of timber at the wing tip may tend to bow
inwards when the fabric is tightened.
Regards Mike T.
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Perez
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2008 1:08 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wing tip bow
Sorry Walt, I will build my plane the way I want to. Sorry you
interpret my questions as a negative.
For the others, thanks or the posts and the link to those great
pictures. I was not thinking of a flat boeard as the pictures show, I
was going to use a tip, just not curved. We'll see, not quite there yet.
--- On Fri, 12/19/08, walt wrote:
From: walt <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wing tip bow
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Date: Friday, December 19, 2008, 6:34 PM
Good for you Ed G.!
Build to the plans.
PS This isn't a "what can I change on the plans", site.
PPS To me , It's belittleing Bernard Pietenpol's talents, to
try to change his plans.
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: Ed G.
To: piet-list piet-list
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2008 10:59 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Wing tip bow
One of the many things I have learned while building my
Piet over the last eight years is that the master has already figuered
out most of the "what ifs" for us. That's why we bought his plans. Yes,
somethings need to be changed to work in todays airport environment,
BUT. Everything that I have changed has added extra planning and
changeing at least one something else to work with the change which
requires more planning and experimenting which adds exponentially to the
build time. So, I have learned that at least with my limited time to
devote to my Piet, If I ever plan to fly the thing, I had better quit
"Changeing" and "Planning" and keep building. It's amazing how much
progress can be made when just building to the plans. Ed G. Do Not
archive
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.mat
ronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
TOM MICHELLE BRANT <tmbrant(at)msn.com>
Subject:
Re: Piet project for a song
Date:
Dec 19, 2008
sounds good=2C let me know .
Tom B.
Date: Fri=2C 19 Dec 2008 07:44:59 -0800
From: farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Piet project for a song
Hi tom
I have a guy in Ill that put his name it=2C I'll let you know if the deal f
alls through. It is the long fuse for a vair.
Del-New Richmond=2C Wi
"farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com"
--- On Thu=2C 12/18/08=2C Tom Anderson wrote:
From: Tom Anderson <tomanderson_nc(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Piet project for a song
Date: Thursday=2C December 18=2C 2008=2C 7:36 PM
I can sing! :D
Is it the std. or long fuselage version?
--------
Location: Wilson=2C NC
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=220006#220006
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Clif Dawson" <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject:
Re: wing tip bows
Date:
Dec 20, 2008
So just what is it about this Pietenpol Airyplane anyway?
For some of us it's a "piece of history from 1932 time machine"
and others a starting point from which to hare off from in all
mannner of directions.
I find it all thought provoking, entertaining and sometimes
just downright hilarious.
I love it! Thank you all!
Sent to you from the northwesterly shores of the Wild Pacific Ocean.
Clif
Remember, Whatever you can't laugh at owns you.
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: wing tip bows
TIME OUT EVERYONE!! If, somehow, I'm misunderstanding all of this and
this is just good humor among friends, then I apologize to all for
getting on my soapbox.
Gene in windy Tennessee
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
12/19/2008 10:09 AM
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 20, 2008
From:
"Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com>
Subject:
Re: Wing tip bow
Well said Mike, I am more the type C. If I wanted to get in the air as soon
as possible in a Piet I would have bought a completed one and saved a bunch
of money. I am in it more for the learning experience and the chance to
communicate with bright and motivated people like the people on this
group , and at Broadhead, and Oshkosh.
Rick
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 9:52 AM, bike.mike wrote:
> Michael,
>
> This list is a warm and friendly home to all types of enthusiasts.
>
> Most of us here are type B, building pretty much to plan but changing a few
> things to suit us and our budgets and operational reality. (If it looks
> somewhat like a Piet, then it is a Piet.)
>
> There are the type A, who build exactly to the plans as they were drawn in
> 1933, or was it 1934, and published in the Flying and Glider manual, or sold
> by the third and/or fourth generation of Pietenpol descenants. These plans
> are an exact representation of BHP's airplane as it was right between his
> 101st and 102nd modifications. (If it has an aluminum head on the Model A
> engine, then it isn't a Pietenpol. A three-piece wing is suspect.) (and
> it's "Bernard", never "Bernie")
>
> Then there are the type C. These are the folks who believe that building
> an experimental airplane is a learning experience. They want to enjoy the
> same process and progress that BHP did. They want to experiment with
> available materials, like BHP did. They want to try new things, like BHP
> did.
>
> Bernard Pietenpol built a number of airplanes, no two of them exactly
> alike. He was able to learn a lot from his building and flying, you should
> too. (It's rumored that his first one did not have seatbelts).
> The guys here who say you should build to plan are right, if you want to
> fly soon in an airplane whose experimentation was enjoyed more than 75 years
> ago. If you want a replica of an historical airplane, you have to add in
> some knowledge gained from old photographs and written history. But if you
> want to learn a lot, experiment, using some of the answers you get here as a
> guide to keep you out of trouble.
> And don't ever think that experimenting just like BHP did is in any way
> belittling what he accomplished.
>
> Mike
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> *From:* Michael Perez
> *To:* pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> *Sent:* Friday, December 19, 2008 4:08 PM
> *Subject:* Re: Pietenpol-List: Wing tip bow
>
> Sorry Walt, I will build my plane the way I want to. Sorry you interpret
> my questions as a negative.
>
> For the others, thanks or the posts and the link to those great pictures. I
> was not thinking of a flat boeard as the pictures show, I was going to use a
> tip, just not curved. We'll see, not quite there yet.
>
> --- On *Fri, 12/19/08, walt * wrote:
>
> **
>
> *
>
>
--
Rick Holland
Castle Rock, Colorado
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 20, 2008
From:
H RULE <harvey.rule(at)rogers.com>
Subject:
Re: ahhhhh purity
For the purists,there isn't any such thing.To use the original model A engi
ne as used back in the day you would be changing leathers on a constant bas
is.Today we use different materials which don't wear out as fast.That's jus
t one point.There are many others to point to.Bernard was anything but a pu
rist,that's why you have the designs you have today.Remember he started wit
h a Jenny.If he was a purist then we would be flying Jenny's instead of Pie
tenpols,GN-1 Aircampers,etc.,etc.For the purist ,I commend you on getting c
lose.Your planes are beautiful and crowd pleasers.I love the sound of the o
ld model A as I do the sound of Prat and Whitney's.I look forward to the da
y when someone with deep pockets builds a composite Pietenpol,sacrilege you
say,not really.It would both strong and light and different.It would be ne
at to see.How bout that for an engineering challenge?!I throw it out to you
builders.By the way I am-not a builder.I am a buyer and a flyer.I
wish I could do the things you guys and gals do.I built a bird house once
and even the birds wouldn't go in it.I finished off a GN-1 Aircamper that h
ad been in production since 1977 but not without the help of a lot of real
handy people including a couple of AME's.Keep the midnight oil burning out
there and the wood chips flying if not for yourselves then for guys like me
who really enjoy your work!Unfortunately the man who started my plane is l
ong since dead but his son did see his name in conjunction with my plane in
a magazine after he googled his fathers name-and contacted me to come an
d see his fathers plane and see it flying ,which he did and he was delighte
d with what he saw.You see as a boy he would crawl through the fuselage and
smell the wood- while running in the cables etc. for his dad.When he loo
ked into the fuselage and smelt the wood it brought back all those wonderfu
l memories of helping his dad-.=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 20, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Re: Wing tip bow
Thank you Mike. I understand exactly what you are saying. I respect those o
n this list not only from a human standpoint, but I respect their ways of t
hinking and the way they choose to build their planes. I get some very usef
ul info. here, as we all have, as well as some useless badgering. I try to
take it all in stride and I try not to let it get out of hand. (Bite my ton
gue from time to time.)- I think this is a great forum to gain/give knowl
edge for a very small community of fliers who chose the Pietenpol.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 20, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Re: wing tip bows
Thank you Gene. I really do ask so many questions here because I just don't
know the answers. I hope to get useful answers from those who have experie
nced what I am proposing to change, good or bad. My ideas are not always (s
eldom) the best, but there is a chance that someone else has tried, seen, e
xperienced exactly what I am asking and can tell me for sure GO or NO GO. M
y plane will not be one so removed that it will not be recognized as a Piet
. I needed a platform to start with and the Pietenpol was the best foundati
on for me. I-hope when it is finished, Mr. Pietenpol himself would approv
e.
-
I love this site and I would not intentionally post things to lesson its va
lue to the Piet. community.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 20, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Wing tip bow
Thanks for the reply Ed. I can make the bow as is, no problems. I have made
furniture in the past that required laminating- 3 pieces of 3/8" thick o
ak to form a curve for the arms of a chair. I had to make the form, jig, et
c.
-
My spars are currently made as per the 3 piece wing print. I see what you a
re saying with the alignment of the spars and leading/trailing edges. Havin
g looked at it more, I would either need to make the tip as shown, or curve
it in a way that it would mate to-the spars and leading/trailing edges.
I guess I could make a straight piece-to attach to the spars, then anothe
r from the front spar to the leading edge and yet a third to go from the re
ar spar to the trailing edge. That would be a 3 piece tip and not very stro
ng as a compression strut. -A straight tip along the spars just won't wor
k, unless as you pointed out, the spars and other considerations are made t
o fit.
-
Thanks.
-
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 20, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Re: ahhhhh purity
I had spent four years rebuilding a car that I dreamed of having someday wh
ile I was in high school. Of course, it is quite modified now, but it was n
ot a numbers matching car when I got it. I always thought that the guys who
were trying to build a numbers matching, all original, as from the factory
car, had it so much harder then me. They had twice the homework, twice the
research to do, and at least 4 times the money to spend. I thought these g
uys were the ones who knew what was what and if I were going to ask anyone
questions these were the guys to go to.
-
The Pietenpol purist have their worked cut out for them trying to stay true
to the original. It is hard to find the materials, the tools, the proper m
ethods and techniques to use, etc. I salute their efforts and look forward
to seeing one of these "originals" in person.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 20, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Re: Interesting site / off topic
Sears Robuck!? Is there anything Sears didn't do back in the day? Those are some
great pictures!
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 20, 2008
From:
"walt" <waltdak(at)verizon.net>
Subject:
Re: Interesting site / off topic
yeah, it's an interesting site.
I never dreamed that the US tried so many "types"
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Perez
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2008 11:17 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Interesting site / off topic
Sears Robuck!? Is there anything Sears didn't do back in the
day? Those are some great pictures!
________________________________________________________________________________
Only the portion between the spars would be considered the compression
strut. The other two pieces would comprise the outboard leading and
trailing edges. What you describe sounds as though it would resemble the
wingtip on a Tailwind, trapezoidal in shape.
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 11:01 AM, Michael Perez wrote:
> Thanks for the reply Ed. I can make the bow as is, no problems. I have made
> furniture in the past that required laminating 3 pieces of 3/8" thick oak
> to form a curve for the arms of a chair. I had to make the form, jig, etc.
>
> My spars are currently made as per the 3 piece wing print. I see what you
> are saying with the alignment of the spars and leading/trailing edges.
> Having looked at it more, I would either need to make the tip as shown, or
> curve it in a way that it would mate to the spars and leading/trailing
> edges. I guess I could make a straight piece to attach to the spars, then
> another from the front spar to the leading edge and yet a third to go from
> the rear spar to the trailing edge. That would be a 3 piece tip and not very
> strong as a compression strut. A straight tip along the spars just won't
> work, unless as you pointed out, the spars and other considerations are made
> to fit.
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
John, I am building my first wing right now as well. If your spars are not
bent and twisted to bad, you have nothing to worry about. When it comes tim
e to make use of the drag wires in the wing as well as rigging the wings to
the fuselage, that is when you can get it all in alignment.- Keep in min
d that wood will continue to move, swell, twist, bend, etc. over time. Even
after the wing is built, I am told they are quite easy to twist and shift.
They don't get stiff until rigged and covered. So, a perfect wing "on the
jig" will more then likely move around a bit once it is removed and put out
of the way for later covering.
-
I have my first wing on my mobile table I made. I used some scrap 5" wood a
s a fence on one end to keep the spar ends even. I have a second fence 90 d
egrees to the first about 3 feel long as a guide for the length of the spar
. The rib locations are marked on the spars from top to bottom using a squa
re to make sure they are perpendicular to the spars. I epoxy in place 3 rib
s at a time and clamp them just enough to draw the spar up to the vertical
rib support. (minimal epoxy squeeze out.)- This process in effect will "w
alk" out any minor twist in the spars. I let these three ribs sit overnight
and then do 3 more, working from one end of the spars to the other. I only
have my spars clamped at the ends up against the fence and the forward spa
r along the 3 foot fence. The rest of the front spar and rear-spar are le
ft to "float". You will find that if you keep the spar ends equal and the r
ibs perpendicular to the spars, the wing is somewhat self aligning. By
clamping the spars to the vertical rib supports, the spars will kinda self
adjust assuming those vertical supports are square and not twisted. As lon
g as-your ribs are made the same and the cap strips are square to each ot
her, (the rib is true in every plane) as you work from one end to the other
, the wing will be just fine.
-
I have pictures of my current setup right now if interested. I will be epox
ying ribs 10,11,and 12 today.
________________________________________________________________________________
I have not, but that would be great!- I can't think of any reason off the
top of my head why it could not be done.
-
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 21, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Re: Squaring up
O.K., Not sure how many pictures I can put on a single post, so I may have
to send multiple replies.
-
This- first picture shows the small oak fences screwed to my table at exa
ctly 90 degrees. At the end of the table is the larger fence that is screwe
d to the smaller oak. The very ends of the spars are butted here and clampe
d to the fence. I put my front spar 6" away from the front small oak fence.
(Just a made up measurement. I wanted to make sure the ribs did not hit th
e front fence.) The dark wood block further down the spar is also 6" clampe
d to the fence and the spar to maintain parrallel. The spar ends are now ev
en and the front spar is locked square to the ends. The ribs themselves pro
perly space the rear spar. The spars are up on spaces that I will show you
in my next picture. Note the wood wedges between the rib tops and the front
spar top. These are added after the ribs have dried overnight.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 21, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Re: Squaring up
This attached picture shows the two small oak fences as well as the larger end
fence. The spar ends are clamped on top of the small end fence to keep the spars
from resting on top of the inside of the ribs and to give me working room.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 21, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Re: Squaring up
All right, here you will see toward the end of the table another piece of oak used
to maintain the same height as the front small fence under the spars. Notice
nothing is clamped to the table or tool box. I allow the spars to float and
let the ribs do the alignment. The green weights strapped to the spar with rags
is just there to keep some down force on the wing so that it won't sway if
bumped. The three bar clamps clamp the spars snugly to the rib verticals and remove
any twist out of the spar. Just enough to lay the spar upagainst the verticles...you
don't want to pre-stress the ribs or squeeze out the epoxy here.
As I said, I do three ribs at a time working from the end fence allowing each
set to dry overnight. I will do the end rib and tip rib tomorrow. The end rib
is not in place in the first photo because I could not rest the spars on the small
oak fence nor butt the spars against the large fence had Itbeen there.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 21, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Re: Squaring up
Lastly, this shows-a rib location mark on the spars. These are drawn squa
re to the spars and as long as the ribs at each spar are on these lines, an
d the ends of the spars are even, (against the end fence) all is square. We
ll, I believe good enough to get you to the rigging and covering stage. The
small arrow near the line is to remind me on which side of the line the ri
b goes. Not needed for the end rib, but helpful for all the other ribs. Rem
ember to plot your rib locations on both spars and put the ribs in place. R
un string to simulate the drag cables and adjust the ribs to clear. Mark th
ese new locations, disassemble the wing and square up these new location ma
rks to the spar. (perpendicular) Patience here, and be mindful that you hav
e the right ends of the spars at the end fence and that you don't have one
upside down, etc.
-
Sorry for the multiple posts and I hope some of what I have said is helpful
. If I can assists any further, let me know. I can take more/better picture
s if needed as well. Good Luck!
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Ray Krause" <raykrause(at)frontiernet.net>
Subject:
Re: Squaring up
Date:
Dec 21, 2008
Michael,
This is Ray Krause, a newbie to this site. I am just starting on my
Pietenpol and would appreciate seeing your pictures, also. My e-mail is
RayKrause(at)frontiernet.net.
I recently completed a Sonex Waiex plane. Beautiful and fast. The
Pietenpol will replace my J-3 for slow and low flying. I just need to
be building something!
Thanks,
Ray Krause
N51YX, Waiex, TD, Jab 3300 (1197), AeroCarb, Sensinich 54X62 wood prop,
Dynon D-180, Garmin SL-30, 327, 296, 65 hrs.
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Perez
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2008 8:26 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Squaring up
John, I am building my first wing right now as well. If your
spars are not bent and twisted to bad, you have nothing to worry about.
When it comes time to make use of the drag wires in the wing as well as
rigging the wings to the fuselage, that is when you can get it all in
alignment. Keep in mind that wood will continue to move, swell, twist,
bend, etc. over time. Even after the wing is built, I am told they are
quite easy to twist and shift. They don't get stiff until rigged and
covered. So, a perfect wing "on the jig" will more then likely move
around a bit once it is removed and put out of the way for later
covering.
I have my first wing on my mobile table I made. I used some
scrap 5" wood as a fence on one end to keep the spar ends even. I have a
second fence 90 degrees to the first about 3 feel long as a guide for
the length of the spar. The rib locations are marked on the spars from
top to bottom using a square to make sure they are perpendicular to the
spars. I epoxy in place 3 ribs at a time and clamp them just enough to
draw the spar up to the vertical rib support. (minimal epoxy squeeze
out.) This process in effect will "walk" out any minor twist in the
spars. I let these three ribs sit overnight and then do 3 more, working
from one end of the spars to the other. I only have my spars clamped at
the ends up against the fence and the forward spar along the 3 foot
fence. The rest of the front spar and rear spar are left to "float". You
will find that if you keep the spar ends equal and the ribs
perpendicular to the spars, the wing is somewhat self aligning. By
clamping the spars to the vertical rib supports, the spars will kinda
self adjust assuming those vertical supports are square and not twisted.
As long as your ribs are made the same and the cap strips are square to
each other, (the rib is true in every plane) as you work from one end to
the other, the wing will be just fine.
I have pictures of my current setup right now if interested. I
will be epoxying ribs 10,11,and 12 today.
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Ray Krause" <raykrause(at)frontiernet.net>
Subject:
Re: Squaring up
Date:
Dec 21, 2008
Thanks, Michael!
Thanks,
Ray Krause
N51YX, Waiex, TD, Jab 3300 (1197), AeroCarb, Sensinich 54X62 wood prop,
Dynon D-180, Garmin SL-30, 327, 296, 65 hrs.
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Perez
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2008 1:15 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Squaring up
Lastly, this shows a rib location mark on the spars. These are
drawn square to the spars and as long as the ribs at each spar are on
these lines, and the ends of the spars are even, (against the end fence)
all is square. Well, I believe good enough to get you to the rigging and
covering stage. The small arrow near the line is to remind me on which
side of the line the rib goes. Not needed for the end rib, but helpful
for all the other ribs. Remember to plot your rib locations on both
spars and put the ribs in place. Run string to simulate the drag cables
and adjust the ribs to clear. Mark these new locations, disassemble the
wing and square up these new location marks to the spar. (perpendicular)
Patience here, and be mindful that you have the right ends of the spars
at the end fence and that you don't have one upside down, etc.
Sorry for the multiple posts and I hope some of what I have said
is helpful. If I can assists any further, let me know. I can take
more/better pictures if needed as well. Good Luck!
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject:
Ford fuel insemination
Date:
Dec 21, 2008
Mike; I guess what Lowell was referring to was the image that was with his post,
showing an injected inline Ford. If you can't see that, go to
http://forums.matronics.com and go to the Piet forum. You'll see that image
attached to the post.
Pretty interesting setup and also has a magneto installed pointing forward
rather than hung off the back of the Ford like most. It would seem that
with so many inline injected 4-cyl. engines on the road these days, taking one
off a car and installing it on an airplane wouldn't be too difficult but then
again there is the "black box" that controls the darned things. Too many
sensors, pickups, wires, and programming details to make them work.
Oscar Zuniga
Air Camper NX41CC
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 21, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Re: Ford fuel insemination
Copy. I just missed it, to fast to read and not look for attachments.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 21, 2008
From:
"Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com>
Subject:
Fuel tank near electrical
Is it a problem placing higher voltage electrical components near a fuel
tank? In this case two ignition coils and a switcher unit for my Corvair
placed on the shelf ahead of the forward instrument panel. Don't know where
else I would put them except on the firewall.
Thanks
Rick
--
Rick Holland
Castle Rock, Colorado
________________________________________________________________________________
----- Original Message -----
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
> It would seem that
> with so many inline injected 4-cyl. engines on the road these days, taking
one
> off a car and installing it on an airplane wouldn't be too difficult but
then
> again there is the "black box" that controls the darned things. Too many
> sensors, pickups, wires, and programming details to make them work.
>
Yes though that one in the photo looked to be a mechanical one taken of a
Lycosaurus or something.
Michael under 18 inches of white fluffy suff today in Maine
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Ford fuel insemination
From:
"Pieti Lowell" <Lowellcfrank(at)yahoo.com>
Date:
Dec 21, 2008
taildrags(at)hotmail.com wrote:
> Mike; I guess what Lowell was referring to was the image that was with his post,
> showing an injected inline Ford. If you can't see that, go to
> http://forums.matronics.com and go to the Piet forum. You'll see that image
> attached to the post.
>
> Pretty interesting setup and also has a magneto installed pointing forward
> rather than hung off the back of the Ford like most. It would seem that
> with so many inline injected 4-cyl. engines on the road these days, taking one
> off a car and installing it on an airplane wouldn't be too difficult but then
> again there is the "black box" that controls the darned things. Too many
> sensors, pickups, wires, and programming details to make them work.
>
> Oscar Zuniga
> Air Camper NX41CC
> San Antonio, TX
> mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
> website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=220465#220465
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Ford fuel insemination
From:
"Pieti Lowell" <Lowellcfrank(at)yahoo.com>
Date:
Dec 21, 2008
The Injection body installed on this Ford B, was first tried on a stock Ford A
in 1992 and ran for 2 years (110 Hrs ) The increase in RPM ran take-off engine
speed at 1450 RPM with a 76X42 Prop. After the trial run the babbit was inspected
and was perfect. This A Ford engine was at Oshkosh during that EAA Pietenpol
Interview.
This Ford B installation has a stock Lambert , 90 HP, prop, (76X57), and will turn
2250 RPM. And by the way there isn't any electronics involved, 4.5 GPH fuel
consumption, no carb heat required, primer injects fuel at intake ports. Idles
at 550 RPM. Look close at photo , you will see many bolt-on go-fasts. this
B Ford has close to 300 Hrs, and no problems.
Pieti Lowell
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=220468#220468
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Dick N." <horzpool(at)goldengate.net>
Subject:
Re: Squaring up
Date:
Dec 21, 2008
Welcome to the group, Ray. You will find it helpful and sometimes
entertaining. What area are you from? We have members all around the
world.
Dick N.
----- Original Message -----
From: Ray Krause
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2008 4:19 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Squaring up
Michael,
This is Ray Krause, a newbie to this site. I am just starting on my
Pietenpol and would appreciate seeing your pictures, also. My e-mail is
RayKrause(at)frontiernet.net.
I recently completed a Sonex Waiex plane. Beautiful and fast. The
Pietenpol will replace my J-3 for slow and low flying. I just need to
be building something!
Thanks,
Ray Krause
N51YX, Waiex, TD, Jab 3300 (1197), AeroCarb, Sensinich 54X62 wood
prop, Dynon D-180, Garmin SL-30, 327, 296, 65 hrs.
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Perez
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 21, 2008
From:
Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu>
Subject:
Re: Ford fuel insemination
Pietei Lowell-
Impressive engine. Hope to meet you at Brodhead.
Jeff
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject:
Ford fuel insemination
Date:
Dec 21, 2008
Mike: careful... real Piets are not fuel injected ;o)
In both a light-hearted and yet a serious way, I look at that injected
Ford and see not only all of Mr. Pietenpol, but also a lot of what has
come after him. No, that engine is not converted according to Mr.
Pietenpol's clear and complete details. The leather flex coupling for
the mag isn't there, neither is the original carb, and very likely
not much of the engine interior is per his details- and yet there it is,
a nifty and reliable conversion. Experimental aviation at its finest,
and all of it based on the tried-and-true, soon to be 80-year-old design
that started life on the floor of a barn.
Start with a stable and forgiving platform and tweak to your heart's content.
There are not too many marginal aspects of the airplane, so we can do
a lot of different things to it and still end up with a good flier.
Oscar Zuniga
Original, unaltered, true-blue Air Camper NX41CC ;o)
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Clif Dawson" <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject:
Re: Squaring up
Date:
Dec 21, 2008
Have you run string through the ribs where the drag wires
will go? Just to make sure they will clear all the upright
parts of the ribs. If you go into the archives there's many
messages over the years indicating that the ribs should be
spaced to clear the drag wires and usually a few ribs will
be moved a bit from even spacing. It would be a shame
to have to cut out and replace rib braces to clear the wires.
Apparently if you build exactly to the planes it won't be an
issue but a few have moved ribs a half inch one way or the
other to have clearance.
It was suggested by Graham Hansen that it would be a
good idea to set all ribs in place without glueing then
install the cross bracing and drag/antidrag wires. If there
appears to be a clearance issue then you can move ribs
to clear. This could be more of an issue if your designing
your own method of drag bracing as some have done.
Clif
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Perez
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2008 8:26 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Squaring up
John, I am building my first wing right now as well. If your
spars are not bent and twisted to bad, you have nothing to worry about.
When it comes time to make use of the drag wires in the wing as well as
rigging the wings to the fuselage, that is when you can get it all in
alignment.
I will be epoxying ribs 10,11,and 12 today.
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
12/21/2008 3:08 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Peter W Johnson" <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au>
Subject:
Fuel tank near electrical
Date:
Dec 22, 2008
Rick,
I have a small header tank in front of my forward instrument panel. The
coils and switcher unit are mounted in the gap between the header tank and
the firewall.
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 Rick Holland
Sent: Monday, 22 December 2008 11:18 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tank near electrical
Is it a problem placing higher voltage electrical components near a fuel
tank? In this case two ignition coils and a switcher unit for my Corvair
placed on the shelf ahead of the forward instrument panel. Don't know where
else I would put them except on the firewall.
Thanks
Rick
--
Rick Holland
Castle Rock, Colorado
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
inter-rib lacing tape or this ?
Date:
Dec 22, 2008
From:
"Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <Michael.D.Cuy(at)nasa.gov>
For those who have completed fabric covering and taughtening on wings:
How many of you installed some sort of inter-rib lacing tape or
mechanical
(as I did with strips of cap strip material) method to keep your ribs
from moving under the forces of heat-shrinking your
dacron fabric ?
For those who did not use the age-old inter-rib lacing or what I did,
did your wing ribs stay put or did they move around some after fabric
taughtening ?
Thank you,
Mike C.
Ohio
<>
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Gardiner Mason" <airlion(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject:
Re: inter-rib lacing tape or this ?
Date:
Dec 22, 2008
inter-rib lacing tape or this ?Michael, I did the same as you with no
problem taughtening and covering. Just don't forget the braces on the
butt rib. I did, and I had to go in and add strips top and bottom for
two spaces between the aft spar and the trailing edge. I am covered and
primed now but the inside of the wing doesn't look near as nice as
yours since I painted everything with grey epoxy primer. That is what I
had in stock. Cheers, Gardiner Mason
----- Original Message -----
From: Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2008 4:37 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: inter-rib lacing tape or this ?
For those who have completed fabric covering and taughtening on wings:
How many of you installed some sort of inter-rib lacing tape or
mechanical
(as I did with strips of cap strip material) method to keep your ribs
from moving under the forces of heat-shrinking your
dacron fabric ?
For those who did not use the age-old inter-rib lacing or what I did,
did your wing ribs stay put or did they move around some after fabric
taughtening ?
Thank you,
Mike C.
Ohio
<>
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject:
inter-rib lacing tape or this ?
Date:
Dec 22, 2008
I used the age old inter-rib lacing tape. My ribs did not move.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Cuy, Michael
D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2008 4:37 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: inter-rib lacing tape or this ?
For those who have completed fabric covering and taughtening on wings: How
many of you installed some sort of inter-rib lacing tape or mechanical
(as I did with strips of cap strip material) method to keep your ribs from
moving under the forces of heat-shrinking your
dacron fabric ?
For those who did not use the age-old inter-rib lacing or what I did, did
your wing ribs stay put or did they move around some after fabric
taughtening ?
Thank you,
Mike C.
Ohio
<>
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Ray Krause" <raykrause(at)frontiernet.net>
Subject:
Re: Squaring up
Date:
Dec 22, 2008
Dick,
I am in Colusa, California (O08), just 60 miles north of Sacramento on
I5. Where is the closest Peitenpol builder?
Thanks,
Ray Krause
N51YX, Waiex, TD, Jab 3300 (1197), AeroCarb, Sensinich 54X62 wood prop,
Dynon D-180, Garmin SL-30, 327, 296, 65 hrs.
----- Original Message -----
From: Dick N.
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2008 5:59 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Squaring up
Welcome to the group, Ray. You will find it helpful and sometimes
entertaining. What area are you from? We have members all around the
world.
Dick N.
----- Original Message -----
From: Ray Krause
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2008 4:19 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Squaring up
Michael,
This is Ray Krause, a newbie to this site. I am just starting on my
Pietenpol and would appreciate seeing your pictures, also. My e-mail is
RayKrause(at)frontiernet.net.
I recently completed a Sonex Waiex plane. Beautiful and fast. The
Pietenpol will replace my J-3 for slow and low flying. I just need to
be building something!
Thanks,
Ray Krause
N51YX, Waiex, TD, Jab 3300 (1197), AeroCarb, Sensinich 54X62 wood
prop, Dynon D-180, Garmin SL-30, 327, 296, 65 hrs.
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Perez
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.mat
ronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 23, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
inter-rib lacing tape or this ?
Did anyone NOT use any typr of lacing or bracing? Curious as well as to the rib
movement.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
a couple of ratty old Pietenpols
Date:
Dec 23, 2008
From:
"Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <Michael.D.Cuy(at)nasa.gov>
Hi Mike,
This was a very good video; thank you for putting it on the list.
Have a very Merry Christmas,
Jim
On Dec 23, 2008, Michael.D.Cuy(at)nasa.gov wrote:
Are in this video.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r91F95FIIZo
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 23, 2008
From:
Jim <jimboyer(at)hughes.net>
Subject:
Re: Squaring up
On Dec 22, 2008, raykrause(at)frontiernet.net wrote:
Hi Ray,
Welcome to the Pietenpol list. As you already know from Gary's message there are
four of us building Piets in Nothern California. Chris is definitely the closest
to you but if you are ever in or near Santa Rosa please do come see me.
My local phone number is 707-571-8001 or my cell 707-953-7837. My Piet is at my
house, 3504 Banyan Street, Santa Rosa, CA, 95403.
I'm retired so am home most days.
Cheers, Jim
Dick,
I am in Colusa, California (O08), just 60 miles
north of Sacramento on I5. Where is the closest Peitenpol
builder?
Thanks,
Ray Krause
N51YX, Waiex, TD, Jab 3300 (1197), AeroCarb,
Sensinich 54X62 wood prop, Dynon D-180, Garmin SL-30, 327, 296, 65
hrs.
----- Original Message -----
From:
Dick
N.
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2008 5:59
PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Squaring
up
Welcome to the group, Ray. You will find it
helpful and sometimes entertaining. What area are you from? We
have members all around the world.
Dick N.
----- Original Message -----
From:
Ray Krause
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2008 4:19
PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Squaring
up
Michael,
This is Ray Krause, a newbie to this
site. I am just starting on my Pietenpol and would appreciate seeing
your pictures, also. My e-mail is RayKrause(at)frontiernet.net.
I recently completed a Sonex Waiex plane.
Beautiful and fast. The Pietenpol will replace my J-3 for slow and low
flying. I just need to be building something!
Thanks,
Ray Krause
N51YX, Waiex, TD, Jab 3300 (1197), AeroCarb,
Sensinich 54X62 wood prop, Dynon D-180, Garmin SL-30, 327, 296, 65
hrs.
----- Original Message -----
From:
Michael Perez
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/chref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/chref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 24, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Back to the flat board wing tips
I am curious, anyone know for sure if these flat board-tipped Piets. used the standard
size wing, or did they make them longer? Since the plans show the ailerons
going past the last rib and out to the tip, did these flat board wings stop
at the rib, making the wing a few inches shorter? If so, I wonder how this
shorter aileron flew. Anyong flying this type of wing tip?
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 25, 2008
From:
"Ryan Mueller" <rmueller23(at)gmail.com>
Subject:
Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 1 Msgs - 12/24/08
First, if you were to install a winglet onto the wingtip then you would no
longer have a flat slab sided wingtip....because you replaced it with a
winglet.
Second, it would be ridiculous, morphodite airplane....IMHO. :P
Merry Christmas everyone!
Ryan
On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 7:19 AM, Gardiner Mason wrote:
> airlion(at)bellsouth.net>
>
> Hey ya'll, how would winglets on the end of the flat board wing tips work?
> Just a thought what with all the discussion on this subject. Merry Christmas
> all. Cheers, Gardiner Mason
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Willis" <
> timothywillis(at)earthlink.net>
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 25, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 1 Msgs - 12/24/08
Thanks Tim, but I don't plan on using the flat board tip. My original questions
were in relation to the ailerons with this flat board design, whether or not
the wings were longer or standard, changes in the aileron length, etc.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Wing tips
Date:
Dec 25, 2008
From:
helspersew(at)aol.com
Gentlemen,
I think its time we form a consensus, and decide right now that if anybody shows
up at Brodhead with flat board wing tips, they?will not be allowed to call their
airplane a Pietenpol, at least while they are there. I'm all for minor personal
alterations, but this flat board wing tip idea is a little too much to
take. Will anybody join me?
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Wing tips
From:
amsafetyc(at)aol.com
Date:
Dec 25, 2008
Is that with or without winglets?
John
------Original Message------
From: helspersew(at)aol.com
Sender: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
ReplyTo: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Dec 25, 2008 12:41 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Wing tips
Gentlemen,
I think its time we form a consensus, and decide right now that if anybody shows
up at Brodhead with flat board wing tips, theywill not be allowed to call their
airplane a Pietenpol, at least while they are there. I'm all for minor personal
alterations, but this flat board wing tip idea is a little too much to
take. Will anybody join me?
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL
----------------
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 25, 2008
From:
Richard Carden <flywrite(at)verizon.net>
Subject:
Re: Wingtips
> My take on the wingtips: The centerline of the leading edge, the
> spars, and the trailing edge are not in the same plane (no pun
> intended!). In order to deal with that, I lofted the rib centerline
> and fashioned a tip with that arc/curve in it. Then, looking as
> what I had, I thought that when the fabric was tightened, it would
> look very peculiar, to say the least. So I fashioned curved pieces
> that carried the horizontal plane of the spar outward for about an
> inch and then arced down to the top of the tip. One such piece
> midway between the front spar and the leading edge, one on each of
> the two spars, two between the rear main spar and the trailing
> edge, and tone each over the rear wing spar and the front aileron
> spar. Same treatment top and bottom. I don't know what this will do
> to the flight characteristics, but it certainly looks good-at least
> to me. The whole job took a great deal of time getting the right
> curves cut. A belt sander was a big help. Merry Christmas to all,
> and back to work tomorrow, deo voto. Dick Carden
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 25, 2008
From:
Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu>
Subject:
Re: Wing tips
Not to be negative, but I won't join that effort. If someone flies
into Brodhead and says they did it in a Pietenpol, that's enough for
me. If it doesn't look like a Piet to me, I'll just keep drinking
Chief Oshkoshes until it does!! :)
>Gentlemen,
>
>I think its time we form a consensus, and decide right now that if
>anybody shows up at Brodhead with flat board wing tips, they will
>not be allowed to call their airplane a Pietenpol, at least while
>they are there. I'm all for minor personal alterations, but this
>flat board wing tip idea is a little too much to take. Will anybody
>join me?
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 25, 2008
From:
Lawrence Williams <lnawms(at)yahoo.com>
Subject:
back to flat board wingtips
Yep, Alan Weise (sp?) flew his for years and years with cut-off tips and 1/
4" ply plates on the tips after a ground-loop "wrinkled" one of them. Piets
are great for that sort of non-critical engineering field fixes.
-
Don't get bogged down with the non-critical details, just build to the plan
s and GO FLY!!!
-
Larry Williams- xcg, xcmr, epp=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Wing Tips
From:
"Pieti Lowell" <Lowellcfrank(at)yahoo.com>
Date:
Dec 25, 2008
In the mid 60's I flew Allen Ruldolf's Piet, and Allen flew with me to Mr Pietenpol's
field for an introduction that I'll never forget. Over the next few years
I kept in close touch with Mr Pietenpol, asking many questions just as you
guys are doing with each other, as the List wasn't available. When I asked him
what his opinion was on the Installation of a Funk Engine, inverted, his answer,
I think that it should be an excellent engine for a " Pietenpol ". I said
that the thrust line would change about 4", Mr. Pietenpol waited a moment and
commented," It should work, just look at the Seabee , it also flies slow." All
of my 4 Piets were not close to to Allen Rudolf's Piet, but you know guys, I
have a bushel basket full of PIET HATS, so I must be fooling the Brodhead experts.
In one of the comments about the Pietenpol being born on the floor of a barn 80
years, I came to wonder " I also was concieved 80 years ago also, don't know
where, but I tell you guys it has been it has been a ride I'll never ever forget,
just ask me.
Pieti Lowell
[Laughing]
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=221109#221109
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
612 and 613.5 Winglets
From:
"LarryB55" <morrisonintexas(at)yahoo.com>
Date:
Dec 25, 2008
I'm wondering if anyone knows if Mr. Buckolt is still selling the full size profiles
of the 612 and 613.5 airfoil? I have his snail-mail address. I also emailed
him through his website, but haven't heard back- thus the question. Wouldn't
want to call and disturb the man.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=221149#221149
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Roman Bukolt <conceptmodels(at)tds.net>
Subject:
Re: 612 and 613.5 Winglets
Date:
Dec 25, 2008
I still sell the Riblett Airfoils.
$10.00 each
Roman Bukolt
6505 Urich Terr.
Madison, Wi. 53719
On Dec 25, 2008, at 9:09 PM, LarryB55 wrote:
> >
>
> I'm wondering if anyone knows if Mr. Buckolt is still selling the
> full size profiles of the 612 and 613.5 airfoil? I have his snail-
> mail address. I also emailed him through his website, but haven't
> heard back- thus the question. Wouldn't want to call and disturb the
> man.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=221149#221149
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 25, 2008
From:
"Bill Princell" <weprincell(at)gmail.com>
Subject:
Re: Back to the flat board wing tips
Hi Michael:
I'm rebuilding a 25yr old GN1 AirCamper which has many modifications to the
original plans, including a Pietenpol airfoil with flat wing tips and the
"boxed-in" aileron bay you are asking about. I'm currently rebuilding the
3-piece wing w/44" wide center section) using the Ribblet 612 airfoil.
Several recent pictures are attached showing the rebuild work on the flat
wing tip and "boxed-in" aileron bay. The ailerons are 7' long and distance
from the last rib to outer edge of the tip might be a few inches longer than
the original design. The original ailerons were about 13" wide. I've
narrowed the ailerons slightly to 11-1/2" to conform with the general layout
of the 612 rib design.
Bill Princell - Noblesville, IN
Corvair Powered/GN1 AirCamper Rebuild Project
On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 11:03 AM, Michael Perez wrote:
> I am curious, anyone know for sure if these flat board-tipped Piets. used
> the standard size wing, or did they make them longer? Since the plans show
> the ailerons going past the last rib and out to the tip, did these flat
> board wings stop at the rib, making the wing a few inches shorter? If so, I
> wonder how this shorter aileron flew. Anyong flying this type of wing tip?
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 26, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Re: Back to the flat board wing tips
Thanks so much Bill. You actually answered my question and provided pictures! Are
you saying that this plane had the flat board tips prior to the rebuild you
are doing? By flat board, I am talking about what looks like the actual tip as
removed, and the wing just stops at the last rib. I was wondering if these planes
did, in fact, just stop at that last rib, or were they made longer by a
rib or two, thereby making the aileron longer. Of course, if the wing just stopped
at the last rib with no tip, then each aileron would be about 5" shorter.
I plan on doing more like what you show, but I am wondering how the slightly shorter
aileron will act. This is why I was asking about the flat board types...I
assumed those wings had the shorter ailerons.
Thanks for the pictures, they have been the most help.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 26, 2008
From:
H RULE <harvey.rule(at)rogers.com>
Subject:
Re: tenpol-List:
=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AMerry Christmas, Happy New Year and Happy flights to all in
2009!=0A-=0A-=0APierre=0A-=0ATwas the night before Christmas, and out
on the ramp,=0ANot an airplane was stirring, not even a Champ.=0AThe aircr
aft were fastened to tiedowns with care,=0AIn hopes that come morning, they
all would be there.=0AThe fuel trucks were nestled, all snug in their spot
s,=0AWith gusts from two-forty at 39 knots.=0AI slumped at the fuel desk, n
ow finally caught up,=0AAnd settled down comfortably, resting my butt.=0AWh
en the radio lit up with noise and with chatter,=0AI turned up the scanner
to see what was the matter.=0AA voice clearly heard over static and snow,
=0ACalled for clearance to land at the airport below.=0AHe barked his trans
mission so lively and quick,=0AI'd have sworn that the call sign he used wa
s "St. Nick".=0AI ran to the panel to turn up the lights,=0AThe better to w
elcome this magical flight.=0AHe called his position, no room for denial,
=0A"St. Nicholas One, turnin' left onto final."=0AAnd what to my wondering
eyes should appear,=0ABut a Rutan-built sleigh, with eight Rotax Reindeer!
=0AWith vectors to final, down the glideslope he came,=0AAs he passed all f
ixes, he called them by name:=0A"Now Ringo! Now Tolga! Now Trini and Bacun!
=0AOn Comet! On Cupid!" What pills was he takin'?=0AWhile controllers were
sittin', and scratchin' their head,=0AThey phoned to my office, and I heard
it with dread,=0AThe message they left was both urgent and dour:=0A"When S
anta pulls in, have him please call the tower."=0AHe landed like silk, with
the sled runners sparking,=0AThen I heard "Left at Charlie," and "Taxi to
parking."=0AHe slowed to a taxi, turned off of three-oh=0AAnd stopped on th
e ramp with a "Ho, ho-ho-ho..."=0AHe stepped out of the sleigh, but before
he could talk,=0AI ran out to meet him with my best set of chocks.=0AHis re
d helmet and goggles were covered with frost=0AAnd his beard was all blacke
ned from Reindeer exhaust.=0AHis breath smelled like peppermint, gone sligh
tly stale,=0AAnd he puffed on a pipe, but he didn't inhale.=0AHis cheeks we
re all rosy and jiggled like jelly,=0AHis boots were as black as a cropdust
er's belly.=0AHe was chubby and plump, in his suit of bright red,=0AAnd he
asked me to "fill it, with hundred low-lead."=0AHe came dashing in from the
snow-covered pump,=0AI knew he was anxious for drainin' the sump.=0AI spok
e not a word, but went straight to my work,=0AAnd I filled up the sleigh, b
ut I spilled like a jerk.=0AHe came out of the restroom, and sighed in reli
ef,=0AThen he picked up a phone for a Flight Service brief.=0AAnd I thought
as he silently scribed in his log,=0AThese reindeer could land in an eight
h-mile fog.=0AHe completed his pre-flight, from the front to the rear,=0ATh
en he put on his headset, and I heard him yell, "Clear!"=0AAnd laying a fin
ger on his push-to-talk,=0AHe called up the tower for clearance and squawk.
=0A"Take taxiway Charlie, the southbound direction,=0ATurn right three-two-
zero at pilot's discretion"=0AHe sped down the runway, the best of the best
,=0A"Your traffic's a Grumman, inbound from the west."=0AThen I heard him p
roclaim, as he climbed through the night,=0A"Merry Christmas to all! I have
traffic in sight."=0A=0AAuthor unknown
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Back to the flat board wing tips
From:
"Pieti Lowell" <Lowellcfrank(at)yahoo.com>
Date:
Dec 26, 2008
>From my experiences, the No 1 Piet had full length wings and flat ends with full
length ailerons. My No2 Piet had 2 ft shorter wings and the aileron were shortened
one foot, and a number of times I ran out of control on a brisk cross
wind landing. That means the stick was up against the max side movement. When
I shortened my 612 wing I kept the full length ailerons, and now a 35 MPH crosswind
can be handled without running out of stick control, and it gives excellent
roll rate speed when you need it. All provided one stays ahead of the airplanes
gyrations on a very windy day.
And as Mr. Pietenpol told me, " If your idea works try it, and it doesn't have
to be perfect".
Pieti Lowell
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=221246#221246
________________________________________________________________________________
Chris you have got to stop spending your time digging through these old magazines
and get out there and finish your Piet (and I have to stop reading your "discoveries.").
Hope you and family had a great Christmas.
Jim
On Dec 26, 2008, Catdesigns(at)att.net wrote:
While we are on the subject of modified Pietenpols check this one out.
http://books.google.com/books?id=6eEDAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA72&dq=pietenpol&lr=&as_brr=1&rview=1#PPA73,M2
--------
Chris Tracy
Sacramento, CA
WestCoastPiet.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=221258#221258
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Clif Dawson" <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject:
Re: Wing Tips
Date:
Dec 26, 2008
http://www.zenithair.com/stolch801/design/design.html
Halfway down- wingtips.
The Horner could satisfy everyone ( OK, maybe not! ) by
having a rounded shape and better tip performance.
Clif
At the risk of getting flamed here, especially since I think this is
> my first post to this list, how about Hornier tips? The Hornier tip
> should theoretically
> increase the effective length and look neat. > Al Hays
> Gore, VA
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
<catdesigns(at)att.net>
Subject:
Re: Modified Pietenpols
Date:
Dec 26, 2008
I got one more that will give some of you ulcers and others wild ideas.
This one is from the Feb. 1982 Sport Aviation. I must admit it's a good
looking plane.
Chris
Sacramento, CA
WestCoastPiet.com
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 27, 2008
From:
Jim <jimboyer(at)hughes.net>
Subject:
Re: Modified Pietenpols
Okay Chris,
Now we just have to make a cantilever wing spar for it so there are no wing struts
at all; it would look great, be much easier to get into the front cockpit
and like this guy Casey said probably would glide better.
Now how long would it add to my building time (and boy would the Pietenpol purists
howl).
Jim
On Dec 26, 2008, catdesigns(at)att.net wrote:
I got one more that will give some of you ulcers and others wild ideas.
This one is from the Feb. 1982 Sport Aviation. I must admit it's a good
looking plane.
Chris
Sacramento, CA
WestCoastPiet.com
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 27, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Re: Back to the flat board wing tips
Thank you Pieti. Real world experience is what I as after. Do you still hav
e this #2 plane?
-
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 27, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Re: Wing Tips
Clif, outstanding! That link is great. Now I know what those wing tips are!
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Back to the flat board wing tips
From:
"Pieti Lowell" <Lowellcfrank(at)yahoo.com>
Date:
Dec 27, 2008
The No 2 Piet had a steel construction with a 4412 wing shortened 2 Ft., push-pull
rod to aileron control, 85 Cont, Round steel struts faired in with balsa.
and much more. I gave a ride to a fellow from England, and he had to have it.
I received information that it is now in a museum in England.
This was built by Hosie Challis of IN. It was one of the fastest Piets I have ever
owned ,except when I put a Werner 145 on my Piet, she would fly @ 85 MPH at
2000 FPM to altitude, but required refueling on my 45 mile trip to Brodhead.
Pieti Lowell
PS The note that I wrote earlier saying that my fuel injection Ford A turned 1450
RPM on take-off, was wrong. It turned 2450 RPM by just opening up the air to
the intake ports.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=221350#221350
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
fantastic help videos from EAA--free
Date:
Dec 27, 2008
From:
"Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" <Michael.D.Cuy(at)nasa.gov>
Guys: Follow this and you'll find these "hidden" (not super-easy to
find) how-to videos that I just
stumbled upon at the EAA web site.
http://www.eaa.org/multimedia/
Then click on 'videos'
>From the drop down box click on 'EAA'
>From the tabs at the upper right click on 'Homebuilders'
>From the sub-tabs you can now pick from an array of videos under the
titles:
GENERAL
SHEET METAL
TUBE & FABRIC
WOOD
COMPOSITE
Then scroll thru the videos and watch whatever interests you.
Mike C.
Happy New Year you bums !
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject:
Aerial project for Anchorage schoolkids
Date:
Dec 27, 2008
Howdy, Pieters-
My wife and I just got back from a nearly 1600 mi. (round-trip) drive up to Los
Alamos, NM to gently gather up a beautiful set of landing gear legs from the
late Arlene Walsh's Aerial project. She died earlier this year in an auto accident
and through various actions and reactions, her project will be headed up
to Anchorage, AK to be worked on (and hopefully, completed) by a group of middle
school students. Thanks to Rob Stapleton from this list for putting together
all the pieces.
I examined and handled the various pieces of Arlene's project in the hangar at
Los Alamos. Outside, snow was drifting and the temp was in the high 20s but inside
the hangar it was impossible not to feel the warmth of the varnished wood
from FOUR wing panels (the Aerial is a biplane version of the Piet), as well
as the tail feathers and fuselage, all ready to be crated for shipping to Alaska.
It's a nice project, all hand-built (little humor for you guys there), and
I hope the kids learn about building from it and get the flying bug too.
There was no flying before, during, or after the trip. This winter storm has packed
some very strong and gusty winds, as anyone from Washington to Arkansas
can attest.
I hope everyone is enjoying the holidays and looking forward to kicking off the
80th anniversary of the Pietenpol beginning January 1 of 2009, an entire year
of celebration! So don't spare the Old Milwaukee, all you cheapskate homebuilders
like me ;o)
Oscar Zuniga
Air Camper NX41CC
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: squaring up
From:
amsafetyc(at)aol.com
Date:
Dec 28, 2008
I know, I know you guys told me not to worry about it too much but I just couldn't
start my wings with bent spars.
So after much thought I was able to straighten them out a bunch.
I had a 6' piece of 1X3 flat stock steel from my home made brake, I used it as
a straight edge and router guide.
I set a straight line then set the straight edge and re cut the edge of the spar
straight. Once I did that I used that routed edge against my saw fence made
2 rips and presto chango straight edges and squared up spars.
I figured that if I start straight, chances are the wings have a better chance
of coming out straight.
Thought I would share that with everyone
John
------Original Message------
From: Oscar Zuniga
Sender: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
ReplyTo: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Dec 27, 2008 8:19 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Aerial project for Anchorage schoolkids
Howdy, Pieters-
My wife and I just got back from a nearly 1600 mi. (round-trip) drive up to Los
Alamos, NM to gently gather up a beautiful set of landing gear legs from the
late Arlene Walsh's Aerial project. She died earlier this year in an auto accident
and through various actions and reactions, her project will be headed up
to Anchorage, AK to be worked on (and hopefully, completed) by a group of middle
school students. Thanks to Rob Stapleton from this list for putting together
all the pieces.
I examined and handled the various pieces of Arlene's project in the hangar at
Los Alamos. Outside, snow was drifting and the temp was in the high 20s but inside
the hangar it was impossible not to feel the warmth of the varnished wood
from FOUR wing panels (the Aerial is a biplane version of the Piet), as well
as the tail feathers and fuselage, all ready to be crated for shipping to Alaska.
It's a nice project, all hand-built (little humor for you guys there), and
I hope the kids learn about building from it and get the flying bug too.
There was no flying before, during, or after the trip. This winter storm has packed
some very strong and gusty winds, as anyone from Washington to Arkansas
can attest.
I hope everyone is enjoying the holidays and looking forward to kicking off the
80th anniversary of the Pietenpol beginning January 1 of 2009, an entire year
of celebration! So don't spare the Old Milwaukee, all you cheapskate homebuilders
like me ;o)
Oscar Zuniga
Air Camper NX41CC
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Clif Dawson" <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject:
Re: squaring up
Date:
Dec 27, 2008
Good man! Now if anyone where to tell you to
" Straighten up and fly right! " you can just point
to your wings. :-)
"Trifles make perfection, and perfection is no trifle."
(Michelangelo)
Clif
I trust Santa was good to everyone?
>
> I know, I know you guys told me not to worry about it too much but I just
> couldn't start my wings with bent spars.
>
>
> I figured that if I start straight, chances are the wings have a better
> chance of coming out straight.
>
> John
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Clif Dawson" <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject:
Re: Wing Tips
Date:
Dec 27, 2008
It's amazing how some stuff works. An extra invisible
foot and a half of wing and it didn't cost you a damn thing!
Clif
"The universe is full of magical things patiently waiting for our wits
to grow sharper."
~ Eden Phillpotts
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Perez
Clif, outstanding! That link is great. Now I know what those wing tips
are!
________________________________________________________________________________
Pieters,
This gift project couldn't and wouldn't happen without Oscar's help. It is
good to hear more about the Aerial and how it affects others. Hopefully it
will attract some attention here in Anchorage and encourage young people
into aviation, instead of just virtual flying.
Thanks Oscar!
RS
Rob Stapleton, Photojournalist
Anchorage, Alaska
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Oscar Zuniga
Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2008 4:20 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Aerial project for Anchorage schoolkids
Howdy, Pieters-
My wife and I just got back from a nearly 1600 mi. (round-trip) drive up to
Los Alamos, NM to gently gather up a beautiful set of landing gear legs from
the late Arlene Walsh's Aerial project. She died earlier this year in an
auto accident and through various actions and reactions, her project will be
headed up to Anchorage, AK to be worked on (and hopefully, completed) by a
group of middle school students. Thanks to Rob Stapleton from this list for
putting together all the pieces.
I examined and handled the various pieces of Arlene's project in the hangar
at Los Alamos. Outside, snow was drifting and the temp was in the high 20s
but inside the hangar it was impossible not to feel the warmth of the
varnished wood from FOUR wing panels (the Aerial is a biplane version of the
Piet), as well as the tail feathers and fuselage, all ready to be crated for
shipping to Alaska. It's a nice project, all hand-built (little humor for
you guys there), and I hope the kids learn about building from it and get
the flying bug too.
There was no flying before, during, or after the trip. This winter storm
has packed some very strong and gusty winds, as anyone from Washington to
Arkansas can attest.
I hope everyone is enjoying the holidays and looking forward to kicking off
the 80th anniversary of the Pietenpol beginning January 1 of 2009, an entire
year of celebration! So don't spare the Old Milwaukee, all you cheapskate
homebuilders like me ;o)
Oscar Zuniga
Air Camper NX41CC
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Rob Hart <robhart67(at)hotmail.com>
Subject:
Re: up too late tonight
Date:
Dec 28, 2008
Hi John
You've got my vote. As part of the overseas support crew=2C I wear my NASA
patch (Space Medicine and Health Care Systems) with great pride. I'd love
to pair that with a Pietenpol Patch. NASA also have a space support system
s poster out for school kids to design their own patch using existing NASA
design paradigms as a guide. I have a copy=2C but I'm no graphics designer
. I can have a crack at it=2C but I'm sure there are more gifted artists o
n the list who can do it justice.
Just glued the ribs for the port wing=3B recent discussions on wing tips an
d squaring up have been most useful.
Rob Hart
Perth=2C Western Australia
VH-PTN (reserved)
e tonightFrom: amsafetyc(at)aol.comDate: Sun=2C 28 Dec 2008 05:32:35 +0000
I was watching the military channel greatest ever. They were reviewing figh
ters and helicopters. I noticed each pilot had a series of insignia patches
. As piet builders and pilots maybe we should have a patch also?Who knows m
aybe we can get someone with artistic abilities to design one Then get some
one to sew it into an embroidered patch. What are your thoughts?John
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
From: "Clif Dawson" Date: Sat=2C 27 Dec 2008 19:59:28 -0800To: <pietenpol-l
ist(at)matronics.com>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing Tips
It's amazing how some stuff works. An extra invisible
foot and a half of wing and it didn't cost you a damn thing!
Clif
"The universe is full of magical things patiently waiting for our wits to g
row sharper." ~ Eden Phillpotts
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Perez
Clif=2C outstanding! That link is great. Now I know what those wing tips ar
=============B7=9B~=89=ED=B2=2C=DE=D9=CA%=A2=BD4
=D3M4}=A7=1Er=8B=AB=89=EA=E7{=07(=BA=B8=9E=AC=F9^j=C7=92=BA=9Ah=AE=D6(=BA
=B2=B2=DB=13=86+ =A2{a=02wFz=D4=A8=99=E0=16=11#=8C=10TD=10h=9F=B6=C3h=BD
=E9=9Bz=B8=AC=B6=17=9E{=9A=94=B8=AC=B4[=A7u=16=A2=B1=EA=C2''$=A2{ax*'
=B6=B8=9B=BA=D8=A8=9EX=A7=91=B7=A5=A3 h~)=DD=A2=EBf=A2=B7=9An=8B=AD=B6=18
=AC=C9=E6=AB=B17=AB=AE'pZ=DEx=89=DCz{b=BD=E1=A2~=DB =8A=CBB=A2{k=89=BB
=AD=8A=89=D6y=B4=A2=B5=E6=A1=AD=E7=E1=B6=DA=7F=FF 0=99=ABk=A2x=9C=B1=CA&=FD
=CA'=B6=B8=9B=BA=D8=A8=9E=1Bm=A7=FF=F0=C3 =9A=B6=BA'=89=CB=1C=A2o=DC=A2{k
=89=BB=AD=8A=89=FFi8Z=9EL=A8=B9=FA+=CA=8B=AB=81=E9=DE=AE=8B=AC=B2=EAi=A2=BB
Lj=DBC=AD=A9ex=B8=AC=B4=07f=8At=E1x=F8=9E=B5=E9=E9=A2R=B2=D1&j)E=A2=BB
R=C7=AD=85=E3=1A=B6=BA'=89=CB =8A=CBEy=ABn=AD=EB j=F8 j=DA+=B6=86=EB=A3
=1E=B6=17j|=8B=8A=CBn=B6)b=B6'=AC=B2=E7!j=C2=B2=D5'=FD+=9B=B1=CA
=D8=A8=9C =DC=86+=DEI=E6=ABr=10=E8=C2yhi=DE=C3k k=A3 =1E =16=AD=14=04=0F
=86=8Bh=B2=16=ABy=A9=DD=9A=E7!=9A=E7!=9A=8A=DEj=1A=DE~=1Bm=A7=FF=F0=C3 =9A
=B6=BA'=89=CB=1C=A2o=CDj=F8 j=DA+>'=ADzzh=94=B8=AC=B6=1Bm=A7=FF=F0=C3 =9A
=B6=BA'=89=CB=1C=A2o=CDj=F8 j=DA+>'=ADzzh=94=B8=AC=B7=F6=8C=014N4=92X@E9
=15 I&z =DEj=D7(=9E=D7=A7=B5=A9l=A1=AB=DA=8AV=9B-=EBj=D8^Y=E6=C5=A2
=BB=B1=A8ky=F8m=B6=9F=FF~=8A=EE=9A=C9=9A=B6=BA'=89=CB=1C=A2hm=B6=9F=FF~
=8A=EE=9A=C9=9A=B6=BA'=89=CB=1C=A2o=DA=FD=DF=A2{=7F=B7n=87r=FE=1Bf
_________________________________________________________________
Messenger's gift to you! Download free emoticons today!
http://livelife.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=669758
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Rob Hart <robhart67(at)hotmail.com>
Subject:
Re: up too late tonight
Date:
Dec 28, 2008
Hi John
You've got my vote. As part of the overseas support crew=2C I wear my NASA
patch (Space Medicine and Health Care Systems) with great pride. I'd love
to pair that with a Pietenpol Patch. NASA also have a space support system
s poster out for school kids to design their own patch using existing NASA
design paradigms as a guide. I have a copy=2C but I'm no graphics designer
. I can have a crack at it=2C but I'm sure there are more gifted artists o
n the list who can do it justice.
Just glued the ribs for the port wing=3B recent discussions on wing tips an
d squaring up have been most useful.
Rob Hart
Perth=2C Western Australia
VH-PTN (reserved)
e tonightFrom: amsafetyc(at)aol.comDate: Sun=2C 28 Dec 2008 05:32:35 +0000
I was watching the military channel greatest ever. They were reviewing figh
ters and helicopters. I noticed each pilot had a series of insignia patches
. As piet builders and pilots maybe we should have a patch also?Who knows m
aybe we can get someone with artistic abilities to design one Then get some
one to sew it into an embroidered patch. What are your thoughts?John
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
From: "Clif Dawson" Date: Sat=2C 27 Dec 2008 19:59:28 -0800To: <pietenpol-l
ist(at)matronics.com>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing Tips
It's amazing how some stuff works. An extra invisible
foot and a half of wing and it didn't cost you a damn thing!
Clif
"The universe is full of magical things patiently waiting for our wits to g
row sharper." ~ Eden Phillpotts
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Perez
Clif=2C outstanding! That link is great. Now I know what those wing tips ar
=============B7=9B~=89=ED=B2=2C=DE=D9=CA%=A2=BD4
=D3M4}=A7=1Er=8B=AB=89=EA=E7{=07(=BA=B8=9E=AC=F9^j=C7=92=BA=9Ah=AE=D6(=BA
=B2=B2=DB=13=86+ =A2{a=02wFz=D4=A8=99=E0=16=11#=8C=10TD=10h=9F=B6=C3h=BD
=E9=9Bz=B8=AC=B6=17=9E{=9A=94=B8=AC=B4[=A7u=16=A2=B1=EA=C2''$=A2{ax*'
=B6=B8=9B=BA=D8=A8=9EX=A7=91=B7=A5=A3 h~)=DD=A2=EBf=A2=B7=9An=8B=AD=B6=18
=AC=C9=E6=AB=B17=AB=AE'pZ=DEx=89=DCz{b=BD=E1=A2~=DB =8A=CBB=A2{k=89=BB
=AD=8A=89=D6y=B4=A2=B5=E6=A1=AD=E7=E1=B6=DA=7F=FF 0=99=ABk=A2x=9C=B1=CA&=FD
=CA'=B6=B8=9B=BA=D8=A8=9E=1Bm=A7=FF=F0=C3 =9A=B6=BA'=89=CB=1C=A2o=DC=A2{k
=89=BB=AD=8A=89=FFi8Z=9EL=A8=B9=FA+=CA=8B=AB=81=E9=DE=AE=8B=AC=B2=EAi=A2=BB
Lj=DBC=AD=A9ex=B8=AC=B4=07f=8At=E1x=F8=9E=B5=E9=E9=A2R=B2=D1&j)E=A2=BB
R=C7=AD=85=E3=1A=B6=BA'=89=CB =8A=CBEy=ABn=AD=EB j=F8 j=DA+=B6=86=EB=A3
=1E=B6=17j|=8B=8A=CBn=B6)b=B6'=AC=B2=E7!j=C2=B2=D5'=FD+=9B=B1=CA
=D8=A8=9C =DC=86+=DEI=E6=ABr=10=E8=C2yhi=DE=C3k k=A3 =1E =16=AD=14=04=0F
=86=8Bh=B2=16=ABy=A9=DD=9A=E7!=9A=E7!=9A=8A=DEj=1A=DE~=1Bm=A7=FF=F0=C3 =9A
=B6=BA'=89=CB=1C=A2o=CDj=F8 j=DA+>'=ADzzh=94=B8=AC=B6=1Bm=A7=FF=F0=C3 =9A
=B6=BA'=89=CB=1C=A2o=CDj=F8 j=DA+>'=ADzzh=94=B8=AC=B7=F6=8C=014N4=92X@E9
=15 I&z =DEj=D7(=9E=D7=A7=B5=A9l=A1=AB=DA=8AV=9B-=EBj=D8^Y=E6=C5=A2
=BB=B1=A8ky=F8m=B6=9F=FF~=8A=EE=9A=C9=9A=B6=BA'=89=CB=1C=A2hm=B6=9F=FF~
=8A=EE=9A=C9=9A=B6=BA'=89=CB=1C=A2o=DA=FD=DF=A2{=7F=B7n=87r=FE=1Bf
_________________________________________________________________
Time for change? Find your ideal job with SEEK.
%2F%3Ftracking%3Dsk%3Atl%3Ask%3Anine%3A0%3Ahottag%3Achange&_t=757263783&_
r=SEEK_tagline&_m=EXT
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject:
Re: Aerial project for Anchorage schoolkids
Date:
Dec 28, 2008
GOOD JOB OSCAR!
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rob Stapleton, Jr." <foto(at)alaska.net>
Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2008 2:36 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Aerial project for Anchorage schoolkids
>
>
> Pieters,
> This gift project couldn't and wouldn't happen without Oscar's help. It is
> good to hear more about the Aerial and how it affects others. Hopefully it
> will attract some attention here in Anchorage and encourage young people
> into aviation, instead of just virtual flying.
> Thanks Oscar!
> RS
>
>
> Rob Stapleton, Photojournalist
> Anchorage, Alaska
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Oscar
> Zuniga
> Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2008 4:20 PM
> To: Pietenpol List
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Aerial project for Anchorage schoolkids
>
>
> Howdy, Pieters-
>
> My wife and I just got back from a nearly 1600 mi. (round-trip) drive up
> to
> Los Alamos, NM to gently gather up a beautiful set of landing gear legs
> from
> the late Arlene Walsh's Aerial project. She died earlier this year in an
> auto accident and through various actions and reactions, her project will
> be
> headed up to Anchorage, AK to be worked on (and hopefully, completed) by a
> group of middle school students. Thanks to Rob Stapleton from this list
> for
> putting together all the pieces.
>
> I examined and handled the various pieces of Arlene's project in the
> hangar
> at Los Alamos. Outside, snow was drifting and the temp was in the high
> 20s
> but inside the hangar it was impossible not to feel the warmth of the
> varnished wood from FOUR wing panels (the Aerial is a biplane version of
> the
> Piet), as well as the tail feathers and fuselage, all ready to be crated
> for
> shipping to Alaska. It's a nice project, all hand-built (little humor for
> you guys there), and I hope the kids learn about building from it and get
> the flying bug too.
>
> There was no flying before, during, or after the trip. This winter storm
> has packed some very strong and gusty winds, as anyone from Washington to
> Arkansas can attest.
>
> I hope everyone is enjoying the holidays and looking forward to kicking
> off
> the 80th anniversary of the Pietenpol beginning January 1 of 2009, an
> entire
> year of celebration! So don't spare the Old Milwaukee, all you cheapskate
> homebuilders like me ;o)
>
> Oscar Zuniga
> Air Camper NX41CC
> San Antonio, TX
> mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
> website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
>
>
> --
> Checked by AVG.
> 12/25/2008 9:40 AM
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 28, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Re: fantastic help videos from EAA--free
Copy Mike C. I had found those early on in my building process. Thanks.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 28, 2008
From:
Tim Willis <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net>
Subject:
Re: up too late tonight-- PATCHES
Here are a couple of designs already out there. See attached. One was apparently
from 1996, and the other maybe (huh?) from 1997, as noted. I am told the
one shown as 1996 might belong to Grant McLaren (sp.?).
Tim in central TX
-----Original Message-----
>From: amsafetyc(at)aol.com
>Sent: Dec 27, 2008 11:32 PM
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: up too late tonight
>
>I was watching the military channel greatest ever. They were reviewing fighters
and helicopters.
>
>I noticed each pilot had a series of insignia patches.
>
>As piet builders and pilots maybe we should have a patch also?
>
>Who knows maybe we can get someone with artistic abilities to design one
>
>Then get someone to sew it into an embroidered patch.
>
>What are your thoughts?
>
>John
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 28, 2008
From:
H RULE <harvey.rule(at)rogers.com>
Subject:
Re: up too late tonight-- PATCHES
I like the red one best and besides it will show up better on my dark blue
aircraft.I like the combination of red and blue together;my favourite colou
r.However I do like the signiture of Bernard on the blue one.=0A=0Ado not a
rchive=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0AFrom: Tim Willis <t
imothywillis(at)earthlink.net>=0ATo: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com=0ASent: Sund
ay, December 28, 2008 10:54:56 AM=0ASubject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: up too
late tonight-- PATCHES=0A=0AHere are a couple of designs already out there
.- See attached.- One was apparently from 1996, and the other maybe (hu
h?) from 1997, as noted.- I am told the one shown as 1996 might belong to
Grant McLaren (sp.?). =0A=0ATim in central TX=0A=0A-----Original Message--
---=0A>From: amsafetyc(at)aol.com=0A>Sent: Dec 27, 2008 11:32 PM=0A>To: pieten
pol-list(at)matronics.com=0A>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: up too late toni
ght=0A>=0A>I was watching the military channel greatest ever. They were rev
iewing fighters and helicopters. =0A>=0A>I noticed each pilot had a series
of insignia patches. =0A>=0A>As piet builders and pilots maybe we should ha
ve a patch also?=0A>=0A>Who knows maybe we can get someone with artistic ab
ilities to design one =0A>=0A>Then get someone to sew it into an embroidere
d patch. =0A>=0A>What are your thoughts?=0A>=0A>John=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: up too late tonight-- PATCHES
From:
amsafetyc(at)aol.com
Date:
Dec 28, 2008
Tim
Got to say I like them both but having to select just one, I vote blue signature
I wonder what it would look like. Blue text on red background?
John
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Willis <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2008 09:54:56 -0600 (GMT-06:00)
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: up too late tonight-- PATCHES
Here are a couple of designs already out there. See attached. One was apparently
from 1996, and the other maybe (huh?) from 1997, as noted. I am told the
one shown as 1996 might belong to Grant McLaren (sp.?).
Tim in central TX
-----Original Message-----
>From: amsafetyc(at)aol.com
>Sent: Dec 27, 2008 11:32 PM
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: up too late tonight
>
>I was watching the military channel greatest ever. They were reviewing fighters
and helicopters.
>
>I noticed each pilot had a series of insignia patches.
>
>As piet builders and pilots maybe we should have a patch also?
>
>Who knows maybe we can get someone with artistic abilities to design one
>
>Then get someone to sew it into an embroidered patch.
>
>What are your thoughts?
>
>John
________________________________________________________________________________
No sweat on the design for the patches, IF someone can get Grant McLaren
to OK the use of his original design (the red one). From there, it's no
sweat at all to snag the Pietenpol signature from the blue one and create
a hybrid. It sounds like most folks like the red design but also like the
blue signature.
If DJ Vegh were still on this list, he could do it in no time flat. He
created an absolutely gorgeous piece of artwork for the Texas Air Camper
Organization (TACO).
Oscar Zuniga
Air Camper NX41CC
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 28, 2008
From:
"Rick Holland" <at7000ft(at)gmail.com>
Subject:
Re: Aerial project for Anchorage schoolkids
You are a saint Oscar, nice work.
Rick
On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 6:19 PM, Oscar Zuniga wrote:
>
>
> Howdy, Pieters-
>
> My wife and I just got back from a nearly 1600 mi. (round-trip) drive up to
> Los Alamos, NM to gently gather up a beautiful set of landing gear legs from
> the late Arlene Walsh's Aerial project. She died earlier this year in an
> auto accident and through various actions and reactions, her project will be
> headed up to Anchorage, AK to be worked on (and hopefully, completed) by a
> group of middle school students. Thanks to Rob Stapleton from this list for
> putting together all the pieces.
>
> I examined and handled the various pieces of Arlene's project in the hangar
> at Los Alamos. Outside, snow was drifting and the temp was in the high 20s
> but inside the hangar it was impossible not to feel the warmth of the
> varnished wood from FOUR wing panels (the Aerial is a biplane version of the
> Piet), as well as the tail feathers and fuselage, all ready to be crated for
> shipping to Alaska. It's a nice project, all hand-built (little humor for
> you guys there), and I hope the kids learn about building from it and get
> the flying bug too.
>
> There was no flying before, during, or after the trip. This winter storm
> has packed some very strong and gusty winds, as anyone from Washington to
> Arkansas can attest.
>
> I hope everyone is enjoying the holidays and looking forward to kicking off
> the 80th anniversary of the Pietenpol beginning January 1 of 2009, an entire
> year of celebration! So don't spare the Old Milwaukee, all you cheapskate
> homebuilders like me ;o)
>
> Oscar Zuniga
> Air Camper NX41CC
> San Antonio, TX
> mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
> website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
>
>
--
Rick Holland
Castle Rock, Colorado
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
AMsafetyC(at)aol.com
Date:
Dec 28, 2008
Subject:
Re: Patches
Oscar.
You re quite the resource and Piet champion. and while I am thinking about
it congratulations on a job well done. Saved a Piet and brought it back to tile
in Alaska and made some people happy in the process. Not a bad days work.
That's great.
Now for the more challenging the patch or patches. We should have one for
the Piet and its creator and a special edition 80 th year anniversary patch for
Brodhead and Oshkosh.
BTW there are only silent thoughts so anyone and everyone is welcome to join
in with ideas and comments this should be a collaborative work it just seems
fitting to celibate the aircraft and it following in addition to the
creation of the Piet.
If we wanted to we could make them available at cost plus for the members
with the plus proceeds going to a trust or museum or worthy project, like
Alaska Piet.
It seems odd the few people that actually knw about the Piet, fewer that
have ever seen one and even fewer that have ridden on one, owned one , flown
one or built one. Its a tremendous legacy that should be advertised rather them
kept within the circles of just we few. Its just too important an aircraft
to go unnoticed.
John
Sorry for the soap box, too much sawdust today "buldapalooza" its a
happening thing.
**************One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail,
Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now.
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Clif Dawson" <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject:
Re: Patches
Date:
Dec 28, 2008
That definitely has my vote. The brown/red one
is visualy dynamic, grabbing attention. It's also
more in line with the graphics of the 30's.
I was really upset when I tried to order the T shirt
only to find non were left and no more in sight!
Clif
>
>
> No sweat on the design for the patches, IF someone can get Grant McLaren
> to OK the use of his original design (the red one). >
> If DJ Vegh were still on this list, he could do it in no time flat. >
> Oscar Zuniga
> Air Camper NX41CC
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject:
Patches, Anchorage, and the buildapalooza
Date:
Dec 28, 2008
AMSafety wrote-
>You're quite the resource and Piet champion.
Corky made me this way ;o) Chuck Gantzer and Mike Cuy weren't any
help either, with their videos and nifty flying Pietenpols.
>congratulations on a job well done. Saved a Piet
I'm going to have to step off the stage and say that the thanks
should go to Jeff Scott, president of EAA Chapter 691 and longtime
friend. He is responsible for helping the original builder along,
caring for the project after her demise, arranging for disposition
of the project out of her estate, arranging for my acquisition of a
few things that I wanted off the airplane after I bought it from the
chapter and donated it to the Anchorage group, and it looks like he
will ultimately be responsible for crating it up for shipment and
seeing that it gets sent off in good shape. Jeff is good people; the
best. He's a builder's builder and does it because he loves to.
>Now for the more challenging the patch or patches. We should have
>one for the Piet and its creator and a special edition 80th year
>anniversary patch for Brodhead and Oshkosh.
I think it would be just as well to do one "patchapalooza" patch ;o)
Most companies have an artwork and/or setup fee and if we stick to
one patch, we'll maximize the bang for our buck. That's what Piet
building and flying is about... affordable and fun.
>it just seems fitting to celibate the aircraft
Well, I guess after 80 years, most of us are celibate whether we want
to be or not ;o) I'm only 57 but my dad-gone blood pressure medication
seems to be taking some of the compression out of my cylinders, if you
catch my drift ;o) But we can still fly and enjoy it, and that's more
fun than we deserve to have, sometimes. Yes, let's "celebrate" the
aircraft!
>It's a tremendous legacy that should be advertised rather than kept
>within the circles of just we few. Its just too important an aircraft
>to go unnoticed.
It's not that it's gone unnoticed, it's just that it's an old wood and
fabric open-cockpit airplane and there are fewer and fewer builders
who are interested in that. More and more of them want sleek, fast,
"glass panel" zoomers that resemble the cars that they drive. There
are fewer and fewer people who are willing to endure flying low and
slow over the countryside with the wind whipping in their faces, fuel
and exhaust smells drifting into the cockpit, airspeed crowding 70
MPH on a good day, sights and sounds coming directly to the pilot,
no digital radio or Ipod, no electrics, no starter, no nothing. So
we'll just have to enjoy one another's company while there are still
those among us who are interested in these old airplanes. And with
a history 80 years long now, I'll bet there will pretty much always
be a few like us who have that interest, that joy, that connection.
Oscar Zuniga
Air Camper NX41CC
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 28, 2008
From:
"Ryan Mueller" <rmueller23(at)gmail.com>
Subject:
New Piet project - one piece wing question
First off, congratulations on your efforts with the Aerial project Oscar!
Jess and I are now proud owners of most of a one piece wing, a fuselage, a
horizontal stab, and most of the metal fittings (Del Magsam's old project)!
We are very excited. I took a few pics, but my digicam memory card decided
to stop playing ball, so I'll take more the next time we are out. Stupid
thing...it's only dealt with every temperature extreme and weather situation
out there for four years, plus a little combat here and there....they just
don't make them like they used to.
Anyhow, the one piece wing is not what we we were planning on building, but
it is what the project came with. We decided we would deal with it; in the
end it will get us in the air faster. We spent some quality time with it on
Saturday (most of the day), trying to manhandle it into it's new home in a
friend's small outbuilding/aircraft factory. All I can say is....wow...my
hat's off to Bernard and all those who followed that built and dealt with
the one piece wing. It defeated all of our plans to loft it that day, so it
is sitting on supports on the ground level (not literally on the ground) for
now. After having to deal with this monstrosity, I figured I would pose the
question: would it be feasible to convert this to a three piece wing? Here
are some details about the wing:
It has Charlie Rubeck ribs that were varnished before being slipped onto the
spars. Thusly they are not glued to the spars. There is just a nail through
the uprights adjacent to the spars holding them in place right now. The wing
does not have any compression struts installed, no metal fittings either. It
is just two spars with the ribs on, and the additional pieces for the
ailerons have been installed. No wingtips. None of the structure for the
fuel tank in the wing has been installed either.
I would think it would go as such: cut the spars just outboard of each
splice. Measure the spar length from the wingtip end of the spar to the
inboard end of the panel, and cut the spars to the exact length needed. We
could remove the nails and slide the center section rib(s) off the remnants.
We would be short on ribs...one full rib, one nose rib, two tail ribs. It
would be pretty easy to make a jig off of a full rib that was removed, to
fab the those pieces. We would have to build the center section, but our
wing panels would be mostly complete. Since the ribs are only nailed they
could all be moved to satisfy any spacing changes.
This would add some work, but would allow us to deal with much smaller
individual wing panels instead of the whole shebang. This is a big plus. We
would also be able to accommodate a fuel tank in the wing if we could do the
three piece....
Am I off my rocker?
Ryan
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Rob Stapleton, Jr." <foto(at)alaska.net>
Subject:
Patches, Anchorage, and the buildapalooza
Date:
Dec 28, 2008
To all Piet'ers:
This is an interesting story and we will provide more details later, but
thanks also need to go to the EAA Chapter in NM, and to FAA's Angie
Slingluff that asked me about a project on behalf of the school at an Alaska
Aviation Heritage Museum function less than a month ago. Also on the
atta-boy list is Carlile Transportation who will take the Aerial and
transport it from New Mexico to Anchorage at no cost to the middle school.
Harry MacDonald, the CEO of Carlile is a pilot, (originally from Fairbanks)
and also offered to have his shop welders help out with a new set of landing
gear once the airplane is in place and the school has started on the
project.
I am sure you will hear more about this in the future but again, thanks
Oscar!
Rob
Rob Stapleton, Photojournalist
Anchorage, Alaska
907-230-9425
KL2AN
Skype:rob.stapleton.jr
IM Windows Live Messenger: foto(at)alaska.net
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Oscar Zuniga
Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2008 6:13 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Patches, Anchorage, and the buildapalooza
AMSafety wrote-
>You're quite the resource and Piet champion.
Corky made me this way ;o) Chuck Gantzer and Mike Cuy weren't any
help either, with their videos and nifty flying Pietenpols.
>congratulations on a job well done. Saved a Piet
I'm going to have to step off the stage and say that the thanks
should go to Jeff Scott, president of EAA Chapter 691 and longtime
friend. He is responsible for helping the original builder along,
caring for the project after her demise, arranging for disposition
of the project out of her estate, arranging for my acquisition of a
few things that I wanted off the airplane after I bought it from the
chapter and donated it to the Anchorage group, and it looks like he
will ultimately be responsible for crating it up for shipment and
seeing that it gets sent off in good shape. Jeff is good people; the
best. He's a builder's builder and does it because he loves to.
>Now for the more challenging the patch or patches. We should have
>one for the Piet and its creator and a special edition 80th year
>anniversary patch for Brodhead and Oshkosh.
I think it would be just as well to do one "patchapalooza" patch ;o)
Most companies have an artwork and/or setup fee and if we stick to
one patch, we'll maximize the bang for our buck. That's what Piet
building and flying is about... affordable and fun.
>it just seems fitting to celibate the aircraft
Well, I guess after 80 years, most of us are celibate whether we want
to be or not ;o) I'm only 57 but my dad-gone blood pressure medication
seems to be taking some of the compression out of my cylinders, if you
catch my drift ;o) But we can still fly and enjoy it, and that's more
fun than we deserve to have, sometimes. Yes, let's "celebrate" the
aircraft!
>It's a tremendous legacy that should be advertised rather than kept
>within the circles of just we few. Its just too important an aircraft
>to go unnoticed.
It's not that it's gone unnoticed, it's just that it's an old wood and
fabric open-cockpit airplane and there are fewer and fewer builders
who are interested in that. More and more of them want sleek, fast,
"glass panel" zoomers that resemble the cars that they drive. There
are fewer and fewer people who are willing to endure flying low and
slow over the countryside with the wind whipping in their faces, fuel
and exhaust smells drifting into the cockpit, airspeed crowding 70
MPH on a good day, sights and sounds coming directly to the pilot,
no digital radio or Ipod, no electrics, no starter, no nothing. So
we'll just have to enjoy one another's company while there are still
those among us who are interested in these old airplanes. And with
a history 80 years long now, I'll bet there will pretty much always
be a few like us who have that interest, that joy, that connection.
Oscar Zuniga
Air Camper NX41CC
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject:
Re: Patches, Anchorage, and the buildapalooza
Date:
Dec 29, 2008
Rob, you have so many irons in the fire I don't know how you get it all
done. A really great job you pulled off! I know it took a great amount of
work for the two of you. It just goes to show what an Alaskan and a Texan
can do.
Gene in Tennessee
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 29, 2008
From:
Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject:
Re: New Piet project - one piece wing question
Ryan, I am sure a 3 piece wing is doable from the wing you have. You said r
ight in your question what needs to be done, I see no problems at all with
your thinking. Measure, mark, re-measure, check marks, cut, make jig from e
xisting rib, make new ribs, build center section...why not!- The fact tha
t is sounds like a "bare" wing, (no tips, compression struts, fittings) it
actually makes the 3 piece make over easier. I say you are a GO for launch.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Patches, Anchorage, and the buildapalooza
From:
amsafetyc(at)aol.com
Date:
Dec 29, 2008
This has evolved into quite the undertaking. The story with photographs should
be put together and submitted to the EAA for publication.
I think it shows the spirit, dedication and commitment to a project as embodied
in the experimental aircraft home builder.
John
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-----Original Message-----
From: "Rob Stapleton, Jr." <foto(at)alaska.net>
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2008 23:36:00
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Patches, Anchorage, and the buildapalooza
To all Piet'ers:
This is an interesting story and we will provide more details later, but
thanks also need to go to the EAA Chapter in NM, and to FAA's Angie
Slingluff that asked me about a project on behalf of the school at an Alaska
Aviation Heritage Museum function less than a month ago. Also on the
atta-boy list is Carlile Transportation who will take the Aerial and
transport it from New Mexico to Anchorage at no cost to the middle school.
Harry MacDonald, the CEO of Carlile is a pilot, (originally from Fairbanks)
and also offered to have his shop welders help out with a new set of landing
gear once the airplane is in place and the school has started on the
project.
I am sure you will hear more about this in the future but again, thanks
Oscar!
Rob
Rob Stapleton, Photojournalist
Anchorage, Alaska
907-230-9425
KL2AN
Skype:rob.stapleton.jr
IM Windows Live Messenger: foto(at)alaska.net
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Oscar Zuniga
Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2008 6:13 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Patches, Anchorage, and the buildapalooza
AMSafety wrote-
>You're quite the resource and Piet champion.
Corky made me this way ;o) Chuck Gantzer and Mike Cuy weren't any
help either, with their videos and nifty flying Pietenpols.
>congratulations on a job well done. Saved a Piet
I'm going to have to step off the stage and say that the thanks
should go to Jeff Scott, president of EAA Chapter 691 and longtime
friend. He is responsible for helping the original builder along,
caring for the project after her demise, arranging for disposition
of the project out of her estate, arranging for my acquisition of a
few things that I wanted off the airplane after I bought it from the
chapter and donated it to the Anchorage group, and it looks like he
will ultimately be responsible for crating it up for shipment and
seeing that it gets sent off in good shape. Jeff is good people; the
best. He's a builder's builder and does it because he loves to.
>Now for the more challenging the patch or patches. We should have
>one for the Piet and its creator and a special edition 80th year
>anniversary patch for Brodhead and Oshkosh.
I think it would be just as well to do one "patchapalooza" patch ;o)
Most companies have an artwork and/or setup fee and if we stick to
one patch, we'll maximize the bang for our buck. That's what Piet
building and flying is about... affordable and fun.
>it just seems fitting to celibate the aircraft
Well, I guess after 80 years, most of us are celibate whether we want
to be or not ;o) I'm only 57 but my dad-gone blood pressure medication
seems to be taking some of the compression out of my cylinders, if you
catch my drift ;o) But we can still fly and enjoy it, and that's more
fun than we deserve to have, sometimes. Yes, let's "celebrate" the
aircraft!
>It's a tremendous legacy that should be advertised rather than kept
>within the circles of just we few. Its just too important an aircraft
>to go unnoticed.
It's not that it's gone unnoticed, it's just that it's an old wood and
fabric open-cockpit airplane and there are fewer and fewer builders
who are interested in that. More and more of them want sleek, fast,
"glass panel" zoomers that resemble the cars that they drive. There
are fewer and fewer people who are willing to endure flying low and
slow over the countryside with the wind whipping in their faces, fuel
and exhaust smells drifting into the cockpit, airspeed crowding 70
MPH on a good day, sights and sounds coming directly to the pilot,
no digital radio or Ipod, no electrics, no starter, no nothing. So
we'll just have to enjoy one another's company while there are still
those among us who are interested in these old airplanes. And with
a history 80 years long now, I'll bet there will pretty much always
be a few like us who have that interest, that joy, that connection.
Oscar Zuniga
Air Camper NX41CC
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject:
Patches
Date:
Dec 29, 2008
I'll mention this once again... Grant McLaren has to give permission if anyone
is planning to use his graphic artwork (the red/brown logo). He seems to be
unwilling to approve the use of any of his work from the past so before anyone
goes too far with that artwork, we need to get approval.
I have no way of contacting Grant and will leave that to someone else here on
the list who might be able to get in touch with him.
Oscar Zuniga
Air Camper NX41CC
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 29, 2008
From:
del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com>
Subject:
Re: New Piet project - one piece wing question
Hi Ryan
Our trip to Iowa came to a sudden halt when we listened to the ice warnings
over there, we went directly home. I liked the lightness and simplicity of
the one piece wing. I can see the difficulty that it is in that barn thoug
h unless you go directly up from where it is sitting on pullies. I do have
two more ribs hanging on the wall that I forgot about. I can send them to y
ou. I never planned on a fuel tank in the wing. It makes me shudder to have
fuel right above me. As proven in William Wynns accident where he got dren
ched in fuel and would have been ok, except-that he was burned. The heade
r tank will give you 2 hrs of flight time and less fuel lines, fittings, we
ight, build time etc. These are just my 2 cents and reasonings, don't let m
e talk you into anything else other than what you want :>). I'll be followi
ng your progress with interest!
Del
Del-New Richmond, Wi
"farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com"
--- On Mon, 12/29/08, Ryan Mueller wrote:
From: Ryan Mueller <rmueller23(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: New Piet project - one piece wing question
Date: Monday, December 29, 2008, 5:18 AM
First off, congratulations on your efforts with the Aerial project Oscar!
Jess and I are now proud owners of most of a one piece wing, a fuselage, a
horizontal stab, and most of the metal fittings (Del Magsam's old project)!
We are very excited. I took a few pics, but my digicam memory card decided
to stop playing ball, so I'll take more the next time we are out. Stupid t
hing...it's only dealt with every temperature extreme and weather situation
out there for four years, plus a little combat here and there....they just
don't make them like they used to.
Anyhow, the one piece wing is not what we we were planning on building, but
it is what the project came with. We decided we would deal with it; in the
end it will get us in the air faster. We spent some quality time with it o
n Saturday (most of the day), trying to manhandle it into it's new home in
a friend's small outbuilding/aircraft factory. All I can say is....wow...my
hat's off to Bernard and all those who followed that built and dealt with
the one piece wing. It defeated all of our plans to loft it that day, so it
is sitting on supports on the ground level (not literally on the ground) f
or now. After having to deal with this monstrosity, I figured I would pose
the question: would it be feasible to convert this to a three piece wing? H
ere are some details about the wing:
It has Charlie Rubeck ribs that were varnished before being slipped onto th
e spars. Thusly they are not glued to the spars. There is just a nail throu
gh the uprights adjacent to the spars holding them in place right now. The
wing does not have any compression struts installed, no metal fittings eith
er. It is just two spars with the ribs on, and the additional pieces for th
e ailerons have been installed. No wingtips. None of the structure for the
fuel tank in the wing has been installed either.
I would think it would go as such: cut the spars just outboard of each spli
ce. Measure the spar length from the wingtip end of the spar to the inboard
end of the panel, and cut the spars to the exact length needed. We could r
emove the nails and slide the center section rib(s) off the remnants. We wo
uld be short on ribs...one full rib, one nose rib, two tail ribs. It would
be pretty easy to make a jig off of a full rib that was removed, to fab the
those pieces. We would have to build the center section, but our wing pane
ls would be mostly complete. Since the ribs are only nailed they could all
be moved to satisfy any spacing changes.
This would add some work, but would allow us to deal with much smaller indi
vidual wing panels instead of the whole shebang.- This is a big plus. We
would also be able to accommodate a fuel tank in the wing if we could do th
e three piece....
Am I off my rocker?
Ryan
=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Patches
From:
amsafetyc(at)aol.com
Date:
Dec 29, 2008
Not being a lawyer myself it is my understanding that it, the work, can only be
protected by copyright or as a registered trade mark. Either or both would to
have existed before the work was released into the public domain and should be
appropriately marked as such. That being the case I would doubt the intellectual
artistic property is protected.
The fact remains if he's uncooperative we can certainly take my approach and tell
him to stick it in his ear and create our own classic rendition.
Aside from all the other reasons to build, I have shared that same sentiment with
the local FBO. Who in my opinion can stick his rentals in his ear. I am not
one to be limited by the ideas and whims of little men with great ambitions and
arrogance.
Yes I know, and have been cautioned in the past about my independent attitude by
many close to me, so go ahead and flame away if you need to.
Meanwhile I am gonna go back to buildapalooza.
John
------Original Message------
From: Oscar Zuniga
Sender: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
ReplyTo: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Dec 29, 2008 10:00 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Patches
I'll mention this once again... Grant McLaren has to give permission if anyone
is planning to use his graphic artwork (the red/brown logo). He seems to be
unwilling to approve the use of any of his work from the past so before anyone
goes too far with that artwork, we need to get approval.
I have no way of contacting Grant and will leave that to someone else here on
the list who might be able to get in touch with him.
Oscar Zuniga
Air Camper NX41CC
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"bike.mike" <bike.mike(at)comcast.net>
Subject:
Re: Patches
Date:
Dec 27, 2008
Being a lawyer, I guess I have to respond.
A copyright, in the US where this discussion is taking place, exists
automatically upon the creation of any work. As soon as an artist writes,
composes, sculpts, draws, paints or otherwise puts an idea into tangible
form, the tangible work belongs to the artist and it cannot be copied
without permission. Even though the tangible form is sold, the copyright is
retained by the originator. A copyright registration with the Library of
Congress primarily provides a way of notifying the world of the creation of
the copyrighted work.
Some copyrightable works can also be registered as trademarks. A trademark
is protected by usage in commerce. The first user of a trademark has the
rights to it in a particular "market area." Registration of a trademark
with the US Patent and Trademark Office prevents others from using it
outside the market area.
What a copyright does is prevent others from using a work in its whole or
substantial part without the permission of the owner. Modifying a work,
such as in musical parodies, is also prevented without permission. Claiming
the work as an original composition of one's own is never permitted.
Quoting a work, with proper attribution, is generally allowed under the
"fair use" doctrine.
The works of Grant McLaren will remain copyrighted for a good number of
years after his death. The exact number will depending on the date of
creation and the specific "Copyright Protection Act" in force at the time.
As I am also a human being in love with Pietenpol airplanes and their
history, I would never tell anyone who has contributed as much as Grant
McLaren to stick anything in his ear.
Mike Hardaway
----- Original Message -----
From: <amsafetyc(at)aol.com>
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2008 8:24 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Patches
>
> Not being a lawyer myself it is my understanding that it, the work, can
only be protected by copyright or as a registered trade mark. Either or both
would to have existed before the work was released into the public domain
and should be appropriately marked as such. That being the case I would
doubt the intellectual artistic property is protected.
>
> The fact remains if he's uncooperative we can certainly take my approach
and tell him to stick it in his ear and create our own classic rendition.
>
> Aside from all the other reasons to build, I have shared that same
sentiment with the local FBO. Who in my opinion can stick his rentals in his
ear. I am not one to be limited by the ideas and whims of little men with
great ambitions and arrogance.
>
> Yes I know, and have been cautioned in the past about my independent
attitude by many close to me, so go ahead and flame away if you need to.
>
> Meanwhile I am gonna go back to buildapalooza.
>
> John
> ------Original Message------
> From: Oscar Zuniga
> Sender: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> To: Pietenpol List
> ReplyTo: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Dec 29, 2008 10:00 AM
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Patches
>
>
> I'll mention this once again... Grant McLaren has to give permission if
anyone
> is planning to use his graphic artwork (the red/brown logo). He seems to
be
> unwilling to approve the use of any of his work from the past so before
anyone
> goes too far with that artwork, we need to get approval.
>
> I have no way of contacting Grant and will leave that to someone else here
on
> the list who might be able to get in touch with him.
>
> Oscar Zuniga
> Air Camper NX41CC
> San Antonio, TX
> mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
> website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
>
>
> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Rob Stapleton, Jr." <foto(at)alaska.net>
Subject:
Patches, Anchorage, and the buildapalooza
Date:
Dec 29, 2008
Hey thanks!
Well I am not sure that anything is really getting done--but we are sure
having some fun putting this together. Really this Aerial project sort of
fell together--Angie asked me, I asked the list and Oscar made the
connection--we need to thank the list for being here too! Alaskans and
Texans have always been able to make things happen. Look at the 800 mile
Trans Alaska Pipeline for example!
Thanks for noticing.
Regards,
Rob
Anchorage, AK
-7F this morning!
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gene & Tammy
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2008 3:12 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Patches, Anchorage, and the buildapalooza
Rob, you have so many irons in the fire I don't know how you get it all
done. A really great job you pulled off! I know it took a great amount of
work for the two of you. It just goes to show what an Alaskan and a Texan
can do.
Gene in Tennessee
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Patches
From:
amsafetyc(at)aol.com
Date:
Dec 29, 2008
Mike
Thanks for your legal perspective on such a complex issue.
And certainly and added benefit is your humanitarian perspective to things
Not knowing him or his contributions I have no knowledge of what has spoiled the
relationship so its difficult for me to appreciate his prevailing attitude of
non cooperation.
As far as that goes what's his shall remain his
John
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-----Original Message-----
From: "bike.mike" <bike.mike(at)comcast.net>
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2008 08:02:39
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Patches
Being a lawyer, I guess I have to respond.
A copyright, in the US where this discussion is taking place, exists
automatically upon the creation of any work. As soon as an artist writes,
composes, sculpts, draws, paints or otherwise puts an idea into tangible
form, the tangible work belongs to the artist and it cannot be copied
without permission. Even though the tangible form is sold, the copyright is
retained by the originator. A copyright registration with the Library of
Congress primarily provides a way of notifying the world of the creation of
the copyrighted work.
Some copyrightable works can also be registered as trademarks. A trademark
is protected by usage in commerce. The first user of a trademark has the
rights to it in a particular "market area." Registration of a trademark
with the US Patent and Trademark Office prevents others from using it
outside the market area.
What a copyright does is prevent others from using a work in its whole or
substantial part without the permission of the owner. Modifying a work,
such as in musical parodies, is also prevented without permission. Claiming
the work as an original composition of one's own is never permitted.
Quoting a work, with proper attribution, is generally allowed under the
"fair use" doctrine.
The works of Grant McLaren will remain copyrighted for a good number of
years after his death. The exact number will depending on the date of
creation and the specific "Copyright Protection Act" in force at the time.
As I am also a human being in love with Pietenpol airplanes and their
history, I would never tell anyone who has contributed as much as Grant
McLaren to stick anything in his ear.
Mike Hardaway
----- Original Message -----
From: <amsafetyc(at)aol.com>
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2008 8:24 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Patches
>
> Not being a lawyer myself it is my understanding that it, the work, can
only be protected by copyright or as a registered trade mark. Either or both
would to have existed before the work was released into the public domain
and should be appropriately marked as such. That being the case I would
doubt the intellectual artistic property is protected.
>
> The fact remains if he's uncooperative we can certainly take my approach
and tell him to stick it in his ear and create our own classic rendition.
>
> Aside from all the other reasons to build, I have shared that same
sentiment with the local FBO. Who in my opinion can stick his rentals in his
ear. I am not one to be limited by the ideas and whims of little men with
great ambitions and arrogance.
>
> Yes I know, and have been cautioned in the past about my independent
attitude by many close to me, so go ahead and flame away if you need to.
>
> Meanwhile I am gonna go back to buildapalooza.
>
> John
> ------Original Message------
> From: Oscar Zuniga
> Sender: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> To: Pietenpol List
> ReplyTo: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Dec 29, 2008 10:00 AM
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Patches
>
>
> I'll mention this once again... Grant McLaren has to give permission if
anyone
> is planning to use his graphic artwork (the red/brown logo). He seems to
be
> unwilling to approve the use of any of his work from the past so before
anyone
> goes too far with that artwork, we need to get approval.
>
> I have no way of contacting Grant and will leave that to someone else here
on
> the list who might be able to get in touch with him.
>
> Oscar Zuniga
> Air Camper NX41CC
> San Antonio, TX
> mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
> website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
>
>
> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 29, 2008
From:
Lawrence Williams <lnawms(at)yahoo.com>
Subject:
re:up too late tonight-Patches
What will be the criteria for who gets/wears a Pietenpol patch?
-
Our newsletter editor and a number of listers seem to hold the view that th
ere is no such thing as a Pietenpol Air Camper. I think the P.C. designatio
n currently in use is "Snowflake" which should open up an entirely new logo
for our patch.
-
Another interesting question comes up when considering the annual "Pietenpo
l" reunion at Brodhead and, since there are no Pietenpol Air Campers, can t
here really be any legitimate representative aircraft on the line at OSH?
-
Where's Chris Egsgaard when he's needed?
-
Larry Williams- xcg, xcmr, epp
-=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
According to the folks I spoke with at the EAA, Grant did not get written
permission to use images from the Flying and Glider Manuals in the Pietenpol
video(s) he created. So maybe these patches could include images (there are
some really good ones!) from those publications (NOT his publications)...
Getting written permission is likely still a good idea, whether it's an
image from the Flying and Glider manuals or something Grant or anyone else
(regardless of author) has printed or reprinted....sure would be a shame to
have to deal with issues such as copyright infringement when you could be
making sawdust....
And I definitely agree, a LOT of hard work on Grant's part filled the
newsletters I still enjoy reading!
-----Original Message-----
>From: "bike.mike" <bike.mike(at)comcast.net>
>Sent: Dec 27, 2008 11:02 AM
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Patches
>
>
>Being a lawyer, I guess I have to respond.
>
>A copyright, in the US where this discussion is taking place, exists
>automatically upon the creation of any work. As soon as an artist writes,
>composes, sculpts, draws, paints or otherwise puts an idea into tangible
>form, the tangible work belongs to the artist and it cannot be copied
>without permission. Even though the tangible form is sold, the copyright is
>retained by the originator. A copyright registration with the Library of
>Congress primarily provides a way of notifying the world of the creation of
>the copyrighted work.
>
>Some copyrightable works can also be registered as trademarks. A trademark
>is protected by usage in commerce. The first user of a trademark has the
>rights to it in a particular "market area." Registration of a trademark
>with the US Patent and Trademark Office prevents others from using it
>outside the market area.
>
>What a copyright does is prevent others from using a work in its whole or
>substantial part without the permission of the owner. Modifying a work,
>such as in musical parodies, is also prevented without permission. Claiming
>the work as an original composition of one's own is never permitted.
>Quoting a work, with proper attribution, is generally allowed under the
>"fair use" doctrine.
>
>The works of Grant McLaren will remain copyrighted for a good number of
>years after his death. The exact number will depending on the date of
>creation and the specific "Copyright Protection Act" in force at the time.
>
>As I am also a human being in love with Pietenpol airplanes and their
>history, I would never tell anyone who has contributed as much as Grant
>McLaren to stick anything in his ear.
>
>
>Mike Hardaway
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <amsafetyc(at)aol.com>
>To:
>Sent: Monday, December 29, 2008 8:24 AM
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Patches
>
>
>>
>> Not being a lawyer myself it is my understanding that it, the work, can
>only be protected by copyright or as a registered trade mark. Either or both
>would to have existed before the work was released into the public domain
>and should be appropriately marked as such. That being the case I would
>doubt the intellectual artistic property is protected.
>>
>> The fact remains if he's uncooperative we can certainly take my approach
>and tell him to stick it in his ear and create our own classic rendition.
>>
>> Aside from all the other reasons to build, I have shared that same
>sentiment with the local FBO. Who in my opinion can stick his rentals in his
>ear. I am not one to be limited by the ideas and whims of little men with
>great ambitions and arrogance.
>>
>> Yes I know, and have been cautioned in the past about my independent
>attitude by many close to me, so go ahead and flame away if you need to.
>>
>> Meanwhile I am gonna go back to buildapalooza.
>>
>> John
>> ------Original Message------
>> From: Oscar Zuniga
>> Sender: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
>> To: Pietenpol List
>> ReplyTo: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>> Sent: Dec 29, 2008 10:00 AM
>> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Patches
>>
>>
>>
>> I'll mention this once again... Grant McLaren has to give permission if
>anyone
>> is planning to use his graphic artwork (the red/brown logo). He seems to
>be
>> unwilling to approve the use of any of his work from the past so before
>anyone
>> goes too far with that artwork, we need to get approval.
>>
>> I have no way of contacting Grant and will leave that to someone else here
>on
>> the list who might be able to get in touch with him.
>>
>> Oscar Zuniga
>> Air Camper NX41CC
>> San Antonio, TX
>> mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
>> website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Dec 29, 2008
From:
Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu>
Subject:
Plane sitting: need list advice on elevator control horns
Dear Pieters,
Today my instructor and I managed to damage the Piet while still in
its chocks; we bent the upper horn of the left elevator bell crank. I
need your advice on repairs.
How it happened: I was sitting in the cockpit. The tail was resting
on a sawhorse. The instructor removed the sawhorse to lower the tail.
The sawhorse wasn't placed far enough away and it caught the lower
elevator cable. The tail was lowered all the way to ground without
this being noticed. The upper horn bent over about 45 degrees towards
the centerline (towards the rudder). We bent the horn back, and of
course the horn now looks like an hourglass when viewed from fore or
aft. Oddly, the lower cable has a little more slack than before;
definitely more than the lower elevator cable on the other side.
There does not appear to be any damage at all to the large, bell
crank in the fuselage (behind the pilot's seat) at the other end of
the cable.
Note that the bell crank appears to be built to plans.
The concerns:
1. Why is the cable slack even when the horn was bent back to
vertical? I guess the cable could have stretched, but this is an
eighth inch cable and I weigh 180. Doesn't seem like there would be
that much tension.
2. Removing and replacing the bell crank will take a lot of effort
and I want to go flying. Now. Could stiffeners be riveted to the horn
instead? How much strength has been lost due to the bend-unbend
cycle, and how much strength is needed here?
3. If it must be removed and replaced/rebuilt, what procedure would
require the least number of steps to accomplish this, with minimal
further damage?
Thanks for any advice on this. I am seriously bummed as I planned to
fly all this week!
Jeff
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Plane sitting: need list advice on elevator control
horns
From:
"Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com>
Date:
Dec 29, 2008
Jeff,
It's possible that thimble on the lower horn collapsed some , but it really doesn't
seem that likely. The geometry might have changed some with the bend. I
guess the repair would depend on what you can do there and what equipment you
