Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-ii

September 25, 2009 - September 30, 2009



      Ameet
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: More cables and turnbuckles
From: "K5YAC" <hangar10(at)cox.net>
Date: Sep 25, 2009
Darn, that is what I was afraid of... the pain in the butt part. Maybe some kind of jig can be devised to hold the thimble and cable while the nicopress sleeve is installed? Either way, I want to use the right stuff. Thanks for the info Jack. -------- Mark - working on wings Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=264901#264901 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: First Flight
Date: Sep 25, 2009
Niner Kilo Papa, when I heard your static and WOT RPMs for that Corvair, I thought you were leaving quite a bit of HP on the table but it's not so. Looking at the power curves for the stock 110HP Corvair, at your static of 2650 RPM the gross output is 76 HP... more than my Cont. A75 ;o) And at your WOT of 2750, the book shows 80HP. So I guess you're entitled to drag around that extra empty weight. You listed 750 as your empty weight; my airplane weighs 627 with no fuel or oil aboard. I'll bet the higher weight also contributes to the descent rate on final and the need to bring it over the fence at 60 or so. I like 55 MPH in relatively calm air but I do carry a bit more airspeed when it's windy or gusty. Oscar Zuniga Air Camper NX41CC San Antonio, TX mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com website at http://www.flysquirrel.net ________________________________________________________________________________
From: AMsafetyC(at)aol.com
Date: Sep 25, 2009
Subject: Re: More cables and turnbuckles
Jack why the different cables in those locations? I haven't gotten to the cable part yet but I am curious as to the why and where John In a message dated 9/25/2009 8:24:34 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net writes: --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Jack Phillips" I used 1 x 19 for drag / anti-drag wires, using thimbles and nicopress fittings. Pain in the butt to bend that stuff around a thimble and get it into the nicopress sleeve. I used the same for the landing gear bracing (straight axle). I used 7 x 19 everywhere else. Jack Phillips NX899JP Raleigh, NC -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of K5YAC Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 10:00 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: More cables and turnbuckles Quick question... should I use 1x19 or 7x19 for drag/anti-drag cables? I plan to use thimbles and turnbuckles rather than swage type fittings. The 1x19 is listed as being quite a bit stronger, but not as flexible. Suggestions? -------- Mark - working on wings Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=264858#264858 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bentoncountycable.net>
Subject: Re: More cables and turnbuckles
Date: Sep 25, 2009
Mark, go to an electrical suppy store and buy yourself a split bolt. The kind electrical workers use to join two large copper wires together. That will firmly hold the cable together while you compress the nicopress. Gene ----- Original Message ----- From: "K5YAC" <hangar10(at)cox.net> Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 8:00 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: More cables and turnbuckles > > Darn, that is what I was afraid of... the pain in the butt part. Maybe > some kind of jig can be devised to hold the thimble and cable while the > nicopress sleeve is installed? Either way, I want to use the right stuff. > Thanks for the info Jack. > > -------- > Mark - working on wings > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=264901#264901 > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 18:00:00 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bentoncountycable.net>
Subject: Re: Test
Date: Sep 25, 2009
that was mean ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 7:47 AM Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Test > > > No > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ameet > Savant > Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 8:44 AM > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Test > > > Last two posts I made to the list, didn't make it back to me. Could some > one > reply back to this email and let me know if you got it on the Pietenpol > list? > > Thanks > Ameet > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 18:00:00 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: More cables and turnbuckles
From: "K5YAC" <hangar10(at)cox.net>
Date: Sep 25, 2009
Thanks Gene... I pass a big electrical supply store every day on the way home. I'll stop in tonight. -------- Mark - working on wings Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=264909#264909 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 25, 2009
Subject: Re: Test
From: Ryan Mueller <rmueller23(at)gmail.com>
And that was pointless. :) If you want to see if your posts are making it through without sending "Hello, hello?" messages to the list (while also failing to add 'do not archive' to such messages), go to http://forum.matronics.com and scroll down to find the link to the web based version of the Pietenpol-List. If your messages are making it through you will find them in there. Ryan On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 8:18 AM, Gene & Tammy wrote: > zharvey(at)bentoncountycable.net> > > that was mean > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net > > > To: > Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 7:47 AM > Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Test > > >> pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> >> >> No >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com >> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ameet >> Savant >> Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 8:44 AM >> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Test >> >> > >> >> Last two posts I made to the list, didn't make it back to me. Could some >> one >> reply back to this email and let me know if you got it on the Pietenpol >> list? >> >> Thanks >> Ameet >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > 18:00:00 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Richard Schreiber" <lmforge(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Straight Axle Wood Gear
Date: Sep 25, 2009
Chris: I know what you mean about wacking your head! I still have the scars. Rick Valparaiso, In ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: 9/25/2009 1:22:41 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Straight Axle Wood Gear Rick It's a great feeling and a big boost to finally get you fuselage on its gear. Just try not to sit in it to much and pretend. One of the reasons I built the gear with the fuselage upside down was to get it up out of the way of the wife and kids. With it up high they could still park the car in the garage and move about without bumping the plane. I on the other hand being taller whacked my head into the axel several times. Ouch! Chris Sacramento, CA WestCoastPiet.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 25, 2009
From: Jim Markle <jim_markle(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: More cables and turnbuckles
It's not that bad. Come on by and I'll show you.... -----Original Message----- >From: K5YAC <hangar10(at)cox.net> >Sent: Sep 25, 2009 7:00 AM >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: More cables and turnbuckles > > >Darn, that is what I was afraid of... the pain in the butt part. Maybe some kind of jig can be devised to hold the thimble and cable while the nicopress sleeve is installed? Either way, I want to use the right stuff. Thanks for the info Jack. > >-------- >Mark - working on wings > > >Read this topic online here: > >http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=264901#264901 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: More cables and turnbuckles
From: "K5YAC" <hangar10(at)cox.net>
Date: Sep 25, 2009
It's going to be a beautiful weekend here Jim... are you going to be home? I'd like to take another look at your wing if you have time to be in the shop. -------- Mark - working on wings Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=264923#264923 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 25, 2009
From: Tim Willis <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: More cables and turnbuckles
Mark, you can get such a split bolt at Lowe's or Home Depot. I recall them to be about $2 each. You only need one. Tim in central TX -----Original Message----- >From: Gene & Tammy <zharvey(at)bentoncountycable.net> >Sent: Sep 25, 2009 8:17 AM >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Re: PieMartenpol-List: Re: More cables and turnbuckles > > >Mark, go to an electrical suppy store and buy yourself a split bolt. The >kind electrical workers use to join two large copper wires together. That >will firmly hold the cable together while you compress the nicopress. >Gene >----- Original Message ----- >From: "K5YAC" <hangar10(at)cox.net> >To: >Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 8:00 AM >Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: More cables and turnbuckles > > >> >> Darn, that is what I was afraid of... the pain in the butt part. Maybe >> some kind of jig can be devised to hold the thimble and cable while the >> nicopress sleeve is installed? Either way, I want to use the right stuff. >> Thanks for the info Jack. >> >> -------- >> Mark - working on wings >> >> >> >> >> >> Read this topic online here: >> >> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=264901#264901 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >18:00:00 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: More cables and turnbuckles
Date: Sep 25, 2009
Simple. 1 x 19 is stronger but cannot flex over pulleys as well. So where I needed stength without flexibility, I used 1 x 19. For the control cables or the wires that are removed and re-installed more frquently (like the flying wires) I used the more flexible 7 x 19. Jack _____ From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of AMsafetyC(at)aol.com Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 9:11 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: More cables and turnbuckles Jack why the different cables in those locations? I haven't gotten to the cable part yet but I am curious as to the why and where John In a message dated 9/25/2009 8:24:34 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net writes: I used 1 x 19 for drag / anti-drag wires, using thimbles and nicopress fittings. Pain in the butt to bend that stuff around a thimble and get it into the nicopress sleeve. I used the same for the landing gear bracing (straight axle). I used 7 x 19 everywhere else. Jack Phillips NX899JP Raleigh, NC -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of K5YAC Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 10:00 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: More cables and turnbuckles Quick question... should I use 1x19 or 7x19 for drag/anti-drag cables? I plan to use thimbles and turnbuckles rather than swage type fittings. The 1x19 is listed as being quite a bit stronger, but not as flexible. Suggestions? -------- Mark - working on wings Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=264858#264858================== ============================= Use the ties Day ================================================ - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS ================================================ - List Contribution Web Site sp; ================================================== ________________________________________________________________________________
From: AMsafetyC(at)aol.com
Date: Sep 25, 2009
Subject: Re: More cables and turnbuckles
I see that 7x7 as being listed as aircraft cable and appears to be between the 1x19 and 7 x 19 in flexibility. Any reason not to go with the one stop shop method and just use that through out? What was your cabling material stainless, galv, steel and what was the nicoprress crimping material? In a message dated 9/25/2009 11:47:40 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net writes: Simple. 1 x 19 is stronger but cannot flex over pulleys as well. So where I needed stength without flexibility, I used 1 x 19. For the control cables or the wires that are removed and re-installed more frquently (like the flying wires) I used the more flexible 7 x 19. Jack ____________________________________ From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of AMsafetyC(at)aol.com Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 9:11 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: More cables and turnbuckles Jack why the different cables in those locations? I haven't gotten to the cable part yet but I am curious as to the why and where John In a message dated 9/25/2009 8:24:34 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net writes: --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Jack Phillips" I used 1 x 19 for drag / anti-drag wires, using thimbles and nicopress fittings. Pain in the butt to bend that stuff around a thimble and get it into the nicopress sleeve. I used the same for the landing gear bracing (straight axle). I used 7 x 19 everywhere else. Jack Phillips NX899JP Raleigh, NC -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of K5YAC Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 10:00 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: More cables and turnbuckles --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "K5YAC" Quick question... should I use 1x19 or 7x19 for drag/anti-drag cables? I plan to use thimbles and turnbuckles rather than swage type fittings. The 1x19 is listed as being quite a bit stronger, but not as flexible. Suggestions? -------- Mark - working on wings Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=264858#264858================== ==== Use the ties Day ======================= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS ======================= - List Contribution Web Site sp; http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List http://forums.matronics.com http://www.matronics.com/contribution (http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List) (http://www.matronics.com/contribution) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gary Boothe" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net>
Subject: More cables and turnbuckles
Date: Sep 25, 2009
Correction to an earlier post I made in haste (would that be "post haste"). I am using 7 x19 galvanized through out. Mine is not flight tested, but I am following the lead of others who have. I tried some 1 x 19 and decided it wasn't worth the PIA. Gary Boothe Cool, Ca. Pietenpol WW Corvair Conversion, mounted Tail done, Fuselage on gear (15 ribs down.) _____ From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of AMsafetyC(at)aol.com Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 8:57 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: More cables and turnbuckles I see that 7x7 as being listed as aircraft cable and appears to be between the 1x19 and 7 x 19 in flexibility. Any reason not to go with the one stop shop method and just use that through out? What was your cabling material stainless, galv, steel and what was the nicoprress crimping material? In a message dated 9/25/2009 11:47:40 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net writes: Simple. 1 x 19 is stronger but cannot flex over pulleys as well. So where I needed stength without flexibility, I used 1 x 19. For the control cables or the wires that are removed and re-installed more frquently (like the flying wires) I used the more flexible 7 x 19. Jack _____ From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of AMsafetyC(at)aol.com Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 9:11 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: More cables and turnbuckles Jack why the different cables in those locations? I haven't gotten to the cable part yet but I am curious as to the why and where John In a message dated 9/25/2009 8:24:34 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net writes: I used 1 x 19 for drag / anti-drag wires, using thimbles and nicopress fittings. Pain in the butt to bend that stuff around a thimble and get it into the nicopress sleeve. I used the same for the landing gear bracing (straight axle). I used 7 x 19 everywhere else. Jack Phillips NX899JP Raleigh, NC -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of K5YAC Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 10:00 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: More cables and turnbuckles Quick question... should I use 1x19 or 7x19 for drag/anti-drag cables? I plan to use thimbles and turnbuckles rather than swage type fittings. The 1x19 is listed as being quite a bit stronger, but not as flexible. Suggestions? -------- Mark - working on wings Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=264858#264858================== ==== Use the ties Day ======================= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS ======================= - List Contribution Web Site sp; http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List http://forums.matronics.com http://www.matronics.com/contribution =================================== t href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.matronic s.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List =================================== ms.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com =================================== tp://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution =================================== ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: More cables and turnbuckles
Date: Sep 25, 2009
I used stainless steel cable. Nicopress fittings were copper. _____ From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of AMsafetyC(at)aol.com Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 11:57 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: More cables and turnbuckles I see that 7x7 as being listed as aircraft cable and appears to be between the 1x19 and 7 x 19 in flexibility. Any reason not to go with the one stop shop method and just use that through out? What was your cabling material stainless, galv, steel and what was the nicoprress crimping material? In a message dated 9/25/2009 11:47:40 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net writes: Simple. 1 x 19 is stronger but cannot flex over pulleys as well. So where I needed stength without flexibility, I used 1 x 19. For the control cables or the wires that are removed and re-installed more frquently (like the flying wires) I used the more flexible 7 x 19. Jack _____ From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of AMsafetyC(at)aol.com Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 9:11 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: More cables and turnbuckles Jack why the different cables in those locations? I haven't gotten to the cable part yet but I am curious as to the why and where John In a message dated 9/25/2009 8:24:34 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net writes: I used 1 x 19 for drag / anti-drag wires, using thimbles and nicopress fittings. Pain in the butt to bend that stuff around a thimble and get it into the nicopress sleeve. I used the same for the landing gear bracing (straight axle). I used 7 x 19 everywhere else. Jack Phillips NX899JP Raleigh, NC -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of K5YAC Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 10:00 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: More cables and turnbuckles Quick question... should I use 1x19 or 7x19 for drag/anti-drag cables? I plan to use thimbles and turnbuckles rather than swage type fittings. The 1x19 is listed as being quite a bit stronger, but not as flexible. Suggestions? -------- Mark - working on wings Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=264858#264858================== ==== Use the ties Day ======================= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS ======================= - List Contribution Web Site sp; http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List http://forums.matronics.com http://www.matronics.com/contribution =================================== t href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.matronic s.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List =================================== ms.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com =================================== tp://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution =================================== ________________________________________________________________________________
From: AMsafetyC(at)aol.com
Date: Sep 25, 2009
Subject: Re: More cables and turnbuckles
Does anyone have any thoughts on this as a viable selection for a one stop shop for a Piets cable? I am interested in hearing your thoughts. Pro if any and con. Thanks John Wire Rope - Aircraft Cable 1/8", 7x7, 500 ft reel. Price: $25.00 This item is in stock Quantity: Brief Description Detailed Description Specifications Galvanized Aircraft Cable, 7x7 construction, 1700 lb Breaking Strength. Galvanized Aircraft Cable, 7x7 construction, 1700 lb Breaking Strength. In a message dated 9/25/2009 12:11:30 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net writes: I used stainless steel cable. Nicopress fittings were copper. ____________________________________ From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of AMsafetyC(at)aol.com Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 11:57 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: More cables and turnbuckles I see that 7x7 as being listed as aircraft cable and appears to be between the 1x19 and 7 x 19 in flexibility. Any reason not to go with the one stop shop method and just use that through out? What was your cabling material stainless, galv, steel and what was the nicoprress crimping material? In a message dated 9/25/2009 11:47:40 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net writes: Simple. 1 x 19 is stronger but cannot flex over pulleys as well. So where I needed stength without flexibility, I used 1 x 19. For the control cables or the wires that are removed and re-installed more frquently (like the flying wires) I used the more flexible 7 x 19. Jack ____________________________________ From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of AMsafetyC(at)aol.com Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 9:11 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: More cables and turnbuckles Jack why the different cables in those locations? I haven't gotten to the cable part yet but I am curious as to the why and where John In a message dated 9/25/2009 8:24:34 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net writes: --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Jack Phillips" I used 1 x 19 for drag / anti-drag wires, using thimbles and nicopress fittings. Pain in the butt to bend that stuff around a thimble and get it into the nicopress sleeve. I used the same for the landing gear bracing (straight axle). I used 7 x 19 everywhere else. Jack Phillips NX899JP Raleigh, NC -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of K5YAC Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 10:00 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: More cables and turnbuckles Quick question... should I use 1x19 or 7x19 for drag/anti-drag cables? I plan to use thimbles and turnbuckles rather than swage type fittings. The 1x19 is listed as being quite a bit stronger, but not as flexible. Suggestions? -------- Mark - working on wings Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=264858#264858================== ==== Use the ties Day ======================= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS ======================= - List Contribution Web Site sp; http://www.matronics.com/contribution =================================== t href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List =================================== ms.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com =================================== tp://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution =================================== http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List http://forums.matronics.com http://www.matronics.com/contribution (http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List) (http://www.matronics.com/contribution) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 25, 2009
From: Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov>
Subject: Re: castoring vs. steerable
Dan, I verified last night that the Sonex has a direct and hard steering link connection to the tailwheel - no springs, no castoring. I still think you could just make your tailwheel a non-castoring, non-steerable arrangement. Cheers, Dan helspersew(at)aol.com wrote: > The only time you want your tailwheel to fully castor (again in my > opinion--there may be some other very good reasons why this might be > wrong) is > when > you're going less than 5 mph. > > Now I am going to have to re-think this whole tailwheel thing. Darn! I > thought I was all done with that! > > Dan Helsper > Poplar Grove, IL. > -- Dan Yocum Fermilab 630.840.6509 yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov Fermilab. Just zeros and ones. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Richard Schreiber" <lmforge(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: More cables and turnbuckles
Date: Sep 25, 2009
John: I asked a couple of AP's at the field about using cable from Sears or the local tractor supply. The cable was identified as being aircraft grade. All of them said don't. Just by from a legitimate aircraft supplier. Even though it may be listed as aircraft grade, it may not be. The risk is too grate for the cost savings. Actually the local stuff was more expensive than Aircraft Spruce. Rick S ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: 9/25/2009 12:16:15 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: More cables and turnbuckles Does anyone have any thoughts on this as a viable selection for a one stop shop for a Piets cable? I am interested in hearing your thoughts. Pro if any and con. Thanks John Wire Rope - Aircraft Cable 1/8", 7x7, 500 ft reel. Price: $25.00 This item is in stock Quantity: Brief Description Detailed Description Specifications Galvanized Aircraft Cable, 7x7 construction, 1700 lb Breaking Strength. Galvanized Aircraft Cable, 7x7 construction, 1700 lb Breaking Strength. In a message dated 9/25/2009 12:11:30 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net writes: I used stainless steel cable. Nicopress fittings were copper. From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of AMsafetyC(at)aol.com Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 11:57 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: More cables and turnbuckles I see that 7x7 as being listed as aircraft cable and appears to be between the 1x19 and 7 x 19 in flexibility. Any reason not to go with the one stop shop method and just use that through out? What was your cabling material stainless, galv, steel and what was the nicoprress crimping material? In a message dated 9/25/2009 11:47:40 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net writes: Simple. 1 x 19 is stronger but cannot flex over pulleys as well. So where I needed stength without flexibility, I used 1 x 19. For the control cables or the wires that are removed and re-installed more frquently (like the flying wires) I used the more flexible 7 x 19. Jack From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of AMsafetyC(at)aol.com Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 9:11 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: More cables and turnbuckles Jack why the different cables in those locations? I haven't gotten to the cable part yet but I am curious as to the why and where John In a message dated 9/25/2009 8:24:34 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net writes: I used 1 x 19 for drag / anti-drag wires, using thimbles and nicopress fittings. Pain in the butt to bend that stuff around a thimble and get it into the nicopress sleeve. I used the same for the landing gear bracing (straight axle). I used 7 x 19 everywhere else. Jack Phillips NX899JP Raleigh, NC -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of K5YAC Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 10:00 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: More cables and turnbuckles Quick question... should I use 1x19 or 7x19 for drag/anti-drag cables? I plan to use thimbles and turnbuckles rather than swage type fittings. The 1x19 is listed as being quite a bit stronger, but not as flexible. Suggestions? -------- Mark - working on wings Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=264858#264858======================= Use the ties Day ======================= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS ======================= - List Contribution Web Site sp; http://www.matronics.com/contribution =================================== t href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List =================================== ms.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com =================================== tp://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution =================================== http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List http://forums.matronics.com http://www.matronics.com/contribution =================================== t href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List =================================== ms.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com =================================== tp://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution =================================== ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: More cables and turnbuckles
Date: Sep 25, 2009
Would probably be fine, although you don't need all that much 1/8" cable. I used 3/32" for the tail bracing wires and all the control cables. Jack Phillips NX899JP _____ From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of AMsafetyC(at)aol.com Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 1:12 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: More cables and turnbuckles Does anyone have any thoughts on this as a viable selection for a one stop shop for a Piets cable? I am interested in hearing your thoughts. Pro if any and con. Thanks John <http://www.pambinaimpex.com/catalog/gac125-77-500.jpg> <http://www.pambinaimpex.com/images/InitialSet/pixel.gif> Wire Rope - Aircraft Cable 1/8", 7x7, 500 ft reel. Price: $25.00 This item is in stock Quantity: Brief Description Detailed Description Specifications Galvanized Aircraft Cable, 7x7 construction, 1700 lb Breaking Strength. Galvanized Aircraft Cable, 7x7 construction, 1700 lb Breaking Strength. In a message dated 9/25/2009 12:11:30 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net writes: I used stainless steel cable. Nicopress fittings were copper. _____ From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of AMsafetyC(at)aol.com Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 11:57 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: More cables and turnbuckles I see that 7x7 as being listed as aircraft cable and appears to be between the 1x19 and 7 x 19 in flexibility. Any reason not to go with the one stop shop method and just use that through out? What was your cabling material stainless, galv, steel and what was the nicoprress crimping material? In a message dated 9/25/2009 11:47:40 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net writes: Simple. 1 x 19 is stronger but cannot flex over pulleys as well. So where I needed stength without flexibility, I used 1 x 19. For the control cables or the wires that are removed and re-installed more frquently (like the flying wires) I used the more flexible 7 x 19. Jack _____ From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of AMsafetyC(at)aol.com Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 9:11 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: More cables and turnbuckles Jack why the different cables in those locations? I haven't gotten to the cable part yet but I am curious as to the why and where John In a message dated 9/25/2009 8:24:34 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net writes: I used 1 x 19 for drag / anti-drag wires, using thimbles and nicopress fittings. Pain in the butt to bend that stuff around a thimble and get it into the nicopress sleeve. I used the same for the landing gear bracing (straight axle). I used 7 x 19 everywhere else. Jack Phillips NX899JP Raleigh, NC -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of K5YAC Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 10:00 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: More cables and turnbuckles Quick question... should I use 1x19 or 7x19 for drag/anti-drag cables? I plan to use thimbles and turnbuckles rather than swage type fittings. The 1x19 is listed as being quite a bit stronger, but not as flexible. Suggestions? -------- Mark - working on wings Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=264858#264858================== ==== Use the ties Day ======================= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS ======================= - List Contribution Web Site sp; http://www.matronics.com/contribution =================================== t href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.matronic s.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List =================================== ms.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com =================================== tp://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution =================================== http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List http://forums.matronics.com http://www.matronics.com/contribution =================================== t href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.matronic s.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List =================================== ms.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com =================================== tp://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution =================================== ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bentoncountycable.net>
Subject: The Pietenpol Story
Date: Sep 25, 2009
Wondering if anyone has Chet Peek's e-mail or home address? Current price of "The Pietenpol Story"? Looking to buy one for a friend to encourage him to build a Piet. Gene in rainy Tennessee ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 25, 2009
Subject: Re: The Pietenpol Story
From: Matt Redmond <mdredmond(at)gmail.com>
Was about $24 at Oshkosh (at his table). Chester L. Peek 1861 Danfield Dr. Norman, Oklahoma 73072 http://www.threepeakspub.com/ On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 1:40 PM, Gene & Tammy wrote: > Wondering if anyone has Chet Peek's e-mail or home address? Current > price of "The Pietenpol Story"? Looking to buy one for a friend to > encourage him to build a Piet. > Gene in rainy Tennessee > > * > > * > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: The Pietenpol Story
Date: Sep 25, 2009
Such a deal! The book is $59.99 on Amazon, so go direct to Chet to buy one. Oscar Zuniga Air Camper NX41CC San Antonio, TX mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com website at http://www.flysquirrel.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Kevin's Airplane and Lettering
From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com>
Date: Sep 25, 2009
Kevin... I did the same thing as you with the lettering. I used someone else's. I borrowed some of Frank Pavliga's pictures of Pietenpol's from the 1930's when I was getting ready to paint. Of course, just like today there were many different paint schemes and designs, but the one thing I really noticed was that none of them used the standard issue block letters and numbers. These were pictures from the very early '30's and those standard letters and numbers had not really come into use yet. So I picked one style that I thought was simple and 'Pietenpol-like', whatever that might be. When the sign painter arrived I just handed her the picture and said, "paint the numbers like those ones". This summer I added a little lettering to the side of the fuselage. Very simple and basic, but for those I just went to my friend down the road who does vinyl lettering and had her make a stencil for me that I then brushed on with "1 shot" sign paint. Very simple and much cheaper than paying a sign painter to do it. However it does not look anything like what a good sign painter can do. Those sign painter are very talented! Again Kevin, super looking airplane! Don Emch NX899DE Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=264997#264997 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 25, 2009
From: Steve Ruse <steve(at)wotelectronics.com>
Subject: Re: The Pietenpol Story
If you are looking for the book, you can get it here: http://threepeakspub.com/ Steve Ruse Quoting Oscar Zuniga : > > > Such a deal! The book is $59.99 on Amazon, so go direct > to Chet to buy one. > > Oscar Zuniga > Air Camper NX41CC > San Antonio, TX > mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com > website at http://www.flysquirrel.net > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bentoncountycable.net>
Subject: Re: The Pietenpol Story
Date: Sep 25, 2009
Thanks everyone that replyed. The book is ordered. Thank you Gene ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Ruse" <steve(at)wotelectronics.com> Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 4:30 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: The Pietenpol Story > > > If you are looking for the book, you can get it here: > > http://threepeakspub.com/ > > Steve Ruse > > Quoting Oscar Zuniga : > >> >> >> >> Such a deal! The book is $59.99 on Amazon, so go direct >> to Chet to buy one. >> >> Oscar Zuniga >> Air Camper NX41CC >> San Antonio, TX >> mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com >> website at http://www.flysquirrel.net >> >> >> >> >> > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 05:51:00 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: tailwheels
Date: Sep 25, 2009
From: helspersew(at)aol.com
Shad, I think after reading this post,?you have convinced me to do this. When I remove my "quick disconnect" tailwheel I will have to stash those cables inside the fuse somehow until I need them again. Thanks. Dan Helsper Poplar Grove, IL. -----Original Message----- From: shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com> Sent: Thu, Sep 24, 2009 10:18 am Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: tailwheels Dan, If I recall correctly, in my minds eye, making your current t/w assembly steerable?would not be very tough.? Just weld some ears on it to attatch cables to and run the cables up through the aft belly and nicopress them to the rudder cables behind the seat.? All you may need to make might be a few fittings to put cable fairleads in.? It might be better to weld up the lower part of the tail wheel "fork" to get a better fit for a steering arm.? Check out west coast piet and look at some pics of Don Emch's t/w, simple and easy to control.? Ours is similar and I have had it in 25-30mph gusty x-winds on pavement, and it can be an airplane saver.? Comparing it to the fixed t/w we had before steerable is 300% easier and more enjoyable. ? Shad ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 25, 2009
From: Jim <jimboyer(at)hughes.net>
Subject: Re: First Flight
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 25, 2009
Subject: Re: The Pietenpol Story
From: Rick Holland <at7000ft(at)gmail.com>
Since you brought up the subject I would highly recommend 'The Pietenpol Story' to all Piet builders, should be required reading. Have several of Chet Peeks other books and they are just as good. Chet is a regular at Broadhead. rick On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 12:40 PM, Gene & Tammy < zharvey(at)bentoncountycable.net> wrote: > Wondering if anyone has Chet Peek's e-mail or home address? Current > price of "The Pietenpol Story"? Looking to buy one for a friend to > encourage him to build a Piet. > Gene in rainy Tennessee > > * > > * > > -- Rick Holland Castle Rock, Colorado "Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad" ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Robert Butsch" <rbutsch(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: how do I view photos
Date: Sep 25, 2009
Hey Jim: I just read and went to the power toys site to download the picture seizer. Unfortunately, the first paragraph states that those applications will not work with VISTA. Too bad since they look very interesting. But thanks for the info anyhow. How it the Piet coming? Bob in Indy. ----- Original Message ----- From: "jimbir" <jimbir(at)yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 7:42 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: how do I view photos > > For everyone using Windows XP here is the handiest picture resizing tool > in the world. This link will tell you all about it. I wouldn't be without > it. > > http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/digitalphotography/learnmore/tips/eschelman2.mspx > > I don't know why it wouldn't work with Vista. > > -------- > Jim Birke > Ira G. Ross Aerospace Museum > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=236300#236300 > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 25, 2009
Subject: Re: Kevin's Airplane and Lettering
From: Rick Holland <at7000ft(at)gmail.com>
Don What kind of paint do those sign painters use? Will they use the same paint we used for our top coat if we provided it for them to use? rick On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 2:11 PM, Don Emch wrote: > > Kevin... > > I did the same thing as you with the lettering. I used someone else's. I > borrowed some of Frank Pavliga's pictures of Pietenpol's from the 1930's > when I was getting ready to paint. Of course, just like today there were > many different paint schemes and designs, but the one thing I really noticed > was that none of them used the standard issue block letters and numbers. > These were pictures from the very early '30's and those standard letters > and numbers had not really come into use yet. So I picked one style that I > thought was simple and 'Pietenpol-like', whatever that might be. When the > sign painter arrived I just handed her the picture and said, "paint the > numbers like those ones". This summer I added a little lettering to the > side of the fuselage. Very simple and basic, but for those I just went to > my friend down the road who does vinyl lettering and had her make a stencil > for me that I then brushed on with "1 shot" sign paint. Very simple and > much cheaper than payi! > ng a sign painter to do it. However it does not look anything like what a > good sign painter can do. Those sign painter are very talented! > > Again Kevin, super looking airplane! > > Don Emch > NX899DE > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=264997#264997 > > -- Rick Holland Castle Rock, Colorado "Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad" ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 26, 2009
From: Jim <jimboyer(at)hughes.net>
Subject: Re: Straight Axle Wood Gear
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 25, 2009
From: Dave and Connie <dmatt(at)frontiernet.net>
Subject: Wood Options
Quite a few years ago I was going to build a Pietenpol. I bought the Western Aircraft wood and started. A Taylorcraft, kids, and many other things got in the way so I sold the wood. The guy that bought it didn't want the plans so I kept them. I am thinking about picking up some wood and making a set of ribs this winter. If I get them done I will look for another piece to build. Locally I can easily get the following: Poplar White Pine Radiata Pine Western Red Cedar undefined versions of Hemlock Douglas Fir flooring The poplar and western red cedar are probably the easiest to find good wood but clear white pine is also available. What would be the first couple of preferences for wood? I was thinking of using red cedar because I had read that Charlie Rubeck (?) had used that. Looking at the archives there seems to be some disagreement on the type of cedar (red or Port Oxford) he used and there is a huge difference in the characteristics between the types. Dave ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 25, 2009
Subject: Re: how do I view photos
From: Ryan Mueller <rmueller23(at)gmail.com>
Rob, A program that I like is IrfanView: http://www.irfanview.com/ It's freeware, opens just about anything, and is nice and lightweight (small footprint and it runs well on older machines). With it you can resize, crop, adjust color levels, etc, but it's also just a really nice image viewer. It runs on Windows 9x through Windows 7 (this includes XP, Vista, etc). Ryan On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Robert Butsch wrote: > > > > Hey Jim: > > I just read and went to the power toys site to download the picture seizer. > Unfortunately, the first paragraph states that those applications will not > work with VISTA. Too bad since they look very interesting. But thanks for > the info anyhow. How it the Piet coming? > > Bob in Indy. > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "jimbir" <jimbir(at)yahoo.com> > To: > Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 7:42 PM > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: how do I view photos > > >> >> For everyone using Windows XP here is the handiest picture resizing tool >> in the world. This link will tell you all about it. I wouldn't be without >> it. >> >> >> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/digitalphotography/learnmore/tips/eschelman2.mspx >> >> I don't know why it wouldn't work with Vista. >> >> -------- >> Jim Birke >> Ira G. Ross Aerospace Museum >> >> >> >> >> Read this topic online here: >> >> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=236300#236300 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gary Boothe" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Wood Options
Date: Sep 25, 2009
Dave, Good idea about building the ribs this winter. I was not so organized and have been fighting that hurdle for over a year. The rest of the plane is just too much fun to build!! I am using mostly poplar, and love working with it. However, I built the tail parts first out of hemlock and really liked that, too. Having not used any cedar, yet, I can't comment on that, but give both poplar and pine a big thumbs up. Gary Boothe Cool, Ca. Pietenpol WW Corvair Conversion, mounted Tail done, Fuselage on gear Working on center section (and kitchen) (15 ribs down.) -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave and Connie Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 5:14 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Wood Options Quite a few years ago I was going to build a Pietenpol. I bought the Western Aircraft wood and started. A Taylorcraft, kids, and many other things got in the way so I sold the wood. The guy that bought it didn't want the plans so I kept them. I am thinking about picking up some wood and making a set of ribs this winter. If I get them done I will look for another piece to build. Locally I can easily get the following: Poplar White Pine Radiata Pine Western Red Cedar undefined versions of Hemlock Douglas Fir flooring The poplar and western red cedar are probably the easiest to find good wood but clear white pine is also available. What would be the first couple of preferences for wood? I was thinking of using red cedar because I had read that Charlie Rubeck (?) had used that. Looking at the archives there seems to be some disagreement on the type of cedar (red or Port Oxford) he used and there is a huge difference in the characteristics between the types. Dave ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 26, 2009
From: Mike Tunnicliffe <zk-owl(at)CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Subject: Re: Wood Options
Hi, I am using port orford cedar, it is a delight to work with except for the smell, I would not use red cedar for an aircraft, it has no guts and is not an approved spruce substitute. regards Mike T. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave and Connie" <dmatt(at)frontiernet.net> Sent: Saturday, September 26, 2009 12:14 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Wood Options > > > Quite a few years ago I was going to build a Pietenpol. I bought the > Western Aircraft wood and started. A Taylorcraft, kids, and many other > things got in the way so I sold the wood. The guy that bought it didn't > want the plans so I kept them. > > I am thinking about picking up some wood and making a set of ribs this > winter. If I get them done I will look for another piece to build. > > Locally I can easily get the following: > Poplar > White Pine > Radiata Pine > Western Red Cedar > undefined versions of Hemlock > Douglas Fir flooring > > The poplar and western red cedar are probably the easiest to find good > wood but clear white pine is also available. > > What would be the first couple of preferences for wood? I was thinking of > using red cedar because I had read that Charlie Rubeck (?) had used that. > Looking at the archives there seems to be some disagreement on the type of > cedar (red or Port Oxford) he used and there is a huge difference in the > characteristics between the types. > > Dave > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Clif Dawson" <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: More cables and turnbuckles
Date: Sep 25, 2009
I'm with you. My cables are all done except wing related ones as I don't have those done. As soon as I've finished my tank I can start on the brakes. As soon as they're done I can move it all to a local field. Probably next spring or summer. I don't suppose anyone knows where I can get wiring info for a Collins mode C transponder. I haven't had any luck on the internet yet. Clif Correction to an earlier post I made in haste (would that be "post haste"). I am using 7 x19 galvanized through out. Mine is not flight tested, but I am following the lead of others who have. I tried some 1 x 19 and decided it wasn't worth the PIA. Gary Boothe ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Clif Dawson" <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: Wood Options
Date: Sep 25, 2009
Red Cedar, because of it's low density, is only 2/3 the strength of Spruce. In other words if you wanted to use it in place of a 1" wide spruce or hemlock spar you would have to make it 1 1/2" wide. Port orford is completely different from red. Port Orford is actually stronger than spruce. Clif ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave and Connie" <dmatt(at)frontiernet.net> Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 5:14 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Wood Options > > > Quite a few years ago I was going to build a Pietenpol. I bought the > Western Aircraft wood and started. A Taylorcraft, kids, and many other > things got in the way so I sold the wood. The guy that bought it didn't > want the plans so I kept them. > > I am thinking about picking up some wood and making a set of ribs this > winter. If I get them done I will look for another piece to build. > > Locally I can easily get the following: > Poplar > White Pine > Radiata Pine > Western Red Cedar > undefined versions of Hemlock > Douglas Fir flooring > > The poplar and western red cedar are probably the easiest to find good > wood but clear white pine is also available. > > What would be the first couple of preferences for wood? I was thinking > of using red cedar because I had read that Charlie Rubeck (?) had used > that. Looking at the archives there seems to be some disagreement on > the type of cedar (red or Port Oxford) he used and there is a huge > difference in the characteristics between the types. > > Dave > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 17:52:00 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 26, 2009
Subject: Re: Wood Options
From: Robert Ray <rray032003(at)gmail.com>
I found enough strainght grained knot free Douglas Fur to build a Piet at Lowe's, strange it was in the section they place specialty and project woods like poplar, oak. It was on sale no one wanted it so I loaded all on the cart and took it home, it was marked down on sale cheaper than construction grade spruce and pine. Around here you can get Poplar from a saw mill of course it's green and you'll have to have them quarter saw it, my sister's farm is covered with poplar. If I want it I just pick a tree with no limbs up to 25 feet and haul it to the saw mill. Also I bought boat grade DF from a mill in BC for 4 dollars a board foot, the ends were sealed the boards were 18' long and it is fine, they shipped I don't remember the charge, I like the DF, I've built a motorcycle trailer out of it it's probably 18% stronger than spruce, takes epoxy like a sponge, I took a piece of plastic drain pipe filled it with hot boiling water stuck the DF strip in and let if soak it bends like crazy but retians the shape and gets it's strength back when it dries. My Longerons will be DF 1 x 3/4 inch because it's heavier than spruce so I will take off 1/4 inch. To test the motorcycle trailer I pulled it behind my truck loaded with 600 lb's at 80 mph, there's no metal in the trialer except the short piece of angle where the leaf springs attach, it's very strong. Russell On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 2:30 AM, Clif Dawson wrote: > > Red Cedar, because of it's low density, is only 2/3 the > strength of Spruce. In other words if you wanted to > use it in place of a 1" wide spruce or hemlock spar > you would have to make it 1 1/2" wide. > > Port orford is completely different from red. Port > Orford is actually stronger than spruce. > > Clif > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave and Connie" < > dmatt(at)frontiernet.net> > To: > Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 5:14 PM > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Wood Options > > >> dmatt(at)frontiernet.net> >> >> Quite a few years ago I was going to build a Pietenpol. I bought the >> Western Aircraft wood and started. A Taylorcraft, kids, and many other >> things got in the way so I sold the wood. The guy that bought it didn't >> want the plans so I kept them. >> >> I am thinking about picking up some wood and making a set of ribs this >> winter. If I get them done I will look for another piece to build. >> >> Locally I can easily get the following: >> Poplar >> White Pine >> Radiata Pine >> Western Red Cedar >> undefined versions of Hemlock >> Douglas Fir flooring >> >> The poplar and western red cedar are probably the easiest to find good >> wood but clear white pine is also available. >> >> What would be the first couple of preferences for wood? I was thinking >> of using red cedar because I had read that Charlie Rubeck (?) had used >> that. Looking at the archives there seems to be some disagreement on >> the type of cedar (red or Port Oxford) he used and there is a huge >> difference in the characteristics between the types. >> >> Dave >> >> >> >> >> > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > 17:52:00 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Kevin's Airplane and Lettering
From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com>
Date: Sep 26, 2009
I'm sure a lot of different paints can be used. "1 Shot" is a very popular sign paint. That's what is on mine. In using it for my fuselage, I found it is really nice to work with. It has just the right consistency for painting vertical surfaces with a brush. I'm sure the quality of brush helps too. I sprung for an average quality one. It was tiny and cost about 30 bucks! Although I haven't tried it, I hear it comes off with "Easy Off" oven cleaner and it won't harm the dope. So if there is something you need to remove that can be a possibility. I sure wish I had the talent of a sign painter, they are amazing to watch! Here is the link to "1 Shot" http://www.1shot.com/ Luckily I have a dealer near me. They tried to give me a quick lesson, Ha! There ain't no quick learning it! Which is the reason the lettering I did the lettering on the side of my with a stencil and they are very simple letters. See it here; http://public.fotki.com/dwbrant/fancies-of-flight/pietenpol-80th-anni/5d022692.html This is the work of a sign painter; http://public.fotki.com/dwbrant/fancies-of-flight/pietenpol-80th-anni/5d022683.html Ha! Little different! Don Emch NX899DE Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265085#265085 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 26, 2009
Subject: Re: Wood Options
From: Ameet Savant <ameetsavant(at)gmail.com>
Dave, I recently read through the 1942 War Department Manual on Aircraft Woodworking (TM 1-414) and they say Poplar is a direct replacement for Sitka Spruce with no need of engineering changes. By the way, the manual is a great read and has some really good tips. Ameet On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 7:14 PM, Dave and Connie wrote: > dmatt(at)frontiernet.net> > > Quite a few years ago I was going to build a Pietenpol. I bought the > Western Aircraft wood and started. A Taylorcraft, kids, and many other > things got in the way so I sold the wood. The guy that bought it didn't > want the plans so I kept them. > > I am thinking about picking up some wood and making a set of ribs this > winter. If I get them done I will look for another piece to build. > > Locally I can easily get the following: > Poplar > White Pine > Radiata Pine > Western Red Cedar > undefined versions of Hemlock > Douglas Fir flooring > > The poplar and western red cedar are probably the easiest to find good wood > but clear white pine is also available. > > What would be the first couple of preferences for wood? I was thinking of > using red cedar because I had read that Charlie Rubeck (?) had used that. > Looking at the archives there seems to be some disagreement on the type of > cedar (red or Port Oxford) he used and there is a huge difference in the > characteristics between the types. > > Dave > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Doug Dever <chiefpepperhead(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Wood Options
Date: Sep 26, 2009
Yeah it would be great if Lowe's even carried Douglas Fir around here. I c an get construction grade fir. Built my addition with it. I wouldn't be a fraid to use western region spf lumber. But here in the east spf includes balsam fir. Be careful on poplar. Needs to be yellow poplar or tulip wo od . Out west "poplar" may be cottonwood or aspen. Not suitable. Doug Dever In beautiful Stow Ohio Date: Sat=2C 26 Sep 2009 05:50:46 -0400 Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood Options From: rray032003(at)gmail.com I found enough strainght grained knot free Douglas Fur to build a Piet at L owe's=2C strange it was in the section they place specialty and project woods like poplar=2C oak. It was on sale no one wanted it so I loaded all on the cart and took it home=2C it was marked down on sale cheaper than con struction grade spruce and pine. Around here you can get Poplar from a saw mill of course it's gre en and you'll have to have them quarter saw it=2C my sister's farm is covered with poplar. If I w ant it I just pick a tree with no limbs up to 25 feet and haul it to the saw mill. Also I bought boat grade DF from a mill in BC for 4 dollars a board foot=2C the ends were sealed the boards we re 18' long and it is fine=2C they shipped I don't remember the charge=2C I like the DF=2C I've b uilt a motorcycle trailer out of it it's probably 18% stronger than spruce=2C takes epoxy like a spon ge=2C I took a piece of plastic drain pipe filled it with hot boiling water stuck the DF strip i n and let if soak it bends like crazy but retians the shape and gets it's strength back when it dries. My Longerons will be DF 1 x 3/4 inch because it's heavier than spruce so I will take off 1/4 inch. To test the motorcycle trailer I pulled it behind my truck loaded with 600 lb's at 80 mph=2C there's no metal in the trialer except the short piece of angl e where the leaf springs attach=2C it's very strong. Russell On Sat=2C Sep 26=2C 2009 at 2:30 AM=2C Clif Dawson wr ote: Red Cedar=2C because of it's low density=2C is only 2/3 the strength of Spruce. In other words if you wanted to use it in place of a 1" wide spruce or hemlock spar you would have to make it 1 1/2" wide. Port orford is completely different from red. Port Orford is actually stronger than spruce. Clif ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave and Connie" <dmatt(at)frontiernet.net > Sent: Friday=2C September 25=2C 2009 5:14 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Wood Options t> Quite a few years ago I was going to build a Pietenpol. I bought the Western Aircraft wood and started. A Taylorcraft=2C kids=2C and many other things got in the way so I sold the wood. The guy that bought it didn't want the plans so I kept them. I am thinking about picking up some wood and making a set of ribs this winter. If I get them done I will look for another piece to build. Locally I can easily get the following: Poplar White Pine Radiata Pine Western Red Cedar undefined versions of Hemlock Douglas Fir flooring The poplar and western red cedar are probably the easiest to find good wood but clear white pine is also available. What would be the first couple of preferences for wood? I was thinking of using red cedar because I had read that Charlie Rubeck (?) had used that. Looking at the archives there seems to be some disagreement on the type of cedar (red or Port Oxford) he used and there is a huge difference in the characteristics between the types. Dave --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 17:52:00 ch as List Un/Subscription=2C www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List" target="_blank">http://www.ma tronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List ronics.com/" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com Matt Dralle=2C List Admin. ==== =0A _________________________________________________________________=0A Hotmail=AE has ever-growing storage! Don=92t worry about storage limits.=0A http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/Storage?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tuto rial_Storage_062009 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 26, 2009
From: Tim Willis <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Don's lettering-- and now Don's prop
Don, While looking for your lettering, I could only find your new side panel lettering. Please show us your tail numbers. Also, I noted your very nifty prop. What is that on the leading edge of most of it-- is that integral wood, or do you have a harder material (metal, fiber?) to protect it? BTW, I love the shot (Brodhead '09) of you gliding in to land, with a young blond lad in the front pit. He is loving it and facing the camera. The photographer captured the motion by panning, so the trees in the background are blurred. The wheels and covers, your new side lettering, all set it off, so that the plane looks 1929, well maybe 1936 (A-40 engine design). Neat. Tim in central TX -----Original Message----- >From: Don Emch <EmchAir(at)aol.com> >Sent: Sep 25, 2009 3:11 PM >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Pietenpol-List: Kevin's Airplane and Lettering > > >Kevin... > >I did the same thing as you with the lettering. I used someone else's. I borrowed some of Frank Pavliga's pictures of Pietenpol's from the 1930's when I was getting ready to paint. Of course, just like today there were many different paint schemes and designs, but the one thing I really noticed was that none of them used the standard issue block letters and numbers. These were pictures from the very early '30's and those standard letters and numbers had not really come into use yet. So I picked one style that I thought was simple and 'Pietenpol-like', whatever that might be. When the sign painter arrived I just handed her the picture and said, "paint the numbers like those ones". This summer I added a little lettering to the side of the fuselage. Very simple and basic, but for those I just went to my friend down the road who does vinyl lettering and had her make a stencil for me that I then brushed on with "1 shot" sign paint. Very simple and much cheaper than payi ! > ng a sign painter to do it. However it does not look anything like what a good sign painter can do. Those sign painter are very talented! > >Again Kevin, super looking airplane! > >Don Emch >NX899DE > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 26, 2009
From: "KMHeide, BA, CPO, FAAOP" <kmheidecpo(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Kevin's Airplane and Lettering
The paint they use id called: "One Shot" great sign painters paint and come s in a few different sizedcontainerss. It has the durability and lasting qu alities that will amaze you! - KMHeide Fargo, ND - --- On Fri, 9/25/09, Rick Holland wrote: From: Rick Holland <at7000ft(at)gmail.com> Subject: Re:Pietenpol-List: Kevin's Airplane and Lettering Date: Friday, September 25, 2009, 6:04 PM Don What kind of paint do those sign painters use? Will they use the same paint we used for our top coat if we provided it for them to use? rick On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 2:11 PM, Don Emch wrote: Kevin... I did the same thing as you with the lettering. -I used someone else's. -I borrowed some of Frank Pavliga's pictures of Pietenpol's from the 1930 's when I was getting ready to paint. -Of course, just like today there w ere many different paint schemes and designs, but the one thing I really no ticed was that none of them used the standard issue block letters and numbe rs. -These were pictures from the very early '30's and those standard let ters and numbers had not really come into use yet. -So I picked one style -that I thought was simple and 'Pietenpol-like', whatever that might be. -When the sign painter arrived I just handed her the picture and said, " paint the numbers like those ones". -This summer I added a little letteri ng to the side of the fuselage. -Very simple and basic, but for those I j ust went to my friend down the road who does vinyl lettering and had her ma ke a stencil for me that I then brushed on with "1 shot" sign paint. -Ver y simple and much cheaper than payi! -ng a sign painter to do it. -However it does not look anything like wh at a good sign painter can do. -Those sign painter are very talented! Again Kevin, super looking airplane! Don Emch NX899DE Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=264997#264997 st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List http://forums.matronics.com le, List Admin. ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution -- Rick Holland Castle Rock, Colorado "Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad" =0A=0A=0A ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: More cables and turnbuckles
Date: Sep 26, 2009
On selecting cables: students, take out your Tony Bingelis "Sportplane Builder" and turn to the section on cables. Like most of these topics, Tony has it all, says it clearly, and has pictures and drawings to help. Easy. There is a reason for using finer stranding for control cables and coarser for standing rigging. There is a reason for using galvanized over stainless and vice-versa. And aircraft control cable is impregnated (or the strands are coated) with a dry lubricant that hardware store cable does not have, so it's not just about the rated strength of the cable, it's also about corrosion resistance and some of the cabling on a Piet hangs out in the elements. "Step right up folks, get yer Tony! Right here, get your Bingelis books!" 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: tailwheels
Date: Sep 26, 2009
One other thing to consider if you don't have cables run to your tailwheel and the tail is already covered is that you can go the GN-1 route and link the tailwheel steering to the rudder itself, not to the rudder cables. The rudder needs to be stiffened but it may be easier for some to do it that way than to run a new set of tailwheel steering cables up to the rudder bar. See the last couple of pix at http://www.flysquirrel.net/piets/piets4.html for how it's done on the GN-1. Oscar Zuniga Air Camper NX41CC San Antonio, TX mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com website at http://www.flysquirrel.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: More cables and turnbuckles
From: "K5YAC" <hangar10(at)cox.net>
Date: Sep 26, 2009
No kidding Oscar! Ha ha! I see this all the time, and now I am a victim too. There are a lot of things I pick up on by looking at the prints or reading related material, but sometimes I get so use to bouncing questions off the people on here that I forget that the books are on the shelf. Thanks for the reminder... I'm going to brush up right now. -------- Mark - working on wings Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265136#265136 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 26, 2009
From: <r.r.hall(at)cox.net>
Subject: Wood Options
Check out actual lumberyards as most big chain stores won't have the high quality stuff. I did a quick search as an example and found 10 places listed as lumberyards near (within about 20 miles) Stow Ohio. Some places can order you wood from their distributor if you specify what you need. It can be found just takes some time. I bought my Douglas fir from a local out of the way place and was amazed at the quality difference between them and Home Depot or Lowes. Rodney Hall ---- Doug Dever wrote: > > Yeah it would be great if Lowe's even carried Douglas Fir around here. I can get construction grade fir. Built my addition with it. I wouldn't be afraid to use western region spf lumber. But here in the east spf includes balsam fir. Be careful on poplar. Needs to be yellow poplar or tulip wood > . Out west "poplar" may be cottonwood or aspen. Not suitable. > > > Doug Dever > In beautiful Stow Ohio > > > > > > > Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 05:50:46 -0400 > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood Options > From: rray032003(at)gmail.com > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > > > I found enough strainght grained knot free Douglas Fur to build a Piet at Lowe's, strange it was in the section they > place specialty and project woods like poplar, oak. It was on sale no one wanted it so I loaded all > on the cart and took it home, it was marked down on sale cheaper than construction grade spruce > and pine. Around here you can get Poplar from a saw mill of course it's green and you'll have to > have them quarter saw it, my sister's farm is covered with poplar. If I want it I just pick a tree > with no limbs up to 25 feet and haul it to the saw mill. Also I bought boat grade DF from a > mill in BC for 4 dollars a board foot, the ends were sealed the boards were 18' long and it is > fine, they shipped I don't remember the charge, I like the DF, I've built a motorcycle trailer > out of it it's probably 18% stronger than spruce, takes epoxy like a sponge, I took a piece > of plastic drain pipe filled it with hot boiling water stuck the DF strip in and let if soak > it bends like crazy but retians the shape and gets it's strength back when it dries. My Longerons > will be DF 1 x 3/4 inch because it's heavier than spruce so I will take off 1/4 inch. > To test the motorcycle trailer I pulled it behind my truck loaded with 600 lb's > at 80 mph, there's no metal in the trialer except the short piece of angle where the leaf springs attach, > it's very strong. > > Russell > > > On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 2:30 AM, Clif Dawson wrote: > > > Red Cedar, because of it's low density, is only 2/3 the > strength of Spruce. In other words if you wanted to > use it in place of a 1" wide spruce or hemlock spar > you would have to make it 1 1/2" wide. > > Port orford is completely different from red. Port > Orford is actually stronger than spruce. > > Clif > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave and Connie" <dmatt(at)frontiernet.net> > To: > Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 5:14 PM > > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Wood Options > > > > > Quite a few years ago I was going to build a Pietenpol. I bought the > Western Aircraft wood and started. A Taylorcraft, kids, and many other > things got in the way so I sold the wood. The guy that bought it didn't > want the plans so I kept them. > > I am thinking about picking up some wood and making a set of ribs this > winter. If I get them done I will look for another piece to build. > > Locally I can easily get the following: > Poplar > White Pine > Radiata Pine > Western Red Cedar > undefined versions of Hemlock > Douglas Fir flooring > > The poplar and western red cedar are probably the easiest to find good > wood but clear white pine is also available. > > What would be the first couple of preferences for wood? I was thinking > of using red cedar because I had read that Charlie Rubeck (?) had used > that. Looking at the archives there seems to be some disagreement on > the type of cedar (red or Port Oxford) he used and there is a huge > difference in the characteristics between the types. > > Dave > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > 17:52:00 > > ch as List Un/Subscription, > www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List > ronics.com/" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com > Matt Dralle, List Admin. > ==== > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail has ever-growing storage! Dont worry about storage limits. http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/Storage?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tutorial_Storage_062009 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Doug Dever <chiefpepperhead(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Wood Options
Date: Sep 26, 2009
Rodney=2C You are right except a friend of mine owns a lumber yard that caters to hig h end custom builders. He can order Doug Fir but only construction grade n ot cv doug fir. Cv doug fir is not available in this part of the country. Yellow poplar (tulip wood) is however I canot fid good stuf locally. Chec ked a few places. everything is flat sawn. However my friend will let me pick through anything in the yard. I built most of my addition with Doug F ir because SPF lumber only goes to 20ft. Doug Fir goes to 32ft. Western r egion SPF would be fine for aircraft because it does not include Balsam Fir . Jack Pine which comprises a lot of eastern region SPF lumber is a great wood. Stronger and lighter than Sitka Spruce=2C but you don't know what yo ur getting. The reason I considered SPF lumber was that as I was cutting up some for my rib jig I noticed it was beautiful stuff. Probably because I didn't buy i t from the chains Doug Dever In beautiful Stow Ohio > Date: Sat=2C 26 Sep 2009 17:17:17 -0400 > From: r.r.hall(at)cox.net > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Wood Options > > > Check out actual lumberyards as most big chain stores won't have the high quality stuff. I did a quick search as an example and found 10 places list ed as lumberyards near (within about 20 miles) Stow Ohio. Some places can o rder you wood from their distributor if you specify what you need. It can b e found just takes some time. I bought my Douglas fir from a local out of t he way place and was amazed at the quality difference between them and Home Depot or Lowes. > > Rodney Hall > > ---- Doug Dever wrote: > > > > Yeah it would be great if Lowe's even carried Douglas Fir around here. I can get construction grade fir. Built my addition with it. I wouldn't be afraid to use western region spf lumber. But here in the east spf includes balsam fir. Be careful on poplar. Needs to be yellow poplar or tulip wood > > . Out west "poplar" may be cottonwood or aspen. Not suitable. > > > > > > Doug Dever > > In beautiful Stow Ohio > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Date: Sat=2C 26 Sep 2009 05:50:46 -0400 > > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood Options > > From: rray032003(at)gmail.com > > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > > > > > > I found enough strainght grained knot free Douglas Fur to build a Piet at Lowe's=2C strange it was in the section they > > place specialty and project woods like poplar=2C oak. It was on sale no one wanted it so I loaded all > > on the cart and took it home=2C it was marked down on sale cheaper than construction grade spruce > > and pine. Around here you can get Poplar from a saw mill of course it's green and you'll have to > > have them quarter saw it=2C my sister's farm is covered with poplar. If I want it I just pick a tree > > with no limbs up to 25 feet and haul it to the saw mill. Also I bought boat grade DF from a > > mill in BC for 4 dollars a board foot=2C the ends were sealed the board s were 18' long and it is > > fine=2C they shipped I don't remember the charge=2C I like the DF=2C I' ve built a motorcycle trailer > > out of it it's probably 18% stronger than spruce=2C takes epoxy like a sponge=2C I took a piece > > of plastic drain pipe filled it with hot boiling water stuck the DF str ip in and let if soak > > it bends like crazy but retians the shape and gets it's strength back w hen it dries. My Longerons > > will be DF 1 x 3/4 inch because it's heavier than spruce so I will take off 1/4 inch. > > To test the motorcycle trailer I pulled it behind my truck loaded with 600 lb's > > at 80 mph=2C there's no metal in the trialer except the short piece of angle where the leaf springs attach=2C > > it's very strong. > > > > Russell > > > > > > On Sat=2C Sep 26=2C 2009 at 2:30 AM=2C Clif Dawson wrote: > > a> > > > > Red Cedar=2C because of it's low density=2C is only 2/3 the > > strength of Spruce. In other words if you wanted to > > use it in place of a 1" wide spruce or hemlock spar > > you would have to make it 1 1/2" wide. > > > > Port orford is completely different from red. Port > > Orford is actually stronger than spruce. > > > > Clif > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave and Connie" <dmatt@frontiernet .net> > > To: > > Sent: Friday=2C September 25=2C 2009 5:14 PM > > > > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Wood Options > > > > > > t.net> > > > > Quite a few years ago I was going to build a Pietenpol. I bought the > > Western Aircraft wood and started. A Taylorcraft=2C kids=2C and many ot her > > things got in the way so I sold the wood. The guy that bought it didn't > > want the plans so I kept them. > > > > I am thinking about picking up some wood and making a set of ribs this > > winter. If I get them done I will look for another piece to build. > > > > Locally I can easily get the following: > > Poplar > > White Pine > > Radiata Pine > > Western Red Cedar > > undefined versions of Hemlock > > Douglas Fir flooring > > > > The poplar and western red cedar are probably the easiest to find good > > wood but clear white pine is also available. > > > > What would be the first couple of preferences for wood? I was thinking > > of using red cedar because I had read that Charlie Rubeck (?) had used > > that. Looking at the archives there seems to be some disagreement on > > the type of cedar (red or Port Oxford) he used and there is a huge > > difference in the characteristics between the types. > > > > Dave > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- --------- > > > > > > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > > 17:52:00 > > > > ch as List Un/Subscription=2C > > www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List" target="_blank">http://ww w.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List > > ronics.com/" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com > > Matt Dralle=2C List Admin. > > ==== > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Hotmail=AE has ever-growing storage! Don=92t worry about storage limits. > http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/Storage?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tu torial_Storage_062009 > > =========== =========== =========== =========== > > > _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: stephen labash <slabash(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Rib Jig
Date: Sep 26, 2009
Any one willing to recycle a rib jig. I am happy to pay for shipping. Tha nks =0A _________________________________________________________________=0A Lauren found her dream laptop. Find the PC that=92s right for you.=0A http://www.microsoft.com/windows/choosepc/?ocid=ftp_val_wl_290 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Rib Jig
From: "K5YAC" <hangar10(at)cox.net>
Date: Sep 26, 2009
Rib jigs are easy... built mine in one day. Get some MDF press board, mark off some of the critical measurements (spar spacing, top and bottom caps, etc.) and start placing blocks. I also cut all my blocks from MDF, which kept the parts list simple. It's not a real fancy one with spring loaded clamps and such, but I did make use of 1" round dowel for locking cams, which allow for easier part placement and removal. I used the glue and nail method on my ribs, so I was able to keep it a little simpler than some of the clamp jigs. Just preference... it worked good though... all the ribs came out identical. Seriously, for the same money you spend on freight you could purchase the materials, and then you would always have it in case you needed to make repairs. Look at the wing section of my log (link below) for more details on my jig. It is just one of many, but it is pretty simple. -------- Mark - working on wings Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265168#265168 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 26, 2009
Subject: Re: Rib Jig
From: Rick Holland <at7000ft(at)gmail.com>
Usually when someone brings up the subject of rib jigs or starting to build ribs the subject of alternative airfoils comes up. But i'm not going to do it.... rick On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 8:25 PM, K5YAC wrote: > > Rib jigs are easy... built mine in one day. Get some MDF press board, mark > off some of the critical measurements (spar spacing, top and bottom caps, > etc.) and start placing blocks. I also cut all my blocks from MDF, which > kept the parts list simple. It's not a real fancy one with spring loaded > clamps and such, but I did make use of 1" round dowel for locking cams, > which allow for easier part placement and removal. I used the glue and nail > method on my ribs, so I was able to keep it a little simpler than some of > the clamp jigs. Just preference... it worked good though... all the ribs > came out identical. > > Seriously, for the same money you spend on freight you could purchase the > materials, and then you would always have it in case you needed to make > repairs. Look at the wing section of my log (link below) for more details > on my jig. It is just one of many, but it is pretty simple. > > -------- > Mark - working on wings > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265168#265168 > > -- Rick Holland Castle Rock, Colorado "Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad" ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <catdesigns(at)att.net>
Subject: Mike Cuy Sketches and Pictures
Date: Sep 26, 2009
I have added Mike Cuy's pictures and sketches to the website. If you are like me and were inspired by Mike plane you will find the numerouse pictures and sketches Mike sent in to be really helpfull. I know I have found a thing or two I was curious about. The pictures can be found here. http://westcoastpiet.com/mike_cuy_page_2.htm His sketches can be found here. http://westcoastpiet.com/design_sketches.htm Thanks Mike for taking the time to send the pictures. As always, anyone who wants to send pictures or information to include on WestCoastPiet.com feel free to send them to me. Chris Sacramento, CA WestCoastPiet.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <catdesigns(at)att.net>
Subject: Dan Helsper's Rotating Wing Jig
Date: Sep 26, 2009
Here are additional pictures of Dan Helsper's wing rotaing jig he used for covering and painting. http://westcoastpiet.com/dan_helsper.htm Chris Sacramento, CA WestCoastPiet.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 26, 2009
From: jorge lizarraga <flightwood(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: 16 years to complete Kevin's airplane-- explained
! i now what you talkin about Im stok in my proyect for 10 year and only fini shed fuse parts of landin gears and tail section the same dilema. --- On Thu, 9/24/09, kevinpurtee wrote: From: kevinpurtee <kevin.purtee(at)us.army.mil> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: 16 years to complete Kevin's airplane-- explai ned ! Date: Thursday, September 24, 2009, 11:46 AM il> There's some truth to that.- My life circumstances have changed significa ntly over the last two years, to include an airplane friendly girlfriend, s o progress really picked up. There was other stuff, too, but, yeah, married was definitely a factor. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=264759#264759 le, List Admin. =0A=0A=0A ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene Rambo" <generambo(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: Dan Helsper's Rotating Wing Jig
Date: Sep 27, 2009
There was a similar wing rotating jig for one-piece wing long ago in the BPA newsletter. It was somewhat smaller and simpler, as it attached to the cabane fittings only. The best I remember, it was two "U" shaped pieces of plywood bolted to the cabane fittings and sitting on a base with rollers much like Dan's. I will try to find it and post. Gene http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List m/Navigator?Pietenpol-List> http://www.matronics.com/contribution on> ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Vortex Generators
From: "tengulfromeo" <gwread(at)aol.com>
Date: Sep 27, 2009
I recently sealed my elevator gap which improved control response. (I strongly recommend gap seals on ailerons, rudder and elevator on the Pietenpol). Just for kicks this weekend I added vortex generators to the underside of my horizontal stabilizer and definitely noticed improved elevator authority on landing flare. Crazy I know, and if they didn't look so darn noticeable and out of character for an antique, but still it has me thinking........has anyone had experience with vortex generators on the Piet wing? Gary N10GR Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265239#265239 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 27, 2009
From: Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu>
Subject: Re: Vortex Generators
Gary, I have had good experience with VGs on my Piet. I'm not in a position to write a long post on it, but check the archives and you'll find my write-up. Let me know if you can't find it. Jeff > >....has anyone had experience with vortex generators on the Piet wing? > >Gary >N10GR > -- Jeff Boatright "Now let's think about this..." ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 27, 2009
Subject: Re: tailwheels
From: Robert Ray <rray032003(at)gmail.com>
I noticed another difference, the upper support wires for the horizonital tail do not attach to a single point but to two different locations on the vertical fin one the leading edge and one the aft. Russell On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Oscar Zuniga wrote: > > > One other thing to consider if you don't have cables run > to your tailwheel and the tail is already covered is that > you can go the GN-1 route and link the tailwheel steering > to the rudder itself, not to the rudder cables. The > rudder needs to be stiffened but it may be easier for some > to do it that way than to run a new set of tailwheel > steering cables up to the rudder bar. > > See the last couple of pix at > http://www.flysquirrel.net/piets/piets4.html > for how it's done on the GN-1. > > Oscar Zuniga > Air Camper NX41CC > San Antonio, TX > mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com > website at http://www.flysquirrel.net > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 28, 2009
Subject: Re: tailwheels
From: Robert Ray <rray032003(at)gmail.com>
The Gre On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 9:49 PM, Robert Ray wrote: > I noticed another difference, the upper support wires for the horizonital > tail > do not attach to a single point but to two different locations on the > vertical > fin one the leading edge and one the aft. > > Russell > > On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Oscar Zuniga wrote: > >> > >> >> >> One other thing to consider if you don't have cables run >> to your tailwheel and the tail is already covered is that >> you can go the GN-1 route and link the tailwheel steering >> to the rudder itself, not to the rudder cables. The >> rudder needs to be stiffened but it may be easier for some >> to do it that way than to run a new set of tailwheel >> steering cables up to the rudder bar. >> >> See the last couple of pix at >> http://www.flysquirrel.net/piets/piets4.html >> for how it's done on the GN-1. >> >> Oscar Zuniga >> Air Camper NX41CC >> San Antonio, TX >> mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com >> website at http://www.flysquirrel.net >> >> >> >> >> > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 28, 2009
Subject: Re: 16 years to complete Kevin's airplane-- explained
!
From: Robert Ray <rray032003(at)gmail.com>
In the past I have been hesitate to offer my opinion because lack of experience, when it comes to women my vast experience causes me to be hesitate in offering an opinion becuse I don't know any more than my first date when I was 15 years old 42 years ago. I can't blame not being finnished on anyone but then why blame who said it was a race. It a destinaion where the travel is as fun as the arrival. Russell On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 1:48 AM, jorge lizarraga wrote: > i now what you talkin about Im stok in my proyect for 10 year and only > finished fuse parts of landin gears and tail section the same dilema. > > --- On *Thu, 9/24/09, kevinpurtee * wrote: > > > From: kevinpurtee <kevin.purtee(at)us.army.mil> > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: 16 years to complete Kevin's airplane-- > explained ! > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > Date: Thursday, September 24, 2009, 11:46 AM > > kevin.purtee@us.army.mil <http://mc/compose?to=kevin.purtee@us.army.mil>> > > There's some truth to that. My life circumstances have changed > significantly over the last two years, to include an airplane friendly > girlfriend, so progress really picked up. > > There was other stuff, too, but, yeah, married was definitely a factor. > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=264759#264759<= - The > Pietenpol-List Email Forum > -http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List>h > --> > > > <http://www.matronics.com/contribution> > > > * > > * > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jack" <jack(at)textors.com>
Subject: tailwheels
Date: Sep 28, 2009
Russell, Not sure what you are referencing, I've not followed the thread. I would comment, when visiting with Tom Brown at Blakesburg this summer, he mentioned he would do this if redoing his Piet. He mentioned it would stop the vibrations of the front of the vertical stabilizer. Jack www.textors.com Jack Textor 29 SW 58th Drive Des Moines, IA 50312 www.textors.com _____ From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert Ray Sent: Sunday, September 27, 2009 7:49 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: tailwheels I noticed another difference, the upper support wires for the horizonital tail do not attach to a single point but to two different locations on the vertical fin one the leading edge and one the aft. Russell On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Oscar Zuniga wrote: One other thing to consider if you don't have cables run to your tailwheel and the tail is already covered is that you can go the GN-1 route and link the tailwheel steering to the rudder itself, not to the rudder cables. The rudder needs to be stiffened but it may be easier for some to do it that way than to run a new set of tailwheel steering cables up to the rudder bar. See the last couple of pix at http://www.flysquirrel.net/piets/piets4.html for how it's done on the GN-1. Oscar Zuniga Air Camper NX41CC San Antonio, TX mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com website at http://www.flysquirrel.net r> www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List ronics.com/" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com Matt Dralle, List Admin. ==== 17:52:00 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 28, 2009
Subject: Re: tailwheels
From: Robert Ray <rray032003(at)gmail.com>
Oh well it wasn't the tail wheel but in the pictures I noticed the support wires for the horizontal stabilizer were attached different, I don't think this was a Grega thing it was just something on the picture that caught my eye. Russell On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 5:46 AM, Jack wrote: > Russell, > > Not sure what you are referencing, I=92ve not followed the thread. I wou ld > comment, when visiting with Tom Brown at Blakesburg this summer, he > mentioned he would do this if redoing his Piet. He mentioned it would st op > the vibrations of the front of the vertical stabilizer. > > Jack > > www.textors.com > > > *Jack Textor* > > 29 SW 58th Drive > > Des Moines, IA 50312 > > www.textors.com > ------------------------------ > > *From:* owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto: > owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Robert Ray > *Sent:* Sunday, September 27, 2009 7:49 PM > *To:* pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > *Subject:* Re: Pietenpol-List: tailwheels > > > I noticed another difference, the upper support wires for the horizonital > tail > > do not attach to a single point but to two different locations on the > vertical > > fin one the leading edge and one the aft. > > > Russell > > On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Oscar Zuniga > wrote: > > > One other thing to consider if you don't have cables run > to your tailwheel and the tail is already covered is that > you can go the GN-1 route and link the tailwheel steering > to the rudder itself, not to the rudder cables. The > rudder needs to be stiffened but it may be easier for some > to do it that way than to run a new set of tailwheel > steering cables up to the rudder bar. > > See the last couple of pix at > http://www.flysquirrel.net/piets/piets4.html > for how it's done on the GN-1. > > Oscar Zuniga > Air Camper NX41CC > San Antonio, TX > mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com > website at http://www.flysquirrel.net > r> www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List" target="_blank"> > http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List > ronics.com/" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com > Matt Dralle, List Admin. > ==== > > > * * > > * * > > ** > > ** > > ** > > *http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List* > > ** > > ** > > *http://forums.matronics.com* > > ** > > ** > > *http://www.matronics.com/contribution* > > * * > .13.113/2399 > - Release Date: 09/27/09 17:52:00 > > * > =========== =========== =========== =========== > * > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Vortex Generators
From: "tengulfromeo" <gwread(at)aol.com>
Date: Sep 28, 2009
Thanks for responding Jeff. I searched Vortex Generators and didn't see your post but read others. I even searched for author by your name. Maybe I missed it. What was the subject line of your post? Gary N10GR Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265287#265287 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Ryan Mueller <rmueller23(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Vortex Generators
Date: Sep 28, 2009
Gary, Go to www.matronics.com/search. Select Pietenpol from the drop down menu. Search for 'boatright & vortex'. There you have it... Ryan Sent from my mobile device On Sep 28, 2009, at 6:44 AM, "tengulfromeo" wrote: > > Thanks for responding Jeff. I searched Vortex Generators and didn't > see your post but read others. I even searched for author by your > name. Maybe I missed it. What was the subject line of your post? > > Gary > N10GR > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265287#265287 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 28, 2009
From: Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Pilot seat height
I can't seem to find dimensions on the prints for the pilot seat height. Before I lose my mind all together, could someone tell me where I may find them. Or, if anyone has a suggestion on seat height, seat angle, etc, I would appreciate it. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 28, 2009
From: Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov>
Subject: Re: Test
> As far as my progress... I am collecting tools. Just picked up an > antique band saw a couple of days ago. It is really a nice one. Now, I > just need a good drill press and the shop will be ready! Bah. Chop, chop. Get going. You don't need a drill press for ribs! Get out there and start to "make little ones out of big ones" so you can start to "make big ones out of little ones!" Yes, I know I have no room to talk since I bought mine pre-assembled. N8031 flies great, by the way. Spent another 1.7 hours in it on Thursday and landed at the end of civil twilight on a cloudy day. Talk about cutting it close! There was a nice big blue flame out of the left exhaust stack, then some smoke as the unburned gas blew off. Top ground speed was 93 mph with calm winds and I'd estimate that we averaged about 86-88mph over the entire triangle we flew. Only 4.2 hours left before I can solo (thank you, Mr. Insurance Man). I hope it gets warmer again for a few days before the snow starts to fly... Cheers, Dan -- Dan Yocum Fermilab 630.840.6509 yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov Fermilab. Just zeros and ones. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 28, 2009
Subject: Re: Pilot seat height
From: Ryan Mueller <rmueller23(at)gmail.com>
Michael, Looking at the bottom of the 'Drawing No. 1' plans sheet, I see the rear seat support shown as being 6" high. This piece of plywood goes on the front of the seat bottom (towards the middle of the sheet there is a 3D sketch of the rear seat that shows this), so that means the seat according to plans is 6" high in the front. The seat back is shown at 21" tall, so from those two dimensions you can figure the height and angle. HTH, Ryan On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 9:10 AM, Michael Perez wrote: > I can't seem to find dimensions on the prints for the pilot seat height. > Before I lose my mind all together, could someone tell me where I may find > them. Or, if anyone has a suggestion on seat height, seat angle, etc, I > would appreciate it. > > * > * > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Pilot seat height
Date: Sep 28, 2009
The main sheet with all the fuselage plans - down at the bottom are all the bulkheads (which define the seat positions). 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, September 28, 2009 10:11 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Pilot seat height I can't seem to find dimensions on the prints for the pilot seat height. Before I lose my mind all together, could someone tell me where I may find them. Or, if anyone has a suggestion on seat height, seat angle, etc, I would appreciate it. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 28, 2009
From: Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov>
Subject: Re: No RPM drop on mag check??
Just a quick note on this subject - during our flight on Thursday we stopped in at friend's airfield and he lent me his digital rpm reader - I don't recall the official name of it at the moment. I have to do some more methodical tests, but what I did see suggests that the tachometer is low by about 11.4%. That is, at 1000RPM indicated on the tachometer, the prop was actually spinning at 1140RPM. So, at 2050RPM (which I do achieve when I lean it out) it's actually spinning at around 2280. That's close enough to redline for my tastes. When Tres delivered the plane he mentioned that at one point in the past the tach pegged itself at the high end. Turns out that some oil got up inside the tachometer from the cable. He cleaned the tachometer up, but apparently didn't recalibrate it. So, mystery solved on that one. Cheers, Dan Robert Ray wrote: > Why don't you disconnect both mags all input and out put wiring taps, > take an olmmeter and measure resistance across the coils, measure > the resistance to ground hopfully infinity, if they don't match there > it is. > Or if they don't match with in say < or > 15% > > Russell > > > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 11:01 AM, Dan Yocum > wrote: > > > > > > > > tkreiner wrote: > > > > > Dan, > > Without fully understanding what's going on, and without an > extensive knowledge of your engine, it's somewhat difficult to > figure out what's going on. A few questions might inform the > audience. > > Are the mags and ignition harnesses, & spark plugs - new, used, > worn out? Explain their condition, as it might help. > > > One mag is new in the last year. One plug is new 'cause the A&P > broke the old one during the last Annual. The harness is probably > the original from 1979 and probably before. > > > > How about the mechanical condition of the engine? Rebuilt? > Describe. > > > 400 SMOH, ~800 hour since new (estimated). Logs are incomplete from > before 1965, hence the reason for the overhaul. One cylinder was > cracked and replaced in '65 with "the same oversize." Compressions > are all in the mid to high 70's. > > I sent out a sample of the oil for analysis and no red flags were found. > > This plane and engine has flown over 150 tach hours in the last 18 > months and 50 hours in the 2 weeks leading up to Oshkosh! > > > > What fuel are you using? > > > 100LL with one shot of Marvel Mystery Oil per 15 gallons. > > > > Perhaps there's no problem at all. Even though our expectation > is that the engine SHOULD show an rpm drop, that is not always > the case... On a plane I fly regularly, the entire ignition > system was recently replaced, i.e., new mags, harnesses, plugs, > and correctly timed. When the plane was put back into service, > there was an imperceptible rpm drop. > > It turned out, with a near perfect ignition system, clean fuel, > etc., the engine was burning so clean and completely that there > was no discernible drop in rpm during mag check. > > > That's what I'm leaning toward, too. When Tres flew it from > California they flew it flat out as fast and lean as it would go for > as long as possible. > > > > > Hope this adds some insight. > > > It does! I'm a glass half-full kind of guy but I like to make sure > there aren't any holes in the glass, too. > > The fact that at least one other engine out there in the world > exhibits the same sort of behaviour suggests that mine isn't > completely alone. 2 data points are always better than 1 (but still > not great...). > > Thanks, > Dan > > > -- > Dan Yocum > Fermilab 630.840.6509 > yocum@fnal.gov , http://fermigrid.fnal.gov > <http://fermigrid.fnal.gov/> > Fermilab. Just zeros and ones. > s List Un/Subscription, > www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List" > target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List > ronics.com/" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com > Matt Dralle, List Admin. > ==== > > > > > * > > > * -- Dan Yocum Fermilab 630.840.6509 yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov Fermilab. Just zeros and ones. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 28, 2009
From: Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: Pilot seat height
I feel like an idiot. I've been looking at that print now for about two weeks...the dimensions went right past me. Thanks Ryan. --- On Mon, 9/28/09, Ryan Mueller wrote: From: Ryan Mueller <rmueller23(at)gmail.com> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Pilot seat height Date: Monday, September 28, 2009, 10:26 AM Michael, Looking at the bottom of the 'Drawing No. 1' plans sheet, I see the rear seat support shown as being 6" high. This piece of plywood goes on the front of the seat bottom (towards the middle of the sheet there is a 3D sketch of the rear seat that shows this), so that means the seat according to plans is 6" high in the front. The seat back is shown at 21" tall, so from those two dimensions you can figure the height and angle. HTH, Ryan On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 9:10 AM, Michael Perez wrote: I can't seem to find dimensions on the prints for the pilot seat height. Before I lose my mind all together, could someone tell me where I may find them. Or, if anyone has a suggestion on seat height, seat angle, etc, I would appreciate it. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Jack's Wing Ribs
From: "K5YAC" <hangar10(at)cox.net>
Date: Sep 28, 2009
Jack... did you say that you just nailed your ribs to your spars? No T-88, just nails? I think I read that somewhere, and in at least a couple of ways, it sounds like a good idea. Can you clarify/explain? -------- Mark - working on wings Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265330#265330 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Test
From: "K5YAC" <hangar10(at)cox.net>
Date: Sep 28, 2009
I agree, you don't need a drill press yet. I'm not sure if you have a disk/belt sander... if not, you WILL like to have one of those. Otherwise, make some sawdust and keep your eyes/ears open for a drill press. -------- Mark - working on wings Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265340#265340 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Wood Options
Date: Sep 28, 2009
From: "Bill Church" <eng(at)canadianrogers.com>
Russell, I don't fully follow your logic. You say the Douglas Fir you have is "probably 18% stronger than spruce". Fair enough. Based on published values, the bending strength of Sitka Spruce is 9400 psi, vs Douglas Fir at 10,900 psi (16% difference - close enough). What confuses me is that you say you will reduce the cross-section of your longerons by 25%. This will result in a weaker structure. Probably a better substitution would be to make your longerons 15/16" square. that would provide a more representative substitution. Then again, the Air Camper has a robust structure (some say it is over-built), and the longerons of The Last Original were apparently 15/16" square Spruce, so maybe 3/4" x 1" DF longerons would be strong enough - but it's the "maybe" that I wouldn't be comfortable with. Just curious as to how you would come up with the size you have chosen. Also, by making the longerons rectangular rather than square, they will be stronger in one direction than the other. How do you chose which way to orient the longerons? Bill C. ________________________________ From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert Ray Sent: Saturday, September 26, 2009 5:51 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood Options ... I like the DF, I've built a motorcycle trailer out of it it's probably 18% stronger than spruce, takes epoxy like a sponge ... My Longerons will be DF 1 x 3/4 inch because it's heavier than spruce so I will take off 1/4 inch. Russell ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Jack's Wing Ribs
Date: Sep 28, 2009
Yep - just nails. I nailed through the capstrips into the spar, then read Tony Bingelis who said that was no longer the preferred method. Oh well - it worked. There is no reason to glue the ribs to the spars. The ribs aren't loaded in such a way to make them move relative to the spar and once they are rib-laced, they can't go anywhere anyway. The nails are just to hold them in place during covering. Jack Phillips NX899JP Raleigh, NC -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of K5YAC Sent: Monday, September 28, 2009 12:19 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Jack's Wing Ribs Jack... did you say that you just nailed your ribs to your spars? No T-88, just nails? I think I read that somewhere, and in at least a couple of ways, it sounds like a good idea. Can you clarify/explain? -------- Mark - working on wings Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265330#265330 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Wood Options
From: "899PM" <rockriverrifle(at)hotmail.com>
Date: Sep 28, 2009
Charlie Rubeck built and sold Western Red Cedar Ribs for many years. After talking with Charlie at Brodhead 11 years ago, I too built using WRC, 1/16 birch gussets and T-88. I was able to get all rib stock from (2) 8-ft 4x4's. At the time they were about $12ea. I recently bought some clear 8' WRC 4x4's for an arbor project and they were nearly $50ea. Be sure to follow aircraft grading standards when looking at the end-grain and slope. Being the engineer type, I built a test fixture and tested one of my finished ribs. I loaded the rib to 11G's before I heard a crack somewhere. Never did find it. -------- PAPA MIKE Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265347#265347 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Jack's Wing Ribs
From: "dwilson" <marwilson(at)charter.net>
Date: Sep 28, 2009
How I did it... NO glue, just two nails through each of the upright rib braces into the back of the front spar and the front of the rear spar. Use cement coated nails available from Wicks or ASS. I used a picture frame glazing plier to squeeze the nails into the spar. No need for a hammer. NO need to nail thru the top cap strip. Agree with Jack, ribs are not going to go anywhere after rib stitching anyway... Dan Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265353#265353 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: straight axle gear???
From: "TOPGUN" <rmdinfo(at)lakefield.net>
Date: Sep 28, 2009
I have two sets of aircamper plans one from the 70's & 08' and neither of them show the construction details for the staight axle variety, only the split gear style. Is there another set of plans with a different option? Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265354#265354 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: straight axle gear???
From: "K5YAC" <hangar10(at)cox.net>
Date: Sep 28, 2009
There is a supplemental plan for wooden landing gear that you can get from the Pietenpol family. Also, check out www.westcoastpiet.com for a great wood gear write up. -------- Mark - working on wings Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265357#265357 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: straight axle gear???
From: "TOPGUN" <rmdinfo(at)lakefield.net>
Date: Sep 28, 2009
ok, your right. i just ordered the supplemental drawings from their site. That sheet must be lost in my original plans my dad had, cause the gear is all done, just need to re-do a few things. Thanks Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265359#265359 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Doug Dever <chiefpepperhead(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: straight axle gear???
Date: Sep 28, 2009
It's a suppliment available throught Andrew or Don Pietenpol Doug Dever In beautiful Stow Ohio > Subject: Pietenpol-List: straight axle gear??? > From: rmdinfo(at)lakefield.net > Date: Mon=2C 28 Sep 2009 11:08:00 -0700 > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > > > I have two sets of aircamper plans one from the 70's & 08' and neither of them show the construction details for the staight axle variety=2C only th e split gear style. Is there another set of plans with a different option? > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265354#265354 > > > > > > > =========== =========== =========== =========== > > > _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail: Free=2C trusted and rich email service. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Vortex Generators
Date: Sep 28, 2009
From: gwread(at)aol.com
thank you -----Original Message----- From: Ryan Mueller <rmueller23(at)gmail.com> Sent: Mon, Sep 28, 2009 10:08 am Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Vortex Generators ? Gary,? ? Go to www.matronics.com/search. Select Pietenpol from the drop down menu. Search for 'boatright & vortex'. There you have it...? ? Ryan? ? Sent from my mobile device? ? On Sep 28, 2009, at 6:44 AM, "tengulfromeo" wrote:? ? >? > Thanks for responding Jeff. I searched Vortex Generators and didn't > see your post but read others. I even searched for author by your > name. Maybe I missed it. What was the subject line of your post?? >? > Gary? > N10GR? >? >? >? >? > Read this topic online here:? >? > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265287#265287? >? >? >? >? >? >? >? >? >? >? ? ? ? ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC Aerospace Corporation]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
Date: Sep 28, 2009
Subject: how to order straight axel gear plans
Number One: Go to the Pietenpol Family Web Site: http://www.pressenter.com/~apieten p/index.html Go to PRODUCT http://www.pressenter.com/~apietenp/index.html Scroll down-- keep scrolling down and you'll see 10 different products to c hoose from and one of them is the Straight Axel Gear Plans. You'll see this below: Product 7 Description; Original Pietenpol Air Camper Wooden Landing Gear Plans Original to first Air Camper's Bernard Pietenpol built. Original Air Camper Wooden Landing Gear Product 7 Price = $20.00 US Dollars *Free Shipping Top of Form Bottom of Form Top of Form Bottom of Form Mike C. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mike Tunnicliffe" <zk-owl(at)CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Subject: Re: Wood Options
Date: Sep 29, 2009
Hi , interesting, this would be one of the few areas where Red Cedar could be used, as ribs are generally made of larger sized timber than is required for strength, due to ease of fastening gussets etc. Another area could be the wing leading edge and perhaps the aileron spars, however I am not advocating a change to a timber of lesser strength without a proper analysis of the structure. The overall weight savings would not be great, especially as these lighter timbers tend to absorb more sealer, however it may allow the use of a less expensive / more readily available / clear grade, species of timber. regards Mike T. ----- Original Message ----- From: "899PM" <rockriverrifle(at)hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 6:33 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wood Options > > Charlie Rubeck built and sold Western Red Cedar Ribs for many years. After > talking with Charlie at Brodhead 11 years ago, I too built using WRC, 1/16 > birch gussets and T-88. I was able to get all rib stock from (2) 8-ft > 4x4's. At the time they were about $12ea. I recently bought some clear 8' > WRC 4x4's for an arbor project and they were nearly $50ea. Be sure to > follow aircraft grading standards when looking at the end-grain and slope. > > Being the engineer type, I built a test fixture and tested one of my > finished ribs. I loaded the rib to 11G's before I heard a crack somewhere. > Never did find it. > > -------- > PAPA MIKE > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265347#265347 > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 28, 2009
Subject: Re: Kevin's Airplane and Lettering
From: John Fay <jfay1950(at)gmail.com>
LIst, My grandfather, Charles Fay, was a sign painter, but passed away a number of years ago. His most famous work, according to our family historians, has been seen by most of you. In the Air and Space museum in Washington, D.C., the name on the side of the *Spirit of St. Louis* was painted on by him. Not the original time, in San Diego, but after Lindbergh's national tour, flight to Mexico City, etc., before the plane was sent to the Smithsonian, it was completely recovered and refurbished in Chicago, and he was hired to come in and repaint the name on the nose. John Fay (about our only brush with fame) ** > > Luckily I have a dealer near me. They tried to give me a quick lesson, Ha! > There ain't no quick learning it! Which is the reason the lettering I did > the lettering on the side of my with a stencil and they are very simple > letters. See it here; > > > http://public.fotki.com/dwbrant/fancies-of-flight/pietenpol-80th-anni/5d022692.html > > This is the work of a sign painter; > > > http://public.fotki.com/dwbrant/fancies-of-flight/pietenpol-80th-anni/5d022683.html > > Ha! Little different! > > Don Emch > NX899DE > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265085#265085 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 28, 2009
Subject: front spar doug fir, rear spar spruce?
From: Ken Chambers <ken.riffic(at)gmail.com>
I've got one good spruce center section spar and one good doug fir center section spar. Anyone see any reason why I coldn't proceed like this, with doug fir for the front spar and spruce for the rear spar? These are 3/4 x 4 3/4 spars for the Riblett airfoil. My Dad mentioned something about the modulus of elasticity differences between the two materials, but I'm not sure it's an important consideration in this case. From what I can understand. Also, does anyone know the basics of spar splicing off the top of their head? What kind of a slope do you need? Stuff like that. Ken, trying to keep the project moving without a whole lot of cash on hand. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "mike" <bike.mike(at)comcast.net>
Subject: front spar doug fir, rear spar spruce?
Date: Sep 28, 2009
Ken, The center section between the cabanes doesn't get much bending load so, if there are any significant modulus differences, it shouldn't matter. Mike Hardaway _____ From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ken Chambers Sent: Monday, September 28, 2009 4:44 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: front spar doug fir, rear spar spruce? I've got one good spruce center section spar and one good doug fir center section spar. Anyone see any reason why I coldn't proceed like this, with doug fir for the front spar and spruce for the rear spar? These are 3/4 x 4 3/4 spars for the Riblett airfoil. My Dad mentioned something about the modulus of elasticity differences between the two materials, but I'm not sure it's an important consideration in this case. From what I can understand. Also, does anyone know the basics of spar splicing off the top of their head? What kind of a slope do you need? Stuff like that. Ken, trying to keep the project moving without a whole lot of cash on hand. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC Aerospace Corporation]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
Date: Sep 28, 2009
Subject: cables
Used 7x19--- like Jack said, easier to get around thimbles and work with. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 28, 2009
Subject: Re: front spar doug fir, rear spar spruce?
From: Robert Ray <rray032003(at)gmail.com>
Well I would use the DF in the front, don't think the modulus of elasticity would matter since lots of airfoils have spars of different widths. Thats what i would do however I no expert. On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 8:27 PM, mike wrote: > Ken, > The center section between the cabanes doesn't get much bending load so, if > there are any significant modulus differences, it shouldn't matter. > Mike Hardaway > > ------------------------------ > *From:* owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto: > owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Ken Chambers > *Sent:* Monday, September 28, 2009 4:44 PM > *To:* pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > *Subject:* Pietenpol-List: front spar doug fir, rear spar spruce? > > > I've got one good spruce center section spar and one good doug fir center > section spar. Anyone see any reason why I coldn't proceed like this, with > doug fir for the front spar and spruce for the rear spar? These are 3/4 x 4 > 3/4 spars for the Riblett airfoil. > > My Dad mentioned something about the modulus of elasticity differences > between the two materials, but I'm not sure it's an important consideration > in this case. From what I can understand. > > Also, does anyone know the basics of spar splicing off the top of their > head? What kind of a slope do you need? Stuff like that. > > Ken, trying to keep the project moving without a whole lot of cash on hand. > > > * > > href="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/c* > > * > > * > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 28, 2009
Subject: Re: Wood Options
From: Robert Ray <rray032003(at)gmail.com>
Yeah I tested a rib, I loaded the rib with tractor weights and left it over night, the fake spars started to crush I don't remember the exact weight I think 1000 lbs, this wasn't certified wood. with 30 ribs that's 30,000 lbs' so yes I can do aerobatic maneuvers with my pianos, girlfriend and dog on board as long as my shoulder harness doesn't break while I'm pulling 12 negative g's, I also bought an old G-suit from an ex military fighter pilot to keep the blood out of my feet I'm wearing it right now. No kidding I did test a rib to that weight and was amazed. Russell On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 5:31 PM, Mike Tunnicliffe wrote: > zk-owl(at)clear.net.nz> > > Hi , interesting, this would be one of the few areas where Red Cedar could > be used, as ribs are generally made of larger sized timber than is required > for strength, due to ease of fastening gussets etc. Another area could be > the wing leading edge and perhaps the aileron spars, however I am not > advocating a change to a timber of lesser strength without a proper analysis > of the structure. The overall weight savings would not be great, especially > as these lighter timbers tend to absorb more sealer, however it may allow > the use of a less expensive / more readily available / clear grade, species > of timber. > regards Mike T. > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "899PM" <rockriverrifle(at)hotmail.com> > To: > Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 6:33 AM > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wood Options > > >> >> Charlie Rubeck built and sold Western Red Cedar Ribs for many years. After >> talking with Charlie at Brodhead 11 years ago, I too built using WRC, 1/16 >> birch gussets and T-88. I was able to get all rib stock from (2) 8-ft 4x4's. >> At the time they were about $12ea. I recently bought some clear 8' WRC 4x4's >> for an arbor project and they were nearly $50ea. Be sure to follow aircraft >> grading standards when looking at the end-grain and slope. >> >> Being the engineer type, I built a test fixture and tested one of my >> finished ribs. I loaded the rib to 11G's before I heard a crack somewhere. >> Never did find it. >> >> -------- >> PAPA MIKE >> >> >> >> >> Read this topic online here: >> >> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265347#265347 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC Aerospace Corporation]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
Date: Sep 28, 2009
Subject: FAASafety.gov - Unapproved Parts Notification "Unapproved
Parts Notification" Of possible interest-- seems like a good thing to check once in a while, like the weather before you go flying. Mike C. Unapproved Parts Notification Notice Number: NOTC1921 It has come to our attention that not all users are aware that the Unapproved Parts Notification program is now hosted on the FAA website at http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/safety/programs/sups/upn/. You should refer to this site on a regular basis to get the latest Unapproved Parts Notifications. In fact, general information and guidance about the Suspected Unapproved Parts Program is available at http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/safety/programs/sups/. You have received this notice from FAASafety.gov because you have selected "Unapproved Parts Notification" in your preferences on your FAASafety.gov account. Click here to log in and edit your preferences on FAASafety.gov. Start FAASTeam CFI Workshops any time! Find Workshop #4 in SPANS. FAASafety.gov<http://www.faasafety.gov/> | Email Preferences | Opt Out Do not reply to this email as it is an unmonitored mailbox. Contact us<http://www.faasafety.gov/about/contact.aspx> for comments or questions. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 28, 2009
Subject: Re: Wood Options
From: Ryan Mueller <rmueller23(at)gmail.com>
I still wonder, how exactly did you keep 1000 lbs of tractor weights balanced on the 1/2" wide capstrip of a single rib? Ryan On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 8:41 PM, Robert Ray wrote: > Yeah I tested a rib, I loaded the rib with tractor weights > and left it over night, the fake spars started to crush I don't remember > the exact weight I think 1000 lbs, this wasn't certified wood. > with 30 ribs that's 30,000 lbs' so yes I can do aerobatic maneuvers > with my pianos, girlfriend and dog on board as long as my shoulder > harness doesn't break while I'm pulling 12 negative g's, > I also bought an old G-suit from an ex military fighter pilot > to keep the blood out of my feet I'm wearing it right now. > > No kidding I did test a rib to that weight and was amazed. > > Russell > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 28, 2009
From: Ross Alexander <karbath1(at)yahoo.ca>
Subject: Re: Vortex Generators
How did you sealo the gaps on the vertical and horizontal stabilizer? Duct tape or what would you suggest. Ross in Orangeville, Ontario, Canada C-FTJM =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0AFrom: tengulfromeo <gwrea d(at)aol.com>=0ATo: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com=0ASent: Sunday, September 27, 2009 7:04:50 PM=0ASubject: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators=0A=0A--> Piet enpol-List message posted by: "tengulfromeo" =0A=0AI recent ly sealed my elevator gap which improved control response. (I strongly reco mmend gap seals on ailerons, rudder and elevator on the Pietenpol). =0A=0AJ ust for kicks this weekend I added vortex generators to the underside of my horizontal stabilizer and definitely noticed improved elevator authority o n landing flare. =0A=0ACrazy I know, and if they didn't look so darn notice able and out of character for an antique, but still it has me thinking..... ...has anyone had experience with vortex generators on the Piet wing? =0A =0AGary =0AN10GR=0A=0A=0A=0A=0ARead this topic online here:=0A=0Ahttp://for =================0A=0A=0A ____________ ______________________________________________________=0AThe new Internet E xplorer=AE 8 - Faster, safer, easier. Optimized for Yahoo! Get it Now for Free! at http://downloads.yahoo.com/ca/internetexplorer/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 28, 2009
Subject: Re: front spar doug fir, rear spar spruce?
From: Ken Chambers <ken.riffic(at)gmail.com>
Thanks Mike. Good to know How about the rest of the wing? More bending forces on the wing panels, seems to me. Ken On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 7:27 PM, mike wrote: > Ken, > The center section between the cabanes doesn't get much bending load so, if > there are any significant modulus differences, it shouldn't matter. > Mike Hardaway > > ------------------------------ > *From:* owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto: > owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Ken Chambers > *Sent:* Monday, September 28, 2009 4:44 PM > *To:* pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > *Subject:* Pietenpol-List: front spar doug fir, rear spar spruce? > > > I've got one good spruce center section spar and one good doug fir center > section spar. Anyone see any reason why I coldn't proceed like this, with > doug fir for the front spar and spruce for the rear spar? These are 3/4 x 4 > 3/4 spars for the Riblett airfoil. > > My Dad mentioned something about the modulus of elasticity differences > between the two materials, but I'm not sure it's an important consideration > in this case. From what I can understand. > > Also, does anyone know the basics of spar splicing off the top of their > head? What kind of a slope do you need? Stuff like that. > > Ken, trying to keep the project moving without a whole lot of cash on hand. > > > * > > href="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/c* > > * > > * > > -- Ken Chambers 512-796-1798 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC Aerospace Corporation]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
Date: Sep 28, 2009
Subject: Thanks Chris-- ! Mike Cuy Sketches and Pictures
For some who were interested in a CD of some of my chicken-scratch sketches and detailed photos please don't send me any money, stock options, or leftover pork chops but go to the site that Chris Tracy has mentioned below. What a great resource Chris ! I'm always learning something new when I look at other people's photos that you have graciously posted on your web site. Book mark this site and save money now ! I'm offering TWO of my sketch CD's and photo CD's for the price of one now !!! Shipping is free too ! Let's see how many write to me now wanting to see if they can get a CD. Money says at least one, maybe two. Mike C. _______________________________________ From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of catdesigns(at)att.net [catdesigns(at)att.net] Sent: Sunday, September 27, 2009 12:11 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Mike Cuy Sketches and Pictures I have added Mike Cuy's pictures and sketches to the website. If you are like me and were inspired by Mike plane you will find the numerouse pictures and sketches Mike sent in to be really helpfull. I know I have found a thing or two I was curious about. The pictures can be found here. http://westcoastpiet.com/mike_cuy_page_2.htm His sketches can be found here. http://westcoastpiet.com/design_sketches.htm Thanks Mike for taking the time to send the pictures. As always, anyone who wants to send pictures or information to include on WestCoastPiet.com feel free to send them to me. Chris Sacramento, CA WestCoastPiet.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 28, 2009
Subject: Re: Wood Options
From: Robert Ray <rray032003(at)gmail.com>
I cut a piece of construction grade lumber down to spar size, the fake spar's were about three feet long, I then hand selected my worse rib that had questionable grain, I glued it to the spars and placed both spars across saw horses, I had a box of three conductor inside telephone wire, I suspended the barbells from the rib which was upside down to simulate positive g forces. I had a full box of wire and I just used it to tie the weights under the rib attached to the rib. I ran out out weight at 533 lbs' I then moved all the weight to the front then to the back, then I asked Jan (German) if he had any tractor weights at work the next day so then I went over and borrowed 500 lbs' of tractor weights, I added those evenly distributing weight along the rib and left it over night. The next day the edges of the fake spars were starting to crush slightly, the rib was OK, and it only had gussets on one side. I also took pictures and have witnesses. NUF said Russell On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 9:47 PM, Ryan Mueller wrote: > I still wonder, how exactly did you keep 1000 lbs of tractor weights > balanced on the 1/2" wide capstrip of a single rib? > > Ryan > > > On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 8:41 PM, Robert Ray wrote: > >> Yeah I tested a rib, I loaded the rib with tractor weights >> and left it over night, the fake spars started to crush I don't remember >> the exact weight I think 1000 lbs, this wasn't certified wood. >> with 30 ribs that's 30,000 lbs' so yes I can do aerobatic maneuvers >> with my pianos, girlfriend and dog on board as long as my shoulder >> harness doesn't break while I'm pulling 12 negative g's, >> I also bought an old G-suit from an ex military fighter pilot >> to keep the blood out of my feet I'm wearing it right now. >> >> No kidding I did test a rib to that weight and was amazed. >> >> Russell >> > * > > > * > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 28, 2009
From: shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Spar splice
Acording to 43-13- spar splice needs to be at a 15:1 angle of the spar th ickness.- The length of the scarf would be 15 times 3/4(or 1 inch if you use 1inch spars)-of an inch or 11 1/4 inches long on each side (spar half ) of the joint.- then a reinforcement plate should be placed over the spl ice.- really you should look up ac43-13 online or buy a copy, there is a diagram in there that shows it better than I can explain it.- There are a few other particulars in there.- My advise is buy spar matrial the full length, scarf joints add weight, and lots of tedious precision work.- If it were a repair to an exsisting airplane I would say ok splice it but this is a new airplane, so it would be worth the extra couple hundred bucks to not fuss with the splice. - Just my 2 cents worth, Shad=0A=0A=0A ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Clif Dawson" <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: front spar doug fir, rear spar spruce?
Date: Sep 28, 2009
I wouldn't worry about it. Basicaly all those things do is hold everything else in place and provide attachment points for cabanes, wing panels, etc. Look at the Moth series of AC. The crossbar between the cabanes is a small diameter tube, What you see as airfoil is actually only the fuel tank. Clif Well I would use the DF in the front, don't think the modulus of elasticity would matter since lots of airfoils have spars of different widths. Thats what i would do however I no expert. On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 8:27 PM, mike wrote: Ken, The center section between the cabanes doesn't get much bending load so, if there are any significant modulus differences, it shouldn't matter. Mike Hardaway ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 28, 2009
From: Dave and Connie <dmatt(at)frontiernet.net>
Subject: Re: Wood Options
Since I started this. I did the math the other night after I posted my question and got a few replies. As I remember from long ago when I got my license a standard class aircraft is rated for 3 G and tested to 4.5 G. If you take a very fat Pietenpol at 1300 pounds and stress it to 4.5 G you are at 5850 pounds. There are 32 ribs in the wing but two are doubles for the three piece so you are dividing the weight across 30 ribs. That gets you to less than 200 pounds per rib. I have had a Decathalon up into that range and doubt that I would ever get my Taylorcraft, let alone a Pietenpol, into that situation. My conclusion was that I could just about use balsa wood for that. I am not all that worried about strength. I also found a local construction lumber yard that Doug Fir 2x8 12' long for $11. I am going to go and take a look. Dave Robert Ray wrote: > Yeah I tested a rib, I loaded the rib with tractor weights > and left it over night, the fake spars started to crush I don't remember > the exact weight I think 1000 lbs, this wasn't certified wood. > with 30 ribs that's 30,000 lbs' so yes I can do aerobatic maneuvers > with my pianos, girlfriend and dog on board as long as my shoulder > harness doesn't break while I'm pulling 12 negative g's, > I also bought an old G-suit from an ex military fighter pilot > to keep the blood out of my feet I'm wearing it right now. > > No kidding I did test a rib to that weight and was amazed. > > Russell > > On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 5:31 PM, Mike Tunnicliffe > wrote: > > > > > Hi , interesting, this would be one of the few areas where Red > Cedar could be used, as ribs are generally made of larger sized > timber than is required for strength, due to ease of fastening > gussets etc. Another area could be the wing leading edge and > perhaps the aileron spars, however I am not advocating a change to > a timber of lesser strength without a proper analysis of the > structure. The overall weight savings would not be great, > especially as these lighter timbers tend to absorb more sealer, > however it may allow the use of a less expensive / more readily > available / clear grade, species of timber. > regards Mike T. > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "899PM" > > > To: > > Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 6:33 AM > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wood Options > > > > > > Charlie Rubeck built and sold Western Red Cedar Ribs for many > years. After talking with Charlie at Brodhead 11 years ago, I > too built using WRC, 1/16 birch gussets and T-88. I was able > to get all rib stock from (2) 8-ft 4x4's. At the time they > were about $12ea. I recently bought some clear 8' WRC 4x4's > for an arbor project and they were nearly $50ea. Be sure to > follow aircraft grading standards when looking at the > end-grain and slope. > > Being the engineer type, I built a test fixture and tested one > of my finished ribs. I loaded the rib to 11G's before I heard > a crack somewhere. Never did find it. > > -------- > PAPA MIKE > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Michael McGowan" <shadetree(at)socket.net>
Subject: Re: Spar splice
Date: Sep 28, 2009
If you are building a one piece wing buying and shipping 30 ft spars would be prohibitive if you could even find them. Mike McGowan building rib jig ----- Original Message ----- From: shad bell To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Monday, September 28, 2009 9:19 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Spar splice Acording to 43-13 spar splice needs to be at a 15:1 angle of the spar thickness. The length of the scarf would be 15 times 3/4(or 1 inch if you use 1inch spars) of an inch or 11 1/4 inches long on each side (spar half) of the joint. then a reinforcement plate should be placed over the splice. really you should look up ac43-13 online or buy a copy, there is a diagram in there that shows it better than I can explain it. There are a few other particulars in there. My advise is buy spar matrial the full length, scarf joints add weight, and lots of tedious precision work. If it were a repair to an exsisting airplane I would say ok splice it but this is a new airplane, so it would be worth the extra couple hundred bucks to not fuss with the splice. Just my 2 cents worth, Shad ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 29, 2009
From: Mike Tunnicliffe <zk-owl(at)CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Subject: Re: front spar doug fir, rear spar spruce?
Hi, the spars in the centre section see fairly high compression loads, Regards Mike T. ----- Original Message ----- From: Clif Dawson To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 3:36 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: front spar doug fir, rear spar spruce? I wouldn't worry about it. Basicaly all those things do is hold everything else in place and provide attachment points for cabanes, wing panels, etc. Look at the Moth series of AC. The crossbar between the cabanes is a small diameter tube, What you see as airfoil is actually only the fuel tank. Clif Well I would use the DF in the front, don't think the modulus of elasticity would matter since lots of airfoils have spars of different widths. Thats what i would do however I no expert. On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 8:27 PM, mike wrote: Ken, The center section between the cabanes doesn't get much bending load so, if there are any significant modulus differences, it shouldn't matter. Mike Hardaway ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Clif Dawson" <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: front spar doug fir, rear spar spruce?
Date: Sep 28, 2009
Yes they do but we are dealing with one of spruce, the other of fir. The question being is it going to make a difference which one goes where. Since the weaker one, made of spruce, is the "gold standard" as it were, then the point is moot. The fir being stronger is overkill. We are, of course, assuming that both have the same dimensions. Clif Hi, the spars in the centre section see fairly high compression loads, Regards Mike T. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Clif Dawson" <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: these West Coast guys seem like they have a good sense
of humor
Date: Sep 29, 2009
Ribs! forget the ribs. I'm all tanked up! Well, almost. Clif > > Still with the ribs! What's with you guys and the ribs! I did get 3/4 of > my > center section built last weekend! (sure wish I had built those ribs > first!) > > Gary Boothe ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 29, 2009
Subject: Re: No RPM drop on mag check??
From: Robert Ray <rray032003(at)gmail.com>
Oh so the tach was bad not the mags well lucky you. On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 10:43 AM, Dan Yocum wrote: > > Just a quick note on this subject - during our flight on Thursday we > stopped in at friend's airfield and he lent me his digital rpm reader - I > don't recall the official name of it at the moment. > > I have to do some more methodical tests, but what I did see suggests that > the tachometer is low by about 11.4%. That is, at 1000RPM indicated on the > tachometer, the prop was actually spinning at 1140RPM. So, at 2050RPM > (which I do achieve when I lean it out) it's actually spinning at around > 2280. That's close enough to redline for my tastes. > > When Tres delivered the plane he mentioned that at one point in the past > the tach pegged itself at the high end. Turns out that some oil got up > inside the tachometer from the cable. He cleaned the tachometer up, but > apparently didn't recalibrate it. So, mystery solved on that one. > > Cheers, > Dan > > > Robert Ray wrote: > >> Why don't you disconnect both mags all input and out put wiring taps, >> take an olmmeter and measure resistance across the coils, measure >> the resistance to ground hopfully infinity, if they don't match there it >> is. >> Or if they don't match with in say < or > 15% >> Russell >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 11:01 AM, Dan Yocum > yocum(at)fnal.gov>> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> tkreiner wrote: >> >> > >> >> Dan, >> >> Without fully understanding what's going on, and without an >> extensive knowledge of your engine, it's somewhat difficult to >> figure out what's going on. A few questions might inform the >> audience. >> >> Are the mags and ignition harnesses, & spark plugs - new, used, >> worn out? Explain their condition, as it might help. >> >> >> One mag is new in the last year. One plug is new 'cause the A&P >> broke the old one during the last Annual. The harness is probably >> the original from 1979 and probably before. >> >> >> >> How about the mechanical condition of the engine? Rebuilt? >> Describe. >> >> >> 400 SMOH, ~800 hour since new (estimated). Logs are incomplete from >> before 1965, hence the reason for the overhaul. One cylinder was >> cracked and replaced in '65 with "the same oversize." Compressions >> are all in the mid to high 70's. >> >> I sent out a sample of the oil for analysis and no red flags were >> found. >> >> This plane and engine has flown over 150 tach hours in the last 18 >> months and 50 hours in the 2 weeks leading up to Oshkosh! >> >> >> >> What fuel are you using? >> >> >> 100LL with one shot of Marvel Mystery Oil per 15 gallons. >> >> >> >> Perhaps there's no problem at all. Even though our expectation >> is that the engine SHOULD show an rpm drop, that is not always >> the case... On a plane I fly regularly, the entire ignition >> system was recently replaced, i.e., new mags, harnesses, plugs, >> and correctly timed. When the plane was put back into service, >> there was an imperceptible rpm drop. >> >> It turned out, with a near perfect ignition system, clean fuel, >> etc., the engine was burning so clean and completely that there >> was no discernible drop in rpm during mag check. >> >> That's what I'm leaning toward, too. When Tres flew it from >> California they flew it flat out as fast and lean as it would go for >> as long as possible. >> >> >> >> >> Hope this adds some insight. >> >> >> It does! I'm a glass half-full kind of guy but I like to make sure >> there aren't any holes in the glass, too. >> >> The fact that at least one other engine out there in the world >> exhibits the same sort of behaviour suggests that mine isn't >> completely alone. 2 data points are always better than 1 (but still >> not great...). >> >> Thanks, >> Dan >> >> >> -- Dan Yocum >> Fermilab 630.840.6509 >> yocum@fnal.gov , http://fermigrid.fnal.gov >> <http://fermigrid.fnal.gov/> >> Fermilab. Just zeros and ones. >> s List Un/Subscription, >> www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List" >> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List >> ronics.com/" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com >> Matt Dralle, List Admin. >> ==== >> >> >> >> >> * >> >> >> * >> > > -- > Dan Yocum > Fermilab 630.840.6509 > yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov > Fermilab. Just zeros and ones. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Spar splice
Date: Sep 29, 2009
From: helspersew(at)aol.com
Shad, AC43-13 was revised a few years ago, and before the revision the spar splice angle was always 12:1. I can't figure out why after many years it had to be increased. When I made?the spar splices on my one-piece wing I referenced my old copy and made it 12:1. Oh well, I guess it will hold together. Dan Helsper Poplar Grove, IL. -----Original Message----- From: shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com> Sent: Mon, Sep 28, 2009 9:19 pm Subject: Pietenpol-List: Spar splice Acording to 43-13? spar splice needs to be at a 15:1 angle of the spar thickness.? The length of the scarf would be 15 times 3/4(or 1 inch if you use 1inch spars)?of an inch or 11 1/4 inches long on each side (spar half) of the joint.? then a reinforcement plate should be placed over the splice.? really you should look up ac43-13 online or buy a copy, there is a diagram in there that shows it better than I can explain it.? There are a few other particulars in there.? My advise is buy spar matrial the full length, scarf joints add weight, and lots of tedious precision work.? If it were a repair to an exsisting airplane I would say ok splice it but this is a new airplane, so it would be worth the extra couple hundred bucks to not fuss with the splice. ? Just my 2 cents worth, Shad ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 29, 2009
From: H RULE <harvey.rule(at)rogers.com>
Subject: Re: tenpol-List:electric engine
What do you think of putting this engine in a Piet?I peronally think it wou ld be awsome!=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AWOW........=0A-=0A-=0A-=0A-=0ACheck this out.----=0Awww.opb.org/programs/ofg/videos/view/56-Electric-Dr ag-Racing=0A=0A=0A>-=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>href="http://www.matronics.com/ Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List =0A>href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com=0A>hre f="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c=0A> =================== ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 29, 2009
From: Jim Markle <jim_markle(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Fuel valve control
Hey Clif, How did you attach the bar (or tube) to the U shaped piece on the valve? Just drill a round hole and tighten down with those bolts? Or some kind of opening with flat sides and matching flat sides on the bar stock? What keeps it from turning when you move the handle up or down? I'm working on that very issue right now and have been wondering how to do it and still keep it simple. I'm thinking maybe just a round hole and tighten down the nuts nice and snug...but I would not want to need to turn it off in a forced landing and not be able to.... jm -----Original Message----- >From: Clif Dawson <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca> >Sent: Sep 29, 2009 2:42 AM >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: these West Coast guys seem like they have a good sense of humor > >Ribs! forget the ribs. I'm all tanked up! Well, almost. > >Clif >> >> Still with the ribs! What's with you guys and the ribs! I did get 3/4 of >> my >> center section built last weekend! (sure wish I had built those ribs >> first!) >> >> Gary Boothe ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 29, 2009
From: "KMHeide, BA, CPO, FAAOP" <kmheidecpo(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Control set-ups
Members: - It appears several of my posts have been kicked back to me and not making t o this forum. I guess Yahoo has been undergoing some changes and- fieldin g many complaints of emails not getting to their destination. - My question is for the stick and control set-ups. I have seen just turnbuck les and thimbles at each end in many areas of control cables. Can anyone se nd me photos of the rigging so I can gather up some ideas as to what I need to order to make sure I have adjustability and proper connections at each end? - My confusion is when to use just a thimble at one end and a turnbuckle at t he other. I guess I have seen so many different set-ups I am second guessin g my next move! Pictures speak nothing but explain everything! - KMHeide - =0A=0A=0A ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: spar splicing
Date: Sep 29, 2009
Ryan wrote- >If you are building a one-piece wing then you would have to >splice the spars, per the plans. Let's clarify the statement... a splice will be required but do NOT splice the spars per the plans, with bolts down through it from top to bottom. The manual and notes from the Pietenpol family, and other sources, make a point of correcting this. It is most definitely NOT the right way to make a spar splice! Oscar Zuniga Air Camper NX41CC San Antonio, TX mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com website at http://www.flysquirrel.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 29, 2009
From: Tim Willis <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: these West Coast guys -- FUEL TANKS
Clif, I am not asking for my own info, but for others who might be considering a fiberglass tank. Is there an epoxy and glass combo that will not only accommodate avgas and mogas, but mogas with ethanol (something we should avoid for other reasons, too) just in case we get some, either by necessity or ignorance? [I recall the problems some boaters had with ethanol in their glass tanks.] Thanks, Tim in central TX -----Original Message----- >From: Clif Dawson <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca> >Sent: Sep 29, 2009 2:42 AM >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: these West Coast guys seem like they have a good sense of humor > >Ribs! forget the ribs. I'm all tanked up! Well, almost. > >Clif >> >> Still with the ribs! What's with you guys and the ribs! I did get 3/4 of >> my >> center section built last weekend! (sure wish I had built those ribs >> first!) >> >> Gary Boothe ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Wood Options
Date: Sep 29, 2009
From: Ken Howe <ken@cooper-mtn.com>
Any chance you could post a couple pictures of your test rig? I was ran a test on one of my ribs, and it broke at 175 lbs. Of course it revealed that I had a glue-starved joint, so I'm taking another look at my glue-up process and I expect to repeat my test. --Ken construction grade lumber down to spar size, the fake spar's were about three feet long, I then hand selected my worse rib that had questionable grain, I glued it to the spars and placed both spars across saw horses, I had a box of three conductor inside telephone wire, I suspended the barbells from the rib which was upside down to simulate positive g forces. I had a full box of wire and I just used it to tie the weights under the rib attached to the rib. I ran out out weight at 533 lbs' I then moved all the weight to the front then to the back, then I asked Jan (German) if he had any tractor weights at work the next day so then I went over and borrowed 500 lbs' of tractor weights, I added those evenly distributing weight along the rib and left it over night. The next day the edges of the fake spars were starting to crush slightly, the rib was OK, and it only had gussets on one side. I also took pictures and have witnesses. NUF said Russell On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 9:47 PM, Ryan Mueller wrote: I still wonder, how exactly did you keep 1000 lbs of tractor weights balanced on the 1/2" wide capstrip of a single rib? Ryan On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 8:41 PM, Robert Ray wrote: Yeah I tested a rib, I loaded the rib with tractor weights and left it over night, the fake spars started to crush I don't remember the exact weight I think 1000 lbs, this wasn't certified wood. with 30 ribs that's 30,000 lbs' so yes I can do aerobatic maneuvers with my pianos, girlfriend and dog on board as long as my shoulder harness doesn't break while I'm pulling 12 negative g's, I also bought an old G-suit from an ex military fighter pilot to keep the blood out of my feet I'm wearing it right now. No kidding I did test a rib to that weight and was amazed. Russell " target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List ttp://forums.matronics.com _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution Links: ------ [1] mailto:rmueller23(at)gmail.com [2] mailto:rray032003(at)gmail.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: fuel tanks
Date: Sep 29, 2009
Tim asked- >Is there an epoxy and glass combo that will not only >accommodate avgas and mogas, but mogas with ethanol >(something we should avoid for other reasons, too) >just in case we get some, either by necessity or ignorance? The glass is completely non-reactive with any of the fuels and is not the issue; it's the epoxy resin used in the layups. Of all the laminating resins available, the only one that I know of that fills the bill is vinylester resin and even that *could* have problems if you used straight ethanol. At low percentages such as are used in the wintertime in some states as autogas blend, it should not be a problem. I think all of the other epoxy resins will have problems with fuels of one blend or the other and that's where the problems have come up in the past, particularly when autogas has been used. The resin can turn gooey and plug up the fuel system, with obvious consequences, or it can break down and the glass can delaminate. Vinylester is just about the best for fuel tanks but it has a short shelf life, terrible odor, and is a bit fussy to use. Oscar Zuniga Air Camper NX41CC San Antonio, TX mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com website at http://www.flysquirrel.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 29, 2009
From: gliderx5(at)comcast.net
Subject: Re: these West Coast guys -- FUEL TANKS
As I understand it the only resin that will stand up to ethanol in the long run is vinylester. Polyester and epoxy are both effected. I am just finishing my tank now using vinylester, and I hate that crap! It really stinks! I hope to have some pictures and description of the tank and the process on my web site in a couple of weeks, assuming that it actually holds fuel. Malcolm Morrison ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Willis" <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net> Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 10:36:29 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: these West Coast guys -- FUEL TANKS Clif, I am not asking for my own info, but for others who might be considering a fiberglass tank. Is there an epoxy and glass combo that will not only accommodate avgas and mogas, but mogas with ethanol (something we should avoid for other reasons, too) just in case we get some, either by necessity or ignorance? [I recall the problems some boaters had with ethanol in their glass tanks.] Thanks, Tim in central TX -----Original Message----- >From: Clif Dawson <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca> >Sent: Sep 29, 2009 2:42 AM >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: these West Coast guys seem like they have a good sense of humor > >Ribs! forget the ribs. I'm all tanked up! Well, almost. > >Clif >> >> Still with the ribs! What's with you guys and the ribs! I did get 3/4 of >> my >> center section built last weekend! (sure wish I had built those ribs >> first!) >> >> Gary Boothe ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Wood Options
From: "899PM" <rockriverrifle(at)hotmail.com>
Date: Sep 29, 2009
With the rib inverted and held on fake spars, I pulled at 12-15 locations on the rib capstrip with load spacing approximating the pressure curve of the airfoil in flight(i.e. concentrated on the front section of the rib). My "load" on the rib fixture was via engineering grade springs and wingnuts to make it easy to count turns and track compression/spring rate. If memory serves, I heard a crack at #358 of loading. This roughly translates to 10G's. If anyone is interested, I can post a pic. -------- PAPA MIKE Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265574#265574 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Wood Options
Date: Sep 29, 2009
From: "Bill Church" <eng(at)canadianrogers.com>
Now THAT sounds like a well thought out, sound, engineering-based approach. I think everybody would appreciate a photo of that. Well, I would, anyway (even though it doesn't involve 1000 pounds of tractor weights or a small elephant balanced precariously atop the capstrip). Bill C. -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of 899PM Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 12:51 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wood Options --> With the rib inverted and held on fake spars, I pulled at 12-15 locations on the rib capstrip with load spacing approximating the pressure curve of the airfoil in flight(i.e. concentrated on the front section of the rib). My "load" on the rib fixture was via engineering grade springs and wingnuts to make it easy to count turns and track compression/spring rate. If memory serves, I heard a crack at #358 of loading. This roughly translates to 10G's. If anyone is interested, I can post a pic. -------- PAPA MIKE ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC Aerospace Corporation]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
Date: Sep 29, 2009
Subject: perplexed at wood testing ?
I have to wonder why anyone would need to test an 80 year old airfoil design that has never (to my knowledge) had a failure ? I'm sure there is some satisfaction with finding out if you're ribs are built safely but who of us has enough knowledge to even setup a proper scenario that would represent a realistic load on the rib ? Instead of doing all this fiddle-farting around I would rather just build my plane with a/c grade materials and accepted practices and enjoy flying it. Just my opinion but unless you're building with knotty pine lumber and Elmer's glue you shouldn't really even be concerned with the strength of a Pietenpol wing rib. Mike C. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: AMsafetyC(at)aol.com
Date: Sep 29, 2009
Subject: Re: Wood Options
Not that I have a desire to do loops or other aerobatic maneuvers in a Piet but you're saying the piet wing is good for 10Gs. In the overall is would be nice to kown what the aircraft as built to plans is capable of just as a matter of general information purposes and not something I would be willing to test through actual empirical methodology. Do we have a realistic stress value for the Piet, For discussion purposes and with no mathematical or engineering proof I have told people when asked it is estimated at 3.5 Gs positive and negative. If I have under or over estimated I would like to know what the real number is, again for no practical purpose other than discussion regarding the safety of the structure is all. John In a message dated 9/29/2009 1:10:17 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, eng(at)canadianrogers.com writes: Now THAT sounds like a well thought out, sound, engineering-based approach. I think everybody would appreciate a photo of that. Well, I would, anyway (even though it doesn't involve 1000 pounds of tractor weights or a small elephant balanced precariously atop the capstrip). Bill C. -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [_mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com_ (mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com) ] On Behalf Of 899PM Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 12:51 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wood Options --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "899PM" --> With the rib inverted and held on fake spars, I pulled at 12-15 locations on the rib capstrip with load spacing approximating the pressure curve of the airfoil in flight(i.e. concentrated on the front section of the rib). My "load" on the rib fixture was via engineering grade springs and wingnuts to make it easy to count turns and track compression/spring rate. If memory serves, I heard a crack at #358 of loading. This roughly translates to 10G's. If anyone is interested, I can post a pic. -------- PAPA MIKE (http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List) (http://www.matronics.com/contribution) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Wayne Bressler <wayne(at)taildraggersinc.com>
Subject: Re: perplexed at wood testing ?
Date: Sep 29, 2009
I'm with Mike. Perhaps I don't have as much of the "experimenter" nature in me, but I just don't see the benefit in straying from the proven materials and procedures. I'm not building a Piet now, but someday I will. When I do, you can be sure that it will be of aircraft quality materials. I understand the desire and/or need to build on a budget, but I fail to see the value. As if this hobby didn't have enough risks already, why would I want to add to them? Some substitutions are proven and simple, but why try to re-engineer an 80-year old proven design? Wayne Bressler Jr. Taildraggers, Inc. taildraggersinc.com Sent from the phone that made the Blackberry obsolete. On Sep 29, 2009, at 1:36 PM, "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC Aerospace Corporation]" wrote: > [ASRC Aerospace Corporation]" > > I have to wonder why anyone would need to test an 80 year old > airfoil design that has never (to my knowledge) had a failure ? > > I'm sure there is some satisfaction with finding out if you're ribs > are built safely but who of us has enough knowledge to even setup a > proper scenario that would represent a realistic load on the rib ? > Instead of doing all this fiddle-farting around I would rather just > build my plane with a/c grade materials and accepted practices and > enjoy flying it. Just my opinion but unless you're building with > knotty pine lumber and Elmer's glue you shouldn't really even be > concerned with the strength of a Pietenpol wing rib. > > Mike C. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: perplexed at wood testing =?UTF-8?Q?=3F?
Date: Sep 29, 2009
From: Ken Howe <ken@cooper-mtn.com>
My reason for testing is to see if my building is up to snuff. This is the first aircraft project I've attempted. While I'm comfortable working with wood, I've never tried to put together a structure anything like this, and with such negative consequences for getting it wrong. So, if I can see how others are testing their ribs and can test mine with a comparable load, then I'll have a lot more confidence in my own abilities. My test last week did show that my gluing techniques were sub-par. I'm also not sure if my test rig was a reasonable approximation of actual high-g loads on a rib - is my rib as weak as I think it is or is my test rig applying the loads poorly? I'm glad I made a test. It showed that I was being way to stingy with that expensive T-88. I've since reasoned that T-88 isn't so expensive that I can't use enough :) I also decided that I was not using enough clamping pressure (I'm going nail-less on my ribs.) I was using steel weights set on the gussets to provide pressure, and I now don't think I used enough weight. I've modified my jig so that I can use the ABS pipe section clamps. The first new rib came out of the jig this morning. It looks like good squeeze out, but not excessive, around all of the gussets Just my thoughts. --Ken Aerospace Corporation]" wrote: > Aerospace Corporation]" > > I have to wonder why anyone would need to test an 80 year old airfoil > design that has never (to my knowledge) had a failure ? > > I'm sure there is some satisfaction with finding out if you're ribs are > built safely but who of us has enough knowledge to even setup a proper > scenario that would represent a realistic load on the rib ? Instead of > doing all this fiddle-farting around I would rather just build my plane > with a/c grade materials and accepted practices and enjoy flying it. Just > my opinion but unless you're building with knotty pine lumber and Elmer's > glue you shouldn't really even be concerned with the strength of a > Pietenpol wing rib. > > Mike C. > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 29, 2009
From: Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu>
Subject: Re: perplexed at wood testing ?
Rib stress analysis is not my cup of tea, either, but I do have in interest in actual known failure points or modes. First, do they exist for the Pietenpol Air Camper? That is, is there some combination of design/build/activity that has produced a failure more than once? For instance, the early V-tailed Bonanzas seemed to have such a failure nexus with the tail attachment. There are now similar questions being asked about Airbus vertical tail members. Does a failure nexus exist on the Piet? If so, what is it? >(GRC-RXD0)[ASRC Aerospace Corporation]" >...Instead of doing all this fiddle-farting around I would rather >just build my plane with a/c grade materials and accepted practices >and enjoy flying it.... >Mike C. -- Jeff Boatright "Now let's think about this..." ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Air Camper load rating
Date: Sep 29, 2009
I would be concerned about a -3.5G load on the lift struts on my airplane. Let's use very quick, rough, and conservative numbers and say that the airplane is at gross, using a rough 1100 lb. max gross. Under 3.5G loading, that's 3850 lbs. and if we get really rough and say each of the four lift struts is sharing that load equally (not even close to the actual condition, but let's just say)- that's nearly 1000 lbs. that each of the lift struts sees in compression loading. The jury struts provide resistance against buckling failure in one mode, but even at that- I would feel very iffy about that kind of loading, particularly if there was any buffetting going on. The attach bolts would be fine, even the ones at the wing- if I recall, those are AN4 and in double shear, so with a shear strength of 76000 psi, they should be good for something like 7000 lbs. each. I believe I've heard it said that there has never been a catastrophic structural failure of a Piet. Knowing how many of them have flown and are flying, and how many zillions of people have piloted them through all sorts of conditions, I think it's safe to say that you really have to mistreat one to break something structural on them. And that's probably about as close as you're going to get to an engineering analysis of the ultimate load rating on the airframe unless someone wants to model it with a finite element analysis or something sharper than a hardware-store yardstick. Oscar Zuniga Air Camper NX41CC San Antonio, TX mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com website at http://www.flysquirrel.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: perplexed at wood testing ?
From: "899PM" <rockriverrifle(at)hotmail.com>
Date: Sep 29, 2009
Mike, All good points. I originally tested a wing rib to 1) Like Ken, give me a warm and fuzzy that my t-88 gluing was up to snuff and 2) to prove to others(on this list 11 years ago) that the Piet rib per plans is built like the proverbial brick crap-house. You may remember that healthy debate. Few of the "old timers'" with the bulk of the knowledge were(or are) on the web to defend the design and LOTS of good intentioned folks were probably scared off from the remarks of some non-building know-it-alls. I have a fairly healthy wooden wing rib collection. None are built as heavily as the Piet...not even the Ford built Waco GC-4A glider ribs. An example of lightness on the other end is the Porterfield CP-50 rib. Slightly less than 1/4" square. -------- PAPA MIKE Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265594#265594 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Abramson" <davea(at)symbolicdisplays.com>
Subject: Air Camper load rating
Date: Sep 29, 2009
Greetings all! There has been at least 1 catastrophic wing failier on a Pietenpol.... In Chet Peeks book..... There is a story of someone doing aerobatics, and his Pietenpol fell apart in the air. (back in the 20's or 30's) Just wanted to throw that out there! Dave -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Oscar Zuniga Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:52 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Air Camper load rating I would be concerned about a -3.5G load on the lift struts on my airplane. Let's use very quick, rough, and conservative numbers and say that the airplane is at gross, using a rough 1100 lb. max gross. Under 3.5G loading, that's 3850 lbs. and if we get really rough and say each of the four lift struts is sharing that load equally (not even close to the actual condition, but let's just say)- that's nearly 1000 lbs. that each of the lift struts sees in compression loading. The jury struts provide resistance against buckling failure in one mode, but even at that- I would feel very iffy about that kind of loading, particularly if there was any buffetting going on. The attach bolts would be fine, even the ones at the wing- if I recall, those are AN4 and in double shear, so with a shear strength of 76000 psi, they should be good for something like 7000 lbs. each. I believe I've heard it said that there has never been a catastrophic structural failure of a Piet. Knowing how many of them have flown and are flying, and how many zillions of people have piloted them through all sorts of conditions, I think it's safe to say that you really have to mistreat one to break something structural on them. And that's probably about as close as you're going to get to an engineering analysis of the ultimate load rating on the airframe unless someone wants to model it with a finite element analysis or something sharper than a hardware-store yardstick. Oscar Zuniga Air Camper NX41CC San Antonio, TX mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com website at http://www.flysquirrel.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: perplexed at wood testing ?
Date: Sep 29, 2009
From: "Bill Church" <eng(at)canadianrogers.com>
Ken, If you build to the plans, using standard building practices, there should be no need to test your construction. The only testing of structures that makes any sense to me is with an unproven design. It sounds like you were not using standard building practices. See the attached Technical Data Sheet for "expensive" T-88. It clearly says that "glue line thickness is not critical, and clamping is not necessary if the joint is undisturbed during the setting of the adhesive." Your conclusion that you were not using enough pressure is unfounded, since T-88 (unlike Resorcinol) does NOT need to be clamped. You are correct when you say you were being "too stingy" with the T-88. Wet both mating surfaces with a liberal amount of adhesive before assembling the joints. "Liberal" means that there is sufficient glue to fill any gaps that might exist between the wood pieces. When you put the pieces together, there should be a little squeeze-out. If you have a lot of squeeze-out, use less glue on the next joint, until you get a feel for the correct amount. Go to the EAA website, and check out the hints for homebuilders videos in the multimedia section. There is one specifically dealing with gluing gussets with T-88. By the way, you might spend $100 on T-88 to build the entire airplane. That isn't a significant amount when you consider the total cost of the project or the importance of what the epoxy does. Bill C. -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ken Howe Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 2:18 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: perplexed at wood testing ? My reason for testing is to see if my building is up to snuff. This is the first aircraft project I've attempted. While I'm comfortable working with wood, I've never tried to put together a structure anything like this, and with such negative consequences for getting it wrong. So, if I can see how others are testing their ribs and can test mine with a comparable load, then I'll have a lot more confidence in my own abilities. My test last week did show that my gluing techniques were sub-par. I'm also not sure if my test rig was a reasonable approximation of actual high-g loads on a rib - is my rib as weak as I think it is or is my test rig applying the loads poorly? I'm glad I made a test. It showed that I was being way to stingy with that expensive T-88. I've since reasoned that T-88 isn't so expensive that I can't use enough :) I also decided that I was not using enough clamping pressure (I'm going nail-less on my ribs.) I was using steel weights set on the gussets to provide pressure, and I now don't think I used enough weight. I've modified my jig so that I can use the ABS pipe section clamps. The first new rib came out of the jig this morning. It looks like good squeeze out, but not excessive, around all of the gussets Just my thoughts. --Ken ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 29, 2009
From: Rados Svagelj <rsvagelj(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Air Camper load rating
http://earth.google.com/kml/2.2"> KmlFile normal #sn_ylw-pushpin highlight #sh_ylw-pushpin myplace 14.59800438862544 46.05490178405317 0 251.2305584083554 0 0.004708165356730392 #msn_ylw-pushpin 14.59800438862544,46.05490178405317,0 Dave Abramson wrote: > > Greetings all! > > There has been at least 1 catastrophic wing failier on a Pietenpol.... > > In Chet Peeks book..... There is a story of someone doing aerobatics, and > his Pietenpol fell apart in the air. (back in the 20's or 30's) > > Just wanted to throw that out there! > > Dave > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Oscar > Zuniga > Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:52 AM > To: Pietenpol List > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Air Camper load rating > > > I would be concerned about a -3.5G load on the lift struts > on my airplane. Let's use very quick, rough, and conservative > numbers and say that the airplane is at gross, using a > rough 1100 lb. max gross. Under 3.5G loading, that's 3850 lbs. > and if we get really rough and say each of the four lift struts > is sharing that load equally (not even close to the actual > condition, but let's just say)- that's nearly 1000 lbs. that > each of the lift struts sees in compression loading. The jury > struts provide resistance against buckling failure in one mode, > but even at that- I would feel very iffy about that kind of > loading, particularly if there was any buffetting going on. > > The attach bolts would be fine, even the ones at the wing- if > I recall, those are AN4 and in double shear, so with a shear > strength of 76000 psi, they should be good for something like > 7000 lbs. each. > > I believe I've heard it said that there has never been a > catastrophic structural failure of a Piet. Knowing how many of > them have flown and are flying, and how many zillions of people > have piloted them through all sorts of conditions, I think it's > safe to say that you really have to mistreat one to break > something structural on them. > > And that's probably about as close as you're going to get to an > engineering analysis of the ultimate load rating on the airframe > unless someone wants to model it with a finite element analysis > or something sharper than a hardware-store yardstick. > > Oscar Zuniga > Air Camper NX41CC > San Antonio, TX > mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com > website at http://www.flysquirrel.net > > > -- LP Rado ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner
Date: Sep 29, 2009
From: gwread(at)aol.com
I used 3/8" M-D rubber weather seal. I have attached a pixture of the package that you can pick up at your local big box home improvement center. I?just used the stick surface it came with as I wasnt sure I would like the results but it worked! Also a picture of the end result. Gap sealed. I also included a picture of "Rocky" with the Broadhead banner my wife won at the Brodhead fly in this year Gary N10GR -----Original Message----- From: Ross Alexander <karbath1(at)yahoo.ca> Sent: Mon, Sep 28, 2009 9:52 pm Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators How did you sealo the gaps on the vertical and horizontal stabilizer? Duct tape or what would you suggest. Ross in Orangeville, Ontario, Canada C-FTJM From: tengulfromeo <gwread(at)aol.com> Sent: Sunday, September 27, 2009 7:04:50 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators I recently sealed my elevator gap which improved control response. (I strongly recommend gap seals on ailerons, rudder and elevator on the Pietenpol). Just for kicks this weekend I added vortex generators to the underside of my horizontal stabilizer and definitely noticed improved elevator authority on landing flare. Crazy I know, and if they didn't look so darn noticeable and out of character for an antique, but still it has me thinking........has anyone had experience with vortex generators on the Piet wing? Gary N10GR Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/vsp; --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List _ref="http://forums.matronics.com" target="_blank">http://forums.matronibsp; Thank you for your generous nbsp; ? ? ? ? ? ? -Matt Dralle, List Admin. Yahoo! Canada Toolbar : Search from anywhere on the web and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now! Yahoo! Canada Toolbar : Search from anywhere on the web and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now! ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Ryan Mueller <rmueller23(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Air Camper load rating
Date: Sep 29, 2009
That statement is not quite correct. There are two stories in the book about crashes stemming from aerobatics; one was a Mr. Galen Elser and the other a gentleman named Bennie Skaarberg. Both aircraft reportedly fell inverted from the top side of an attempted loop, thereby putting negative loading on the wing struts. The struts promptly failed, and the wings departed the aircraft. The wings themselves did not fail, the struts did. As Chet later writes, 'Bernard always warned against doing "stunts"'. If you want to do stunts, build yourself a Pitts. :P Ryan Sent from my mobile device On Sep 29, 2009, at 2:16 PM, "Dave Abramson" wrote: > > > > Greetings all! > > There has been at least 1 catastrophic wing failier on a Pietenpol.... > > In Chet Peeks book..... There is a story of someone doing > aerobatics, and > his Pietenpol fell apart in the air. (back in the 20's or 30's) > > Just wanted to throw that out there! > > Dave > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Oscar > Zuniga > Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:52 AM > To: Pietenpol List > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Air Camper load rating > > > > > > > I would be concerned about a -3.5G load on the lift struts > on my airplane. Let's use very quick, rough, and conservative > numbers and say that the airplane is at gross, using a > rough 1100 lb. max gross. Under 3.5G loading, that's 3850 lbs. > and if we get really rough and say each of the four lift struts > is sharing that load equally (not even close to the actual > condition, but let's just say)- that's nearly 1000 lbs. that > each of the lift struts sees in compression loading. The jury > struts provide resistance against buckling failure in one mode, > but even at that- I would feel very iffy about that kind of > loading, particularly if there was any buffetting going on. > > The attach bolts would be fine, even the ones at the wing- if > I recall, those are AN4 and in double shear, so with a shear > strength of 76000 psi, they should be good for something like > 7000 lbs. each. > > I believe I've heard it said that there has never been a > catastrophic structural failure of a Piet. Knowing how many of > them have flown and are flying, and how many zillions of people > have piloted them through all sorts of conditions, I think it's > safe to say that you really have to mistreat one to break > something structural on them. > > And that's probably about as close as you're going to get to an > engineering analysis of the ultimate load rating on the airframe > unless someone wants to model it with a finite element analysis > or something sharper than a hardware-store yardstick. > > Oscar Zuniga > Air Camper NX41CC > San Antonio, TX > mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com > website at http://www.flysquirrel.net > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 29, 2009
From: Jim Markle <jim_markle(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Air Camper load rating
Agreed, there have actually been a number of "failures" with Pietenpols. Just none (that I've ever heard of) due to the design. I always enjoy pointing out to "non aviation types" that the so called "failures" had everything to do with the pilot. Seems everyone I've ever showed my project to (non aviation types, that is) always want to know if it's gonna fall apart in flight...it's nice to be able to say "As long as I fly it the way I'm supposed to fly it...no problem!" jm -----Original Message----- >From: Dave Abramson <davea(at)symbolicdisplays.com> >Sent: Sep 29, 2009 2:16 PM >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Air Camper load rating > > >Greetings all! > >There has been at least 1 catastrophic wing failier on a Pietenpol.... > >In Chet Peeks book..... There is a story of someone doing aerobatics, and >his Pietenpol fell apart in the air. (back in the 20's or 30's) > >Just wanted to throw that out there! > >Dave > > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com >[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Oscar >Zuniga >Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:52 AM >To: Pietenpol List >Subject: Pietenpol-List: Air Camper load rating > > >I would be concerned about a -3.5G load on the lift struts >on my airplane. Let's use very quick, rough, and conservative >numbers and say that the airplane is at gross, using a >rough 1100 lb. max gross. Under 3.5G loading, that's 3850 lbs. >and if we get really rough and say each of the four lift struts >is sharing that load equally (not even close to the actual >condition, but let's just say)- that's nearly 1000 lbs. that >each of the lift struts sees in compression loading. The jury >struts provide resistance against buckling failure in one mode, >but even at that- I would feel very iffy about that kind of >loading, particularly if there was any buffetting going on. > >The attach bolts would be fine, even the ones at the wing- if >I recall, those are AN4 and in double shear, so with a shear >strength of 76000 psi, they should be good for something like >7000 lbs. each. > >I believe I've heard it said that there has never been a >catastrophic structural failure of a Piet. Knowing how many of >them have flown and are flying, and how many zillions of people >have piloted them through all sorts of conditions, I think it's >safe to say that you really have to mistreat one to break >something structural on them. > >And that's probably about as close as you're going to get to an >engineering analysis of the ultimate load rating on the airframe >unless someone wants to model it with a finite element analysis >or something sharper than a hardware-store yardstick. > >Oscar Zuniga >Air Camper NX41CC >San Antonio, TX >mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com >website at http://www.flysquirrel.net > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: perplexed at wood testing =?UTF-8?Q?=3F?
Date: Sep 29, 2009
From: Ken Howe <ken@cooper-mtn.com>
Bill, I agree with everything you said, I perhaps wasn't very clear in what I intended to say. By 'insufficient clamping pressure' what I meant was "insufficient pressure to close up the small gaps and maintain contact given that I did not use enough T-88". I've read the Technical Data Sheet and have viewed the excellent EAA how-to videos. My comments on T-88 were a bit tongue-in-cheek. I realize that trying to use 'just enough' T-88 was plainly wrong, and in the grand scheme the cost of T-88 is not significant. As a result of my failed test I've made several changes to gluing process, including being more careful about leveling the contact areas of every joint (that's out of Tony B's book), using enough T-88 to fully wet both surfaces and a different clamping method that will insure contact even if I jar the jig as I progress around the rib. I also of course realize that I'm using a 'non-standard' building technique. That's one reason I wanted to test how I was doing. A basic principle of the Experimental Amateur Built classification is education, and I'm learning as I go. For me, using cement coated brass nails to hold the gussets in place is just as non-standard as clamping. I've never done it before and I've never watched anyone making a rib that way. Even the EAA video uses a technique that didn't exist in 1929 (staples). I highly value the work Mr. Pietenpol did, but you also have to remember that (as far as I know or have read) he never built 2 aircraft the same. He was experimenting all the time, some of the obvious things he changed were engines, landing gear, and spar dimensions. I'd be willing to bet that there are many little changes that aren't so obvious. When I'm done, my airplane will not be built exactly to plans, but then I doubt any of them truly are. You can't show everything exactly on 8 sheets (although they are amazingly complete for just being 8 sheets.) I'll still be proud to call it a Pietenpol. --Ken wrote: > Ken, > > If you build to the plans, using standard building practices, there > should be no need to test your construction. The only testing of > structures that makes any sense to me is with an unproven design. > It sounds like you were not using standard building practices. See the > attached Technical Data Sheet for "expensive" T-88. It clearly says that > "glue line thickness is not critical, and clamping is not necessary if > the joint is undisturbed during the setting of the adhesive." Your > conclusion that you were not using enough pressure is unfounded, since > T-88 (unlike Resorcinol) does NOT need to be clamped. You are correct > when you say you were being "too stingy" with the T-88. Wet both mating > surfaces with a liberal amount of adhesive before assembling the joints. > "Liberal" means that there is sufficient glue to fill any gaps that > might exist between the wood pieces. When you put the pieces together, > there should be a little squeeze-out. If you have a lot of squeeze-out, > use less glue on the next joint, until you get a feel for the correct > amount. > Go to the EAA website, and check out the hints for homebuilders videos > in the multimedia section. There is one specifically dealing with gluing > gussets with T-88. > By the way, you might spend $100 on T-88 to build the entire airplane. > That isn't a significant amount when you consider the total cost of the > project or the importance of what the epoxy does. > > Bill C. > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ken Howe > Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 2:18 PM > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: perplexed at wood testing ? > > > > My reason for testing is to see if my building is up to snuff. This is > the first aircraft project I've attempted. While I'm comfortable working > with wood, I've never tried to put together a structure anything like > this, and with such negative consequences for getting it wrong. So, if I > can see how others are testing their ribs and can test mine with a > comparable load, then I'll have a lot more confidence in my own > abilities. > > My test last week did show that my gluing techniques were sub-par. I'm > also not sure if my test rig was a reasonable approximation of actual > high-g loads on a rib - is my rib as weak as I think it is or is my test > rig applying the loads poorly? > > I'm glad I made a test. It showed that I was being way to stingy with > that expensive T-88. I've since reasoned that T-88 isn't so expensive > that I can't use enough :) I also decided that I was not using enough > clamping pressure (I'm going nail-less on my ribs.) I was using steel > weights set on the gussets to provide pressure, and I now don't think I > used enough weight. I've modified my jig so that I can use the ABS pipe > section clamps. > The first new rib came out of the jig this morning. It looks like good > squeeze out, but not excessive, around all of the gussets > > Just my thoughts. > > --Ken > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Doug Dever <chiefpepperhead(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: these West Coast guys -- FUEL TANKS
Date: Sep 29, 2009
vinyl ester resin is compatable with av gas Doug Dever In beautiful Stow Ohio > Date: Tue=2C 29 Sep 2009 09:36:29 -0500 > From: timothywillis(at)earthlink.net > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: these West Coast guys -- FUEL TANKS > .net> > > Clif=2C > I am not asking for my own info=2C but for others who might be considerin g a fiberglass tank. Is there an epoxy and glass combo that will not only a ccommodate avgas and mogas=2C but mogas with ethanol (something we should a void for other reasons=2C too) just in case we get some=2C either by necess ity or ignorance? [I recall the problems some boaters had with ethanol in t heir glass tanks.] > Thanks=2C Tim in central TX > > -----Original Message----- > >From: Clif Dawson <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca> > >Sent: Sep 29=2C 2009 2:42 AM > >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: these West Coast guys seem like they have a good sense of humor > > > >Ribs! forget the ribs. I'm all tanked up! Well=2C almost. > > > >Clif > >> > >> Still with the ribs! What's with you guys and the ribs! I did get 3/4 of > >> my > >> center section built last weekend! (sure wish I had built those ribs > >> first!) > >> > >> Gary Boothe > > =========== =========== =========== =========== > > > =0A _________________________________________________________________=0A Hotmail=AE has ever-growing storage! Don=92t worry about storage limits.=0A http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/Storage?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tuto rial_Storage_062009 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: perplexed at wood testing ?
Date: Sep 29, 2009
From: "Bill Church" <eng(at)canadianrogers.com>
Ken, My comment regarding "standard construction practices" had nothing to do with clamping, or nailing, or stapling, or the lack thereof. It was based solely on the practice of using the materials specified by the designer, and using the adhesive of choice in the manner in which it is designed to be used. T-88 is a well proven adhesive which has been used in aircraft construction for quite a while - long enough to be considered a "standard practice" (as has Resorcinol, which has very different directions for use). But if an adhesive is not used as directed, then its use becomes "non-standard". With T-88, if not enough epoxy is applied to the joints, or if excessive clamping pressure is applied (resulting in glue starvation), the joints will not achieve the design strength. In your test rib, you did not use enough epoxy. That was my point. Having said that, from the sounds of things, you are on the right track. You obtained (and actually read) the Bingelis books. You've read the data sheets for your adhesive. You've witnessed (via video) some wood construction techniques. And now, you've tried building a rib, and seen what you needed to change in your technique. That's what it's all about. Live and learn (and live). While your comments regarding "expensive T-88" were intended to be tongue-in-cheek, it seems that many builders (and this comment is not directed at you, personally) appear to have a mentality that there are many opportunities to cut corners, in an attempt to reduce the cost to build. I have read many posts about builders trying to calculate the EXACT ideal amount of epoxy that one should mix to assemble a wing rib - with the goal being that the last drop scraped off the mixing board (or cup, or whatever) gets used to glue the last gusset in place. Well, what does a builder do if he comes up just a little bit short? I always was left with a bit of epoxy (about 1/8" deep) left in the bottom of my mixing cup when I finished a rib. Those remains are left in that mixing cup, dated, and kept as samples of my glue mix. I will probably end up with $25 worth of "wasted" epoxy by the time I'm finished. That will be less than a half tank of gas - maybe two hours in the air. If one is a scrounger, it is said that a Pietenpol can be built for under $10,000. But if you don't squeeze the pennies, your Piet might approach $20,000. That's not a huge range, and the upper value is still a very cheap airplane, and once finished, the building costs will become more and more insignificant when the costs of hangar space, insurance, fuel, oil and maintenance are factored in. I'm trying to keep my costs down as well, but sometimes I'm baffled by the "logic" of some builders. In my opinion (which is worth every penny you paid for it), if the cost of a bottle of epoxy is a financial concern, then maybe building an airplane isn't a good decision. Again, Ken, I'm not directing these comments at you, just putting it "out there". Bill C. (stepping off the soapbox now) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Thomas Bernie <tsbernie(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner
Date: Sep 29, 2009
Guys, Another way is to use fabric when covering, but you can't take the elevators off without cutting them. Regards, Tom On Sep 29, 2009, at 3:42 PM, gwread(at)aol.com wrote: > > I used 3/8" M-D rubber weather seal. I have attached a pixture of > the package that you can pick up at your local big box home > improvement center. I just used the stick surface it came with as I > wasnt sure I would like the results but it worked! Also a picture of > the end result. Gap sealed. > I also included a picture of "Rocky" with the Broadhead banner my > wife won at the Brodhead fly in this year > Gary > N10GR > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ross Alexander <karbath1(at)yahoo.ca> > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > Sent: Mon, Sep 28, 2009 9:52 pm > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators > > How did you sealo the gaps on the vertical and horizontal > stabilizer? Duct tape or what would you suggest. Ross in > Orangeville, Ontario, Canada C-FTJM > > From: tengulfromeo <gwread(at)aol.com> > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > Sent: Sunday, September 27, 2009 7:04:50 PM > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators > > > I recently sealed my elevator gap which improved control response. > (I strongly recommend gap seals on ailerons, rudder and elevator on > the Pietenpol). > > Just for kicks this weekend I added vortex generators to the > underside of my horizontal stabilizer and definitely noticed > improved elevator authority on landing flare. > > Crazy I know, and if they didn't look so darn noticeable and out of > character for an antique, but still it has me thinking........has > anyone had experience with vortex generators on the Piet wing? > > Gary > N10GR > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/vsp; --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List > _ref="http://forums.matronics.com" target="_blank">http://forums.matronibsp > ; Thank you for your generous nbsp; -Matt Dralle, List > Admin. > > > Yahoo! Canada Toolbar : Search from anywhere on the web and bookmark > your favourite sites. Download it now! > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner
Date: Sep 29, 2009
From: gwread(at)aol.com
Nice work. I used fabric on the ailerons. Gary N10GR "If we love flying so much why are we in a hurry to get there?" -----Original Message----- From: Thomas Bernie <tsbernie(at)earthlink.net> Sent: Tue, Sep 29, 2009 6:20 pm Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner Guys, Another way is to use fabric when covering, but you can't take the elevators off without cutting them. Regards, Tom On Sep 29, 2009, at 3:42 PM, gwread(at)aol.com wrote: I used 3/8" M-D rubber weather seal. I have attached a pixture of the package that you can pick up at your local big box home improvement center. I?just used the stick surface it came with as I wasnt sure I would like the results but it worked! Also a picture of the end result. Gap sealed. I also included a picture of "Rocky" with the Broadhead banner my wife won at the Brodhead fly in this year Gary N10GR -----Original Message----- From: Ross Alexander <karbath1(at)yahoo.ca> To:?pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Mon, Sep 28, 2009 9:52 pm Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators How did you sealo the gaps on the vertical and horizontal stabilizer? Duct tape or what would you suggest. Ross in Orangeville, Ontario, Canada C-FTJM From:?tengulfromeo To:?pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent:?Sunday, September 27, 2009 7:04:50 PM Subject:?Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators I recently sealed my elevator gap which improved control response. (I strongly recommend gap seals on ailerons, rudder and elevator on the Pietenpol).? Just for kicks this weekend I added vortex generators to the underside of my horizontal stabilizer and definitely noticed improved elevator authority on landing flare.? Crazy I know, and if they didn't look so darn noticeable and out of character for an antique, but still it has me thinking........has anyone had experience with vortex generators on the Piet wing?? Gary? N10GR Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/vsp; -->?http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List _ref="http://forums.matronics.com" target="_blank">http://forums.matronibsp; Thank you for your generous nbsp; ? ? ? ? ? ? -Matt Dralle, List Admin. Yahoo! Canada Toolbar :?Search from anywhere on the web and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now! = ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 29, 2009
From: Ross Alexander <karbath1(at)yahoo.ca>
Subject: Re: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner
I am not familiar with this material called MD rubber weaqther seal. What store sells it? What are it's dimensions? Width, thickness, lengths? Appreciate any info. Thanx Ross ________________________________ From: Thomas Bernie <tsbernie(at)earthlink.net> Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 6:20:56 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner Guys, Another way is to use fabric when covering, but you can't take the elevators off without cutting them. Regards, Tom On Sep 29, 2009, at 3:42 PM, gwread(at)aol.com wrote: >I used 3/8" M-D rubber weather seal. I have attached a pixture of the package that you can pick up at your local big box home improvement center. I just used the stick surface it came with as I wasnt sure I would like the results but it worked! Also a picture of the end result. Gap sealed. >I also included a picture of "Rocky" with the Broadhead banner my wife won at the Brodhead fly in this year >Gary >N10GR > >-----Original Message----- >From: Ross Alexander <karbath1(at)yahoo.ca> >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >Sent: Mon, Sep 28, 2009 9:52 pm >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators > > >How did you sealo the gaps on the vertical and horizontal stabilizer? Duct tape or what would you suggest. Ross in Orangeville, Ontario, Canada C-FTJM > > ________________________________ From: tengulfromeo <gwread(at)aol.com> >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >Sent: Sunday, September 27, 2009 7:04:50 PM >Subject: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators > > >I recently sealed my elevator gap which improved control response. (I strongly recommend gap seals on ailerons, rudder and elevator on the Pietenpol). > >Just for kicks this weekend I added vortex generators to the underside of my horizontal stabilizer and definitely noticed improved elevator authority on landing flare. > >Crazy I know, and if they didn't look so darn noticeable and out of character for an antique, but still it has me thinking........has anyone had experience with vortex generators on the Piet wing? > >Gary >N10GR > > >Read this topic online here: > >http://forums.matronics.com/vsp; --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List >_ref="http://forums.matronics.com" target="_blank">http://forums.matronibsp; Thank you for your generous nbsp; -Matt Dralle, List Admin. > > ________________________________ >Yahoo! Canada Toolbar : Search from anywhere on the web and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now! __________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Canada Toolbar: Search from anywhere on the web, and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Doug Dever <chiefpepperhead(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: perplexed at wood testing ?
Date: Sep 29, 2009
You don't need toapproximate loading. All you need to do is see if the woo d failed or the glue joint failed first. The method of destruction doesn't really matter. Doug Dever In beautiful Stow Ohio > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: perplexed at wood testing ? > Date: Tue=2C 29 Sep 2009 12:18:04 -0600 > From: ken@cooper-mtn.com > > > > My reason for testing is to see if my building is up to snuff. This is th e > first aircraft project I've attempted. While I'm comfortable working with > wood=2C I've never tried to put together a structure anything like this =2C and > with such negative consequences for getting it wrong. So=2C if I can see how > others are testing their ribs and can test mine with a comparable load=2C > then I'll have a lot more confidence in my own abilities. > > My test last week did show that my gluing techniques were sub-par. I'm al so > not sure if my test rig was a reasonable approximation of actual high-g > loads on a rib - is my rib as weak as I think it is or is my test rig > applying the loads poorly? > > I'm glad I made a test. It showed that I was being way to stingy with tha t > expensive T-88. I've since reasoned that T-88 isn't so expensive that I > can't use enough :) I also decided that I was not using enough clamping > pressure (I'm going nail-less on my ribs.) I was using steel weights set on > the gussets to provide pressure=2C and I now don't think I used enough > weight. I've modified my jig so that I can use the ABS pipe section clamp s. > The first new rib came out of the jig this morning. It looks like good > squeeze out=2C but not excessive=2C around all of the gussets > > Just my thoughts. > > --Ken > C > Aerospace Corporation]" wrote: C > > Aerospace Corporation]" > > > > I have to wonder why anyone would need to test an 80 year old airfoil > > design that has never (to my knowledge) had a failure ? > > > > I'm sure there is some satisfaction with finding out if you're ribs are > > built safely but who of us has enough knowledge to even setup a proper > > scenario that would represent a realistic load on the rib ? Instead of > > doing all this fiddle-farting around I would rather just build my plane > > with a/c grade materials and accepted practices and enjoy flying it. > Just > > my opinion but unless you're building with knotty pine lumber and Elmer 's > > glue you shouldn't really even be concerned with the strength of a > > Pietenpol wing rib. > > > > Mike C. > > > > > > > > > > > > > =========== =========== =========== =========== > > > =0A _________________________________________________________________=0A Bing=99 brings you maps=2C menus=2C and reviews organized in one place. Try it now.=0A http://www.bing.com/search?q=restaurants&form=MLOGEN&publ=WLHMTAG&cre a=TEXT_MLOGEN_Core_tagline_local_1x1 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner
Date: Sep 29, 2009
From: gwread(at)aol.com
I attached pictures of the package, showing the dimensions. Did they come through on the original email or do I need to post them somewhere? -----Original Message----- From: Ross Alexander <karbath1(at)yahoo.ca> Sent: Tue, Sep 29, 2009 8:47 pm Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner I am not familiar with this material called MD rubber weaqther seal. What store sells it? What are it's dimensions? Width, thickness, lengths? Appreciate any info. Thanx? Ross From: Thomas Bernie <tsbernie(at)earthlink.net> Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 6:20:56 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner Guys, Another way is to use fabric when covering, but you can't take the elevators off without cutting them. Regards, Tom On Sep 29, 2009, at 3:42 PM, gwread(at)aol.com wrote: I used 3/8" M-D rubber weather seal. I have attached a pixture of the package that you can pick up at your local big box home improvement center. I?just used the stick surface it came with as I wasnt sure I would like the results but it worked! Also a picture of the end result. Gap sealed. I also included a picture of "Rocky" with the Broadhead banner my wife won at the Brodhead fly in this year Gary N10GR -----Original Message----- From: Ross Alexander <karbath1(at)yahoo.ca> To:?pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Mon, Sep 28, 2009 9:52 pm Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators How did you sealo the gaps on the vertical and horizontal stabilizer? Duct tape or what would you suggest. Ross in Orangeville, Ontario, Canada C-FTJM From:?tengulfromeo To:?pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent:?Sunday, September 27, 2009 7:04:50 PM Subject:?Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators I recently sealed my elevator gap which improved control response. (I strongly recommend gap seals on ailerons, rudder and elevator on the Pietenpol).? Just for kicks this weekend I added vortex generators to the underside of my horizontal stabilizer and definitely noticed improved elevator authority on landing flare.? Crazy I know, and if they didn't look so darn noticeable and out of character for an antique, but still it has me thinking........has anyone had experience with vortex generators on the Piet wing?? Gary? N10GR Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/vsp; -->?http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List _ref="http://forums.matronics.com" target="_blank">http://forums.matronibsp; Thank you for your generous nbsp; ? ? ? ? ? ? -Matt Dralle, List Admin. Yahoo! Canada Toolbar :?Search from anywhere on the web and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now! Instant message from any web browser! Try the new Yahoo! Canada Messenger for the Web BETA ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "mike" <bike.mike(at)comcast.net>
Subject: tenpol-List:electric engine
Date: Sep 29, 2009
That much power (300 Hp) would be spectacularly awesome in a Piet...for a few minutes of flight time. (Math is easier for me if we just go with 100 Hp, a more reasonable number for Piets, so that is what I use here initially.) The best energy storage density of lithium-ion batteries these days is around 200 W-hr/Kg, or about 0.12 Hp-Hr/Lb. To get 100 Hp for one hour would require about 850 Lbs of batteries (at an unattainable 100% efficiency). A Piet needs about 30-40 Hp to cruise straight and level at a relatively slow speed. Consider that two hours of gasoline (at 5 gph) is about 60 lbs. I'm guessing that the electric motor weighs something less than a 100 Hp aircraft motor so assume a motor that weighs 100 lb less than its internal combustion counterpart. To cruise electrically for two hours, you would need about 600 Lb of lithium-ion batteries (with something more for takeoff). Minus the motor and gas weight savings, that adds 440Lb to your existing takeoff weight. With a pre-existing 650 Lb empty weight and 200 lbs of pilot, you have a 1300 Lb airplane. That might upset the stress analysis guys, but a Piet is pretty strong. And, with 300 Hp of takeoff power, 1300 lb will get off the ground right smartly. However, every time you climb, you eat up cruising time. Everyone, please feel free to critique my reasoning. Mike Hardaway _____ From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of H RULE Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 5:08 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List:electric engine What do you think of putting this engine in a Piet?I peronally think it would be awsome! WOW........ Check this out. www.opb.org/programs/ofg/videos/view/56-Electric-Drag-Racing ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "gcardinal" <gcardinal(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Does anybody know this plane?
Date: Sep 29, 2009
See the attached photo. Does anybody know this plane? It appears to be a Grega with an oversized fin / rudder. The wheels are interesting...... I'm trying to find more pictures or who it belongs to. Greg Cardinal ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Clif Dawson" <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: Fuel valve control
Date: Sep 29, 2009
The handle on mine is 1/8" thick. I bent it in a U, drilled and tapped for the 1/4" brass rod. with the two capture nuts and the thread in the U I think it's not likely to move anywhere. Just make the inside of the U wide enough for a nut and maybe 1/4" more just because. Oh yeah, In the final assembly I'll use lock nuts. Clif > Hey Clif, > > How did you attach the bar (or tube) to the U shaped piece on the valve? > Just drill a round hole and tighten down with those bolts? Or some kind > of opening with flat sides and matching flat sides on the bar stock? What > keeps it from turning when you move the handle up or down? > jm ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 29, 2009
Subject: Re: Air Camper load rating
From: Robert Ray <rray032003(at)gmail.com>
I plan on using the aluminum struts from Carlson, I think the ultimate fail in tension is 23000 (positive) g's. I think they are strong enough. Especially when there are two of them, now how's that for engineering calculus! Didn't need no caculator on that one. Russell On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 4:17 PM, Jim Markle wrote: > jim_markle(at)mindspring.com> > > Agreed, there have actually been a number of "failures" with Pietenpols. > Just none (that I've ever heard of) due to the design. > > I always enjoy pointing out to "non aviation types" that the so called > "failures" had everything to do with the pilot. > > Seems everyone I've ever showed my project to (non aviation types, that is) > always want to know if it's gonna fall apart in flight...it's nice to be > able to say "As long as I fly it the way I'm supposed to fly it...no > problem!" > > jm > > > -----Original Message----- > >From: Dave Abramson <davea(at)symbolicdisplays.com> > >Sent: Sep 29, 2009 2:16 PM > >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > >Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Air Camper load rating > > > davea(at)symbolicdisplays.com> > > > >Greetings all! > > > >There has been at least 1 catastrophic wing failier on a Pietenpol.... > > > >In Chet Peeks book..... There is a story of someone doing aerobatics, > and > >his Pietenpol fell apart in the air. (back in the 20's or 30's) > > > >Just wanted to throw that out there! > > > >Dave > > > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com > >[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Oscar > >Zuniga > >Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:52 AM > >To: Pietenpol List > >Subject: Pietenpol-List: Air Camper load rating > > > > > > > > > > > >I would be concerned about a -3.5G load on the lift struts > >on my airplane. Let's use very quick, rough, and conservative > >numbers and say that the airplane is at gross, using a > >rough 1100 lb. max gross. Under 3.5G loading, that's 3850 lbs. > >and if we get really rough and say each of the four lift struts > >is sharing that load equally (not even close to the actual > >condition, but let's just say)- that's nearly 1000 lbs. that > >each of the lift struts sees in compression loading. The jury > >struts provide resistance against buckling failure in one mode, > >but even at that- I would feel very iffy about that kind of > >loading, particularly if there was any buffetting going on. > > > >The attach bolts would be fine, even the ones at the wing- if > >I recall, those are AN4 and in double shear, so with a shear > >strength of 76000 psi, they should be good for something like > >7000 lbs. each. > > > >I believe I've heard it said that there has never been a > >catastrophic structural failure of a Piet. Knowing how many of > >them have flown and are flying, and how many zillions of people > >have piloted them through all sorts of conditions, I think it's > >safe to say that you really have to mistreat one to break > >something structural on them. > > > >And that's probably about as close as you're going to get to an > >engineering analysis of the ultimate load rating on the airframe > >unless someone wants to model it with a finite element analysis > >or something sharper than a hardware-store yardstick. > > > >Oscar Zuniga > >Air Camper NX41CC > >San Antonio, TX > >mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com > >website at http://www.flysquirrel.net > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 29, 2009
Subject: Re: these West Coast guys -- FUEL TANKS
From: Robert Ray <rray032003(at)gmail.com>
I heard of building with epoxy however there is another resin thats better suited for it, It's NOT polyester resin it's some thing else, search in on the net and you'll find web sites that tell what to use and what not to and the weight of cloth is also important. There's a site where a guy has had gas setting in a tank for couple of years. humm sound like anybody we know? Russell On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 5:31 PM, Doug Dever wr ote: > vinyl ester resin is compatable with av gas > > Doug Dever > In beautiful Stow Ohio > > > > Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 09:36:29 -0500 > > From: timothywillis(at)earthlink.net > > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: these West Coast guys -- FUEL TANKS > > > timothywillis(at)earthlink.net> > > > > Clif, > > I am not asking for my own info, but for others who might be considerin g > a fiberglass tank. Is there an epoxy and glass combo that will not only > accommodate avgas and mogas, but mogas with ethanol (something we should > avoid for other reasons, too) just in case we get some, either by necessi ty > or ignorance? [I recall the problems some boaters had with ethanol in the ir > glass tanks.] > > Thanks, Tim in central TX > > > > -----Original Message----- > > >From: Clif Dawson <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca> > > >Sent: Sep 29, 2009 2:42 AM > > >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > > >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: these West Coast guys seem like they have a > good sense of humor > > > > > >Ribs! forget the ribs. I'm all tanked up! Well, almost. > > > > > >Clif > > >> > > >> Still with the ribs! What's with you guys and the ribs! I did get 3/ 4 > of > > >> my > > >> center section built last weekend! (sure wish I had built those ribs > > >> first!) > > >>====================== > &g====== > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > Hotmail=AE has ever-growing storage! Don=92t worry about storage limits. Check > it out.<http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/Storage?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_ WL_HM_Tutorial_Storage_062009> > > * > =========== =========== =========== =========== > * > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Clif Dawson" <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: these West Coast guys -- FUEL TANKS
Date: Sep 29, 2009
Like all the others have said, Vinylester. I didn't find it excessively smelly and the layup went quite smoothly. One thing though, get the resin that's for laying up layers. There's a finishing resin that oozes out wax as it cures. The guy at the fiberglass store called it "surfboard resin". If you haven't done this before it would be wise to do some practice layup, particularely edges and corners! It doesn't have to be big, a few inches in area is fine. The more rounded corners and edges the better. USE PLENTY OF RELEASE WAX ON THE PLUG!!! Clif Remember, every drip or blob in a cosmetic area is going to have to be filed off! :-) > Clif, > I am not asking for my own info, but for others who might be considering a > fiberglass tank. Is there an epoxy and glass combo that will not only > accommodate avgas and mogas, but mogas with ethanol (something we should > avoid for other reasons, too)> Thanks, Tim in central TX ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 29, 2009
From: Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov>
Subject: Re: Vortex Generators
Gary, In the last BPA newsletter Bill Rewey talks about dimple tape and his experiences using it on his props (~10% increase in performance, quieter operation, less fuel burn, etc.). The page at http://www.dimpletape.com says you can put the stuff on your wings, too. It might be worth a try and it's not nearly as noticeable as VGs. There's something to this stuff - the following is a research paper on increasing the L/D (lift over drag) coefficient on a high performance sailplane by 7-11% in general and by up to 20% in specific speed regions by placing a deturbulator strip on the wing at the correct location. This deturbulator creates a "slip layer" a couple of microns thick which increases the efficiency of the wing: http://www.sinhatech.com/AIAA-2006.pdf Now, I'm not one to take food out of an honest man's mouth, but on a recent foray into a local sign making shop, I noticed that they sold dimpled adhesive backed vinyl in large rolls for quite a bit less than $4.95 per foot... Cheers, Dan tengulfromeo wrote: > > I recently sealed my elevator gap which improved control response. (I strongly recommend gap seals on ailerons, rudder and elevator on the Pietenpol). > > Just for kicks this weekend I added vortex generators to the underside of my horizontal stabilizer and definitely noticed improved elevator authority on landing flare. > > Crazy I know, and if they didn't look so darn noticeable and out of character for an antique, but still it has me thinking........has anyone had experience with vortex generators on the Piet wing? > > Gary > N10GR > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265239#265239 > > > > > > > > > > -- Dan Yocum Fermilab 630.840.6509 yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov Fermilab. Just zeros and ones. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Does anybody know this plane?
From: "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca>
Date: Sep 29, 2009
Greg, You're right. That is a Grega with a large tail - in fact, it's the tail off a J3 Piper Cub. I believe it also has Piper wings. The plane is French (based in France). Here are a couple of links to some pages with some more photos: http://tagazous.free.fr/affichage.php?immat=F-PBGT http://www.flickr.com/photos/8221101@N02/with/3522085948/ I did a little Google searching, and found only French websites, and based on my weak skills in French, I believe the plane had an incident in 2001 where the left wheel didn't bother to accompany the plane on one flight. The pilot had to land with only the right wheel. The wheels are from a motorcycle, and the axle cracked, and snapped off upon take-off. The pilot managed to fly around, and attract attention to himself and his problem by wagging his wings. The fire department was called, and he flew around to burn off the fuel. When he landed, he eventually ground looped, without injury. Those wheels do look interesting. There was an email address for the owner of the plane (from a few years ago) on one of the websites I found - but since it's in France, you'd likely need to "parlez Francais" to get some more info from the owner. Bill C.[size=18][/size] Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265665#265665 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 30, 2009
Subject: Re: Does anybody know this plane?
From: Robert Ray <rray032003(at)gmail.com>
Nice! On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 11:54 PM, Bill Church wrote: > billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> > > Greg, > > You're right. That is a Grega with a large tail - in fact, it's the tail > off a J3 Piper Cub. I believe it also has Piper wings. The plane is French > (based in France). Here are a couple of links to some pages with some more > photos: > http://tagazous.free.fr/affichage.php?immat=F-PBGT > http://www.flickr.com/photos/8221101@N02/with/3522085948/ > > I did a little Google searching, and found only French websites, and based > on my weak skills in French, I believe the plane had an incident in 2001 > where the left wheel didn't bother to accompany the plane on one flight. The > pilot had to land with only the right wheel. The wheels are from a > motorcycle, and the axle cracked, and snapped off upon take-off. The pilot > managed to fly around, and attract attention to himself and his problem by > wagging his wings. The fire department was called, and he flew around to > burn off the fuel. When he landed, he eventually ground looped, without > injury. > > Those wheels do look interesting. There was an email address for the owner > of the plane (from a few years ago) on one of the websites I found - but > since it's in France, you'd likely need to "parlez Francais" to get some > more info from the owner. > > Bill C.[size=18][/size] > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265665#265665 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 30, 2009
Subject: Re: Does anybody know this plane?
From: Robert Ray <rray032003(at)gmail.com>
I don't think the wings are Grega either, what airfoil is that? russell On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 12:12 AM, Robert Ray wrote: > Nice! > > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 11:54 PM, Bill Church wrote: > >> billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> >> >> Greg, >> >> You're right. That is a Grega with a large tail - in fact, it's the tail >> off a J3 Piper Cub. I believe it also has Piper wings. The plane is French >> (based in France). Here are a couple of links to some pages with some more >> photos: >> http://tagazous.free.fr/affichage.php?immat=F-PBGT >> http://www.flickr.com/photos/8221101@N02/with/3522085948/ >> >> I did a little Google searching, and found only French websites, and based >> on my weak skills in French, I believe the plane had an incident in 2001 >> where the left wheel didn't bother to accompany the plane on one flight. The >> pilot had to land with only the right wheel. The wheels are from a >> motorcycle, and the axle cracked, and snapped off upon take-off. The pilot >> managed to fly around, and attract attention to himself and his problem by >> wagging his wings. The fire department was called, and he flew around to >> burn off the fuel. When he landed, he eventually ground looped, without >> injury. >> >> Those wheels do look interesting. There was an email address for the owner >> of the plane (from a few years ago) on one of the websites I found - but >> since it's in France, you'd likely need to "parlez Francais" to get some >> more info from the owner. >> >> Bill C.[size=18][/size] >> >> >> >> >> Read this topic online here: >> >> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265665#265665 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Air Camper load rating
From: "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca>
Date: Sep 29, 2009
Russell, What on earth are you talking about? Aluminum struts rated for 23000 g's !!! I guess that would apply to ANY aircraft they get used on? I'm going to assume that you're joking around - but on the off-chance that you're not... Other Piet builders have successfully used the aluminum streamline struts sold by Carlson, but I think you're overstating the strength by "more than a bit". Here's a link to the company website: http://www.carlsonaircraft.com/struts.html I assume you're referring to the Ultimate strengths listed on the Carlson website. For starters, you want to base any design calculations on Yield strength as opposed to Ultimate strength (Yield is when the part will deform (stretch) and not return to it's original state, whereas Ultimate strength is when the strut snaps in two, and your wings fold up, and you plummet to the ground). Secondly, those strengths are listed in PSIs (pounds per square inch) not Gs - Believe it or not, those two things are NOT related. Bill C. PS No need to boil the aluminum struts. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265670#265670 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 30, 2009
Subject: Re: Air Camper load rating
From: Robert Ray <rray032003(at)gmail.com>
Yes I meant 2300 lbs not G's, have you heard anything negative about these struts? I was was planning on using the cabane struts they sell also. Russell On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 12:21 AM, Bill Church wrote: > billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> > > Russell, > What on earth are you talking about? > Aluminum struts rated for 23000 g's !!! > > I guess that would apply to ANY aircraft they get used on? > > I'm going to assume that you're joking around - but on the off-chance that > you're not... > > Other Piet builders have successfully used the aluminum streamline struts > sold by Carlson, but I think you're overstating the strength by "more than a > bit". > > Here's a link to the company website: > http://www.carlsonaircraft.com/struts.html > > I assume you're referring to the Ultimate strengths listed on the Carlson > website. For starters, you want to base any design calculations on Yield > strength as opposed to Ultimate strength (Yield is when the part will deform > (stretch) and not return to it's original state, whereas Ultimate strength > is when the strut snaps in two, and your wings fold up, and you plummet to > the ground). Secondly, those strengths are listed in PSIs (pounds per square > inch) not Gs - Believe it or not, those two things are NOT related. > > Bill C. > > PS No need to boil the aluminum struts. > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265670#265670 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 30, 2009
Subject: Re: Does anybody know this plane?
From: Robert Ray <rray032003(at)gmail.com>
I think I understand why the axle broke, the larger diameters wheels create more side loads than the smaller wheels normally used in that configuration. Where as the straight axle will take the larger diameter wheels the J-3 type landing gear will not take as well. The increased in diameter acts as a lever. However bush pilots used those large tires up north. Russell On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 12:13 AM, Robert Ray wrote: > I don't think the wings are Grega either, what airfoil is that? > > russell > > On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 12:12 AM, Robert Ray wrote: > >> Nice! >> >> >> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 11:54 PM, Bill Church wrote: >> >>> billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> >>> >>> Greg, >>> >>> You're right. That is a Grega with a large tail - in fact, it's the tail >>> off a J3 Piper Cub. I believe it also has Piper wings. The plane is French >>> (based in France). Here are a couple of links to some pages with some more >>> photos: >>> http://tagazous.free.fr/affichage.php?immat=F-PBGT >>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/8221101@N02/with/3522085948/ >>> >>> I did a little Google searching, and found only French websites, and >>> based on my weak skills in French, I believe the plane had an incident in >>> 2001 where the left wheel didn't bother to accompany the plane on one >>> flight. The pilot had to land with only the right wheel. The wheels are from >>> a motorcycle, and the axle cracked, and snapped off upon take-off. The pilot >>> managed to fly around, and attract attention to himself and his problem by >>> wagging his wings. The fire department was called, and he flew around to >>> burn off the fuel. When he landed, he eventually ground looped, without >>> injury. >>> >>> Those wheels do look interesting. There was an email address for the >>> owner of the plane (from a few years ago) on one of the websites I found - >>> but since it's in France, you'd likely need to "parlez Francais" to get some >>> more info from the owner. >>> >>> Bill C.[size=18][/size] >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Read this topic online here: >>> >>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265665#265665 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 30, 2009
Subject: Re: these West Coast guys -- FUEL TANKS
From: Robert Ray <rray032003(at)gmail.com>
Makes me wonder if there is something you could coat epoxy lay up with to improve it's performance, I coated two motorcycles a 81 BMW gas tank and a Concours with POR-15 they claim that not even carb cleaner will break it down. So far they are holding up. russell On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 11:18 PM, Clif Dawson wrote: > > Like all the others have said, Vinylester. I didn't find it excessively > smelly > and the layup went quite smoothly. One thing though, get the resin that's > for laying up layers. There's a finishing resin that oozes out wax as it > cures. The guy at the fiberglass store called it "surfboard resin". > > If you haven't done this before it would be wise to do some practice > layup, particularely edges and corners! It doesn't have to be big, a few > inches in area is fine. The more rounded corners and edges the better. > > USE PLENTY OF RELEASE WAX ON THE PLUG!!! > > Clif > > Remember, every drip or blob in a cosmetic area is going to have to be > filed off! :-) > > > Clif, >> I am not asking for my own info, but for others who might be considering a >> fiberglass tank. Is there an epoxy and glass combo that will not only >> accommodate avgas and mogas, but mogas with ethanol (something we should >> avoid for other reasons, too)> Thanks, Tim in central TX >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 30, 2009
Subject: Re: Thanks Chris-- ! Mike Cuy Sketches and Pictures
From: Robert Ray <rray032003(at)gmail.com>
Micheal, Heck man I'll take a left over pork chop any time, may be biscuit with it! Russell On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 9:57 PM, Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC Aerospace Corporation] wrote: > Aerospace Corporation]" > > > For some who were interested in a CD of some of my chicken-scratch sketches > and detailed photos please don't > send me any money, stock options, or leftover pork chops but go to the site > that Chris Tracy has mentioned > below. > > What a great resource Chris ! I'm always learning something new when I > look at other people's photos that you > have graciously posted on your web site. > > Book mark this site and save money now ! I'm offering TWO of my sketch > CD's and photo CD's for the price of one now !!! Shipping is free too ! > > Let's see how many write to me now wanting to see if they can get a CD. > > Money says at least one, maybe two. > > Mike C. > > > _______________________________________ > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [ > owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of catdesigns(at)att.net[ > catdesigns(at)att.net] > Sent: Sunday, September 27, 2009 12:11 AM > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Mike Cuy Sketches and Pictures > > > I have added Mike Cuy's pictures and sketches to the website. If you are > like me and were inspired by Mike plane you will find the numerouse > pictures > and sketches Mike sent in to be really helpfull. I know I have found a > thing or two I was curious about. The pictures can be found here. > > http://westcoastpiet.com/mike_cuy_page_2.htm > > His sketches can be found here. > > http://westcoastpiet.com/design_sketches.htm > > Thanks Mike for taking the time to send the pictures. > > As always, anyone who wants to send pictures or information to include on > WestCoastPiet.com feel free to send them to me. > > Chris > Sacramento, CA > WestCoastPiet.com > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bentoncountycable.net>
Subject: Re: No RPM drop on mag check??
Date: Sep 30, 2009
Congrats Dan, sounds like your getting everything in order. Gene ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan Yocum" <yocum(at)fnal.gov> Sent: Monday, September 28, 2009 9:43 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: No RPM drop on mag check?? > > Just a quick note on this subject - during our flight on Thursday we > stopped in at friend's airfield and he lent me his digital rpm reader - > I don't recall the official name of it at the moment. > > I have to do some more methodical tests, but what I did see suggests > that the tachometer is low by about 11.4%. That is, at 1000RPM > indicated on the tachometer, the prop was actually spinning at 1140RPM. > So, at 2050RPM (which I do achieve when I lean it out) it's actually > spinning at around 2280. That's close enough to redline for my tastes. > > When Tres delivered the plane he mentioned that at one point in the past > the tach pegged itself at the high end. Turns out that some oil got up > inside the tachometer from the cable. He cleaned the tachometer up, but > apparently didn't recalibrate it. So, mystery solved on that one. > > Cheers, > Dan > > > Robert Ray wrote: >> Why don't you disconnect both mags all input and out put wiring taps, >> take an olmmeter and measure resistance across the coils, measure >> the resistance to ground hopfully infinity, if they don't match there >> it is. >> Or if they don't match with in say < or > 15% >> >> Russell >> >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 11:01 AM, Dan Yocum > > wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> tkreiner wrote: >> >> > >> >> Dan, >> >> Without fully understanding what's going on, and without an >> extensive knowledge of your engine, it's somewhat difficult to >> figure out what's going on. A few questions might inform the >> audience. >> >> Are the mags and ignition harnesses, & spark plugs - new, used, >> worn out? Explain their condition, as it might help. >> >> >> One mag is new in the last year. One plug is new 'cause the A&P >> broke the old one during the last Annual. The harness is probably >> the original from 1979 and probably before. >> >> >> >> How about the mechanical condition of the engine? Rebuilt? >> Describe. >> >> >> 400 SMOH, ~800 hour since new (estimated). Logs are incomplete from >> before 1965, hence the reason for the overhaul. One cylinder was >> cracked and replaced in '65 with "the same oversize." Compressions >> are all in the mid to high 70's. >> >> I sent out a sample of the oil for analysis and no red flags were >> found. >> >> This plane and engine has flown over 150 tach hours in the last 18 >> months and 50 hours in the 2 weeks leading up to Oshkosh! >> >> >> >> What fuel are you using? >> >> >> 100LL with one shot of Marvel Mystery Oil per 15 gallons. >> >> >> >> Perhaps there's no problem at all. Even though our expectation >> is that the engine SHOULD show an rpm drop, that is not always >> the case... On a plane I fly regularly, the entire ignition >> system was recently replaced, i.e., new mags, harnesses, plugs, >> and correctly timed. When the plane was put back into service, >> there was an imperceptible rpm drop. >> >> It turned out, with a near perfect ignition system, clean fuel, >> etc., the engine was burning so clean and completely that there >> was no discernible drop in rpm during mag check. >> >> >> That's what I'm leaning toward, too. When Tres flew it from >> California they flew it flat out as fast and lean as it would go for >> as long as possible. >> >> >> >> >> Hope this adds some insight. >> >> >> It does! I'm a glass half-full kind of guy but I like to make sure >> there aren't any holes in the glass, too. >> >> The fact that at least one other engine out there in the world >> exhibits the same sort of behaviour suggests that mine isn't >> completely alone. 2 data points are always better than 1 (but still >> not great...). >> >> Thanks, >> Dan >> >> >> -- >> Dan Yocum >> Fermilab 630.840.6509 >> yocum@fnal.gov , http://fermigrid.fnal.gov >> <http://fermigrid.fnal.gov/> >> Fermilab. Just zeros and ones. >> s List Un/Subscription, >> www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List" >> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List >> ronics.com/" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com >> Matt Dralle, List Admin. >> ==== >> >> >> >> >> * >> >> >> * > > -- > Dan Yocum > Fermilab 630.840.6509 > yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov > Fermilab. Just zeros and ones. > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 05:51:00 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 30, 2009
From: H RULE <harvey.rule(at)rogers.com>
Subject: Re: tenpol-List:electric engine
I guess I'll just have to wait for a stronger lighter battery to be invente d.Great stuff you figured out there though.=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A_________________ _______________=0AFrom: mike <bike.mike(at)comcast.net>=0ATo: pietenpol-list@m atronics.com=0ASent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 10:06:53 PM=0ASubject: RE: Pietenpol-List:electric engine=0A=0A=0AThat much power (300 Hp) would be s pectacularly awesome in a Piet...for a few minutes of flight time.- =0A(M ath is easier for me if we just go with 100 Hp, a more reasonable number fo r Piets, so that is what I use here initially.)=0AThe best energy storage d ensity of lithium-ion batteries these days-is around 200 W-hr/Kg, or abou t 0.12 Hp-Hr/Lb.- To get 100 Hp for one-hour would require about 850 Lb s of batteries (at an unattainable-100% efficiency).- =0AA Piet needs a bout 30-40 Hp to cruise straight and level at a relatively slow speed.- C onsider that two hours of gasoline (at 5 gph) is about 60 lbs.- I'm guess ing that the electric motor weighs something less than a 100 Hp aircraft mo tor so assume a motor that weighs 100 lb less than its internal combustion counterpart.- To cruise electrically for two hours, you would need about 600 Lb of lithium-ion batteries (with something more for takeoff).- Minus the motor and gas weight savings, that adds 440Lb to your existing takeoff weight.- With a pre-existing-650 Lb empty weight and 200 lbs of pilot, you have a 1300 Lb airplane.- That might upset the stress analysis guys, but a Piet is pretty strong.- And, with 300 Hp of takeoff power, 1300 lb will get off the ground right smartly.=0AHowever, every time you climb, yo u eat up cruising time.- =0A-=0AEveryone, please feel free to critique my reasoning.=0AMike Hardaway=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0AFr om: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list- server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of H RULE=0A>Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2 009 5:08 AM=0A>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com=0A>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-L ist:electric engine=0A>=0A>=0A>What do you think of putting this engine in a Piet?I peronally think it would be awsome!=0A>-=0A>=0A>=0A>WOW........ =0A>-=0A>Check this out.----=0A>www.opb.org/programs/ofg/videos/v ======== ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene Rambo" <generambo(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: Spar splice
Date: Sep 30, 2009
The old version of 43.13 said a splice had to be 10:1 minimum, 12:1 preferred. As it has been pointed out, the original plans for the center splice is not the best way to go although I suppose you could, it is an experimental after all. I am building a one piece wing. If you draw it out, using the proper-sized plates on both sides of the splice, a 12:1 splice won't work and still keep the splice plates out from under the cabane fittings as is also required under 43.13 (the splice is 12", and the splice plates are supposed to be 6" on either side of the splice line, making the whole thing 24" from end to end, and the cabane fittings are not that far apart) For this reason, I made my splice 10:1. This way, it is legal and keeps the splice plates away from the cabane fittings (10" splice, plates 5" either side of the splice line for a 20" total splice, the ends are about 1" from the cabane fittings). Gene ----- Original Message ----- From: helspersew(at)aol.com<mailto:helspersew(at)aol.com> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 7:34 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Spar splice Shad, AC43-13 was revised a few years ago, and before the revision the spar splice angle was always 12:1. I can't figure out why after many years it had to be increased. When I made the spar splices on my one-piece wing I referenced my old copy and made it 12:1. Oh well, I guess it will hold together. Dan Helsper Poplar Grove, IL. -----Original Message----- From: shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Mon, Sep 28, 2009 9:19 pm Subject: Pietenpol-List: Spar splice Acording to 43-13 spar splice needs to be at a 15:1 angle of the spar thickness. The length of the scarf would be 15 times 3/4(or 1 inch if you use 1inch spars) of an inch or 11 1/4 inches long on each side (spar half) of the joint. then a reinforcement plate should be placed over the splice. really you should look up ac43-13 online or buy a copy, there is a diagram in there that shows it better than I can explain it. There are a few other particulars in there. My advise is buy spar matrial the full length, scarf joints add weight, and lots of tedious precision work. If it were a repair to an exsisting airplane I would say ok splice it but this is a new airplane, so it would be worth the extra couple hundred bucks to not fuss with the splice. Just my 2 cents worth, Shad http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List m/Navigator?Pietenpol-List> http://www.matronics.com/contribution on> ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 30, 2009
From: H RULE <harvey.rule(at)rogers.com>
Subject: Re: tenpol-List:electric engine
One thing the guy mentioned in the video was the torque generated by the el ectric engine as compared to the gas engine.Perhaps a different prop of new er design than the old style might be of help here.I noticed on smaller mod el electric planes that the prop has quite a bite to it.Also consider just asking for 80 hp as in my plane instead of 100 hp.The problem in my case wo uld be that there is no place to plug in the batteries at the airfield.A sm all prop driven generater between the landing gear could generate power to charge as-I fly along adding to the cause.The weight of the engine and no gas tank and gas-is greatly diminished giving more room for the weight o f the batteries.Batterries could be placed in the wings as well.I don't car ry passengers so I could carry more batteries of the lithium type of coarse .I may be able to solar charge those batteries now that I think of it.Cover the whole top of the wing surface in solar chargers also adding to the cause as I fly along.What do you think?=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A________________ ________________=0AFrom: H RULE <harvey.rule(at)rogers.com>=0ATo: pietenpol-li st(at)matronics.com=0ASent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 7:17:43 AM=0ASubject : Re: Pietenpol-List:electric engine=0A=0A=0AI guess I'll just have to wait for a stronger lighter battery to be invented.Great stuff you figured out there though.=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0AFrom: mike < bike.mike(at)comcast.net>=0ATo: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com=0ASent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 10:06:53 PM=0ASubject: RE: Pietenpol-List:electric engin e=0A=0A=0AThat much power (300 Hp) would be spectacularly awesome in a Piet ...for a few minutes of flight time.- =0A(Math is easier for me if we jus t go with 100 Hp, a more reasonable number for Piets, so that is what I use here initially.)=0AThe best energy storage density of lithium-ion batterie s these days-is around 200 W-hr/Kg, or about 0.12 Hp-Hr/Lb.- To get 100 Hp for one-hour would require about 850 Lbs of batteries (at an unattain able-100% efficiency).- =0AA Piet needs about 30-40 Hp to cruise straig ht and level at a relatively slow speed.- Consider that two hours of gaso line (at 5 gph) is about 60 lbs.- I'm guessing that the electric motor we ighs something less than a 100 Hp aircraft motor so assume a motor that wei ghs 100 lb less than its internal combustion counterpart.- To cruise elec trically for two hours, you would need about 600 Lb of lithium-ion batterie s (with something more for takeoff).- Minus the motor and gas weight savi ngs, that adds 440Lb to your existing takeoff weight.- With a pre-existin g-650 Lb empty weight and 200 lbs of pilot, you have a 1300 Lb airplane. - That might upset the stress analysis guys, but a Piet is pretty strong. - And, with 300 Hp of takeoff power, 1300 lb will get off the ground righ t smartly.=0AHowever, every time you climb, you eat up cruising time.- =0A-=0AEveryone, please feel free to critique my reasoning.=0AMike Hardaw ay=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0AFrom: owner-pietenpol-list-se rver(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Be half Of H RULE=0A>Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 5:08 AM=0A>To: pietenpo l-list(at)matronics.com=0A>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List:electric engine=0A>=0A> =0A>What do you think of putting this engine in a Piet?I peronally think it would be awsome!=0A>-=0A>=0A>=0A>WOW........=0A>-=0A>Check this out. ----=0A>www.opb.org/programs/ofg/videos/view/56-Electric-Drag-Racin g=0A>=0A>=0A>>-
http://www.matronics.co://forums.matronics.com/" rel=nof ollow target=_blank>http://forums.matr --> http://www.matronics.com/Navig ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 30, 2009
From: airlion <airlion(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Vortex Generators
How wide should the dimple tape be, and where should it be applied on the wing and elevator? Cheers, Gardiner Mason ----- Original Message ---- From: Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov> Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:24:06 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators Gary, In the last BPA newsletter Bill Rewey talks about dimple tape and his experiences using it on his props (~10% increase in performance, quieter operation, less fuel burn, etc.). The page at http://www.dimpletape.com says you can put the stuff on your wings, too. It might be worth a try and it's not nearly as noticeable as VGs. There's something to this stuff - the following is a research paper on increasing the L/D (lift over drag) coefficient on a high performance sailplane by 7-11% in general and by up to 20% in specific speed regions by placing a deturbulator strip on the wing at the correct location. This deturbulator creates a "slip layer" a couple of microns thick which increases the efficiency of the wing: http://www.sinhatech.com/AIAA-2006.pdf Now, I'm not one to take food out of an honest man's mouth, but on a recent foray into a local sign making shop, I noticed that they sold dimpled adhesive backed vinyl in large rolls for quite a bit less than $4.95 per foot... Cheers, Dan tengulfromeo wrote: > > I recently sealed my elevator gap which improved control response. (I strongly recommend gap seals on ailerons, rudder and elevator on the Pietenpol). > Just for kicks this weekend I added vortex generators to the underside of my horizontal stabilizer and definitely noticed improved elevator authority on landing flare. > Crazy I know, and if they didn't look so darn noticeable and out of character for an antique, but still it has me thinking........has anyone had experience with vortex generators on the Piet wing? > Gary N10GR > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265239#265239 > > > > > > > > > > -- Dan Yocum Fermilab 630.840.6509 yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov Fermilab. Just zeros and ones. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 30, 2009
From: shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Wood testing to failure, a little off topic
Guys, I am not too worried about glue joints failing after a little friendl y competition at work.- Me and another guy had a contest to see who could build a stronger bridge out of toungue depressors.- It had to span 12" a nd we hung the weight off the botom of the bridges.- Only glue we could u se was epoxy, just 30 toungue depressors, and 5 min epoxy.- My 1st bridge held 95 lbs (just a quick throw togeather), his held 195lbs.- Well not t o be out done I built another and tested it yesterday and it held 450lbs, a nd broke at 500lbs.- The relivance here to piets is out of all 3 bridges not one glue joint failure, and popcickle sticks even feel kind of "waxy" a nd smooth.- Rember, gluejonts are strongest in shear loads, weakest in pe el, and tension loads.- It made me feel-even better about wooden airpla nes and T-88. - Shad=0A=0A=0A ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 30, 2009
From: shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Spar splice
Dan, I doubt very many spars have been splice repaired since the revision a ny how.- Even 12:1 ratio is a very big glue joint.- The scarf joint in the plans from top to bottom with a nail in each side still scares me thoug h.- But I guess it works, and the cabanes carry most of the load there an y how.- I guess people from the good'ol'days Knew how to build and test t heir creations to their satisfaction. - Shad =0A=0A=0A ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 30, 2009
From: Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov>
Subject: Re: Vortex Generators
Here's the picture I was referring to: http://westcoastpiet.com/images/Bill Rewey/IMG_0391.JPG Cheers, Dan Dan Yocum wrote: > There are pictures of the dimple tape applied on Bill's Piet on the > westcoastpiet.com web site and the original Sport Aviation article is on > the dimpletape.com page which shows pictures, too. > > I'd guesstimate that the tape is 1" wide (count the holes) and the > article says to apply it where the airfoil cord is thickest. > > Dan > > > airlion wrote: >> >> How wide should the dimple tape be, and where should it be applied on >> the wing and elevator? Cheers, Gardiner Mason >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ---- >> From: Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov> >> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >> Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:24:06 PM >> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators >> >> >> Gary, >> >> In the last BPA newsletter Bill Rewey talks about dimple tape and his >> experiences using it on his props (~10% increase in performance, >> quieter operation, less fuel burn, etc.). >> >> The page at http://www.dimpletape.com says you can put the stuff on >> your wings, too. It might be worth a try and it's not nearly as >> noticeable as VGs. >> >> There's something to this stuff - the following is a research paper on >> increasing the L/D (lift over drag) coefficient on a high performance >> sailplane by 7-11% in general and by up to 20% in specific speed >> regions by placing a deturbulator strip on the wing at the correct >> location. This deturbulator creates a "slip layer" a couple of microns >> thick which increases the efficiency of the wing: >> >> http://www.sinhatech.com/AIAA-2006.pdf >> >> Now, I'm not one to take food out of an honest man's mouth, but on a >> recent foray into a local sign making shop, I noticed that they sold >> dimpled adhesive backed vinyl in large rolls for quite a bit less than >> $4.95 per foot... >> >> Cheers, >> Dan >> >> >> >> tengulfromeo wrote: >>> >>> I recently sealed my elevator gap which improved control response. (I >>> strongly recommend gap seals on ailerons, rudder and elevator on the >>> Pietenpol). Just for kicks this weekend I added vortex generators to >>> the underside of my horizontal stabilizer and definitely noticed >>> improved elevator authority on landing flare. Crazy I know, and if >>> they didn't look so darn noticeable and out of character for an >>> antique, but still it has me thinking........has anyone had >>> experience with vortex generators on the Piet wing? Gary N10GR >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Read this topic online here: >>> >>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265239#265239 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> -- Dan Yocum >> Fermilab 630.840.6509 >> yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov >> Fermilab. Just zeros and ones. >> >> >> >> >> > -- Dan Yocum Fermilab 630.840.6509 yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov Fermilab. Just zeros and ones. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 30, 2009
From: Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov>
Subject: Re: Vortex Generators
There are pictures of the dimple tape applied on Bill's Piet on the westcoastpiet.com web site and the original Sport Aviation article is on the dimpletape.com page which shows pictures, too. I'd guesstimate that the tape is 1" wide (count the holes) and the article says to apply it where the airfoil cord is thickest. Dan airlion wrote: > > How wide should the dimple tape be, and where should it be applied on the wing and elevator? Cheers, Gardiner Mason > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov> > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:24:06 PM > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators > > > Gary, > > In the last BPA newsletter Bill Rewey talks about dimple tape and his experiences using it on his props (~10% increase in performance, quieter operation, less fuel burn, etc.). > > The page at http://www.dimpletape.com says you can put the stuff on your wings, too. It might be worth a try and it's not nearly as noticeable as VGs. > > There's something to this stuff - the following is a research paper on increasing the L/D (lift over drag) coefficient on a high performance sailplane by 7-11% in general and by up to 20% in specific speed regions by placing a deturbulator strip on the wing at the correct location. This deturbulator creates a "slip layer" a couple of microns thick which increases the efficiency of the wing: > > http://www.sinhatech.com/AIAA-2006.pdf > > Now, I'm not one to take food out of an honest man's mouth, but on a recent foray into a local sign making shop, I noticed that they sold dimpled adhesive backed vinyl in large rolls for quite a bit less than $4.95 per foot... > > Cheers, > Dan > > > > tengulfromeo wrote: >> >> I recently sealed my elevator gap which improved control response. (I strongly recommend gap seals on ailerons, rudder and elevator on the Pietenpol). >> Just for kicks this weekend I added vortex generators to the underside of my horizontal stabilizer and definitely noticed improved elevator authority on landing flare. >> Crazy I know, and if they didn't look so darn noticeable and out of character for an antique, but still it has me thinking........has anyone had experience with vortex generators on the Piet wing? >> Gary N10GR >> >> >> >> >> Read this topic online here: >> >> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265239#265239 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > -- Dan Yocum > Fermilab 630.840.6509 > yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov > Fermilab. Just zeros and ones. > > > > > -- Dan Yocum Fermilab 630.840.6509 yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov Fermilab. Just zeros and ones. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dortch, Steven D MAJ NG NG NGB" <steven.d.dortch(at)us.army.mil>
Date: Sep 30, 2009
Subject: Re: tenpol-List:electric engine
I did some math on electric planes and looking at converting older systems (like a Piet or Bonanza) to use an electric engine. Purely amature since "I ain't no alectronic jenious!" but rather an infantryman. It came down to weight and speed. Electric motors tend to like higher RPMs. So they need a reduction and they tend to not like lower speeds. So the concept works better for a sleek little speedster like a sonex rather than a barn door like a Piet. I have a 1948 Bonanza and there the problem is not speed but rather the weight of the aircraft and the HP of the motor needed. Taking out the old engine and gas tanks provides about 450-500 pounds. Getting a light/strong electric motor is not hard. Getting enough batteries for enough range to be useable is the problem. Batteries are HEAVY. So putting enough batteries into the plane to get enough range would eat up all of my useable weight and even then the range would be marginal. The same applies to a piet as far as weight. If you look at the current electric planes they are very limited on weight carrying and range. Range is often 20 minutes to 1.5 hours. Not much reserve for any trip even just fun flying. Also there is not much potential for a quick turnaround due to recharge times. I love the idea of flying a much quieter airplane that does not pollute. I do think it is on the not too distant horizon but there will be adjustments. I am more than willing to be wrong on this subject. This was just my conclusions after discussions that I had with some electric motor gurus. Blue Skies, Steve D ----- Original Message ----- From: H RULE <harvey.rule(at)rogers.com> Date: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 7:48 Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List:electric engine > One thing the guy mentioned in the video was the torque generated > by the electric engine as compared to the gas engine.Perhaps a > different prop of newer design than the old style might be of help > here.I noticed on smaller model electric planes that the prop has > quite a bite to it.Also consider just asking for 80 hp as in my > plane instead of 100 hp.The problem in my case would be that there > is no place to plug in the batteries at the airfield.A small prop > driven generater between the landing gear could generate power to > charge asI fly along adding to the cause.The weight of the engine > and no gas tank and gasis greatly diminished giving more room for > the weight of the batteries.Batterries could be placed in the > wings as well.I don't carry passengers so I could carry more > batteries of the lithium type of coarse.I may be able to solar > charge those batteries now that I think of it.Cover the whole top > of the wing surface in solar chargers also adding to > the cause as I fly along.What do you think? > > > > > ________________________________ > From: H RULE < > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 7:17:43 AM > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List:electric engine > > > I guess I'll just have to wait for a stronger lighter battery to be invented.Great stuff you figured out there though. > > > > > ________________________________ > From: mike < > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 10:06:53 PM > Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List:electric engine > > > That much power (300 Hp) would be spectacularly awesome in a Piet...for a few minutes of flight time. > (Math is easier for me if we just go with 100 Hp, a more reasonable number for Piets, so that is what I use here initially.) > The best energy storage density of lithium-ion batteries these daysis around 200 W-hr/Kg, or about 0.12 Hp-Hr/Lb. To get 100 Hp for onehour would require about 850 Lbs of batteries (at an unattainable100% efficiency). > A Piet needs about 30-40 Hp to cruise straight and level at a relatively slow speed. Consider that two hours of gasoline (at 5 gph) is about 60 lbs. I'm guessing that the electric motor weighs something less than a 100 Hp aircraft motor so assume a motor that weighs 100 lb less than its internal combustion counterpart. To cruise electrically for two hours, you would need about 600 Lb of lithium-ion batteries (with something more for takeoff). Minus the motor and gas weight savings, that adds 440Lb to your existing takeoff weight. With a pre-existing650 Lb empty weight and 200 lbs of pilot, you have a 1300 Lb airplane. That might upset the stress analysis guys, but a Piet is pretty strong. And, with 300 Hp of takeoff power, 1300 lb will get off the ground right smartly. > However, every time you climb, you eat up cruising time. > > Everyone, please feel free to critique my reasoning. > Mike Hardaway > > > ________________________________ > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of H RULE > >Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 5:08 AM > >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List:electric engine > > > > > >What do you think of putting this engine in a Piet?I peronally think it would be awsome! > > > > > > > >WOW........ > > > >Check this out. > >www.opb.org/programs/ofg/videos/view/56-Electric-Drag-Racing > > > > > >>http://www.matronics.co://forums.matronics.com/" rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://forums.matr --> http://www.matronics.com/Navig ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 30, 2009
From: Tim Willis <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Vortex Generators/ Cub wings/ etc.
Answering some questions, not about dimple tape. Grega and Cub: The Grega plans call for Cub wings if available, otherwise the Grega ribs one makes from Graga plans look like BP's FC10 on the lower surface, and like a Clark Y or USA35b on the top surface. The Cub itself used a USA35b airfoil. VG placement: The instructions on VGs on wings typically have them placed at about 10 percent of the chord-- more or less that far back from the leading edge. Instructions vary. Tim in central TX -----Original Message----- >From: Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov> >Sent: Sep 29, 2009 10:24 PM >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators > > >Gary, > >In the last BPA newsletter Bill Rewey talks about dimple tape and his >experiences using it on his props (~10% increase in performance, quieter >operation, less fuel burn, etc.). > >The page at http://www.dimpletape.com says you can put the stuff on your >wings, too. It might be worth a try and it's not nearly as noticeable >as VGs. > >There's something to this stuff - the following is a research paper on >increasing the L/D (lift over drag) coefficient on a high performance >sailplane by 7-11% in general and by up to 20% in specific speed regions >by placing a deturbulator strip on the wing at the correct location. >This deturbulator creates a "slip layer" a couple of microns thick which >increases the efficiency of the wing: > >http://www.sinhatech.com/AIAA-2006.pdf > >Now, I'm not one to take food out of an honest man's mouth, but on a >recent foray into a local sign making shop, I noticed that they sold >dimpled adhesive backed vinyl in large rolls for quite a bit less than >$4.95 per foot... > >Cheers, >Dan > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 30, 2009
From: Ross Alexander <karbath1(at)yahoo.ca>
Subject: Re: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner
I guess you will have to send them direct to my email, as an attachment. Al l I saw was the horizontal stabilizer photo. Ross=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A__________ ______________________=0AFrom: "gwread(at)aol.com" <gwread(at)aol.com>=0ATo: piet enpol-list(at)matronics.com=0ASent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 9:50:10 PM=0AS ubject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner=0A=0AI att ached pictures of the package, showing the dimensions. Did they come throug h on the original email or do I need to post them somewhere?=0A=0A-----Orig inal Message-----=0AFrom: Ross Alexander <karbath1(at)yahoo.ca>=0ATo: pietenpo l-list(at)matronics.com=0ASent: Tue, Sep 29, 2009 8:47 pm=0ASubject: Re: Piete npol-List: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner=0A=0A=0A =0AI am not famili ar with this material called MD rubber weather seal. What store sells it? W hat are it's dimensions? Width, thickness, lengths? Appreciate any info. Th anx Ross=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0A From: Thomas Be rnie =0ATo: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com=0ASent: Tu esday, September 29, 2009 6:20:56 PM=0ASubject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner=0A=0AGuys, =0AAnother way is to use fabric wh en covering, but you can't take the elevators off without cutting them.=0AR egards,=0ATom=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AOn Sep 29, 2009, at 3:42 PM, gwread(at)aol.com wro te:=0A=0A>=0A>>=0A>=0A>>I used 3/8" M-D rubber weather seal. I have attache d a pixture of the package that you can pick up at your local big box home improvement center. I just used the stick surface it came with as I wasnt s ure I would like the results but it worked! Also a picture of the end resul t. Gap sealed.=0A>I also included a picture of "Rocky" with the Broadhead b anner my wife won at the Brodhead fly in this year=0A>Gary=0A>N10GR=0A>=0A> >-----Original Message-----=0A>>From: Ross Alexander <karbath1(at)yahoo.ca>=0A >>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com=0A>>Sent: Mon, Sep 28, 2009 9:52 pm=0A>> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators=0A>=0A>=0A>>=0A>>=0A>How did you sealo the gaps on the vertical and horizontal stabilizer? Duct tape or what would you suggest. Ross in Orangeville, Ontario, Canada C-FTJM=0A>=0A >=0A>=0A>=0A________________________________=0A From: tengulfromeo <gwread@ aol.com>=0A>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com=0A>Sent: Sunday, September 27, 2009 7:04:50 PM=0A>Subject: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators=0A>=0A>>--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "tengulfromeo" =0A>=0A>>I recently sealed my elevator gap which improved control response. (I strong ly recommend gap seals on ailerons, rudder and elevator on the Pietenpol). =0A>=0A>>Just for kicks this weekend I added vortex generators to the under side of my horizontal stabilizer and definitely noticed improved elevator a uthority on landing flare. =0A>=0A>>Crazy I know, and if they didn't look s o darn noticeable and out of character for an antique, but still it has me thinking........has anyone had experience with vortex generators on the Pie t wing? =0A>=0A>>Gary =0A>>N10GR=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>>Read this topic online here:=0A>=0A>http://forums.matronics.com/vsp; --> http://www.matronics.com /Navigator?Pietenpol-List=0A>>_ref="http://forums.matronics.com" target ="_blank">http://forums.matronibsp; Thank you for your generous nbsp; -Matt Dralle, List Admin.=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A> >=0A>=0A____________ ____________________=0A =0A>Yahoo! Canada Toolbar : Search from anywhere on the web and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now!< IMG00307.jpg>=0A=0A________________________________=0A Instan t message from any web browser! Try the new Yahoo! Canada Messenger for the Web BETA =0A=0A=0A __________________________________________________ ________________=0AThe new Internet Explorer=AE 8 - Faster, safer, easier. Optimized for Yahoo! Get it Now for Free! at http://downloads.yahoo.com/c a/internetexplorer/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "mike" <bike.mike(at)comcast.net>
Subject: tenpol-List:electric engine
Date: Sep 30, 2009
Power is the product of torque times rotational velocity. It takes a certain amount of power to maintain a particular flight condition, whether the power comes at high rpm on a small prop or low rpm on a big one. Efficiency, which is measured by how much comes out vs how much is put in, is affected a lot by rpm vs. torque, but it is flight conditions that dictate long prop slow or short prop fast. A Piet at 60 mph can fly quite well on a long prop at low rpm but an RV-4 at 200 mph rpm cannot. The solar panels on top of the wing would, of course, add some weight but would help recharging. However, the wind-driven generator idea is a no-go. It takes more power to drag it through the air than you get out of it in electricity. The example I used earlier gets 1300# without a passenger, adding a flying buddy would make for a 1500# or so takeoff weight. You might save a few lb by sizing for a smaller motor, but not enough to obviate the need for takeoff power to get 1200-1300# off the ground. What really makes the electric airplane a possibility is reduction in drag (not a Piet's long suit). There are some really clean and light airplanes that take only a few horsepower to maintain straight and level flight. Motor gliders seem to be the reasonable focus for electrification and do well with much less battery weight than we would need in a Piet. Mike Hardaway _____ From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of H RULE Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 5:27 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List:electric engine One thing the guy mentioned in the video was the torque generated by the electric engine as compared to the gas engine.Perhaps a different prop of newer design than the old style might be of help here.I noticed on smaller model electric planes that the prop has quite a bite to it.Also consider just asking for 80 hp as in my plane instead of 100 hp.The problem in my case would be that there is no place to plug in the batteries at the airfield.A small prop driven generater between the landing gear could generate power to charge as I fly along adding to the cause.The weight of the engine and no gas tank and gas is greatly diminished giving more room for the weight of the batteries.Batterries could be placed in the wings as well.I don't carry passengers so I could carry more batteries of the lithium type of coarse.I may be able to solar charge those batteries now that I think of it.Cover the whole top of the wing surface in solar chargers also adding to the cause as I fly along.What do you think? _____ From: H RULE <harvey.rule(at)rogers.com> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 7:17:43 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List:electric engine I guess I'll just have to wait for a stronger lighter battery to be invented.Great stuff you figured out there though. _____ From: mike <bike.mike(at)comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 10:06:53 PM Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List:electric engine That much power (300 Hp) would be spectacularly awesome in a Piet...for a few minutes of flight time. (Math is easier for me if we just go with 100 Hp, a more reasonable number for Piets, so that is what I use here initially.) The best energy storage density of lithium-ion batteries these days is around 200 W-hr/Kg, or about 0.12 Hp-Hr/Lb. To get 100 Hp for one hour would require about 850 Lbs of batteries (at an unattainable 100% efficiency). A Piet needs about 30-40 Hp to cruise straight and level at a relatively slow speed. Consider that two hours of gasoline (at 5 gph) is about 60 lbs. I'm guessing that the electric motor weighs something less than a 100 Hp aircraft motor so assume a motor that weighs 100 lb less than its internal combustion counterpart. To cruise electrically for two hours, you would need about 600 Lb of lithium-ion batteries (with something more for takeoff). Minus the motor and gas weight savings, that adds 440Lb to your existing takeoff weight. With a pre-existing 650 Lb empty weight and 200 lbs of pilot, you have a 1300 Lb airplane. That might upset the stress analysis guys, but a Piet is pretty strong. And, with 300 Hp of takeoff power, 1300 lb will get off the ground right smartly. However, every time you climb, you eat up cruising time. Everyone, please feel free to critique my reasoning. Mike Hardaway _____ From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of H RULE Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 5:08 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List:electric engine What do you think of putting this engine in a Piet?I peronally think it would be awsome! WOW........ Check this out. www.opb.org/programs/ofg/videos/view/56-Electric-Drag-Racing http://www.matronics.co://forums.matronics.com/" rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://forums.matr --> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: John Hofmann <jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc.com>
Subject: Re: Vortex Generators/ Cub wings/ etc.
Date: Sep 30, 2009
Here are a couple of shots that show the VGs on my Cub. -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 Sep 30, 2009, at 10:21 AM, Tim Willis wrote: > > > > Answering some questions, not about dimple tape. > > Grega and Cub: The Grega plans call for Cub wings if available, > otherwise the Grega ribs one makes from Graga plans look like BP's > FC10 on the lower surface, and like a Clark Y or USA35b on the top > surface. The Cub itself used a USA35b airfoil. > > VG placement: The instructions on VGs on wings typically have them > placed at about 10 percent of the chord-- more or less that far back > from the leading edge. Instructions vary. > > Tim in central TX > > -----Original Message----- >> From: Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov> >> Sent: Sep 29, 2009 10:24 PM >> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com >> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators >> >> >> Gary, >> >> In the last BPA newsletter Bill Rewey talks about dimple tape and his >> experiences using it on his props (~10% increase in performance, >> quieter >> operation, less fuel burn, etc.). >> >> The page at http://www.dimpletape.com says you can put the stuff on >> your >> wings, too. It might be worth a try and it's not nearly as >> noticeable >> as VGs. >> >> There's something to this stuff - the following is a research paper >> on >> increasing the L/D (lift over drag) coefficient on a high performance >> sailplane by 7-11% in general and by up to 20% in specific speed >> regions >> by placing a deturbulator strip on the wing at the correct location. >> This deturbulator creates a "slip layer" a couple of microns thick >> which >> increases the efficiency of the wing: >> >> http://www.sinhatech.com/AIAA-2006.pdf >> >> Now, I'm not one to take food out of an honest man's mouth, but on a >> recent foray into a local sign making shop, I noticed that they sold >> dimpled adhesive backed vinyl in large rolls for quite a bit less >> than >> $4.95 per foot... >> >> Cheers, >> Dan >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 30, 2009
From: Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu>
Subject: Re: Vortex Generators/ Cub wings/ etc.
Wow, those are a lot closer to the leading edge than mine. Mine are 6 inches back. Did installing the VGs change any speeds? -- Jeff Boatright "Now let's think about this..." ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner
From: "K5YAC" <hangar10(at)cox.net>
Date: Sep 30, 2009
Never mind the vortex generators... check out that banner! -------- Mark - working on wings Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265737#265737 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jack" <jack(at)textors.com>
Subject: Vortex Generators/ Cub wings/ etc.
Date: Sep 30, 2009
Hey John.if you forget the prop-lock on preflight those generators won't be necessary! :-) Jack Textor 29 SW 58th Drive Des Moines, IA 50312 www.textors.com _____ From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Hofmann Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 9:48 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators/ Cub wings/ etc. Here are a couple of shots that show the VGs on my Cub. -john- Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 10:35:00 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: John Hofmann <jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc.com>
Subject: Re: Vortex Generators/ Cub wings/ etc.
Date: Sep 30, 2009
Hi Jeff, They are forward! Here are my observations. When you sit in a Cub on the ground, with the birdcage and all the cabin around, if feels like a ridiculous angle. Given that, with the VGs I am able to climb and sustain a ridiculous angle as well. Stalls don't really seem to happen. It just kind of gets mushy, nods its head and loses altitude. There is no real break. I haven't spun it yet so not sure how those are affected. Now I am not the highest time Cub pilot in the world as I probably only have 60 hours in them. This is the fourth one I have flown and like Cubs (and all airplanes) each one is exactly the same --- they are all different. This had the VGs on it when purchased so I can't attest to the flying qualities before they were installed but I can match it against the 20 or so hours I have in other Cubs. Please also note that I don't really fly by airspeed indicator but how the airplane feels, sounds, reference points, etc. So, compared to the three other Cubs I have flown, the sweet spot on climb is 50 indicated compared to 60 indicated in the others. I cruise around 70 and that seems a bit low to me with an A-75 but it is a dirty old Cub with a 980 hour engine. I can approach like a rock at 40-45. The stall speed is placarded at 23 mph. I don't know how that number was attained. One thing I really like is in a gusty crosswind, I can horse it off the ground very quickly, establish my crab angle and continue out. I seem to be able to handle more of a crosswind that way. The only thing I really don't like is I have to fly the plane all the way to the hangar. The wing always seems to be close to flying. That may be my low time but I still pay a lot of attention to control position when taxiing in any sort of wind. Jeff, what do you think of yours and how does this compare? -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 Sep 30, 2009, at 11:36 AM, Jeff Boatright wrote: > > > > Wow, those are a lot closer to the leading edge than mine. Mine are > 6 inches back. Did installing the VGs change any speeds? > -- > > Jeff Boatright > "Now let's think about this..." > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: John Hofmann <jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc.com>
Subject: Re: Vortex Generators/ Cub wings/ etc.
Date: Sep 30, 2009
That is actually the new B&S pull starter I am working on :) 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 Sep 30, 2009, at 12:13 PM, Jack wrote: > Hey John=85if you forget the prop-lock on preflight those generators > won=92t be necessary! J > > Jack Textor > 29 SW 58th Drive > Des Moines, IA 50312 > www.textors.com > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner- > pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Hofmann > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 9:48 AM > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators/ Cub wings/ etc. > > Here are a couple of shots that show the VGs on my Cub. > > -john- > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > 09/30/09 10:35:00 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: John Hofmann <jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc.com>
Subject: Re: Vortex Generators/ Cub wings/ etc.
Date: Sep 30, 2009
One other think I forgot to mention. I seem to run out of elevator in the flare. That may be my stomach but I have heard this from other Cub drivers with VGs. There is a new set of tail VGs out that I am thinking of installing this Winter to see how they work. I have also lost five pounds so that may help. Almost a gallon of gas. A few pictures. Our own Jack Phillips and Glenn Thomas when I went to pick up the plane Ready for the big adventure from North Carolina to Wisconsin Virginia Tech off the wing and ready for the mountains Ground speed was 27 mph when this was taken. Mountains and clouds. "I DIDN'T LIKE IT MUCH!" Photo by J. Phillips. Me testing my civil war general beard. Reward at the end of the trip -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 Sep 30, 2009, at 12:54 PM, John Hofmann wrote: > Hi Jeff, > > They are forward! Here are my observations. > > When you sit in a Cub on the ground, with the birdcage and all the > cabin around, if feels like a ridiculous angle. Given that, with the > VGs I am able to climb and sustain a ridiculous angle as well. > Stalls don't really seem to happen. It just kind of gets mushy, nods > its head and loses altitude. There is no real break. I haven't spun > it yet so not sure how those are affected. > > Now I am not the highest time Cub pilot in the world as I probably > only have 60 hours in them. This is the fourth one I have flown and > like Cubs (and all airplanes) each one is exactly the same --- they > are all different. This had the VGs on it when purchased so I can't > attest to the flying qualities before they were installed but I can > match it against the 20 or so hours I have in other Cubs. Please > also note that I don't really fly by airspeed indicator but how the > airplane feels, sounds, reference points, etc. > > So, compared to the three other Cubs I have flown, the sweet spot on > climb is 50 indicated compared to 60 indicated in the others. I > cruise around 70 and that seems a bit low to me with an A-75 but it > is a dirty old Cub with a 980 hour engine. I can approach like a > rock at 40-45. The stall speed is placarded at 23 mph. I don't know > how that number was attained. One thing I really like is in a gusty > crosswind, I can horse it off the ground very quickly, establish my > crab angle and continue out. I seem to be able to handle more of a > crosswind that way. The only thing I really don't like is I have to > fly the plane all the way to the hangar. The wing always seems to be > close to flying. That may be my low time but I still pay a lot of > attention to control position when taxiing in any sort of wind. > > Jeff, what do you think of yours and how does this compare? > > -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 Sep 30, 2009, at 11:36 AM, Jeff Boatright wrote: > >> > >> >> Wow, those are a lot closer to the leading edge than mine. Mine are >> 6 inches back. Did installing the VGs change any speeds? >> -- >> >> Jeff Boatright >> "Now let's think about - The --> http:// >> www.matr &n - &nbs -- >> > http://www.matronics.com/co================ >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Michael McGowan" <shadetree(at)socket.net>
Subject: Re: Spar splice
Date: Sep 30, 2009
Would it not be acceptable to continue the splice plates further outbord so they also became the reinforcement plate under the cabane fittings? The actual splice would be away from the fittings, the plywood piece would be larger and stronger and the whole spar should be stronger. Also at the very center both the bending loads and shear loads are smallest. Mike going to buid a one piece wing ----- Original Message ----- From: Gene Rambo To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 7:07 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Spar splice The old version of 43.13 said a splice had to be 10:1 minimum, 12:1 preferred. As it has been pointed out, the original plans for the center splice is not the best way to go although I suppose you could, it is an experimental after all. I am building a one piece wing. If you draw it out, using the proper-sized plates on both sides of the splice, a 12:1 splice won't work and still keep the splice plates out from under the cabane fittings as is also required under 43.13 (the splice is 12", and the splice plates are supposed to be 6" on either side of the splice line, making the whole thing 24" from end to end, and the cabane fittings are not that far apart) For this reason, I made my splice 10:1. This way, it is legal and keeps the splice plates away from the cabane fittings (10" splice, plates 5" either side of the splice line for a 20" total splice, the ends are about 1" from the cabane fittings). Gene ----- Original Message ----- From: helspersew(at)aol.com To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 7:34 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Spar splice Shad, AC43-13 was revised a few years ago, and before the revision the spar splice angle was always 12:1. I can't figure out why after many years it had to be increased. When I made the spar splices on my one-piece wing I referenced my old copy and made it 12:1. Oh well, I guess it will hold together. Dan Helsper Poplar Grove, IL. -----Original Message----- From: shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Mon, Sep 28, 2009 9:19 pm Subject: Pietenpol-List: Spar splice Acording to 43-13 spar splice needs to be at a 15:1 angle of the spar thickness. The length of the scarf would be 15 times 3/4(or 1 inch if you use 1inch spars) of an inch or 11 1/4 inches long on each side (spar half) of the joint. then a reinforcement plate should be placed over the splice. really you should look up ac43-13 online or buy a copy, there is a diagram in there that shows it better than I can explain it. There are a few other particulars in there. My advise is buy spar matrial the full length, scarf joints add weight, and lots of tedious precision work. If it were a repair to an exsisting airplane I would say ok splice it but this is a new airplane, so it would be worth the extra couple hundred bucks to not fuss with the splice. Just my 2 cents worth, Shad title=http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.mat ronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Michael McGowan" <shadetree(at)socket.net>
Subject: Re: tenpol-List:electric engine
Date: Sep 30, 2009
Paul McCready did it with solar cells but he had a lot bigger wing to cover with the cells. Mike ----- Original Message ----- From: H RULE To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 6:17 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List:electric engine I guess I'll just have to wait for a stronger lighter battery to be invented.Great stuff you figured out there though. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- From: mike <bike.mike(at)comcast.net> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 10:06:53 PM Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List:electric engine That much power (300 Hp) would be spectacularly awesome in a Piet...for a few minutes of flight time. (Math is easier for me if we just go with 100 Hp, a more reasonable number for Piets, so that is what I use here initially.) The best energy storage density of lithium-ion batteries these days is around 200 W-hr/Kg, or about 0.12 Hp-Hr/Lb. To get 100 Hp for one hour would require about 850 Lbs of batteries (at an unattainable 100% efficiency). A Piet needs about 30-40 Hp to cruise straight and level at a relatively slow speed. Consider that two hours of gasoline (at 5 gph) is about 60 lbs. I'm guessing that the electric motor weighs something less than a 100 Hp aircraft motor so assume a motor that weighs 100 lb less than its internal combustion counterpart. To cruise electrically for two hours, you would need about 600 Lb of lithium-ion batteries (with something more for takeoff). Minus the motor and gas weight savings, that adds 440Lb to your existing takeoff weight. With a pre-existing 650 Lb empty weight and 200 lbs of pilot, you have a 1300 Lb airplane. That might upset the stress analysis guys, but a Piet is pretty strong. And, with 300 Hp of takeoff power, 1300 lb will get off the ground right smartly. However, every time you climb, you eat up cruising time. Everyone, please feel free to critique my reasoning. Mike Hardaway ------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of H RULE Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 5:08 AM To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List:electric engine What do you think of putting this engine in a Piet?I peronally think it would be awsome! WOW........ Check this out. www.opb.org/programs/ofg/videos/view/56-Electric-Drag-Racing http://www.matronics.co://forums.matronics.com/" rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://forums.matr --> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Wayne Bressler <wayne(at)taildraggersinc.com>
Subject: Re: tenpol-List:electric engine
Date: Sep 30, 2009
Steve, I appreciate your research on this topic. For me, the allure of electric flight is not environmental, it's purely financial. The dream would be to charge your aircraft using solar cells on the hangar roof and "fly for free". It will happen in my lifetime, and I will fly one. For reference, I'm 31. Don't get me wrong, boys, I still love the sound of an A-65 and the smell of burnt 100LL! But technology sure is cool, too! Wayne Bressler Jr. Taildraggers, Inc. taildraggersinc.com Sent from the phone that made the Blackberry obsolete. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Michael McGowan" <shadetree(at)socket.net>
Subject: Re: tenpol-List:electric engine
Date: Sep 30, 2009
The electric tractor conversions I am familar with use series wound motors which put out maximum torque at zero rpm. They are happy at low rpm. Mike ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dortch, Steven D MAJ NG NG NGB" <steven.d.dortch(at)us.army.mil> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 10:10 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List:electric engine I did some math on electric planes and looking at converting older systems (like a Piet or Bonanza) to use an electric engine. Purely amature since "I ain't no alectronic jenious!" but rather an infantryman. It came down to weight and speed. Electric motors tend to like higher RPMs. So they need a reduction and they tend to not like lower speeds. So the concept works better for a sleek little speedster like a sonex rather than a barn door like a Piet. I have a 1948 Bonanza and there the problem is not speed but rather the weight of the aircraft and the HP of the motor needed. Taking out the old engine and gas tanks provides about 450-500 pounds. Getting a light/strong electric motor is not hard. Getting enough batteries for enough range to be useable is the problem. Batteries are HEAVY. So putting enough batteries into the plane to get enough range would eat up all of my useable weight and even then the range would be marginal. The same applies to a piet as far as weight. If you look at the current electric planes they are very limited on weight carrying and range. Range is often 20 minutes to 1.5 hours. Not much reserve for any trip even just fun flying. Also there is not much potential for a quick turnaround due to recharge times. I love the idea of flying a much quieter airplane that does not pollute. I do think it is on the not too distant horizon but there will be adjustments. I am more than willing to be wrong on this subject. This was just my conclusions after discussions that I had with some electric motor gurus. Blue Skies, Steve D ----- Original Message ----- From: H RULE <harvey.rule(at)rogers.com> Date: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 7:48 Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List:electric engine > One thing the guy mentioned in the video was the torque generated > by the electric engine as compared to the gas engine.Perhaps a > different prop of newer design than the old style might be of help > here.I noticed on smaller model electric planes that the prop has > quite a bite to it.Also consider just asking for 80 hp as in my > plane instead of 100 hp.The problem in my case would be that there > is no place to plug in the batteries at the airfield.A small prop > driven generater between the landing gear could generate power to > charge as I fly along adding to the cause.The weight of the engine > and no gas tank and gas is greatly diminished giving more room for > the weight of the batteries.Batterries could be placed in the > wings as well.I don't carry passengers so I could carry more > batteries of the lithium type of coarse.I may be able to solar > charge those batteries now that I think of it.Cover the whole top > of the wing surface in solar chargers also adding to > the cause as I fly along.What do you think? > > > ________________________________ > From: H RULE < > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 7:17:43 AM > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List:electric engine > > > I guess I'll just have to wait for a stronger lighter battery to be > invented.Great stuff you figured out there though. > > > ________________________________ > From: mike < > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 10:06:53 PM > Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List:electric engine > > > That much power (300 Hp) would be spectacularly awesome in a Piet...for a > few minutes of flight time. > (Math is easier for me if we just go with 100 Hp, a more reasonable number > for Piets, so that is what I use here initially.) > The best energy storage density of lithium-ion batteries these days is > around 200 W-hr/Kg, or about 0.12 Hp-Hr/Lb. To get 100 Hp for one hour > would require about 850 Lbs of batteries (at an unattainable 100% > efficiency). > A Piet needs about 30-40 Hp to cruise straight and level at a relatively > slow speed. Consider that two hours of gasoline (at 5 gph) is about 60 > lbs. I'm guessing that the electric motor weighs something less than a 100 > Hp aircraft motor so assume a motor that weighs 100 lb less than its > internal combustion counterpart. To cruise electrically for two hours, you > would need about 600 Lb of lithium-ion batteries (with something more for > takeoff). Minus the motor and gas weight savings, that adds 440Lb to your > existing takeoff weight. With a pre-existing 650 Lb empty weight and 200 > lbs of pilot, you have a 1300 Lb airplane. That might upset the stress > analysis guys, but a Piet is pretty strong. And, with 300 Hp of takeoff > power, 1300 lb will get off the ground right smartly. > However, every time you climb, you eat up cruising time. > > Everyone, please feel free to critique my reasoning. > Mike Hardaway > > > ________________________________ > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of H RULE > >Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 5:08 AM > >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com > >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List:electric engine > > > > > >What do you think of putting this engine in a Piet?I peronally think it > >would be awsome! > > > > > > > >WOW........ > > > >Check this out. > >www.opb.org/programs/ofg/videos/view/56-Electric-Drag-Racing > > > > > >> http://www.matronics.co://forums.matronics.com/" rel=nofollow > >> target=_blank>http://forums.matr --> http://www.matronics.com/Navig ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gene Rambo" <generambo(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: Spar splice
Date: Sep 30, 2009
Well, first of all yes, the bending and shear loads are very low in the center of the one-piece wing. That is why the original splice probably worked fine, and most likely still would, although I would never splice it that way. There are a couple of reasons not to extend the splice plates under the cabane fittings. First, because 43.13 and prior practice specifically states that the plates shall not extend under any fitting. I've never seen anything say "unless you artificially extend the plates longer than required to make them go under a fitting." Second, it adds weight for no benefit whatsoever. The cabane fittings don't need plates under them, (even if they did, you would only be adding a plate on one side) and now the fitting has to be wider and the bolts longer (more weight) for no real reason. If you are talking about extending the plates the full width on BOTH sides of the spar, why not extend them all the way out to the wingtips? Not trying to be funny, but just stating that the same logic would apply. Remember, keep it light. You can add this or that "to make it a little stronger," when it does not need it, until it won't fly anymore. Gene ----- Original Message ----- From: Michael McGowan<mailto:shadetree(at)socket.net> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 3:11 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Spar splice Would it not be acceptable to continue the splice plates further outbord so they also became the reinforcement plate under the cabane fittings? The actual splice would be away from the fittings, the plywood piece would be larger and stronger and the whole spar should be stronger. Also at the very center both the bending loads and shear loads are smallest. Mike going to buid a one piece wing ----- Original Message ----- From: Gene Rambo<mailto:generambo(at)msn.com> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 7:07 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Spar splice The old version of 43.13 said a splice had to be 10:1 minimum, 12:1 preferred. As it has been pointed out, the original plans for the center splice is not the best way to go although I suppose you could, it is an experimental after all. I am building a one piece wing. If you draw it out, using the proper-sized plates on both sides of the splice, a 12:1 splice won't work and still keep the splice plates out from under the cabane fittings as is also required under 43.13 (the splice is 12", and the splice plates are supposed to be 6" on either side of the splice line, making the whole thing 24" from end to end, and the cabane fittings are not that far apart) For this reason, I made my splice 10:1. This way, it is legal and keeps the splice plates away from the cabane fittings (10" splice, plates 5" either side of the splice line for a 20" total splice, the ends are about 1" from the cabane fittings). Gene ----- Original Message ----- From: helspersew(at)aol.com<mailto:helspersew(at)aol.com> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 7:34 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Spar splice Shad, AC43-13 was revised a few years ago, and before the revision the spar splice angle was always 12:1. I can't figure out why after many years it had to be increased. When I made the spar splices on my one-piece wing I referenced my old copy and made it 12:1. Oh well, I guess it will hold together. Dan Helsper Poplar Grove, IL. -----Original Message----- From: shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Mon, Sep 28, 2009 9:19 pm Subject: Pietenpol-List: Spar splice Acording to 43-13 spar splice needs to be at a 15:1 angle of the spar thickness. The length of the scarf would be 15 times 3/4(or 1 inch if you use 1inch spars) of an inch or 11 1/4 inches long on each side (spar half) of the joint. then a reinforcement plate should be placed over the splice. really you should look up ac43-13 online or buy a copy, there is a diagram in there that shows it better than I can explain it. There are a few other particulars in there. My advise is buy spar matrial the full length, scarf joints add weight, and lots of tedious precision work. If it were a repair to an exsisting airplane I would say ok splice it but this is a new airplane, so it would be worth the extra couple hundred bucks to not fuss with the splice. Just my 2 cents worth, Shad title=http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.mat ronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com href="http://www.matronics.com/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 href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List m/Navigator?Pietenpol-List> http://www.matronics.com/contribution on> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "mike" <bike.mike(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Spar splice
Date: Sep 30, 2009
Right on. _____ From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gene Rambo [snip] Remember, keep it light. You can add this or that "to make it a little stronger," when it does not need it, until it won't fly anymore. Gene [snip] ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "mike" <bike.mike(at)comcast.net>
Subject: tenpol-List:electric engine
Date: Sep 30, 2009
When I was working for NASA, we flew McCready's Gossamer Penguin, the battery-powered predecessor to the Solar Challenger, out on Rogers Lake bed. The bird flew so slow that we could almost run alongside and it carried a cute-as-a-button ninety-pound pilot named Janice Brown for only a few minutes of flight. A huge wing and extremely light construction made for a plane that could hold straight and level on about one Hp. That was twenty-seven years ago, way back in the steady progression of motor and battery technology. Mike Hardaway _____ From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael McGowan Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 12:13 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List:electric engine Paul McCready did it with solar cells but he had a lot bigger wing to cover with the cells. Mike ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Michael McGowan" <shadetree(at)socket.net>
Subject: Re: Spar splice
Date: Sep 30, 2009
You're right Thanks Mike ----- Original Message ----- From: Gene Rambo To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 2:52 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Spar splice Well, first of all yes, the bending and shear loads are very low in the center of the one-piece wing. That is why the original splice probably worked fine, and most likely still would, although I would never splice it that way. There are a couple of reasons not to extend the splice plates under the cabane fittings. First, because 43.13 and prior practice specifically states that the plates shall not extend under any fitting. I've never seen anything say "unless you artificially extend the plates longer than required to make them go under a fitting." Second, it adds weight for no benefit whatsoever. The cabane fittings don't need plates under them, (even if they did, you would only be adding a plate on one side) and now the fitting has to be wider and the bolts longer (more weight) for no real reason. If you are talking about extending the plates the full width on BOTH sides of the spar, why not extend them all the way out to the wingtips? Not trying to be funny, but just stating that the same logic would apply. Remember, keep it light. You can add this or that "to make it a little stronger," when it does not need it, until it won't fly anymore. Gene ----- Original Message ----- From: Michael McGowan To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 3:11 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Spar splice Would it not be acceptable to continue the splice plates further outbord so they also became the reinforcement plate under the cabane fittings? The actual splice would be away from the fittings, the plywood piece would be larger and stronger and the whole spar should be stronger. Also at the very center both the bending loads and shear loads are smallest. Mike going to buid a one piece wing ----- Original Message ----- From: Gene Rambo To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 7:07 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Spar splice The old version of 43.13 said a splice had to be 10:1 minimum, 12:1 preferred. As it has been pointed out, the original plans for the center splice is not the best way to go although I suppose you could, it is an experimental after all. I am building a one piece wing. If you draw it out, using the proper-sized plates on both sides of the splice, a 12:1 splice won't work and still keep the splice plates out from under the cabane fittings as is also required under 43.13 (the splice is 12", and the splice plates are supposed to be 6" on either side of the splice line, making the whole thing 24" from end to end, and the cabane fittings are not that far apart) For this reason, I made my splice 10:1. This way, it is legal and keeps the splice plates away from the cabane fittings (10" splice, plates 5" either side of the splice line for a 20" total splice, the ends are about 1" from the cabane fittings). Gene ----- Original Message ----- From: helspersew(at)aol.com To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 7:34 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Spar splice Shad, AC43-13 was revised a few years ago, and before the revision the spar splice angle was always 12:1. I can't figure out why after many years it had to be increased. When I made the spar splices on my one-piece wing I referenced my old copy and made it 12:1. Oh well, I guess it will hold together. Dan Helsper Poplar Grove, IL. -----Original Message----- From: shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Mon, Sep 28, 2009 9:19 pm Subject: Pietenpol-List: Spar splice Acording to 43-13 spar splice needs to be at a 15:1 angle of the spar thickness. The length of the scarf would be 15 times 3/4(or 1 inch if you use 1inch spars) of an inch or 11 1/4 inches long on each side (spar half) of the joint. then a reinforcement plate should be placed over the splice. really you should look up ac43-13 online or buy a copy, there is a diagram in there that shows it better than I can explain it. There are a few other particulars in there. My advise is buy spar matrial the full length, scarf joints add weight, and lots of tedious precision work. If it were a repair to an exsisting airplane I would say ok splice it but this is a new airplane, so it would be worth the extra couple hundred bucks to not fuss with the splice. Just my 2 cents worth, Shad title=
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.mat ronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com href="http://www.matronics.com/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 href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c title=http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.mat ronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC Aerospace Corporation]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov>
Date: Sep 30, 2009
Subject: Thank goodness for Dee Mosher
Doc and Dee Mosher publish our Brodhead Pietenpol Association Newsletter. In the latest issue Dee outlined the amazing biography of her husband pilot/mechanic (and probably father and grandfather) and I want to congratulate Dee for twisting Doc's arm in allowing her to publish the MUCH deserved awards that Doc rec'd recently in the Fourth Quarter, 2009 Issue of the BPAN that I just read tonight. Normally at every Brodhead event I listen to new jokes that Doc has heard over the past year and try to surprise Doc with a few new ones of my own but tonight when I read the article that Dee published about Doc's bio and FAA awards it really set me back in my seat. I have the highest regards for Doc--despite all of the rations of baloney that we have joked about over the years. I am very grateful for your and Dee's dedication to producing and sending our BPAN newsletter out every four quarters and want to salute you on your "Forrest Gump of Aviation" article where Dee highlighted Doc's 1994 FAA Charles Taylor "Master Mechanic Award" (for having your A&P for more than 50 years) and just this past summer at Oshkosh for Doc receiving the Wright Brother's Master Pilot Award. Whereby both awards require "no actions or accidents logged against any certificates" We are very fortunate to have Doc and Dee putting up with us and publishing this fine newsletter four times a year. After all, wouldn't you think that Doc, at 84 might want to retire sometime ? (Dee is too young...she's 59) My favorite quote from Doc happened during Oshkosh 2009 when we were watching the Rutan/Branson White Knight II fly-by's one afternoon. Doc said: "boy, those guys sure are flying a nice, tight formation, aren't they ?" Mike C. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 30, 2009
From: Dave and Connie <dmatt(at)frontiernet.net>
Subject: Riblett 612 Leading Edge
Since I am thinking of restarting my project I started looking at the other airfoils. Looking at the plots of the Riblett airfoils they look to get taller in the leading edge quicker than the FC-10. For you guys building with the 612 airfoil - what are you doing about the leading edge? Do you use a taller piece of wood the same thickness as on the original (and gain a bunch of weight) or are you keeping the same height and a thinner piece (less weight but weaker)? Dave ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Elevator travel adjustment
Date: Sep 30, 2009
From: helspersew(at)aol.com
I seem to run out of elevator in the flare John, This was happening on my Aeronca for several years after I bought it. A friend of mine (IA) suggested I check the elevator stops per the data sheets. Sure enough it was set wrong, and once adjusted, it flared like a dream. Dan Helsper Poplar Grove, IL. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 30, 2009
From: santiago morete <moretesantiago(at)yahoo.com.ar>
Subject: Spar splice
Hello, - Mike, we did exactly what you suggest, with a 15:1 splice joint, but we are using 3/4" spars, so we needed the 1/8 plywood-plates under the cabane -fittings anyway.- There is nothing wrong-on doing it this way. Saludos - Santiago=0A=0A=0A Yahoo! Cocina=0A=0AEncontra las mejores recetas con Yahoo! Cocina.=0A=0A=0Ahttp://ar.mujer.yahoo.com/cocina/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 30, 2009
From: Ross Alexander <karbath1(at)yahoo.ca>
Subject: Re: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner
YES, I FOUND THE PHOTO'S IN THE NEXT EMAIL. GOT IT! HAVE BEEN TO HOME DEPOT AND FOUND SIMILAR MATERIAL. WILL GIVE IT A GO. THANKS AGAIN ROSS=0A=0A


September 25, 2009 - September 30, 2009

Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-ii