Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-kq
July 26, 2011 - August 14, 2011
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 1911 pusher, and piet |
| From: | "namrednos" <namrednos(at)yahoo.com> |
Here is a picture I took at Lee-Bottom last year. It helped me make up my mind
that I wanted to build a Piet. Where do you keep her, Indiana?
Scott
--------
Scott
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347775#347775
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com> |
Hi Larry,
Unfortunately Will did pass away. I believe about a year and a half ago. He was
a great guy. Too bad. I believe it was cancer. George Jenkins has his Piet
now. In Pennsylvania.
Don Emch
NX899DE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347776#347776
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charles Campbell" <cncampbell(at)windstream.net> |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Billy McCaskill" <billmz(at)cox.net>
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2011 12:15 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Report!
>
> Bill forgot to mention Dan Helsper and his beautiful Model A powered Piet
> being in attendance as well. This was a really great flyi-in this year.
> I didn't take nearly as many photos but I did spend a lot more time
> meeting and getting to know the good people on the list who make an event
> like this more of a reunion rather than just a bunch of nice airplanes
> showing up for a long weekend. Can't wait for next year!
>
> --------
> Billy McCaskill
> Urbana, IL
> tail section almost done, starting on ribs soon
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347763#347763
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charles Campbell" <cncampbell(at)windstream.net> |
Billy, I'm hoping that you will have another "new" Piet to look at next
year -- mine. I have just about finished the right wing, have all the tail
surfaces finished, and the fuselage is about 1/2 finished. Think I'll make
it? I certainly hope, if the plane is finished and the test hours flown
off, that I can arrange to be there next year. Chuck
----- Original Message -----
From: "Billy McCaskill" <billmz(at)cox.net>
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2011 12:15 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Report!
>
> Bill forgot to mention Dan Helsper and his beautiful Model A powered Piet
> being in attendance as well. This was a really great flyi-in this year.
> I didn't take nearly as many photos but I did spend a lot more time
> meeting and getting to know the good people on the list who make an event
> like this more of a reunion rather than just a bunch of nice airplanes
> showing up for a long weekend. Can't wait for next year!
>
> --------
> Billy McCaskill
> Urbana, IL
> tail section almost done, starting on ribs soon
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347763#347763
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 1911 pusher, and piet |
Scott, It is based at my place in Centerburg, OH.- I am very fortunate to
live on a grass airport community, it works out for Dad as well, no hangar
rent/ and an airplane in my back yard............now if I could only get m
y own airplane done.
-
Shad
--- On Tue, 7/26/11, namrednos wrote:
From: namrednos <namrednos(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: 1911 pusher, and piet
Date: Tuesday, July 26, 2011, 2:22 PM
Here is a picture I took at Lee-Bottom last year. It helped me make up my m
ind that I wanted to build a Piet. Where do you keep her, Indiana?
Scott
--------
Scott
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347775#347775
le, List Admin.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Abramson" <davea(at)symbolicdisplays.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 1911 pusher, and piet |
Hi Shad, do you know the story behind the 1911 pusher? Who built it, how
long it took, how it flys???? Love those old airplanes!!!
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of shad bell
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2011 1:36 PM
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: 1911 pusher, and piet
Scott, It is based at my place in Centerburg, OH. I am very
fortunate to live on a grass airport community, it works out for Dad as
well, no hangar rent/ and an airplane in my back yard............now if I
could only get my own airplane done.
Shad
--- On Tue, 7/26/11, namrednos wrote:
From: namrednos <namrednos(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: 1911 pusher, and piet
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Date: Tuesday, July 26, 2011, 2:22 PM
Here is a picture I took at Lee-Bottom last year. It helped me
make up my mind that I wanted to build a Piet. Where do you keep her,
Indiana?
Scott
--------
Scott
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=34http://forums.mat
- List Contribution Web Site; &nb;
http://www.=====================
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 1911 pusher, and piet |
| From: | "jarheadpilot82" <jarheadpilot82(at)hotmail.com> |
Dave,
here is their website-
--------
Semper Fi,
Terry Hand
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347795#347795
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Charvet <bencharvet(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron Pulley Mount |
As I remember, I made my brackets exactly from the prints on the plans,
and everything lined up fine. I used the Pietenpol airfoil and aileron
horns per the plans. Too bad you have to remake them, but when you do
be sure to add cable guides while you are at it. I ended up adding mine
through an inspection cover after the whole airplane was complete.
Ben Charvet
Titusville, Fl
Hoping to fly to Brodhead in 360 days
On 7/26/2011 12:08 PM, Michael Perez wrote:
> As mentioned in another post, I am re-making my pulley mounts. I was
> asked about some pictures, so here goes.
>
> I have not re-made them as of yet, but here are the originals. What I
> need to do with the new brackets is to bring the pulley angles closer
> towards each other, or flatten them out as from the mounted point of
> view.
>
> I am using the 612 airfoil...not sure if that requires the change in
> angle or not.
>
> The shown pulleys fit nicely within the wing, they would not have
> interfered with fabric installation, but just did not fit the cable
> angle off of the ailerons.
>
>
> Michael Perez
> Karetaker Aero
> www.karetakeraero.com
>
--
Ben Charvet, PharmD
Staff Pharmacist
Parrish Medical center
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | KM Heide CPO/FAAOP <kmheidecpo(at)yahoo.com> |
Members:
-
My pietenpol manual has the Landing Gear and Metal Fittings section. Is the
re suposed to be a ful size drawing in my plans? am I missing a plan or sup
pliment?
-
Needing to order the metal to make the vee fittings. Seeking thickness and
amount of material needed but can't read build manual small print.
-
KMHeide
Hawley, MN
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Fuel Tank Bending forms |
| From: | "Pieti Lowell" <Lowellcfrank(at)yahoo.com> |
Hi Gang:
Did anyone get to see the forms that I gave Doc.? These Maple blocks were cut to
fit the 612 airfoil and almost 3 inches thick. One clamps the precut Aluminum
between these blocks leaving 1/2" wide tab all the way around and with a hammer
turn the edges 90 Deg,, one left and one right . The strap clamps that were
there are used to hold the flat sheet around the ends, and welding will be very
easy and non warping, I had 4 tanks made this way.
I also left 2 cardboard rib forms that are marked to show where you punch the stitch
holes, 1 for the prop blast area with closer distant than the second one
2, balance of the stitching.When rolled on the surface of the wing, transfer
the marks, punch holes and with a strong light, the stitch is a one man job.
Pieti Lowell
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347826#347826
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Schreiber" <lmforge(at)earthlink.net> |
The only plans available are the ones in the manual. I used the drawings of the
fittings only as a guide, especially the fittings on the inside and outside parts
of the wooden gear legs. These fittings need to be matched to the actual
gear legs you construct. I don't recall what gage I used. I'll measure and repost
later today.
Rick Schreiber
----- Original Message -----
From: KM Heide CPO/FAAOP
Sent: 7/27/2011 1:42:45 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Landing gear
Members:
My pietenpol manual has the Landing Gear and Metal Fittings section. Is there suposed
to be a ful size drawing in my plans? am I missing a plan or suppliment?
Needing to order the metal to make the vee fittings. Seeking thickness and amount
of material needed but can't read build manual small print.
KMHeide
Hawley, MN
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron Pulley Mount |
Thanks Ben. I will be adding guides once the new hardware is correct.
To clarify, I am not saying the plans are wrong, I just messed mine up! Since I
made them once, doing them again should go a little quicker.
Michael Perez
Karetaker Aero
www.karetakeraero.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Landing gear |
| From: | "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> |
Ken,
I assume that when you say "the manual", you are referring to the 1932 Flying and
Glider Manual, and therefore you are asking about the straight axle, Jenny-style
gear. I agree that the tiny drawing in the EAA reprint is extremely difficult
to read, but there is a larger drawing available. The Pietenpol family offers
for sale a large scale drawing for the original landing gear. See this link,
and scroll down to Product#7:
http://www.pressenter.com/~apietenp/Product.html
Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347838#347838
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Brodhead pictures |
| From: | Ken Bickers <bickers.ken(at)gmail.com> |
Kevin just posted a bunch of photos from Brodhead 2011. You'll find
them at http://www.flickr.com/photos/coloradokevbot or on the
Pietenpol group in Facebook. We had fun. Thanks especially to Jack
for the great brat lunch on Friday and to all the Pietenpol drivers
for making the event possible. Cheers, Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Markle <jim_markle(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 1911 pusher, and piet |
Still is.....
-----Original Message-----
From: mark lee
Sent: Jul 27, 2011 6:10 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: 1911 pusher, and piet
Seems like there was a Pusher hanging in the Tulsa Airport many years ago.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 1911 pusher, and piet |
| From: | mark lee <mlmarkelee7(at)gmail.com> |
OK and here is where I'm really straining the old memory.Is that Tulsa hung
Curtis pusher built without a canard?Or if it has one isn't it a very
different model than the 1911 flying replica.Also in the 60s there was a
Ryan trainer at Harvey Young Airport overgrown with weeds.I wanted it so bad
I could taste it.I saved up enough money that I had a fair offer by the time
I was 15.My dad kept saying no.If nothing else I wanted to hang it in the
hay loft to get it out of the weather.That's the kind of memories that just
make me wonder"what if".
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Jim Markle wrote:
> jim_markle(at)mindspring.com>
>
> Still is.....
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: mark lee
>
> Sent: Jul 27, 2011 6:10 PM
>
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: 1911 pusher, and piet
>
>
> Seems like there was a Pusher hanging in the Tulsa Airport many years ago.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Brodhead pictures |
| From: | "bubbleboy" <scott.dawson3(at)bigpond.com> |
Thank you for posting the pics! I was curious as to find out more about the pic
I have attached. Is that a Piet and is it the front or rear cockpit? The control
stick doesnt go forward so it makes me think its the forward seat but a lot
of controls if it is?
I was looking at all the leg room!
Can anyone else fill me in on this one?
Scotty
--------
Tamworth, Australia
Building a Corvair Powered Pietenpol Air Camper
www.scottyspietenpol.com
Rudder, Vert stab, Elevators and Ribs built...Building Horizontal stab...
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347905#347905
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/5982485868_78b112c150_b_856.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "skipgadd(at)earthlink.net" <skipgadd(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Brodhead pictures |
Scotty, That is Bill Liimatainen's Sky Scout, beautiful one place Piet,
based at Brodhead.
Skip
> Can anyone else fill me in on this one?
>
> Scotty
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Brodhead pictures |
| From: | "bubbleboy" <scott.dawson3(at)bigpond.com> |
Thanks Skip...I was envious of all that leg room!
Scotty
--------
Tamworth, Australia
Building a Corvair Powered Pietenpol Air Camper
www.scottyspietenpol.com
Rudder, Vert stab, Elevators and Ribs built...Building Horizontal stab...
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347907#347907
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Parting out a Pietenpol |
| From: | "olflyr45" <wyliejohnson45(at)gmail.com> |
Fuselage frame, ready to cover. $1,000.
Tail group, covered, $1200
Steerable tailwheel assembly, $500
Miscellaneous small pieces
All this came from a flying airplane with about 200 hrs on it.
(865) 963-6978
wyliejohnson45(at)gmail.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347909#347909
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 1911 pusher, and piet |
| From: | "jarheadpilot82" <jarheadpilot82(at)hotmail.com> |
Here is a link to a very good discussion by Bob Coolbaugh of the flying characteristics
of the 1911 Curtiss Pusher-
--------
Semper Fi,
Terry Hand
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347921#347921
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Woodflier(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Home from Brodhead and OSH |
I touched down at Twin Rivers Airstrip in Glasgow, VA yesterday about 4
p.m. The flight home was about 12 hours total from Oshkosh, with an overnight
in Marion, IN. Weather was beautiful for the entire flight, but I hear I
left some messy stuff in OSH that came in yesterday (Wednesday) morning. It
was great meeting a lot of you in person that I've felt like I've known
through the list for years. Dan, Kevin and Shelly, John, Shad, Gary - Boothe
and Bell, Rob, Bill, Greg and a lot of others I look forward to seeing next
year, though I probably won't be flying the Piet in again for a few years
until my butt heals. Many thanks to Jack Phillips for the use of his prop and
his help in getting Nine Mike Lima airborne again after the gear trouble.
I think die springs are definitely in the works.
Thanks also to Jeff who got Jack and me primo parking for our Piets at
Oshkosh right next to the Brown Gate. That was a thrill. Good luck with you
project and let me know if I can be of any help as you progress.
Blue Skies to all of you.
Matt Paxton
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Pusher pix from Valpo, IN |
| From: | James Haklin <jhaklin(at)gmail.com> |
Sorry this took so long to send. New laptop--needed different driver to
download pix. Hope this gets through.
Jim H
Almost finished Piet at VPZ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov> |
| Subject: | video over Brodhead |
Hi all,
I took a short video while flying with the Black German, Dan Helsper,
over Brodhead this past weekend. Enjoy!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddUgZzWq0js
Dan
--
Dan Yocum
Fermilab 630.840.6509
yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: radial engine |
| From: | "xTrainwrecKx" <derek.brundage(at)gmail.com> |
This is so awesome... I want one!
Derek
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347940#347940
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 1911 pusher, and piet |
| From: | "ldmill" <lorin.miller(at)emerson.com> |
Here's another pic of a dfferent Pusher and Piet. Took this pic on the way to Gardner,
Kansas several months ago. The pusher is the only known flying replica
(5/8 scale) of a French built Voison. The Voison was responsible for the first
air-air victory ever in WW1. It shot down a German plane. The replica cruises
at 50mph and was scratch designed/built by Corey Butcher of State Center, Iowa
- using Smithsonian plans as a starting point - within 2 years start to finish.
It uses a Geo Metro 3 cylinder engine.
Lorin
--------
Lorin Miller
Waiex N81YX
GN-1 N30PP
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347941#347941
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc04042_349.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: video over Brodhead |
| From: | "aerocarjake" <flight.jake(at)gmail.com> |
Thanks for posting - it's beyond words and makes me pine for the day...
I guess that kind of "simple flight" experience is what draws us to the Piet......!
Wonderful....................
--------
Jake Schultz - curator,
Newport Way Air Museum (OK, it's just my home)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347947#347947
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: video over Brodhead |
Of course, I meant to say "The Black and Yellow German."
Glad you enjoyed it!
--
Dan Yocum
Fermilab 630.840.6509
yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Markle <jim_markle(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Few short Brodhead videos... |
http://youtu.be/vk8HL6R31TI
http://youtu.be/BcYw7h8kl3g
http://youtu.be/Hjk1-EUJZ48
More later. Enjoy.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Home from Brodhead and OSH |
| From: | "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> |
Good to hear that the return home was uneventful, Matt. I think you had your share
of drama at the beginning of your journey. And I must say it was a pleasure
to meet the man behind the inspirational series of articles from a few years
ago. I am sure that there are many other builders out there that were also inspired
by your writing.
Must have been quite a feeling of satisfaction to land your Piet at both Brodhead
and Oshkosh, after a decade of building and dreaming.
In case there are some who have not read Matt's series of articles yet, here are
the links:
http://www.avweb.com/news/homeblts/182611-1.html
http://www.avweb.com/news/homeblts/182612-1.html
http://www.avweb.com/news/homeblts/182613-1.html
http://www.avweb.com/news/homeblts/181622-1.html
http://www.avweb.com/news/homeblts/183301-1.html
Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347952#347952
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Few short Brodhead videos... |
| From: | "jarheadpilot82" <jarheadpilot82(at)hotmail.com> |
The videos look great! Thanks for uploading them. great motivation.
Speaking of videos, did anyone video the Saturday discussions? I think that it
was Jeff Boatright who uploaded them to Youtube from Brodhead 2010. I was just
wondering if it was going to happen for Brodhead 2011. If you (whoever it may
be) are working on it, and just have not uploaded them to Youtube, thanks in
advance from those of us who were unable to attend.
--------
Semper Fi,
Terry Hand
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347953#347953
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "skellytown flyer" <skellflyer1(at)yahoo.com> |
I know there was some discussion of a pull scale being brought to the big gathering.
did anyone ever get around to doing a comparison on the various planes with
it? that will be a fun and interesting article to read about I hope. I know
there was too much fun being had to devote a lot of time to it but just wondering.
Raymond
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347990#347990
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gboothe5" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
That would have been an interesting project, Raymond, but never happened.
The scales are now firmly in my possession (even if temporary), and I am
awaiting an appropriate time to run my flying contraption outside and do a
full throttle run-up (wife needs to be gone!). I don't know much about prop
thrust, and what it means in a test like this, but I am looking for
somewhere between 250-290 lbs.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of skellytown
flyer
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2011 6:28 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Thrust
I know there was some discussion of a pull scale being brought to the big
gathering. did anyone ever get around to doing a comparison on the various
planes with it? that will be a fun and interesting article to read about I
hope. I know there was too much fun being had to devote a lot of time to it
but just wondering. Raymond
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347990#347990
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Piet2112" <curtdm(at)gmail.com> |
Gary, Although it would be a pleasure to meet your bride when I visit, if
she's not there and you haven't done a full-throttle run-up, I'd be glad to
assist. Your neighbors will complain about the noise but they'll get over it.
Curt
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347994#347994
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dick N" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Contact Brodhead EAA chapter for me... |
Jake
I sent it off to Mike Weeden at Brodhead. If you need to get a hold of him
in the future his address is; blueleader(at)wekz.net
Dick N.
----- Original Message -----
From: "aerocarjake" <flight.jake(at)gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 10:47 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Contact Brodhead EAA chapter for me...
>
>
> Could someone at Brodhead please contact the Brodhead EAA chapter
> treasurer for me. I wrote them a modest check for their building campaign
> many months ago and right away got a nice thank you letter back - but the
> check has never been cashed....?!?!?!??
>
> I want to make sure the funds go to their new hangar project.....
>
> Thanks..........
>
> --------
> Jake Schultz - curator,
> Newport Way Air Museum (OK, it's just my home)
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347310#347310
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Piet Reunion 2012? |
| From: | Jeff Wilson <jlwilsonnn(at)yahoo.com> |
I know the reunion at Brodhead is usually always the weekend before Airventure
but because I need to plan a year in advance, I just want to verify that it is
indeed going to be the Thursday, Friday and Saturday of July 19, 20 and 21,
2012. Because with a little luck and spousal cooperation, I'll be flying a brand
new Pietenpol up to Brodhead and then on to Oshkosh next year.
Can anyone verify this for me?
Jeff Wilson
N899WT
St. Louis
Sent from my iPhone
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Silvius" <silvius(at)gwi.net> |
| Subject: | 2 Kiwi Piets with Toyota engines |
http://nzcivair.blogspot.com/2009/02/parasol-wings-at-ashburton.html
Aircamper ZK-PRB which was built by Evan and Penny Belworthy at Cust in
Canterbury. It was first registered on 26/6/97. It was originally
powered by a converted Ford Model A engine, then a converted Ford
Cortina engine, and now is powered by a converted Toyota Hilux engine.
ZK-JBF which is a customised Pietenpol Aircamper. It was registered on
16/6/06 to Andrew Fairhall at Blenhiem. It is also powered by a
converted Toyota Hilux engine.
Michael
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: Piet Reunion 2012? |
EAA says Airventure is July 23-29, 2012, so the Pietenpol Reunion will
be the 3 days prior:
http://www.eaa.org/calendar/eventdetail.aspx?id=7013
Cheers,
Dan
On 07/29/2011 11:25 AM, Jeff Wilson wrote:
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Jeff Wilson
>
> I know the reunion at Brodhead is usually always the weekend before Airventure
but because I need to plan a year in advance, I just want to verify that it
is indeed going to be the Thursday, Friday and Saturday of July 19, 20 and 21,
2012. Because with a little luck and spousal cooperation, I'll be flying a
brand new Pietenpol up to Brodhead and then on to Oshkosh next year.
>
> Can anyone verify this for me?
>
> Jeff Wilson
> N899WT
> St. Louis
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
--
Dan Yocum
Fermilab 630.840.6509
yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Charvet <bencharvet(at)gmail.com> |
After hearing all your posts last week about Brodhead, I planned out the
trip on my I-fly 700 gps. Took off this morning and pointed the nose at
320 degrees. When I turned around I was only 14 hrs 15 min from being
there. Sure hope to make it next year
--
Ben Charvet, PharmD
Staff Pharmacist
Parrish Medical center
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Brodhead Plans |
| From: | "namrednos" <namrednos(at)yahoo.com> |
Ben how do you like your Ifly 700. Is it big in the cockpit. Is it bright enough.
Is it better than the Anywhere Maps GPS
Thanks Scott
--------
Scott
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348024#348024
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 Kiwi Piets with Toyota engines |
Neat! Isn't the hilux engine the one that the Top Gear guys drowned in
the ocean, crashed through a camper, and ultimately dropped off a
building during a demolition and it survived?
On 07/29/2011 12:46 PM, Michael Silvius wrote:
> http://nzcivair.blogspot.com/2009/02/parasol-wings-at-ashburton.html
> Aircamper ZK-PRB which was built by Evan and Penny Belworthy at Cust in
> Canterbury. It was first registered on 26/6/97. It was originally
> powered by a converted Ford Model A engine, then a converted Ford
> Cortina engine, and now is powered by a converted Toyota Hilux engine.
> ZK-JBF which is a customised Pietenpol Aircamper. It was registered on
> 16/6/06 to Andrew Fairhall at Blenhiem. It is also powered by a
> converted Toyota Hilux engine.
> Michael
>
> *
>
>
> *
--
Dan Yocum
Fermilab 630.840.6509
yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Silvius" <silvius(at)gwi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 2 Kiwi Piets with Toyota engines |
Dan:
The one on Top Gear was the diesel vesion of the Tacoma/Hilux. Unfortunately
they never sold those in the US.
The photo of ZK-PRB shows a carb, so I suspect it is the venrable R-22
(gasoline) engine.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_y93A2MLIpKw/SZKGqT8PEiI/AAAAAAAAAGs/sIHoz1abOzI/s1600-h/IMG_1023.JPG
Michael
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Yocum" <yocum(at)fnal.gov>
> Neat! Isn't the hilux engine the one that the Top Gear guys drowned in
> the ocean, crashed through a camper, and ultimately dropped off a building
> during a demolition and it survived?
>
>
> On 07/29/2011 12:46 PM, Michael Silvius wrote:
>> http://nzcivair.blogspot.com/2009/02/parasol-wings-at-ashburton.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Boyer <boyerjrb(at)comcast.net> |
HI Gary,
What do you suppose the cost of getting my next door neighbor to be gone would
be? He is the Santa Rosa police chief; most of my other neighbors are older and
can't hear anyway!
I wonder if Tom is a computer guru?
Cheers,
Jim B.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gboothe5" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
Well, Jim, I=99m no expert, but I am told that Police Chiefs come
at a higher pricepossibly more than a Piet builder could
afford. Maybe even more than an RV builder could afford. However, he
would never make it to Chief without developing a taste for scotch or
whiskey. A case of JD would do if he were a whisky drinker, but if
he=99s a scotch man, 1 bottle of =98Oban=99 Single
Malt Scotch would suffice. Jack Phillips will attest to that. Now you
know what goes on at =98The Cove.=99
Here=99s the good news, though.I=99m only doing a
full throttle run-up to test the pitch on my home made prop. You should
suffice with just a partial run-up
Gary
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jim
Boyer
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2011 3:16 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Thrust
HI Gary,
What do you suppose the cost of getting my next door neighbor to be gone
would be? He is the Santa Rosa police chief; most of my other neighbors
are older and can't hear anyway!
I wonder if Tom is a computer guru?
Cheers,
Jim B.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 2 Kiwi Piets with Toyota engines |
| From: | mark lee <mlmarkelee7(at)gmail.com> |
It's hard to get an idea of the prop length.Is that prop direct drive?
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 3:25 PM, Michael Silvius wrote:
>
> Dan:
>
> The one on Top Gear was the diesel vesion of the Tacoma/Hilux.
> Unfortunately they never sold those in the US.
> The photo of ZK-PRB shows a carb, so I suspect it is the venrable R-22
> (gasoline) engine.
> http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_**y93A2MLIpKw/SZKGqT8PEiI/**
> AAAAAAAAAGs/sIHoz1abOzI/s1600-**h/IMG_1023.JPG<http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_y93A2MLIpKw/SZKGqT8PEiI/AAAAAAAAAGs/sIHoz1abOzI/s1600-h/IMG_1023.JPG>
>
> Michael
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan Yocum" <yocum(at)fnal.gov>
>
>
> Neat! Isn't the hilux engine the one that the Top Gear guys drowned in
>> the ocean, crashed through a camper, and ultimately dropped off a building
>> during a demolition and it survived?
>>
>>
>>
>> On 07/29/2011 12:46 PM, Michael Silvius wrote:
>>
>>> http://nzcivair.blogspot.com/**2009/02/parasol-wings-at-**ashburton.html>
>>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | sentuchows(at)aol.com |
Hey Skip, Did Gary Barger make it up to Brodhead this year
.
??? Dave?
?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Charvet <bencharvet(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | I-Fly 700, was Brodhead Plans |
I have the GPS mounted via the suction cup provided to an aluminum plate
I fastened under the instrument panel. It is bright enough, as I have a
flop and not a cutout in my center section so its rarely in the sun. I
haven't played with an Anywhere Maps GPS, but I think the price of the
I-Fly is hard to beat. Of course you could argue that I won't be doing
all that many cross-countries, but handling a sectional in a Pietenpol
ain't much fun either.
Ben
On 7/29/2011 4:36 PM, namrednos wrote:
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "namrednos"
>
> Ben how do you like your Ifly 700. Is it big in the cockpit. Is it bright enough.
Is it better than the Anywhere Maps GPS
>
> Thanks Scott
>
> --------
> Scott
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348024#348024
>
>
--
Ben Charvet, PharmD
Staff Pharmacist
Parrish Medical center
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "skipgadd(at)earthlink.net" <skipgadd(at)earthlink.net> |
Dave, I talked to Gary about a week before Brodhead. He said It was too hot for
him this year. A lot of folks at Brodhead ask about him. He is almost a legend
there as the first year he went there, think it was 1991, he showed up about
10PM on his motor cycle from N Carolina and refused to be shown where to camp
until he saw a Pietenpol in person. I guess the Brodhead folks thought that was
kind of cool.
I heard your North End cook out was great.
Skip
----- Original Message -----
From:
Sent: 7/29/2011 7:34:15 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Hey Skip
Hey Skip, Did Gary Barger make it up to Brodhead this year
.
Dave
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Clif Dawson" <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca> |
Why don't you just ask him to help. It's an engine.
He's a guy. Tell him you'll help him build up one
for his lawn mower.
Clif
Confucius--"An inconvenience is an unrecognized opportunity."
Well, Jim, I=99m no expert, but I am told that Police Chiefs
come at a higher price However, he would never make it to Chief
without developing a taste for scotch or whiskey.
Gary
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Contact Brodhead EAA chapter for me... |
| From: | "aerocarjake" <flight.jake(at)gmail.com> |
Thanks Dick..... hope Paul and the guys at ROTEC were fun this year......
--------
Jake Schultz - curator,
Newport Way Air Museum (OK, it's just my home)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348055#348055
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Boyer <boyerjrb(at)comcast.net> |
Hi Gary,
I will have to try something line that.=C2- Tom is a Raiders fan and we a
re 49ers fans so have to be careful not to wear the wrong jerseys. Thought
I would invite him and his wife to a BBQ and then show him what I will be d
oing and enlist his help. A little scotch might be just the thing to convin
ce him.
I wondered what all the hooting and hollaring over there in the cove was ab
out. Jack must let his hair down and have had some good crank snapping comm
ents.
Cheers and good luck with the full power runup.
Jim B.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Boyer <boyerjrb(at)comcast.net> |
Hi Clif,
I wondered if one of the police cars engines is heavier than a model A?
We do have really good police presence in our neighborhood so might have to
have a BBQ that is more inclusive as my son-in-law is a recently retired f
ireman and several other neighbors are also fireman or policemen. Might get
them to block off the street for some=C2- taxi tests;=C2- or drag race
their cop cars!
Jim=C2- B.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Markle <jim_markle(at)mindspring.com> |
This a bit of what it's like for those if you that didn't make it this year.....
Heaven
http://youtu.be/O3E0uZHBpmM
More to come as I have time...
Enjoy
Jim in Pryor
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Lawrence Williams <lnawms(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | off topic queries |
Everybody: Larry is home from his trip to Brodhead. Piet did great, Ford did great,
Larry did great. All are glad to be home again!!
Gary Bell: please email me off line re: teardrops.
Rick Schreibner: please email me off line re: wood finishing.
Thanks to you all for another wonderful reunion at Brodhead. Got to see all of
you previous friends getting older and met some nice new friends.Adventures on
the road are still to be had and the Piet is the perfect vehicle in which to
have them. I was once again introduced to the real America and it's inhabitants.
Kindnesses were extended to me from many sources as a matter of course. It's
always nice to reconnect with good people and realize what a bogus outlook I
get watching the TV. Ah-h-h-h, I am rejuvenated and it makes me feel good all
over.
Larry W.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "carson" <carsonvella(at)yahoo.com.au> |
Hi
Has anyone used the Skytek struts and if so witch size?
Thanks
Carson
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348107#348107
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Groah <dskogrover(at)yahoo.com> |
Well,.... while everyone else had to run off to Brodhead, I got to work on
=0Amy airplane.- Here's what we have so far.- The wing center section i
s =0Abeing covered and the wings themselves will come down from the ceiling
=0Ato be covered in the near future.- I still have a lot to do with the
=0Afuselage including putting the graphics on the side, but I'm working on
=0Ait. =0A=0AGary Boothe, Jim Boyer and the rest of the west coast builders
better get back to work or I'm going to get in the air first!=0A=0AMike Gr
oah=0ATulare CA
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: off topic queries |
| From: | "Billy McCaskill" <billmz(at)cox.net> |
Larry, it was great meeting you at Brodhead (nearly go to meet you at Frasca Field
in Urbana on your way up, but things didn't work out).
Just a personal observation- if TV is giving you a bogus outlook on life, watch
less TV and go fly more often. There's always time for TV on bad weather days
or in the winter.
do not archive
--------
Billy McCaskill
Urbana, IL
tail section almost done, starting on ribs soon
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348120#348120
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Jake's gorgeous engine-turning aluminum firewall results |
and
| From: | "broocya" <broocyatook(at)rediffmail.com> |
What is the best firewall for computers to use at home and protect the kids?
I need to install a good firewall system at home to protect the kids from all the
internet dangers. Which are the best ones? Are they free or do you have to
pay for them?
--------
who loves you
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348124#348124
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "xTrainwrecKx" <derek.brundage(at)gmail.com> |
Mike,
It is looking great! I really like the color and the wood finish. Just more inspiration
for me to get my butt home and start mine. Thanks buddy!
Very respectfully,
Derek
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348127#348127
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack" <jack(at)textors.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Jake's gorgeous engine-turning aluminum firewall |
results and
http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/security_essentials/default.aspx , works for
me.
Jack
DSM
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of broocya
Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2011 1:22 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Jake's gorgeous engine-turning aluminum
firewall results and
What is the best firewall for computers to use at home and protect the kids?
I need to install a good firewall system at home to protect the kids from
all the internet dangers. Which are the best ones? Are they free or do you
have to pay for them?
--------
who loves you
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348124#348124
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: skytek struts |
| From: | "carson" <carsonvella(at)yahoo.com.au> |
sorry guys stupid question,I have searched and found that a few people have used
them,but none of the posts really say what size has been used the large ones
or small ones,
I think the small ones would be ok but not sure
Any info would be great
Carson
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348132#348132
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: skytek struts |
| From: | helspersew(at)aol.com |
Used the small ones.
Dan Helsper
Puryear, TN
Finally made it back home from OSH yesterday
-----Original Message-----
From: carson <carsonvella(at)yahoo.com.au>
Sent: Sun, Jul 31, 2011 5:53 am
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: skytek struts
sorry guys stupid question,I have searched and found that a few people have
used
hem,but none of the posts really say what size has been used the large ones
or
mall ones,
think the small ones would be ok but not sure
ny info would be great
arson
ead this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348132#348132
-= - The Pietenpol-List Email Forum -
-= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse
-= the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription,
-= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
-= Photoshare, and much much more:
-
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
-
-========================
-= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
-= Same great content also available via the Web Forums!
-
-= --> http://forums.matronics.com
-
-========================
-= - List Contribution Web Site -
-= Thank you for your generous support!
-= -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-========================
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: skytek struts |
| From: | "jarheadpilot82" <jarheadpilot82(at)hotmail.com> |
Carson,
I looked through the archives and found the following. Hope it helps-
________________________
----- Original Message -----
From: Doyle K. Combs
To: pietenpol-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 11:28 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Skytek struts
DJ ...where did you purchase the skytech strut material? Thanks
Doyle Combs
----- Original Message -----
From: "DJ Vegh"
To:
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Skytek struts
>
> I am using the skytek struts. I'm using the smaller size for the cabanes
> and the larger for ift struts.
>
> I did the math and figured that the smaller struts would be sufficient for
> lift struts but I wanted an extra factor of safety so I went witht he
larger
> struts.
>
> For the cabanes I inserted .75" x 1" 2024 T3 aluminum bar about 5" long
into
> the strut to terminate the ends see the photos here
>
> http://imagedv.com/aircamper/log/image-pages/03-30-03.htm
>
> For the lift strutsI will instert 1x1 4130 solid steel bar about 7" long
> into the lower ends so that I can tap and thread a hole for lift strut
> forks.
>
> They are probably a tad heavier than 4130 streamline but you can get all
the
> strut material for cabanes, lift and jury struts for about $290 and no
> welding is required.
>
> They make some nice jury strut streamline tube as well...
>
>
> DJ Vegh
> N74DV
> Mesa, AZ
> www.imagedv.com/aircamper
>
>
> -
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "rod wooller"
> To:
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Skytek struts
>
>
>
> >
> > A question (or two) for anyone who has used the 6061-T6 streamline lift
> > struts from Skytek.
> >
> > Is the "small" strut (2.44'x1.00") ok to use or do we have to up the
size
> > to the "large" strut seeing that it is 6061 and not steel, as in the
plans
> ?
> >
> > Have you used the same size for the lift struts and the cabanes ?
> >
> > Hope to meet plenty of Piet builders at Brodhead (and ask a lot more
> > questions).
> >
> > Rod Wooller
> > Chidlow
> > Australia
> >
_________________________________
--------
Semper Fi,
Terry Hand
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348136#348136
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: skytek struts |
| From: | "carson" <carsonvella(at)yahoo.com.au> |
Thanks for the replies now I am just as confused as one used small and one large.
Dan a question for you I think that I read that you also used a 7075 aluminum bar
threaded for the cub fork end,is that correct?
Someone else said that the fork into the ally was not a good idea,but I am thinking
that if it has worked for you and your aircraft flies it should work for
me,any details of what you used would be great
Thanks
Carson
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348138#348138
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: skytek struts |
| From: | "jarheadpilot82" <jarheadpilot82(at)hotmail.com> |
Carson,
Drinking my coffee on a Sunday morning, I went on an internet hunt and found the
following website. The Skytek website is up for sale, so I don't quite know
their status.
--------
Semper Fi,
Terry Hand
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348139#348139
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | alternative construction materials |
| From: | "letchik.ivan(at)gmail.com" <letchik.ivan(at)gmail.com> |
I was wondering if anyone has built a Pietenpol Air Camper or Sky Scout with
materials other than wood or less wood? I know that the Pietenpol was
designed to make use of wood in its construction. There is also a
supplemental plan drawn by Bernard Pietenpol which uses metal tubing to
construct the fuselage.
Has anyone built a Pietenpol using more metal than the original plans called
for? For example using light metal tubing for the tail and stabilizer
section, or perhaps aircraft grade aluminum for the wing ribs or spar, or
maybe sheet aluminum on the leading edge of the wing or in place of plywood
on the fuselage, or any other combination. Would the aircraft weigh more if
constructed in the way I just described? Could a more powerful engine
overcome the added weight of having used heavier construction materials? I
know the L4 / J3 Piper Cub is built with all metal structural components
covered with cloth skin and is powered by a 65 hp Continental engine, so I
am wondering if similar construction technique could be used on a Pietenpol?
Tom
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: alternative construction materials |
| From: | Ben Charvet <bencharvet(at)gmail.com> |
The J-3 and J-4 both originally had wooden spars and ribs. If you want an al
l metal airplane check out Wag-Aero for their plans/kits for cub like airpla
nes. There are several metal tube Piets oit there, but I havent heard of an
y metal wings
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 31, 2011, at 11:00 AM, "letchik.ivan(at)gmail.com" wrote:
>
> I was wondering if anyone has built a Pietenpol Air Camper or Sky Scout wi
th materials other than wood or less wood? I know that the Pietenpol was de
signed to make use of wood in its construction. There is also a supplementa
l plan drawn by Bernard Pietenpol which uses metal tubing to construct the f
uselage.
>
>
>
> Has anyone built a Pietenpol using more metal than the original plans call
ed for? For example using light metal tubing for the tail and stabilizer se
ction, or perhaps aircraft grade aluminum for the wing ribs or spar, or mayb
e sheet aluminum on the leading edge of the wing or in place of plywood on t
he fuselage, or any other combination. Would the aircraft weigh more if con
structed in the way I just described? Could a more powerful engine overcome
the added weight of having used heavier construction materials? I know the
L4 / J3 Piper Cub is built with all metal structural components covered wit
h cloth skin and is powered by a 65 hp Continental engine, so I am wondering
if similar construction technique could be used on a Pietenpol?
>
>
>
> Tom
>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "aerocarjake" <flight.jake(at)gmail.com> |
Wonderful plane on what looks like a wonderful afternoon....... now I need to quit
reading Matronics and get back down to my shop. thanks for the inspiration...!
--------
Jake Schultz - curator,
Newport Way Air Museum (OK, it's just my home)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348155#348155
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: off topic queries |
Larry, I forwarded your email to Dad, he is not on the list.- I am going
oveer to visit later today I will Give him your email add.- Glad to hear
you made it safe, We enjoyed catching up with friends and flying.
Untill next time,
-
Shad
--- On Sat, 7/30/11, Lawrence Williams wrote:
From: Lawrence Williams <lnawms(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: off topic queries
Date: Saturday, July 30, 2011, 4:26 PM
Everybody: Larry is home from his trip to Brodhead. Piet did great, Ford di
d great, Larry did great. All are glad to be home again!!
Gary Bell: please email me off line re: teardrops.
Rick Schreibner: please email me off line re: wood finishing.
Thanks to you all for another wonderful reunion at Brodhead. Got to see all
of you previous friends getting older and met some nice new friends. Adven
tures on the road are still to be had and the Piet is the perfect vehicle i
n which to have them. I was once again introduced to the real America and i
t's inhabitants. Kindnesses were extended to me from many sources as a matt
er of course. It's always nice to reconnect with good people and realize wh
at a bogus outlook I get watching the TV. Ah-h-h-h, I am rejuvenated and it
makes me feel good all over.
Larry W.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Boyer <boyerjrb(at)comcast.net> |
Wow Mike,
It is looking very good.=C2- I am still=C2- in=C2-South Dakota for an
other 2 to 3 weeks so I think I may not catch you. Gary should be home thou
gh but I think he is behind as well.
Oh well then you can fly up to help me and Gary finish our Piets right?
Cheers,
Jim B.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Boyer <boyerjrb(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: off topic queries |
Larry it was nice to finally meet you at Brodhead. Glad you had a great trip home
and hopefully will see you again next year.
Jim and Arlene
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: skytek struts |
| From: | mike Hardaway <bkemike(at)gmail.com> |
The SkyTek struts, spars, ribs and other products can be found here:
http://www.carlsonaircraft.com/index.shtml#comp
They appear to be alive and well.
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 4:27 AM, jarheadpilot82
wrote:
> jarheadpilot82(at)hotmail.com>
>
> Carson,
>
> I looked through the archives and found the following. Hope it helps-
>
> ________________________
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Doyle K. Combs
> To: pietenpol-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 11:28 AM
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Skytek struts
>
>
> DJ ...where did you purchase the skytech strut material? Thanks
>
> Doyle Combs
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "DJ Vegh"
> To:
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Skytek struts
>
>
> >
> > I am using the skytek struts. I'm using the smaller size for the
> cabanes
> > and the larger for ift struts.
> >
> > I did the math and figured that the smaller struts would be sufficient
> for
> > lift struts but I wanted an extra factor of safety so I went witht he
> larger
> > struts.
> >
> > For the cabanes I inserted .75" x 1" 2024 T3 aluminum bar about 5" long
> into
> > the strut to terminate the ends see the photos here
> >
> > http://imagedv.com/aircamper/log/image-pages/03-30-03.htm
> >
> > For the lift strutsI will instert 1x1 4130 solid steel bar about 7" long
> > into the lower ends so that I can tap and thread a hole for lift strut
> > forks.
> >
> > They are probably a tad heavier than 4130 streamline but you can get all
> the
> > strut material for cabanes, lift and jury struts for about $290 and no
> > welding is required.
> >
> > They make some nice jury strut streamline tube as well...
> >
> >
> > DJ Vegh
> > N74DV
> > Mesa, AZ
> > www.imagedv.com/aircamper
> >
> >
> > -
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "rod wooller"
> > To:
> > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Skytek struts
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > A question (or two) for anyone who has used the 6061-T6 streamline
> lift
> > > struts from Skytek.
> > >
> > > Is the "small" strut (2.44'x1.00") ok to use or do we have to up the
> size
> > > to the "large" strut seeing that it is 6061 and not steel, as in the
> plans
> > ?
> > >
> > > Have you used the same size for the lift struts and the cabanes ?
> > >
> > > Hope to meet plenty of Piet builders at Brodhead (and ask a lot more
> > > questions).
> > >
> > > Rod Wooller
> > > Chidlow
> > > Australia
> > >
>
> _________________________________
>
> --------
> Semper Fi,
>
> Terry Hand
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348136#348136
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: skytek struts |
| From: | "skellytown flyer" <skellflyer1(at)yahoo.com> |
Carson I tried to reply earlier to your email address that is shows but it came
back. I finished and am flying the plane D.J . started and it does have the aluminum
struts- front ones 3.130" and rear about 2.445" across the front to back
dimension.I did not stay exactly as he started with the end fittings. I don't
know how much I trust the tear out strength of the aluminum so I extended the
pull area by extending 5/8" wide 4130 strap onto the 2- 1/4" diameter through
bolts and on along the strut a few inches and used 3/16" pop rivets 3 to a
side on each end fitting for my peace of mind and because that is what a Rans
aircraft used to carry the loads and I figured they had done some fairly serious
research into it before marketing theirs.I had just assumed the struts were
the earlier Carlson ones but after seeing the post DJ showed it is apparently
th Skytek. they may have bought them out for all I know. Raymond
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348212#348212
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: skytek struts |
| From: | "carson" <carsonvella(at)yahoo.com.au> |
Thanks Raymond
I have spent hours now reading through all the posts,I am thinking that all the
methods used seem safe and strong enough and it is a matter of personal comfort
with the set up that I use.
Do you have any pictures of your setup?
Thanks
Carson
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348213#348213
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: skytek struts |
| From: | helspersew(at)aol.com |
Hi Carson,
Yes, I used a J-3 fork threaded into the 7075 aluminum insert, with the sma
ll Skyteck lift struts. My wings are still attached with no ill effects so
far after 25 flight hours. Please contact Larry Williams also for his input
. I unapologetically copied Larry's struts. I thought the same thing. If hi
s wings are still attached, I figured mine would be too.
Dan Helsper
Puryear, TN.
-----Original Message-----
From: carson <carsonvella(at)yahoo.com.au>
Sent: Sun, Jul 31, 2011 6:54 am
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: skytek struts
Thanks for the replies now I am just as confused as one used small and one
arge.
an a question for you I think that I read that you also used a 7075 aluminu
m
ar threaded for the cub fork end,is that correct?
omeone else said that the fork into the ally was not a good idea,but I am
hinking that if it has worked for you and your aircraft flies it should wor
k
or me,any details of what you used would be great
hanks
arson
ead this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348138#348138
-= - The Pietenpol-List Email Forum -
-= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse
-= the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription,
-= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
-= Photoshare, and much much more:
-
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
-
-========================
-= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
-= Same great content also available via the Web Forums!
-
-= --> http://forums.matronics.com
-
-========================
-= - List Contribution Web Site -
-= Thank you for your generous support!
-= -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-========================
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: skytek struts |
| From: | "skellytown flyer" <skellflyer1(at)yahoo.com> |
I'll look and see if I can find anything- I am about to pack up the laptop for
a trip out of state for work in the morning -I might find a picture somewhere
i could send to an email address.I just never tried to send any to the list and
really don't know how. Raymond
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348216#348216
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: skytek struts |
| From: | "skellytown flyer" <skellflyer1(at)yahoo.com> |
Well I found a few pictures of the installation I did with the straps I added-
if you send me your address I'll forward them- I'll try to attach them to this
but I am not sure if it will work. Raymond
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348218#348218
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/mvc_007f_170.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | GA 30-613.5 airfoil drawings. |
| From: | Jose Dominguez <jdominguez8826(at)comcast.net> |
Hy everyone:
Can anyone please give me the contact info for the gentleman selling copies of
the GA 30-613.5 airfoil drawing.
Thanks.
Sent from my iPad
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Clif Dawson" <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca> |
See! I knew you could do it! :-)
Don't forget the vids.
Oh, I think their engines a tad heavier. :-)
Clif
Hi Clif,
I wondered if one of the police cars engines is heavier than a model
A?
We do have really good police presence in our neighborhood so might
have to have a BBQ
block off the street for some taxi tests; or drag race their cop
cars!
Jim B.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: GA 30-613.5 airfoil drawings. |
| From: | "Billy McCaskill" <billmz(at)cox.net> |
If you search the archives of this list, the coordinates of the original Piet airfoil,
the Riblett 612 and the 613.5 are posted. It's a simple matter to graph
out the airfoil outline on some large paper with the coordinates provided.
--------
Billy McCaskill
Urbana, IL
tail section almost done, starting on ribs soon
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348232#348232
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "TOM STINEMETZE" <TOMS(at)mcpcity.com> |
OMG! I got a ride in FBG. (And that's pretty much all of the modern
speak that I know)
Kevin "Axel" Purtee made a huge deviation from his straight route back
from Oshkosh just for the purpose of giving me a ride AND IT WAS
MARVELOUS! I got some good video which I will upload once I figure out
how but in the meantime I just want to wax poetic about how great it is
to get to do something like this at my advanced age (61). It's about
all my poor heart could take. Unfortunately Axel and Shelly could not
stick around for the wineing and dining part (well home grown steak and
root beer anyway) since they had been held up by weather and had to make
up time. I will return the favor one of these days though!
Anyway, the density altitude here in McPherson was 5,000+ due to the
100+ temps and you know how much hotter it gets on a concrete ramp.
With my substantial mass added to a full tank of gas and Kevin's more
reasonable weight, FBG was pretty much at gross. In spite of that,
however, the mighty Corvair lifted us up with authority and performed
flawlessly throughout. What a nice airplane and a great couple! What a
shot in the arm!
That was my first flight in a Pietenpol, my first flight behind a
Corvair, and only my second flight in an open cockpit. I am STOKED as
the surfer dudes like to say.
And, by the way Axel, "I am not worthy."
Tom Stinemetze
McPherson, KS.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Yocum <yocum137(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | source for Eisemann magneto parts? |
Hi all,
Does anyone have a source for Eisemann mag parts? It seems that the
contactor spring has "sprung" on the left mag on N8031.
Thanks,
Dan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Perry Rhoads" <prhoads61(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: source for Eisemann magneto parts? |
Fresno Airparts
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Yocum" <yocum137(at)gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, August 01, 2011 9:45 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: source for Eisemann magneto parts?
>
> Hi all,
>
> Does anyone have a source for Eisemann mag parts? It seems that the
> contactor spring has "sprung" on the left mag on N8031.
>
> Thanks,
> Dan
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: source for Eisemann magneto parts? |
Thanks Perry - I just sent them an email through TAP, though I've heard
it's better just to call them. If I don't hear back in a day or so,
I'll give them a ring.
And, thanks again, for helping me get my engine running this year.
Say, why didn't you fly your Piet up this year?
Dan
On 08/01/2011 10:08 AM, Perry Rhoads wrote:
>
>
> Fresno Airparts
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan Yocum" <yocum137(at)gmail.com>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, August 01, 2011 9:45 AM
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: source for Eisemann magneto parts?
>
>
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Does anyone have a source for Eisemann mag parts? It seems that the
>> contactor spring has "sprung" on the left mag on N8031.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Dan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
Dan Yocum
Fermilab 630.840.6509
yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Wing Strut Cable Length Change |
Crew, I am wrapping up the work involved with attaching the wings and =0Awi
ng struts, running the aileron cables, making cable guides, etc. One =0Aof
the last steps prior to taking it all apart is to make my wing strut =0Asup
port cables. I have my wings angled back, but I have no idea if this =0Ais
in fact, where they will end up. (no engine right now)- I am =0Awondering
if I make the wing strut support cables now and latter end up =0Amoving th
e wing to a different set back angle, will the cables still =0Afit?- Look
ing at the geometry, it appears to me that the wings would =0Ahave to move
A LOT before the cables/turnbuckles would run out of travel=0A and need to
be re-made, but I want to be sure. Remember, I use the swage on fittings, s
o I only get one shot at getting the length correct.
Thanks.
Michael Perez
=0AKaretaker Aero
=0Awww.karetakeraero.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: source for Eisemann magneto parts? |
| From: | gboothe5(at)comcast.net |
Dan,
I'm going to be in Fresno next week, if it's any help.
Gary
------Original Message------
From: Dan Yocum
Sender: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
ReplyTo: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: source for Eisemann magneto parts?
Sent: Aug 1, 2011 8:26 AM
Thanks Perry - I just sent them an email through TAP, though I've heard
it's better just to call them. If I don't hear back in a day or so,
I'll give them a ring.
And, thanks again, for helping me get my engine running this year.
Say, why didn't you fly your Piet up this year?
Dan
On 08/01/2011 10:08 AM, Perry Rhoads wrote:
>
>
> Fresno Airparts
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan Yocum" <yocum137(at)gmail.com>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, August 01, 2011 9:45 AM
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: source for Eisemann magneto parts?
>
>
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Does anyone have a source for Eisemann mag parts? It seems that the
>> contactor spring has "sprung" on the left mag on N8031.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Dan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
Dan Yocum
Fermilab 630.840.6509
yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
Sent on the Sprint Now Network from my BlackBerry
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Where to find good, cheap turnbuckles |
| From: | John Kuhfahl <kuhlcouper(at)gmail.com> |
Life got in the way but I am now back restoring a 35-plus year old Piet.
The builder put in nice "Flying" tail brace wires, but they are shot now
(frozen)
I will go back to the plans and use cables and turnbuckles (Flying wires are
nearly $1000)
I'll need eight turnbuckles--anyone have a source, maybe used or surplus?
--
John Kuhfahl, Lt Col USAF (Ret),
President, KUHLCOUPER LLC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Franklin <jbfjr(at)peoplepc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Where to find good, cheap turnbuckles |
John,
B & B Aircraft Supplies. PO Box 37, Gardner, Kansas 66030, Phone (913)
884-5930.
Regards,
John F .
Richmond, TX
GN-1/Corvair
-----Original Message-----
From: John Kuhfahl
Sent: Aug 1, 2011 11:55 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Where to find good, cheap turnbuckles
Life got in the way but I am now back restoring a 35-plus year old Piet.
The builder put in nice "Flying" tail brace wires, but they are shot now (frozen)
I will go back to the plans and use cables and turnbuckles (Flying wires are nearly
$1000)
I'll need eight turnbuckles--anyone have a source, maybe used or surplus?
--
John Kuhfahl, Lt Col USAF (Ret),
President, KUHLCOUPER LLC
________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Where to find good, cheap turnbuckles |
John, if there is a way for you to remove the flying wires intact, (say without
cutting them off), I would be interested in having them. Assuming you plan on
throwing them away, we can work out a deal.
Michael Perez
Karetaker Aero
www.karetakeraero.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Wing Strut Cable Length Change |
| From: | "Jerry Dotson" <jdotson(at)centurylink.net> |
FWIW I had to move my wing back 4" and had to make 2 new ones and shorten the other
2.
--------
Jerry Dotson
59 Daniel Johnson Rd
Baker, FL 32531
Started building NX510JD July, 2009
wing, tailfeathers done, fuselage rolling
using Lycoming O-235
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348278#348278
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Where to find good, cheap turnbuckles |
| From: | John Kuhfahl <kuhlcouper(at)gmail.com> |
There are of course 8 wires--a left and right thread on each end--that is 16
threads. I got 12 threads free, 3 still frozen, and broke one off. I was
very gentle, but it broke. One of the wires is also pitted. I was going to
try to "save" these, but when one broke, I gave up. But sure, I might
consider giving these up if you want to mess with them.
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Michael Perez wrote:
> John, if there is a way for you to remove the flying wires intact, (say
> without cutting them off), I would be interested in having them. Assuming
> you plan on throwing them away, we can work out a deal.
>
> Michael Perez
> Karetaker Aero
> www.karetakeraero.com
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
--
John Kuhfahl, Lt Col USAF (Ret),
President, KUHLCOUPER LLC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jdominguez8826(at)comcast.net |
| Subject: | Re: GA 30-613.5 airfoil drawings. |
----- Original Message -----
Hi Bill:
=C2-I did several searches on the Matronics list, but the only thing that
came up just the mention of it's caracteristics, and Mr. Roman had some dr
awings. I could not find plots for any of them.
=C2-Take good care.
=C2- Jose'
If you search the archives of this list, the coordinates of the original Pi
et airfoil, the Riblett 612 and the 613.5 are posted. =C2-It's a simple m
atter to graph out the airfoil outline on some large paper with the coordin
ates provided.
--------
Billy McCaskill
Urbana, IL
tail section almost done, starting on ribs soon
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348232#348232
===========
===========
MS -
===========
e -
=C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2--Matt Dralle, List Admin.
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: GA 30-613.5 airfoil drawings. |
| From: | "Billy McCaskill" <billmz(at)cox.net> |
Jose, let me search in my computer for the files and if I can find them I will
email them direct to you as an attachment. They were posted here on the list
as an attachment quite some time ago, and I saved them. Just not sure where I
saved them, or if it was even on this computer.
--------
Billy McCaskill
Urbana, IL
tail section almost done, starting on ribs soon
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348289#348289
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert S. Edson" <robertse(at)centurytel.net> |
I am useing riblett 612 ribs and I was told to make the cabanes the same
length. Now I was told if (if) it was me I
I would make the front cabane 1/2" longer. Does anyone have any positive
input on this. I started my piet last year upon my return from Brodhead
and the frame is complete and on the gear, 21" wheels,ash gear with
brakes. Gages in and 0-200 running with one hour run time. Cowting
complete, windshield,leather comming,padded seats and installing
innercom.Almost ready to cover. Thank you for your time ---I enjoy
everyones comments . Bob Edson
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Wing Strut Cable Length Change |
| From: | "kevinpurtee" <kevin.purtee(at)us.army.mil> |
Same here. Suggest you wait to make them.
--------
Kevin "Axel" Purtee
NX899KP
Austin/Georgetown, TX
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348295#348295
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Billy McCaskill" <billmz(at)cox.net> |
Wow, you work fast Bob!
As far as I know, Pieti Lowell is the only one who is currently flying a Piet with
the 612 wing, so he would be the one to offer any valid input on this. I
do know that I talked to him at Brodhead last year about the 612, and at that
time he was flying his plane with the cabanes as per the plans and he stated
that he had to hold a lot of forward pressure on the stick for straight and level
flight. He said that he needed to address this by either shortening the front
struts or lengthening the rear struts to change the angle of incidence, not
sure if he's done this yet. He was at Brodhead this year, but I did not get
a chance to ask him about this.
If it were me, I'd make the rear struts longer rather than shortening the front
struts, just as a matter of making for easier entry into the cockpit. As to
the +1/2" incidence for your wing, I hope that Pieti chimes in on this, as he's
the authority on the Riblett wing on Piets right now...
--------
Billy McCaskill
Urbana, IL
tail section almost done, starting on ribs soon
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348299#348299
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Charvet <bencharvet(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing Strut Cable Length Change |
I waited until the weight/balance was done and my wing position set
before making the wing strut support cables. They are right on the CG,
so I didn't think waiting would make a significant difference.
Ben
On 8/1/2011 12:06 PM, Michael Perez wrote:
> Crew, I am wrapping up the work involved with attaching the wings and
> wing struts, running the aileron cables, making cable guides, etc. One
> of the last steps prior to taking it all apart is to make my wing
> strut support cables. I have my wings angled back, but I have no idea
> if this is in fact, where they will end up. (no engine right now) I
> am wondering if I make the wing strut support cables now and latter
> end up moving the wing to a different set back angle, will the cables
> still fit? Looking at the geometry, it appears to me that the wings
> would have to move A LOT before the cables/turnbuckles would run out
> of travel and need to be re-made, but I want to be sure. Remember, I
> use the swage on fittings, so I only get one shot at getting the
> length correct.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Michael Perez
> Karetaker Aero
> www.karetakeraero.com
>
> *
>
>
> *
--
Ben Charvet, PharmD
Staff Pharmacist
Parrish Medical center
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov> |
According to my math, if you put both spars directly on top of the
bottom rib capstrip and you build the cabanes the same length, this will
automatically build in the 1.5-ish degree angle of incidence.
The reason is that the front spar will sit about an inch lower than the
rear spar with respect to the wing cord line. Building the cabanes the
same length with raise the front of the wing the necessary amount.
It's simple geometry, so get out a calculator and calculate the angle at
the rear spar location between the line parallel to the chord and the
line drawn to the bottom of the front spar.
Dan
PS. We're suckers for pictures, post some of your progress!
On 08/01/2011 03:08 PM, Robert S. Edson wrote:
> I am useing riblett 612 ribs and I was told to make the cabanes the same
> length. Now I was told if (if) it was me I
> I would make the front cabane 1/2" longer. Does anyone have any positive
> input on this. I started my piet last year upon my return from Brodhead
> and the frame is complete and on the gear, 21" wheels,ash gear with
> brakes. Gages in and 0-200 running with one hour run time. Cowting
> complete, windshield,leather comming,padded seats and installing
> innercom.Almost ready to cover. Thank you for your time ---I enjoy
> everyones comments . Bob Edson
>
> *
>
>
> *
--
Dan Yocum
Fermilab 630.840.6509
yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "kevinpurtee" <kevin.purtee(at)us.army.mil> |
Bottom line up front: home yesterday after 2 weeks on the road. Flew ~40 hours
and ~2400 miles. Met lots of nice people and gave a bunch of rides. Had a ball
at both C37 and OSH.
Thanks to: IT Girl Shelley wife, Aeden, the Markles, the Chouinards, Gary Boothe,
Jeremy Heidinger, Curt Merdan, Billy McAskill, Jeff Gaulden, the Stinemetzes,
and, of course, my Pietenpol brothers who know who they are and who are family.
I'll do a trip report when I have the energy.
--------
Kevin "Axel" Purtee
NX899KP
Austin/Georgetown, TX
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348303#348303
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | A Great big Thank You To Kevin and Shelly |
To Kevin, and Shelly, A GREAT BIG THANK YOU FOR YOUR TEXAS HOSPITALITY!-
Kevin be sure to give Shelly Dad and my thanks, we were very greatful for t
he cooking and friendship we recieved.- Look forward to seeing you again.
- Congrats on your journey, and good job representing the Corvair Crowd,
my crank did not snap either.
-
Shad
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: A Great big Thank You To Kevin and Shelly |
| From: | helspersew(at)aol.com |
A Huge Ditto from me, that mean man Dan Helsper. Shelly you are the greates
t, the absolute best IT girl of all time. You also pick out the nicest clot
hes I have seen in quite a while. I would have starved if it weren't for yo
u and your great kindness.
-----Original Message-----
From: shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com>
Sent: Mon, Aug 1, 2011 5:26 pm
Subject: Pietenpol-List: A Great big Thank You To Kevin and Shelly
To Kevin, and Shelly, A GREAT BIG THANK YOU FOR YOUR TEXAS HOSPITALITY! Ke
vin be sure to give Shelly Dad and my thanks, we were very greatful for the
cooking and friendship we recieved. Look forward to seeing you again. Co
ngrats on your journey, and good job representing the Corvair Crowd, my cra
nk did not snap either.
Shad
-= - The Pietenpol-List Email Forum -
-= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse
-= the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription,
-= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
-= Photoshare, and much much more:
-
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
-
-========================
-= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
-= Same great content also available via the Web Forums!
-
-= --> http://forums.matronics.com
-
-========================
-= - List Contribution Web Site -
-= Thank you for your generous support!
-= -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-========================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pieti Lowell" <Lowellcfrank(at)yahoo.com> |
Hi People:
I suggest : make the cabanes the same length and, one can add adapter blocks to
get it perfect with standard wing length, Keep in mind that my wings are 2 feet
shorter than standard, It shouldn't make any difference. I find that , with
the lower radiator the trim is different, the center section is now lift area.
If I fly at 65 MPH and at 1800 RPM the stick is neutral, at 1900 the speed moves
to 72 MPH , and at 1875 RPM air speed increases to 78 MPH. And as the speeds
go up the forward pressure increases on the stick.
I have been slow in raising the aft cabanes because it also requires a number of
other adjustments in the flying wires and rear strut length.
The entrance is much easer with a higher wing location and it does not effect the
flying characteristics one bit.
The 612 ers are going to be surprised with their wing, Just wait and see what I
have enjoyed since 2004.
If the angle is too close to natural I gain air speed, like being on the step,
with a little stick back-pressure added.
Pieti Lowell
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348310#348310
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: GA 30-613.5 airfoil drawings. |
| From: | "Billy McCaskill" <billmz(at)cox.net> |
Jose,
I tried emailing you with the info you requested, but the email bounced. Please
contact me at billmz (at) cox. net with a valid email address so that I can
email those files to you...
--------
Billy McCaskill
Urbana, IL
tail section almost done, starting on ribs soon
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348311#348311
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: GA 30-613.5 airfoil drawings. |
| From: | "Pieti Lowell" <Lowellcfrank(at)yahoo.com> |
I gave Doc. a bunch of Riblett stuff and I believe that what you are looking for
Doc has a copy.
Pieti Lowell
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348312#348312
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: skytek struts |
| From: | "bender" <jfaith(at)solairusaviation.com> |
i did something similar but put the straps on the inside..7 inches long i believe...and
3/4" wide and 1/4" thick 6060 t6.. 4, 3/16 stainless structural rivets
on each side...leaves just enough room for the as drawn fittings to slide inside..
not flying but my math says it will hold and an engineer buddy liked it
too
btw ..small struts from carlson
jeff
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348314#348314
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/alum_strut_attach_163.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/strut_111.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Made it home |
| From: | "tkreiner" <tkreiner(at)gmail.com> |
Kevin,
Along with "winning" the not-so-blind auction for the Piet fuselage, my trip to
Brodhead was fabulous this year.
Many thanks to you and Shelley for having given me my first ride in a Piet, even
tho its a 'crank snapper...
The entire experience has charged my batteries, and I'm formulating plans for the
'12 flyin as I write this.
Many thanks also go to Dick Navratil, and the entire gang of fellow Piet enthusiasts
who built my fuse.
Blue Skies,
Tom Kreiner
--------
Tom Kreiner
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348317#348317
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | A Great big Thank You To Kevin and Shelly |
By the way, Shad, a big thank you to you and your Dad, Gary, for letting me
fly your crank-snapper. It's a good flying airplane, if you can keep it
from going off the right side of the runway on takeoff. You'll notice I
stayed within gliding distance of the runway, but it ran strong and true.
Jack Phillips
Glad to be home after 3 days of flying from Wisconsin
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of shad bell
Sent: Monday, August 01, 2011 6:23 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: A Great big Thank You To Kevin and Shelly
To Kevin, and Shelly, A GREAT BIG THANK YOU FOR YOUR TEXAS HOSPITALITY!
Kevin be sure to give Shelly Dad and my thanks, we were very greatful for
the cooking and friendship we recieved. Look forward to seeing you again.
Congrats on your journey, and good job representing the Corvair Crowd, my
crank did not snap either.
Shad
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jdominguez8826(at)comcast.net |
| Subject: | Re: GA 30-613.5 airfoil drawings. |
----- Original Message -----
Hi Pieti:
=C2- Thanks for the info, I'll see if I can get hold of Doc.
=C2- Thanks.
=C2-=C2- Jose'.
m>
I gave Doc. a bunch of Riblett stuff and I believe that what you are lookin
g for Doc has a copy.
Pieti Lowell
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348312#348312
===========
===========
MS -
===========
e -
=C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2--Matt Dralle, List Admin.
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "FlyBoy57" <donato_m(at)hotmail.com> |
I have all of the Pietenpol plans and just purchased the GN-1 plans. I have read
some great posts on the pros and cons of each, but I need more details. I
am not 100% sure at this time which airplane I should build.
Can anyone please tell me why you chose to build and fly the GN-1 over the original
Pietenpol? Do they fly the same? Any major cost differences or building
skills needed?
Thanks a bunch, please send me all of your thoughts pros and cons.
Blue skies,
Donato
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348327#348327
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: source for Eisemann magneto parts? |
| From: | "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com> |
Definitely call them. Great people to deal with but they just don't do "modern".
You can just describe to them what you need over the phone and they'll send
it out. They don't do Visa. Just check or C.O.D. If you are in a bind you
can tell them and usually they will send it out before they receive the payment.
I've bought a lot of stuff from them...always good quality.
Don Emch
NX899DE
P.S. Great to hear everyone has made it home safe!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348329#348329
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Princell <weprincell(at)gmail.com> |
Hi Dan:
I'm also using the GA612 airfoil and just finished fabricating my cabane
struts this afternoon. They are going to the weld shop in the morning. Bill
Rewey, who I bought the full size GA612 rib drawing from, told me last
summer at Brodhead, to make the rear cabanes 1" shorter than the front ones.
A couple of weeks ago Bill Church who has an engineering background posted
information on this list, stating that he had calculated the actual
difference in length to be 11/16" between the longer front cabanes and the
rear ones. I went with Bill's dimensions. I guess if I find out later that I
screwed up, I can always use Lowell's spacer suggestion.
Bill Princell - Noblesville, IN
Corvair Powered/Pietenpol Rebuild Project
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 4:58 PM, Dan Yocum wrote:
>
> According to my math,
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Piet vs. GN-1 |
| From: | "Billy McCaskill" <billmz(at)cox.net> |
Hi FlyBoy57,
The GN-1 was designed back in the late 1950's to look like a Pietenpol, but make
use of cheap, readily available parts such as landing gear, engine and mounts,
cowlings, struts, and wing panels from Piper Cubs or Aeronca Champs that were
no longer airworthy or repairable for whatever reason. Those parts are no
longer as cheap or easily obtainable as they once were. So essentially you must
still fabricate pretty much everything on the plans unless you can source some
old usable Cub parts.
The GN's rib profile is slightly different from the Pietenpol, with more rounded
leading edge and no undercamber, and supposedly softer stall characteristics.
Additionally, due to changes in the way the GN-1's cabane struts and wing fittings
are made, changing the position of the wing to bring weight & balance
into line is not possible. On the Piet, the wing can easily be moved back up
to 4" to affect the weight and balance, rather than adding ballast or moving accessories
and components as necessary on the GN-1.
I'm told that GN-1's are typically a little bit heavier than Pietenpols due to
the way the fuselage is skinned with plywood from the firewall all the way back
to the tailpost.
I cannot comment on the flying qualities of the GN-1, as I have never flown one
or even in one. Several have made their way to Brodhead over the years, so obviously
the GN-1 is certainly capable of flying, but as to how the flight qualities
of the GN compare to the Piet, somebody else on the list who has flown
both types will have to speak to that issue.
Hope this answers some of your questions.
--------
Billy McCaskill
Urbana, IL
tail section almost done, starting on ribs soon
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348334#348334
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Made it home |
| From: | "K5YAC" <hangar10(at)cox.net> |
Glad you got back ok... we just got in last night too. Got tons of pics to share...
prob do it on FB. Can you believe I got pulled over in StL on the way home?
Damn that town! Got me coming and going.
--------
Mark Chouinard
Wings, Center Section and Empannage framed up - Working on Fuselage
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348335#348335
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Franklin <jbfjr(at)peoplepc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Piet vs. GN-1 |
Donato,
I'm building a GN-1 and I recommend you build the Piet. There is more support
for the Piet, and any desirable feature that the GN-1 has can be done on the Piet
as a modification. Of course you risk running afoul of the dreaded "Piet
Police", but other than that, no problem. I don't think there is much difference
as far as flying goes but perhaps someone else can comment on that.
Good luck,
John F.
Richmond, TX
-----Original Message-----
>From: FlyBoy57 <donato_m(at)hotmail.com>
>Sent: Aug 1, 2011 9:34 PM
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: Piet vs. GN-1
>
>
>I have all of the Pietenpol plans and just purchased the GN-1 plans. I have read
some great posts on the pros and cons of each, but I need more details. I
am not 100% sure at this time which airplane I should build.
>
>Can anyone please tell me why you chose to build and fly the GN-1 over the original
Pietenpol? Do they fly the same? Any major cost differences or building
skills needed?
>
>Thanks a bunch, please send me all of your thoughts pros and cons.
>
>Blue skies,
>Donato
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348327#348327
>
>
________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | alternative construction materials |
All I can say is "Why?"
If you want a steel tube airplane, build one. If you want an aluminum
airplane, build one.
If you want a Pietenpol, build it as close to the plans as possible and you
will have a good flying airplane.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
letchik.ivan(at)gmail.com
Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2011 11:01 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: alternative construction materials
I was wondering if anyone has built a Pietenpol Air Camper or Sky Scout with
materials other than wood or less wood? I know that the Pietenpol was
designed to make use of wood in its construction. There is also a
supplemental plan drawn by Bernard Pietenpol which uses metal tubing to
construct the fuselage.
Has anyone built a Pietenpol using more metal than the original plans called
for? For example using light metal tubing for the tail and stabilizer
section, or perhaps aircraft grade aluminum for the wing ribs or spar, or
maybe sheet aluminum on the leading edge of the wing or in place of plywood
on the fuselage, or any other combination. Would the aircraft weigh more if
constructed in the way I just described? Could a more powerful engine
overcome the added weight of having used heavier construction materials? I
know the L4 / J3 Piper Cub is built with all metal structural components
covered with cloth skin and is powered by a 65 hp Continental engine, so I
am wondering if similar construction technique could be used on a Pietenpol?
Tom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "skipgadd(at)earthlink.net" <skipgadd(at)earthlink.net> |
Donato,
I have some hours in both. They fly virtually the same. I would build a
Piet. The Piet has more cachet.
Skip
> [Original Message]
> From: FlyBoy57 <donato_m(at)hotmail.com>
> To:
> Date: 8/1/2011 10:38:51 PM
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Piet vs. GN-1
>
>
> I have all of the Pietenpol plans and just purchased the GN-1 plans. I
have read some great posts on the pros and cons of each, but I need more
details. I am not 100% sure at this time which airplane I should build.
>
> Can anyone please tell me why you chose to build and fly the GN-1 over
the original Pietenpol? Do they fly the same? Any major cost differences
or building skills needed?
>
> Thanks a bunch, please send me all of your thoughts pros and cons.
>
> Blue skies,
> Donato
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348327#348327
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Parting out a Pietenpol |
| From: | "olflyr45" <wyliejohnson45(at)gmail.com> |
The guy who owned it got to be in such bad shape that he had to quit flying. We
bought it for the engine. Both of us are too big to get in it so we're passing
the parts along to people who can use them. That's better than letting it
sit somewhere and rot away.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348347#348347
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
I agree with Skip. I've flown both and they fly virtually identical. The
Pietenpol has some advantages that the GN-1 doesn't, and the advantage the
GN-1 had at one time (the ability to use then-cheap Cub or Champ parts) no
longer applies.
Besides, it's cooler to describe your airplane as "the first truly
successful homebuilt design, dating from 1929" than "this is sort of a copy
of the world's first truly successful homebuilt design, which was done in
1929, but this copy was designed in the late 1950's".
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
skipgadd(at)earthlink.net
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 8:03 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Piet vs. GN-1
Donato,
I have some hours in both. They fly virtually the same. I would build a
Piet. The Piet has more cachet.
Skip
> [Original Message]
> From: FlyBoy57 <donato_m(at)hotmail.com>
> To:
> Date: 8/1/2011 10:38:51 PM
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Piet vs. GN-1
>
>
> I have all of the Pietenpol plans and just purchased the GN-1 plans. I
have read some great posts on the pros and cons of each, but I need more
details. I am not 100% sure at this time which airplane I should build.
>
> Can anyone please tell me why you chose to build and fly the GN-1 over
the original Pietenpol? Do they fly the same? Any major cost differences
or building skills needed?
>
> Thanks a bunch, please send me all of your thoughts pros and cons.
>
> Blue skies,
> Donato
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348327#348327
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Piet vs. GN-1 |
| From: | "Dale McCleskey" <dale.mccleskey(at)lifeway.com> |
I've got nearly 200 hours on my GN-1 and I love it. Haven't flown a Piet to compare.
But I'm no hope for reason. I built (completed) the GN-1 because I found
a partially built project and finished it. It was on the gear with a gear, cowl,
and engine mount and gas tank off a cub. I've since had to replace the tank
(rust) and the gear (had been repaired with inferior tubing), so don't know
how much that really saved. If I were starting over I'd choose the long Piet
version. One other note is I have the front cockpit door, and while it's controversial
on the list, I wouldn't take for it. Have been able to fly a bunch of
my more "mature" buddies who would never have been able to climb in without it.
--------
Dale McCleskey
N7035N
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348349#348349
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pieti Lowell" <Lowellcfrank(at)yahoo.com> |
Bill:
Great Pictures, and excellent work.
I will just touch on the subject lightly once again, Bill Rewey received my initial
information from H. Riblett a number of years ago an ask if he could reproduce
to others, I suggested he get in touch with Harold R. to pursue his thoughts.
I do not know if Bill flew a Riblett airfoil.
Bill Church with his back ground, In my opinion has a good idea of the 11/16" dimension
to get the 1 degree that Harold said is the angle required for his foil,
I think that the proper angle would depend on the power you have up front and the
speed you are comfortable with. I like around 80 and that requires less angle
than 65 MPH. Why I suggested same length, with 0200
Keep in mind that when I received my Engineering Degree, the Freiden Machine required
a week-end to produce formulas to allow my Thesis to be accepted At IIT.
On the torsional Vibrations of a V 6 Diesel crankshaft, when it was never conceived
as practical. Thank God we never relied on the computer, or we may be
on Mars by now.
Pieti Lowell
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348352#348352
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Piet vs. GN-1 |
| From: | "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> |
Donato,
You have both sets of plans, so you should be able to see the differences between
the two designs. While I don't have a set of GN-1 plans, the "improvements"
that I have been able to discern don't seem to fall within the definition of
that word. The most noticable changes are:
1. Plywood fuselage side skins run all the way back to the tailpost, rather than
stopping at the rear cockpit. This feature adds strength and weight where it
is not needed - why bother?.
2. The use of Piper Cub landing gear. Surplus Cub landing gear is no longer readily
available, so IF you can find a set, they will not be cheap. But more importantly,
the landing gear attach points do not line up with the rear lift strut
attach points. Structurally, this does not make sense, and aesthetically it
isn't right either. So, if you will need to build your own gear, why not make
a set of gear that was designed for the plane that you're building, as opposed
to building a replica of landing gear that was designed for a different plane.
3. Different cabane strut mounting brackets. For some reason, Grega redesigned
the mounting brackets for the cabane attachments, and in doing so, eliminated
the possibility of tilting the cabanes fore or aft, for W&B adjustment. As a result,
the GN-1 does not offer much ability to compensate for CG that varies from
the norm, other than adding ballast, or building a new motor mount. One of
the beauties of the Pietenpol design is the ability to tilt the cabanes, and
effectively move the wing back (actually, it moves the entire fuselage forward)
to account for tail heaviness. This is a far superior method than adding ballast
in the nose or tail.
So, from a design perspective, I personally cannot see any benefit of these three
"improvements". And, since the feedback from pilots that have flown both seems
to indicate no noticeable difference in flight characteristics, one would
have to wonder why one would choose the GN-1 over the Pietenpol plans.
I think that the reason why many builders chose the GN-1 over the Pietenpol was
that for many years, the GN-1 plans were only $25, whereas the Pietenpol plans
were two or three times that price. However, a savings of $25 or $50 on the
overall cost of an aircraft is extremely insignificant, and really should not
have been a deciding factor. But people can be funny sometimes.
Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348359#348359
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pieti Lowell" <Lowellcfrank(at)yahoo.com> |
It is important that a little wash-out is necessary in order to make nice gentle
stalls and good landings.
Some of the wings that I saw at Brodhead had no washout, gap-seals are necessary
but do not take the place of washout.
I suggest 1/2" to1.0" if there is no dihedral, it makes a great difference during
the stall. As the stall moves outward the stability increases when control
decreases.
If wash-out is applied to the wing, is the angle of incident required to be also
changed ?
Has anyone read the article about the adjustable angle of incident airplane that
was featured in the 30's ? I read it many years ago and don't remember all the
facts. That is the price one pays for getting in their 80's. You all will have
to deal with it one day , so take notes.
Pieti Lowell
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348360#348360
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | steve(at)wotelectronics.com |
I have a GN-1, built (finished) in 1983. It has about 700 hours total
time on it, about 400 of those are mine. I've also flow "true" Piets,
and they fly nearly identical. My wing does have negative camber, and
to me is visually identical to the Piet wing.
The wing is much higher than the Piet, which makes getting in and out
much easier. However, I wonder if this doesn't slow my plane down due
to the elevator being trimmed down to counteract the up-pitching moment
from the wing's drag being so far above the cg & thrustline (in addition
to the up-pitching moment of the wing itself).
My plane has a J3 cowl and a modified J3 gear. I like the Jenny gear
far better, and a lot of the custom Piet cowls look more antique than
mine. It is a really good plane, well built, reliable, and no serious
flaws or bad flight characteristics. I got a little too close to a
small thunderstorm cell once, trying to sneak around it and scared
myself nearly to death. The turbulence ripped the gap seals off the
elevators and jerked me hard into the straps for a few minutes but the
plane held together (as Axle says, "I didn't like it much"). The Cub
gear is indestructible on a plane this light. With the big tires I can
land on any terrain...I am confident the fuselage would break before the
gear. It is really fun to fly and as far as nearly anyone else knows,
it is an antique. But I know better...I wish it was a Piet. Even so,
I'd say it is about 90% Piet. It draws a crowd at any fly-in, but
probably wouldn't at Broadhead where everyone knows better...I intend to
make it one day. When I bought it I had about 75 hours of total flight
time...I didn't know much. 7 years later, I know a little more about
antiques.
I'm waiting for Mike Cuy to die so I can buy his Piet, unless he'll
trade it for a GN-1 straight up, right now. I will even throw in a ride
with the 2nd greatest flyer in the world.
Steve Ruse
Norman, OK
>
>
> I agree with Skip. I've flown both and they fly virtually identical.
> The
> Pietenpol has some advantages that the GN-1 doesn't, and the
> advantage the
> GN-1 had at one time (the ability to use then-cheap Cub or Champ
> parts) no
> longer applies.
>
> Besides, it's cooler to describe your airplane as "the first truly
> successful homebuilt design, dating from 1929" than "this is sort of
> a copy
> of the world's first truly successful homebuilt design, which was
> done in
> 1929, but this copy was designed in the late 1950's".
>
> Jack Phillips
> NX899JP
> Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> skipgadd(at)earthlink.net
> Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 8:03 AM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Piet vs. GN-1
>
>
>
> Donato,
> I have some hours in both. They fly virtually the same. I would build
> a
> Piet. The Piet has more cachet.
> Skip
>
>
>> [Original Message]
>> From: FlyBoy57 <donato_m(at)hotmail.com>
>> To:
>> Date: 8/1/2011 10:38:51 PM
>> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Piet vs. GN-1
>>
>>
>>
>> I have all of the Pietenpol plans and just purchased the GN-1 plans.
>> I
> have read some great posts on the pros and cons of each, but I need
> more
> details. I am not 100% sure at this time which airplane I should
> build.
>>
>> Can anyone please tell me why you chose to build and fly the GN-1
>> over
> the original Pietenpol? Do they fly the same? Any major cost
> differences
> or building skills needed?
>>
>> Thanks a bunch, please send me all of your thoughts pros and cons.
>>
>> Blue skies,
>> Donato
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348327#348327
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> |
Bob,
That is very impressive progress for one year. Wow.
Just to be clear, when you say you were told to make the cabanes the same length,
do you mean the same length as the Pietenpol plans show, or the same length
front and back?
I was mentioned in a couple of replies to your question, so I thought I should
chime in. First, a disclaimer; I have built standard Pietenpol airfoil ribs for
my plane, not Riblett airfoil ribs. The calculations that I did were in response
to some questions that came up here on the List, and are theoretical - not
proven. However, they seem to make sense, and appear to be in concurrence with
Lowell's real-world experience. As far as we know, Lowell has the only flying
example of an Air camper with the Riblett wing.
Here's a link to the calculations:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=336915&highlight=#336915
Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348367#348367
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Where to find good, cheap turnbuckles |
Thank you, however, since one of the 8 are broke, it would not really help
me. That's too bad...your plane with those wires would have been sweet.
Michael Perez
=0AKaretaker Aero
=0Awww.karetakeraero.com
--- On Mon, 8/1/11, John Kuhfahl wrote:
From: John Kuhfahl <kuhlcouper(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Where to find good, cheap turnbuckles
Date: Monday, August 1, 2011, 2:01 PM
There are of course 8 wires--a left and right thread on each end--that is 1
6 threads. I got 12 threads free, 3 still frozen, and broke one off.- I w
as very gentle, but it broke. One of the wires is also pitted. I was going
to try to "save" these, but when one broke, I gave up. But sure, I might co
nsider giving these up if you want to mess with them.
=0A
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Michael Perez w
rote:
=0AJohn, if there is a way for you to remove the flying wires intact, (say
without cutting them off), I would be interested in having them. Assuming y
ou plan on throwing them away, we can work out a deal.
=0A
Michael Perez
=0AKaretaker Aero
=0Awww.karetakeraero.com
=0A
" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
--
John Kuhfahl, Lt Col USAF (Ret),
President, KUHLCOUPER LLC
=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing Strut Cable Length Change |
Understood. I'll wait until the rest of the plane is together and the final wing
location is determined.
Thanks for the intell.
Michael Perez
Karetaker Aero
www.karetakeraero.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Timothy Willis <timwillis01(at)gmail.com> |
I have shown a couple of fellow Piet builders my little metal bender.
They liked it. , esp. Others may be interested.
It comes from Lee Valley Tools, a great source for many things. Here
is a link to the item, priced at $22.50:
http://www.leevalley.com/US/wood/page.aspx?p=32011&cat=1,43456,43407
I have a Harbor Freight 18 inch brake for longer pieces, esp. aluminum
sheet, but for steel I really like the controllability and leverage I
get with this item in my big vise.
I bent up all the control horns using the Lee Valley item, but not
using the sharp male side. (Looking at a picture will make more
sense.) I used only the "V" female side in that application, with
various punches or round bars on the other side, to impart radiused
bends instead of sharp bends. (Then I hammered the piece a lot with a
big rubber hammer, to soften the many minor bends into something
smoother.)
On all the other pieces with straight bends, the rig works well out of
the box, even on .090 in. thick 4130 steel.
Tim in central TX
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Piet vs. GN-1 |
| From: | "FlyBoy57" <donato_m(at)hotmail.com> |
First I want to thank all of you who posted a response I really appreciate your
thoughts. I'm staying with the original Pietenpol plans. The support for this
airplane is overwhelming and that's important to me. You guys are the greatest,
thanks again.
I'm sure I will post more questions as I move along. Ordering the spruce wood
today from Aircraft Spruce.
Oh, I do want to mention I attended Jack's presentation at Oshkosh and he helped
me out there too. Kudos to Jack. I also attended the EAA Woodworking Workshop
and learned allot there too.
Thanks again, Blue skies,
Donato
Future Pietenpol builder/owner
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348390#348390
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: metal bender |
| From: | "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> |
Tim,
I have the exact same tool. It is very handy for bending small parts.
I found the surface texture of the dies to be a bit rough, so I smoothed them and
put a little bit of a radius on the male die (using a file).
The actual radius achieved in bending depends more on the alloy and thickness of
the material and the opening dimension of the female die than it does on the
radius of the male die. That's just the nature of bending metal. Of course, if
the metal being bent is soft, the radius becomes more important.
Lee Valley sure makes some nice woodworking tools.
Bill C
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348422#348422
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Yocum <yocum137(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Bob Edson's piet pictures |
Bob sent me some pictures of his plane which he's agreed to let me
forward to the list. In his former lives he's been a cabinet maker and
fine instrument artisan and it really shows in the quality of his work.
It's outstanding quality in my humble opinion.
I see hints of Helsper and Cardinal in his project, too.
He'll hang the wings in a couple of weeks and start covering soon after
that. I suspect we'll see him at Brodhead, next year.
Enjoy!
Dan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: source for Eisemann magneto parts? |
They replied to my email sent through TAP. $3.50 per spring/brush. $17
for 2 sets plus s&h. Can't be beat.
Thanks,
Dan
On 08/01/2011 09:38 PM, Don Emch wrote:
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Don Emch"
>
> Definitely call them. Great people to deal with but they just don't do "modern".
You can just describe to them what you need over the phone and they'll send
it out. They don't do Visa. Just check or C.O.D. If you are in a bind you
can tell them and usually they will send it out before they receive the payment.
I've bought a lot of stuff from them...always good quality.
>
> Don Emch
> NX899DE
>
> P.S. Great to hear everyone has made it home safe!
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348329#348329
>
>
--
Dan Yocum
Fermilab 630.840.6509
yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | M.E.R.F.I. Ohio area pieters |
Anyone planning on flying to the Mid Eastern Reg. Fly-in at Urbana Ohio (Gr
imes Field)-this year?- I will probably head over on Saturday sept 10th
.- They are restoring a B-17 there and have a little museum with a B-25 a
nd A-26 and snj etc.- I hope a few of you can make it.- Mike C., Don E.
, Frank P.-Mr. Emo,-and others, if you want to stop off here (or somewh
ere along the route)-on the way and fly over as a group that would be fun
.- It is close enough that you could fly over and back in a day and sleep
well in your own bed that night.- It would be a good cap on a good flyin
g season, I don't think the boss will allow me to make Lee Bottom this year
, My honey do list just got bigger after returning from Brodhead.
-
Let me know,
Shad
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Does anybody recognize this... |
| From: | "K5YAC" <hangar10(at)cox.net> |
The hat says Markle. LOL!
--------
Mark Chouinard
Wings, Center Section and Empannage framed up - Working on Fuselage
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348471#348471
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Markle <jim_markle(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Does anybody recognize this... |
I was wondering where my hat was. If anyone can figure out who that bafoon is...please
let me know!!!
Looks like I'm taking parts off Jack's....no, I won't go there.
Thank you Bill
-----Original Message-----
>From: K5YAC <hangar10(at)cox.net>
>Sent: Aug 2, 2011 10:00 PM
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Does anybody recognize this...
>
>
>The hat says Markle. LOL!
>
>--------
>Mark Chouinard
>Wings, Center Section and Empannage framed up - Working on Fuselage
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348471#348471
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: metal bender |
| From: | "womenfly2" <Love2Fly.KAP(at)gmail.com> |
Remember the minimum inside radius, when bending 4130, is equal to its thickness.
--------
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348490#348490
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Schreiber" <lmforge(at)earthlink.net> |
Question for those that are using mechanical drum or band brakes. What diameter
cable are you using? 1/16" stranded cable and sheaths are readilly available
from bicycle shops, but is this to thin?
Rick Schreiber
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: brake cables |
| From: | gboothe5(at)comcast.net |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=
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: brake cables |
| From: | helspersew(at)aol.com |
Hi Rick,
I used the 1/16th stranded cable. Seems to work fine.
Dan Helsper
Puryear, TN
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Schreiber <lmforge(at)earthlink.net>
Sent: Wed, Aug 3, 2011 10:52 am
Subject: Pietenpol-List: brake cables
Question for those that are using mechanical drum or band brakes. What diam
eter cable are you using? 1/16" stranded cable and sheaths are readilly ava
ilable from bicycle shops, but is this to thin?
Rick Schreiber
-= - The Pietenpol-List Email Forum -
-= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse
-= the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription,
-= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
-= Photoshare, and much much more:
-
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
-
-========================
-= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
-= Same great content also available via the Web Forums!
-
-= --> http://forums.matronics.com
-
-========================
-= - List Contribution Web Site -
-= Thank you for your generous support!
-= -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-========================
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: brake cables |
| From: | Ben Charvet <bencharvet(at)gmail.com> |
I used 1/16 cable and sheaths from ASS. Ive had one brake come apart but no p
roblems with the cables in 85 hours
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 3, 2011, at 12:06 PM, gboothe5(at)comcast.net wrote:
> That's what I have, but it's untested.
>
> Gary
> Sent on the Sprint=C3=86 Now Network from my BlackBerry=C3=86
>
> From: "Richard Schreiber" <lmforge(at)earthlink.net>
> Sender: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2011 10:49:48 -0500
> To: pietenpol-list
> ReplyTo: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: brake cables
>
>
>
> Question for those that are using mechanical drum or band brakes. What dia
meter cable are you using? 1/16" stranded cable and sheaths are readilly ava
ilable from bicycle shops, but is this to thin?
>
> Rick Schreiber
>
>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
> ky=88=91=C3=8B=C3=BB=82=AC"=C3-=C3=8C=C3=BA=C2=A2Z+=9DM4
=9DG=81=84q=C3=81(=88=AB=88=8F=C3=BB=C3=86w=88=9Er=C3=A3=C2=B4=C3
=A2=C3=8D=9D=C3'=9E=9Az=97=8A=C3=9F=C2=B6=C3=A2K=C3=A4
=C3D=C3=B4=C2=AE=A2=16=C3=A4=C3=93=C3=B4K=1E=88=82=17=C3=A5j=81
=84=C3=8B=C3=BB',.+-=15=C3=8A=89-=88=AB=88=91=C2=A85=C2=B4=9A
=C3=85=C2=B4h=C3=86=81=84=1B=C3=86=C3=A5,z=C3^=C3=B4=C2=A9=C3=9A.+-
=88=AB=C3=A2=C3=A4=C3=C3=BB=89=A4=C3=C3=BA=C3'=C2=B4=0B=C3
=A4=C3T=C3=BC=C3=99=C3=86n=C2=AB+=C3=A4=C3=B5b=C2=A2p+r=18=C3=98y'=C3=B6
=89-=C2=BBC=C2=A3 =C3=82=C2=B0=C3=9F{ =C2=A8=C3=85=C3=86=C3=A5,x(Z=C2
=A5P=10>=1A-=C2=A2=C2=BBZ=89-=C3=8A=C3=9Fvk=C3=BA=C3=9Ck=C3=BA=C3=9Cj+y
=C2=AEky=C2=AFm=88=82=C3=BC=CB=87=88=9A=0C&j=81=84=C3=8B=C3=BB',r=C3
=A2=C3=B85=C2=B4=9A=C3=85=C2=B4h=C2=A8=C2=AF=C3=BB=C2=B5=C3=88=C3=88=C2
=A2R=9A=89=A4=C3m=88=82=C3=BC=CB=87=88=9A=0C&j=81=84=C3
=8B=C3=BB',r=C3=A2=C3=B85=C2=B4=9A=C3=85=C2=B4h=C2=A8=C2=AF=C3=BB=C2=B5
=C3=88=C3=88=C2=A2R=9A=89=A4=EF=AC=82=81=840=04=948=9C
=02Ia=01=14=B0T1$=C3=B6=C3=B4=C3=8B+y=C2=B4\=C2=A2{^=C3=BB=C3=B7
=A2=89=A4=C3=9C=C3=98j)ZnW=C3=98=C3=A2=C2=B4ayg=C3=B5=16=C3=A4=C3=93=C3=B6
=88=86=C2=B0=89-=C3=81=C2=B7=88=82=81=84=7F=CB=9D=CB=99+=88
=ABk&j=81=84=C3=8B=C3=BB',r=C3=A2=C2=B0=88=82=81=84=7F=CB=9D=CB=99+
=88=ABk&j=81=84=C3=8B=C3=BB',r=C3=A2=C3=B8h=88=8F=C2=A8=C2=A5*'=88
=82=88=8F=C3=B5=88=AB=C3=C2=AE=C3=B9g=C3=B5J+^N=16=C3=9F=C3=AC*.~=C3
=A4=C3=9A=C2=A2=C3=8D=A1zw=C2=B4=C2=A2=C3=8E,=88=AB=C3=B6h=C3=86
=9D=1A=88=82=93=C3=8EjY^.+-=01=C5=B8=C2=A2=C3=B9=C2=AEky=C2=AFm
=88=82=C3=BC=CB=87=88=9A=0C&j=81=84=C3=8B=C3=BB',r=C3=A2=C3=B8r=C3=A2=C3
=8C=C3=86&=C3=93=88=82*'=C3=9C=82=ACi=CB=87=C2=B80=C2=ACf=89-=C3=86
=C3=A2=9Ar=C2=AB(=C3=B5=CB=9C(=C3=BB=81=84=9An=C3=8Eb=C2=A2=7F
=81=84=CB=9D=C3=B8=EF=AC=82=C2=A2{=7F=C2=B6=88=91=C3=B8n=C3=A1r=CB=9B=1B
f
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Does anybody recognize this... |
| From: | "K5YAC" <hangar10(at)cox.net> |
Where is Hofmann? That would be a great shot for a coffee cup... er, better make
that a mug! Probably sell like hot cakes!
--------
Mark Chouinard
Wings, Center Section and Empannage framed up - Working on Fuselage
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348523#348523
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Schreiber" <lmforge(at)earthlink.net> |
Gary, Dan and Ben.....
Thanks for the response. I'll be going with the 1/16 inch brake cables.
Rcik Schreiber
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Silvius" <silvius(at)gwi.net> |
| Subject: | re: GA 30-613.5 airfoil drawings. |
Jose:
Found these in my stash of goodies, hope they help...
Saludos:
Michael
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Greg Cardinal" <gcardinal(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: re: GA 30-613.5 airfoil drawings. |
Mr. Riblett's comments on the stall characteristics of the original
Pietenpol airfoil are complete rubbish.
Watch Jeff Boatright's youtube videos demonstrating stalls for one
example of mild stalls.
The stall characteristics of NX18235 are equally mild. There is nothing
sudden or unsafe when stalling a Pietenpol.
Greg Cardinal
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Silvius
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2011 6:00 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: re: GA 30-613.5 airfoil drawings.
Jose:
Found these in my stash of goodies, hope they help...
Saludos:
Michael
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bkemike(at)gmail.com |
| Subject: | re: GA 30-613.5 airfoil drawings. |
Airfoil characteristics are profoundly affected by planform/aspect ratio,
washout/twist, adjacent bodies such as struts, radiators, etc. Obviously,
many years of successful flying trump some early computer analysis. I have
flown, safely and happily, in airplanes with sharp leading edges and thin
sections that had horrible AIRFOIL characteristics but quite controllable
AIRPLANE characteristics.
To call a serious scientific investigation of an airfoil into doubt because
your airplane behaves in a way that, to your non-scientific observation, is
inconsistent with the results of the investigation, is like saying lead
paint can't be dangerous because your grandma safely drove a Buick.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | re: GA 30-613.5 airfoil drawings. |
| From: | helspersew(at)aol.com |
Why all this discussion of Riblett and other airfoils? I don't get it. Chec
k out this vid from The Great Jim Markle, Brodhead 2011, at 3:00 min and 5:
00 min. First one is a Ford Model A and the second is Kevin's proven 85 hor
se Corvair. Both climb like a rocket on a hot summer day. What more does on
e want from a Piet? http://youtu.be/DjY0YVsjc7U
Dan Helsper
Puryear, TN
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Silvius <silvius(at)gwi.net>
Sent: Wed, Aug 3, 2011 5:05 pm
Subject: Pietenpol-List: re: GA 30-613.5 airfoil drawings.
Jose:
Found these in my stash of goodies, hope they help...
Saludos:
Michael
Dan Helsper
Puryear, TN
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Silvius <silvius(at)gwi.net>
Sent: Wed, Aug 3, 2011 5:05 pm
Subject: Pietenpol-List: re: GA 30-613.5 airfoil drawings.
Jose:
Found these in my stash of goodies, hope they help...
Saludos:
Michael
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Charvet <bencharvet(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: re: GA 30-613.5 airfoil drawings. |
Have to agree with you Greg
Ben
On 8/3/2011 6:19 PM, Greg Cardinal wrote:
> Mr. Riblett's comments on the stall characteristics of the original
> Pietenpol airfoil are complete rubbish.
> Watch Jeff Boatright's youtube videos demonstrating stalls for one
> example of mild stalls.
> The stall characteristics of NX18235 are equally mild. There is
> nothing sudden or unsafe when stalling a Pietenpol.
> Greg Cardinal
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Michael Silvius
> *To:* pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 03, 2011 6:00 PM
> *Subject:* Pietenpol-List: re: GA 30-613.5 airfoil drawings.
>
> Jose:
> Found these in my stash of goodies, hope they help...
> Saludos:
> Michael
>
> *
>
>
> *
--
Ben Charvet, PharmD
Staff Pharmacist
Parrish Medical center
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: GA 30-613.5 airfoil drawings. |
| From: | "kevinpurtee" <kevin.purtee(at)us.army.mil> |
And I've gotta go with you, Ben.
--------
Kevin "Axel" Purtee
NX899KP
Austin/Georgetown, TX
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348562#348562
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: re: GA 30-613.5 airfoil drawings. |
| From: | Ryan Mueller <rmueller23(at)gmail.com> |
Careful Dan....you've gotten by since you're so properly sized...you're
almost the IT Boy of the skies. I'm afraid if you put someone in the front
pit that you may not get off the ground. I mean, good lord man, it's an
FC-10! You want to dance with the devil fine....don't bring others into it!
As an aside....she's damn pretty.....too bad some Virginan didn't think of
that paint scheme first.... ;-)
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 6:28 PM, wrote:
> **
> Why all this discussion of Riblett and other airfoils? I don't get it.
> Check out this vid from The Great Jim Markle, Brodhead 2011, at 3:00 min and
> 5:00 min. First one is a Ford Model A and the second is Kevin's proven 85
> horse Corvair. Both climb like a rocket on a hot summer day. What more does
> one want from a Piet? http://youtu.be/DjY0YVsjc7U
>
> Dan Helsper
> Puryear, TN
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Silvius <silvius(at)gwi.net>
> To: pietenpol-list
> Sent: Wed, Aug 3, 2011 5:05 pm
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: re: GA 30-613.5 airfoil drawings.
>
> Jose:
>
> Found these in my stash of goodies, hope they help...
>
> Saludos:
>
> Michael
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Franklin <jbfjr(at)peoplepc.com> |
| Subject: | Wheel Assemblies for sale |
I have for sale two Carlisle 8.00x6 tires mounted on Matco wheels and bearings
plus Matco 3/4" axles. They were mounted on my GN-1 but only rolled in and out
of the hangar.
Please email me offline if interested.
Thanks,
John F.
Richmond, TX
________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: brake cables |
| From: | Ken Bickers <bickers.ken(at)gmail.com> |
Richard, I'm using band brakes. I bought my brake cables at a local
bicycle store that caters to mountain bikes (we have a bunch of those
here in CO). I picked up 1.5mm (essentially 1/16") stainless steel
slick cables. I purchased them in 3000 mm lengths, which had to be
special ordered. I also picked up the housings at the same time.
They sell some that have an inner sheathing that offers ongoing
lubrication and are sized for the 1.5 mm sheathing. The whole thing
was pretty cheap. Whether any of it works, I don't really know yet.
But I like to think it holds the plane from surging forward when I'm
sitting in it making very loud airplane noises. Cheers, Ken
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 3:30 PM, Richard Schreiber wrote:
> Gary, Dan and Ben.....
>
> Thanks for the response. I'll be going with the 1/16 inch brake cables.
>
> Rcik Schreiber
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Doug Dever <chiefpepperhead(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | re: GA 30-613.5 airfoil drawings. |
A very wise old bush pilot told me more than once. There are 2 things you
can never have too much of. Wing and horse power. Of course by wing he me
ant lift.
Doug Dever
In beautiful Stow Ohio
Subject: Fwd: Pietenpol-List: re: GA 30-613.5 airfoil drawings.
From: helspersew(at)aol.com
Date: Wed=2C 3 Aug 2011 19:28:19 -0400
Why all this discussion of Riblett and other airfoils? I don't get it. Chec
k out this vid from The Great Jim Markle=2C Brodhead 2011=2C at 3:00 min an
d 5:00 min. First one is a Ford Model A and the second is Kevin's proven 85
horse Corvair. Both climb like a rocket on a hot summer day. What more doe
s one want from a Piet? http://youtu.be/DjY0YVsjc7U
Dan Helsper
Puryear=2C TN
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Silvius <silvius(at)gwi.net>
Sent: Wed=2C Aug 3=2C 2011 5:05 pm
Subject: Pietenpol-List: re: GA 30-613.5 airfoil drawings.
Jose:
Found these in my stash of goodies=2C hope they help...
Saludos:
Michael
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Brodhead Participants |
| From: | "johnnysdrop" <johnnysdrop(at)googlemail.com> |
To all you Brodhead participants who made Helen and I so welcome on our first visit,
thank you.
The event was fantastic, the people fantastic and we all know Pietenpols are fantastic
anyway!
John Theron
*About to start Pietenpol building in England*
--------
The only way is UP
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348618#348618
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: GA 30-613.5 airfoil drawings. |
| From: | "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com> |
I'm right there with you too Greg. The stall is very very gentle. Obviously Mr.
Riblett has never flown a Piet. Quite a bold statement for someone who has
never experienced it firsthand! I've had the fortune of flying a handful of
them and they all behave the same. Very nice and gentle. I've never talked to
anyone that built the basic "plans" wing and felt the stall was anything but
very gentle.
I don't mean to rant on and on but I really do get tired of people that say negative
things about the Piet and its flying characteristics when they have never
experienced the original design themselves. So even if there has been a serious
scientific evaluation of the airfoil it doesn't mean a whole lot if the airplane
just doesn't behave the way they think it should.
I think I'm going to go enjoy stalling my airplane this evening. :)
Don Emch
NX899DE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348629#348629
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Brodhead Participants |
| From: | "Pieti Lowell" <Lowellcfrank(at)yahoo.com> |
Hello John,
Sorry about the tail wheel assembly. Did you get in touch with Ken Perkins ? He
said ," I have 12 ready to put on a Piet."
Glad to meet you and your lady, we are happy to have you at Brodhead.
Pieti Lowell
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348637#348637
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Brodhead Participants |
| From: | helspersew(at)aol.com |
Hi John and Helen,
Glad to hear that you and Helen made it home safely. Hope y'all had a great
time here in Brodhead and Oshkosh. Can't wait to hear about the progress o
n your new Piet, in your new shop that you described to me. Please come bac
k whenever you have a chance. We will all look forward to it. Good luck my
friend.
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL
Puryear, TN
USA
-----Original Message-----
From: johnnysdrop <johnnysdrop(at)googlemail.com>
Sent: Thu, Aug 4, 2011 2:45 pm
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Brodhead Participants
.com>
To all you Brodhead participants who made Helen and I so welcome on our fir
st
isit, thank you.
he event was fantastic, the people fantastic and we all know Pietenpols are
antastic anyway!
ohn Theron
*About to start Pietenpol building in England*
--------
he only way is UP
ead this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348618#348618
-= - The Pietenpol-List Email Forum -
-= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse
-= the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription,
-= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
-= Photoshare, and much much more:
-
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
-
-========================
-= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
-= Same great content also available via the Web Forums!
-
-= --> http://forums.matronics.com
-
-========================
-= - List Contribution Web Site -
-= Thank you for your generous support!
-= -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-========================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "carson" <carsonvella(at)yahoo.com.au> |
Hi Guys
Just about to order some aluminum for my wing tank I have been through the archives
and see most people are using 5052 is there a reason to use 5052 rather than
6061?
Also thickness 0.040 or 0.050 seem to be the thickness used has anyone found this
to be to thin?
And while I am at it what grade and thickness have people used for there cockpit
coaming ?
Thanks
Carson
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348650#348650
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gboothe5" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
Carson,
You will want to stick with 5052, if for no other reason than it's far
easier to bend than 6061. Mine is .040 and sealed with Pro-seal. The first
air test found two leaks...patched those, then did a fuel test and do leaks
at all!...very easy.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of carson
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 5:08 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fuel Tank
Hi Guys
Just about to order some aluminum for my wing tank I have been through the
archives and see most people are using 5052 is there a reason to use 5052
rather than 6061?
Also thickness 0.040 or 0.050 seem to be the thickness used has anyone found
this to be to thin?
And while I am at it what grade and thickness have people used for there
cockpit coaming ?
Thanks
Carson
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348650#348650
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | helspersew(at)aol.com |
Hi Carson,
I used .050 for the tank. That thickness is good, but I have had some weld
breakage problems because of my lousy design. The edges next to the welds s
hould be stiffened by putting a "trough" with a roller along side the weld
edge. Better to look and follow Bingelis books and look at existing fuel ta
nks out there. If mine gives me any more problems I will start completely o
ver again.
My front engine cowl is .030, 3003 alloy. This is soft enough to form bump-
outs around bolt heads, and installing louvers and such. The sections that
formed the "pit" areas I used .030 , 2024 alloy for stiffness.
Dan Helsper
Puryear, TN
-----Original Message-----
From: carson <carsonvella(at)yahoo.com.au>
Sent: Thu, Aug 4, 2011 7:10 pm
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fuel Tank
Hi Guys
ust about to order some aluminum for my wing tank I have been through the
rchives and see most people are using 5052 is there a reason to use 5052 ra
ther
han 6061?
lso thickness 0.040 or 0.050 seem to be the thickness used has anyone found
his to be to thin?
nd while I am at it what grade and thickness have people used for there coc
kpit
oaming ?
hanks
arson
ead this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348650#348650
-= - The Pietenpol-List Email Forum -
-= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse
-= the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription,
-= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
-= Photoshare, and much much more:
-
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
-
-========================
-= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
-= Same great content also available via the Web Forums!
-
-= --> http://forums.matronics.com
-
-========================
-= - List Contribution Web Site -
-= Thank you for your generous support!
-= -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-========================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Markle <jim_markle(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | What it was like at Brodhead this year.... |
Heaven of course!
Here's a bit more video I just added. And some REALLY exciting video of the ground
as I walked around with the darn camera recording....oops.
http://youtu.be/_c1OG7WcWdY
Jim in Pryor (well, LA right now...but on my way back to Pryor)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: alternative construction materials |
| From: | Wayne Bressler <wayne(at)taildraggersinc.com> |
Tom,
I would recommend hiring an engineer to do the necessary calculations on any
significant modifications such as you're proposing.
I don't know if anybody has done it before, buy I'm certain it could be done
. I have to echo Jack's question of, "why?".
The Pietenpol has proven itself time and again. The only reason to modify i
s builder's preference. I think you will find, with little effort, that the
large majority of modified homebuilts are never completed. Every change af
fects something else, and these changes snowball into a giant mess, overwhel
ming the builder, and completely diminishing any value in the airframe.
If you want to build a flying airplane, stick to the plans. You'll be happi
er in the end, and will have something that you can eventually sell for a fa
ir price in good conscience.
Then again, it's your airplane. Do whatever you'd like. :)
Wayne Bressler
Taildraggers, Inc.
www.taildraggersinc.com
On Aug 2, 2011, at 8:02 AM, "Jack Phillips" wrote:
> All I can say is =9CWhy?=9D
>
> If you want a steel tube airplane, build one. If you want an aluminum air
plane, build one.
>
> If you want a Pietenpol, build it as close to the plans as possible and yo
u will have a good flying airplane.
>
> Jack Phillips
> NX899JP
> Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
>
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-li
st-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of letchik.ivan(at)gmail.com
> Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2011 11:01 AM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: alternative construction materials
>
>
> I was wondering if anyone has built a Pietenpol Air Camper or Sky Scout wi
th materials other than wood or less wood? I know that the Pietenpol was de
signed to make use of wood in its construction. There is also a supplementa
l plan drawn by Bernard Pietenpol which uses metal tubing to construct the f
uselage.
>
> Has anyone built a Pietenpol using more metal than the original plans call
ed for? For example using light metal tubing for the tail and stabilizer se
ction, or perhaps aircraft grade aluminum for the wing ribs or spar, or mayb
e sheet aluminum on the leading edge of the wing or in place of plywood on t
he fuselage, or any other combination. Would the aircraft weigh more if con
structed in the way I just described? Could a more powerful engine overcome
the added weight of having used heavier construction materials? I know the
L4 / J3 Piper Cub is built with all metal structural components covered wit
h cloth skin and is powered by a 65 hp Continental engine, so I am wondering
if similar construction technique could be used on a Pietenpol?
>
> Tom
>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: alternative construction materials |
| From: | "Billy McCaskill" <billmz(at)cox.net> |
If you are intent on using these alternative construction materials to build an
airplane, perhaps you should consider an alternative airplane design to the Pietenpol.
The Piet was designed to be built using materials that were readily
available and with a minimum of effort, and with a skill set that almost everyone
could master easily. The Piet still fits within those design parameters,
and there's no need to go changing the material list or construction methods
to produce a high quality airplane with great flying qualities. Adding weight
and complexity to an airplane rarely adds to the performance of an existing,
proven design.
Go to the Brodhead Piet fly-in some year and check out what shows up at the field...
you won't find a lot of aluminum spars, ribs or leading edges on the planes
there. You won't find a lot of extra metal that adds a lot of extra weight
that requires larger engines with more horsepower. The idea is to keep it simple,
keep it light, keep to the plans as much as possible and wind up with a
great little airplane that you'll be very happy with.
--------
Billy McCaskill
Urbana, IL
tail section almost done, starting on ribs soon
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348679#348679
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Widen fuselage by 2 inches |
| From: | "FlyBoy57" <donato_m(at)hotmail.com> |
I looked at a project today and I like the workmanship. The fuselage is built
and covered. My only concern is that the builder widened the fuselage by 2 inches.
Anyone have any thoughts on what this means for me down the line? What
other modifications and changes do I have to consider because of the wider fuselage?
Thanks a bunch.
Blue skies and warm tailwinds,
Donato
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348683#348683
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Widen fuselage by 2 inches |
Donato,
A wider fuselage is not the end of the world. It just means the plane will
be heavier (and more expensive) than normal. You will also need to take the
extra width into account when mounting the cabane struts to the
centersection. You might want to make the turtledeck and cowlings a bit
taller to keep the fuselage proportions the same.
Mine is 1" wider than plans and as I've stated before, if I had it to do
over again, I would make it to plans. But if everything else looks good on
the project I would not reject it for its Wide Body aspects.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of FlyBoy57
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2011 1:53 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Widen fuselage by 2 inches
I looked at a project today and I like the workmanship. The fuselage is
built and covered. My only concern is that the builder widened the fuselage
by 2 inches. Anyone have any thoughts on what this means for me down the
line? What other modifications and changes do I have to consider because of
the wider fuselage? Thanks a bunch.
Blue skies and warm tailwinds,
Donato
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348683#348683
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charles Campbell" <cncampbell(at)windstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Widen fuselage by 2 inches |
I can't really see anything wrong with widening the fuse by 2 inches as long
as he widened the wing center section the same amount. The cabane
attachment metal pieces need to line up -- vertically. C
----- Original Message -----
From: "FlyBoy57" <donato_m(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2011 1:53 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Widen fuselage by 2 inches
>
> I looked at a project today and I like the workmanship. The fuselage is
> built and covered. My only concern is that the builder widened the
> fuselage by 2 inches. Anyone have any thoughts on what this means for me
> down the line? What other modifications and changes do I have to consider
> because of the wider fuselage? Thanks a bunch.
>
> Blue skies and warm tailwinds,
> Donato
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348683#348683
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | airlion <airlion(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Widen fuselage by 2 inches |
I widened my fuse 2 in. and it sure is a lot more comfy. The changes have
already been done so just put it together and fly. Gardiner
----- Original Message ----
From: FlyBoy57 <donato_m(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Fri, August 5, 2011 1:53:18 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Widen fuselage by 2 inches
I looked at a project today and I like the workmanship. The fuselage is built
and covered. My only concern is that the builder widened the fuselage by 2
inches. Anyone have any thoughts on what this means for me down the line? What
other modifications and changes do I have to consider because of the wider
fuselage? Thanks a bunch.
Blue skies and warm tailwinds,
Donato
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348683#348683
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | airlion <airlion(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Widen fuselage by 2 inches |
I ALSO MADE MY CENTER SECTION 36 INCHES which gave me 20 gallons overhead for my
corvair. Weight is 757lbs. Gardiner
----- Original Message ----
From: Charles Campbell <cncampbell(at)windstream.net>
Sent: Fri, August 5, 2011 3:49:14 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Widen fuselage by 2 inches
I can't really see anything wrong with widening the fuse by 2 inches as long
as he widened the wing center section the same amount. The cabane
attachment metal pieces need to line up -- vertically. C
----- Original Message -----
From: "FlyBoy57" <donato_m(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2011 1:53 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Widen fuselage by 2 inches
>
> I looked at a project today and I like the workmanship. The fuselage is
> built and covered. My only concern is that the builder widened the
> fuselage by 2 inches. Anyone have any thoughts on what this means for me
> down the line? What other modifications and changes do I have to consider
> because of the wider fuselage? Thanks a bunch.
>
> Blue skies and warm tailwinds,
> Donato
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348683#348683
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Widen fuselage by 2 inches |
Donato,
Do not reject that project because of the 2 inch wider fuselage! My Piet has
been flying for over forty years with its fuselage widened by that amount
and did not turn out to be particularly heavy at 630 lb empty.(with a C85-8
and a wooden propeller). I have flown a couple of standard-width Pietenpols
which were a bit "cosy" with extra clothing we need most of the year here in
central Alberta, Canada.
I widened the center section by two inches to match the fuselage, but
changed little else. A friend built his Piet using my jigs and his a/c has
been flying since 1975. Its present owner is somewhat "heavy set" and
appreciates the extra cockpit width.
In my opinion, two additional inches is optimal and I would not widen it
more than that. If I were to build another Pietenpol, it would have the same
fuselage width as old CF-AUN (which I had planned to fly this evening until
thunderstorms showed up).
Graham Hansen
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: What it was like at Brodhead this year.... |
| From: | "K5YAC" <hangar10(at)cox.net> |
You had to get me on tape saying, "wimmins be thinkin too much", right? LOL!
That Burgundy Hatz at 15:30 is from Collinsville, OK.
Thanks for sharing the vid.
--------
Mark Chouinard
Wings, Center Section and Empannage framed up - Working on Fuselage
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348703#348703
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: What it was like at Brodhead this year.... |
| From: | "Jerry Dotson" <jdotson(at)centurylink.net> |
Very good Jim come on down to humid, muggy Florida and help me cover. You can do
the rib stitching. Just getting my feet wet on the control surfaces now. Seeing
all those Piets flying lights a fire to get her done.
--------
Jerry Dotson
59 Daniel Johnson Rd
Baker, FL 32531
Started building NX510JD July, 2009
wing, tailfeathers done, fuselage rolling
using Lycoming O-235
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348708#348708
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Widen fuselage by 2 inches |
| From: | "FlyBoy57" <donato_m(at)hotmail.com> |
Thank you everyone for your responses. I really like this project and it will
move me light years ahead in the build process. I am going back Monday to "make
a deal" I hope. The workmanship looks great, this guy is an A&P/IA and restores
classic airplanes. He was working on rebuilding the wooded wings on a Beech
Stagger Wing when I visited him today.
Thanks again. Blue skies & warm tailwinds,
Donato
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348709#348709
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 1911 pusher, and piet |
| From: | "Baldeagle" <baldeagle27(at)earthlink.net> |
The Curtiss made it home to Virginia on Tuesday, we have about 100 hours on it
now. Since last November it's been from its home in New Market, VA, to Norfolk,
VA, to New York City, then to Oshkosh and back, with many stops along the way.
Here's a shot of it at 4,000 feet over SW Pennsylvania on Tuesday morning:
Unfortunately I only had a cell phone camera in the Taylorcraft, but a neat shot
anyway.
Also, a note about the engine, don't be confused by measuring an engine by horsepower,
the C-125 actually puts out about the same foot-pounds of torque as the
original Curtiss engine, which was a 402 cubic inch V-8. So the thrust, and
performance of the airplane, are very close to the original. Remember, a Curtiss
Jenny weighs 1,920 lbs. gross and is powered by a 90 hp OX-5 (504 cubic inches),
a C-90 probably wouldn't even get a Jenny off the ground.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348712#348712
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Markle <jim_markle(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | DVD copies of videos and rib stitching.... |
wow, rib stitching? I would LOVE to! I'll possibly be in Clearwater FL in a few
weeks so the idea got me all excited....but the 450 mile drive to Baker might
be a bit much.....darn it.
I love looking at those videos and it's a real pleasure sharing them. Even though
my camcorder doesn't have much in the way of stabilizing/movement control.
Oh well.
And if anyone is interested in having a bit over an hour of videos I took this
year, send me an S.A.S.E and I'll send you a DVD. I have a bunch of spare DVD's
and would be more than glad to share them.
Here's hoping the temp drops below 110 this weekend...I'm in the mood to do some
varnishing!
Jim in....LAX....
-----Original Message-----
>From: Jerry Dotson <jdotson(at)centurylink.net>
>Sent: Aug 5, 2011 6:07 PM
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: What it was like at Brodhead this year....
>
>
>Very good Jim come on down to humid, muggy Florida and help me cover. You can
do the rib stitching. Just getting my feet wet on the control surfaces now. Seeing
all those Piets flying lights a fire to get her done.
>
>--------
>Jerry Dotson
>59 Daniel Johnson Rd
>Baker, FL 32531
>
>Started building NX510JD July, 2009
>wing, tailfeathers done, fuselage rolling
>using Lycoming O-235
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348708#348708
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Baldeagle" <baldeagle27(at)earthlink.net> |
The new home for Will's Piet:
http://www.eaglesmereairmuseum.org/
Will and Frank Pavliga and I flew a lot of miles together
-
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348716#348716
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: brake cables |
| From: | "skellytown flyer" <skellflyer1(at)yahoo.com> |
it's probably overkill but I had to replace a Harley clutch cable once on the road.
I got a generic cable from a shop in Denver and it was really heavy duty-
nice outer housing and good smooth operation. if the lengths could be found at
a motorcycle shop you need it might be an option-could likely find that type
part searching online
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348722#348722
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "carson" <carsonvella(at)yahoo.com.au> |
Thanks for the replies
I ended up getting a sheet of 5052 locally .063 as that was the thinnest they had
a little thicker but hopefully a bit easier to weld.
I cant seem to find anything in the Bingelis book about welding aluminum fuel tanks.
I will spend the weekend reading from cover to cover to find it
Carson
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348723#348723
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack" <jack(at)textors.com> |
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=220825189872&s
sPageName=ADME:B:SS:MOTORS:1123
Jack
DSM
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 1911 pusher, and piet |
| From: | "womenfly2" <Love2Fly.KAP(at)gmail.com> |
In the first video you can see the "Johnson Airspeed Indicator" on the strut that
Bob purchased from me, cool!
--------
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348732#348732
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: C85-12 on eBay |
Does anyone know if a C-85 fit on the same motor mount as an A-65?
Dan
On 08/06/2011 06:24 AM, Jack wrote:
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=220825189872&s
> sPageName=ADME:B:SS:MOTORS:1123
>
> Jack
> DSM
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> ______________________________________________________________________
--
Dan Yocum
Fermilab 630.840.6509
yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
Yes, according to the drawings I have, the A65, A75 and the C75, C85 and
C90-12 all use the same mounts. Upper mounts are 7" apart, lower mounts are
10-1/2" apart and the vertical spacing of the mounts is 11-9/16" for all
these engines. The O-200 uses the same spacing but the mounts are
different. The C90-14, C90-16 and O-200 use Lord bushings in the engine
mount, all the earlier models use the standard conical bushings like the A65
used.
So go for it, Dan. Put that C85 in your Pietenpol and get the best of both
worlds - Corvair like power (better, actually since it doesn't need to turn
so fast and can swing a longer prop) and Continental reliability
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Yocum
Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2011 12:38 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: C85-12 on eBay
Does anyone know if a C-85 fit on the same motor mount as an A-65?
Dan
On 08/06/2011 06:24 AM, Jack wrote:
>
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=220825189872&s
> sPageName=ADME:B:SS:MOTORS:1123
>
> Jack
> DSM
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> ______________________________________________________________________
--
Dan Yocum
Fermilab 630.840.6509
yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: C85-12 on eBay |
| From: | mark lee <mlmarkelee7(at)gmail.com> |
That sounds like a nice set up.How does the weight compare to a corvair?
On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Jack Phillips wrote:
> pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net>
>
> Yes, according to the drawings I have, the A65, A75 and the C75, C85 and
> C90-12 all use the same mounts. Upper mounts are 7" apart, lower mounts
> are
> 10-1/2" apart and the vertical spacing of the mounts is 11-9/16" for all
> these engines. The O-200 uses the same spacing but the mounts are
> different. The C90-14, C90-16 and O-200 use Lord bushings in the engine
> mount, all the earlier models use the standard conical bushings like the
> A65
> used.
>
> So go for it, Dan. Put that C85 in your Pietenpol and get the best of both
> worlds - Corvair like power (better, actually since it doesn't need to turn
> so fast and can swing a longer prop) and Continental reliability
>
> Jack Phillips
> NX899JP
> Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Yocum
> Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2011 12:38 PM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: C85-12 on eBay
>
>
> Does anyone know if a C-85 fit on the same motor mount as an A-65?
>
> Dan
>
> On 08/06/2011 06:24 AM, Jack wrote:
> >
>
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=220825189872&s
> > sPageName=ADME:B:SS:MOTORS:1123
> >
> > Jack
> > DSM
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________________
> > This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> > For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> > ______________________________________________________________________
>
> --
> Dan Yocum
> Fermilab 630.840.6509
> yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
> "I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
An A65 weighs 167 lbs. A C85 weighs 182 lbs without starter or generator.
A Corvair weighs somewhere between 210 and 220 lbs and generates 100 -120
hp. However, that horsepower is not as usable as the hp produced at lower
rpm by the Continental.
Lower RPM for the same power implies higher torque and the ability to swing
a larger diameter prop and move a larger column of air. This is exactly why
a Curtiss OX-5 engine which only produced 90 hp could fly something as heavy
as a Curtiss Jenny, weighing over 1900 lbs. I doubt if a Corvair could get
a Jenny off the ground (nor could a C85) where the OX-5, generating its 90
hp at only 1400 rpm could swing a large prop and make very effective use of
its limited horsepower.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of mark lee
Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2011 1:42 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: C85-12 on eBay
That sounds like a nice set up.How does the weight compare to a corvair?
On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Jack Phillips
wrote:
Yes, according to the drawings I have, the A65, A75 and the C75, C85 and
C90-12 all use the same mounts. Upper mounts are 7" apart, lower mounts are
10-1/2" apart and the vertical spacing of the mounts is 11-9/16" for all
these engines. The O-200 uses the same spacing but the mounts are
different. The C90-14, C90-16 and O-200 use Lord bushings in the engine
mount, all the earlier models use the standard conical bushings like the A65
used.
So go for it, Dan. Put that C85 in your Pietenpol and get the best of both
worlds - Corvair like power (better, actually since it doesn't need to turn
so fast and can swing a longer prop) and Continental reliability
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Yocum
Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2011 12:38 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: C85-12 on eBay
Does anyone know if a C-85 fit on the same motor mount as an A-65?
Dan
On 08/06/2011 06:24 AM, Jack wrote:
>
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem
<http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=220825189872&
s> &item=220825189872&s
> sPageName=ADME:B:SS:MOTORS:1123
>
> Jack
> DSM
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> ______________________________________________________________________
--
Dan Yocum
Fermilab 630.840.6509
yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
==========
st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
==========
http://forums.matronics.com
==========
le, List Admin.
="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Boothe" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
.or, for a more scientific test and results, one could read this:
http://www.flycorvair.com/thrust.html
Gary
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jack
Phillips
Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2011 12:01 PM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: C85-12 on eBay
An A65 weighs 167 lbs. A C85 weighs 182 lbs without starter or generator.
A Corvair weighs somewhere between 210 and 220 lbs and generates 100 -120
hp. However, that horsepower is not as usable as the hp produced at lower
rpm by the Continental.
Lower RPM for the same power implies higher torque and the ability to swing
a larger diameter prop and move a larger column of air. This is exactly why
a Curtiss OX-5 engine which only produced 90 hp could fly something as heavy
as a Curtiss Jenny, weighing over 1900 lbs. I doubt if a Corvair could get
a Jenny off the ground (nor could a C85) where the OX-5, generating its 90
hp at only 1400 rpm could swing a large prop and make very effective use of
its limited horsepower.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of mark lee
Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2011 1:42 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: C85-12 on eBay
That sounds like a nice set up.How does the weight compare to a corvair?
On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Jack Phillips
wrote:
Yes, according to the drawings I have, the A65, A75 and the C75, C85 and
C90-12 all use the same mounts. Upper mounts are 7" apart, lower mounts are
10-1/2" apart and the vertical spacing of the mounts is 11-9/16" for all
these engines. The O-200 uses the same spacing but the mounts are
different. The C90-14, C90-16 and O-200 use Lord bushings in the engine
mount, all the earlier models use the standard conical bushings like the A65
used.
So go for it, Dan. Put that C85 in your Pietenpol and get the best of both
worlds - Corvair like power (better, actually since it doesn't need to turn
so fast and can swing a longer prop) and Continental reliability
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Yocum
Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2011 12:38 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: C85-12 on eBay
Does anyone know if a C-85 fit on the same motor mount as an A-65?
Dan
On 08/06/2011 06:24 AM, Jack wrote:
>
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem
<http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=220825189872&
s> &item=220825189872&s
> sPageName=ADME:B:SS:MOTORS:1123
>
> Jack
> DSM
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> ______________________________________________________________________
--
Dan Yocum
Fermilab 630.840.6509
yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
==========
st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
==========
http://forums.matronics.com
==========
le, List Admin.
="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Boothe" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
.or, for a more scientific test and results:
http://www.flycorvair.com/thrust.html
Gary
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jack
Phillips
Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2011 12:01 PM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: C85-12 on eBay
An A65 weighs 167 lbs. A C85 weighs 182 lbs without starter or generator.
A Corvair weighs somewhere between 210 and 220 lbs and generates 100 -120
hp. However, that horsepower is not as usable as the hp produced at lower
rpm by the Continental.
Lower RPM for the same power implies higher torque and the ability to swing
a larger diameter prop and move a larger column of air. This is exactly why
a Curtiss OX-5 engine which only produced 90 hp could fly something as heavy
as a Curtiss Jenny, weighing over 1900 lbs. I doubt if a Corvair could get
a Jenny off the ground (nor could a C85) where the OX-5, generating its 90
hp at only 1400 rpm could swing a large prop and make very effective use of
its limited horsepower.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of mark lee
Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2011 1:42 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: C85-12 on eBay
That sounds like a nice set up.How does the weight compare to a corvair?
On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Jack Phillips
wrote:
Yes, according to the drawings I have, the A65, A75 and the C75, C85 and
C90-12 all use the same mounts. Upper mounts are 7" apart, lower mounts are
10-1/2" apart and the vertical spacing of the mounts is 11-9/16" for all
these engines. The O-200 uses the same spacing but the mounts are
different. The C90-14, C90-16 and O-200 use Lord bushings in the engine
mount, all the earlier models use the standard conical bushings like the A65
used.
So go for it, Dan. Put that C85 in your Pietenpol and get the best of both
worlds - Corvair like power (better, actually since it doesn't need to turn
so fast and can swing a longer prop) and Continental reliability
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dan Yocum
Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2011 12:38 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: C85-12 on eBay
Does anyone know if a C-85 fit on the same motor mount as an A-65?
Dan
On 08/06/2011 06:24 AM, Jack wrote:
>
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem
<http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=220825189872&
s> &item=220825189872&s
> sPageName=ADME:B:SS:MOTORS:1123
>
> Jack
> DSM
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> ______________________________________________________________________
--
Dan Yocum
Fermilab 630.840.6509
yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
==========
st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
==========
http://forums.matronics.com
==========
le, List Admin.
="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: C85-12 on eBay |
| From: | Dan Yocum <yocum137(at)gmail.com> |
Hm. Tempting. Very tempting.
Unfortunately, the remodeling projects we just completed dipped a bit farther into
our checking account than I anticipated.
I'd guesstimate that my A-65 with ~500 hrs SMOH would offset a good portion of
the C-85, though. And I reckon I could keep the McCauley 74-42 prop I have for
the time being...
Yes, it's tempting all right.
Dan
--
Dan Yocum
yocum137(at)gmail.com
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "GliderMike" <glidermikeg(at)yahoo.com> |
Does anyone spin their Piet? Is the general consensus the airframe is strong enough
to do 1 or 2 turn spins, if you don't get drastic with it. When Beech and
Piper came out with the Skipper and Tomahawk, they were originally supposed
to be OK to do spins in them, until a couple of tails fell off.
--------
HOMEBUILDER
Will WORK for Spruce
Long flights, smooth air, and soft landings,
GliderMike, aka Mike Glasgow
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348786#348786
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
I've never spun mine, and don't intend to try. The Pietenpol has a very
small vertical fin and is only marginally stable in yaw. I'm not sure it
would recover well from a spin and would hate to try to spin it, only to
find that it will not recover. Just don't see the point in trying it.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of GliderMike
Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2011 11:00 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Spins
Does anyone spin their Piet? Is the general consensus the airframe is
strong enough to do 1 or 2 turn spins, if you don't get drastic with it.
When Beech and Piper came out with the Skipper and Tomahawk, they were
originally supposed to be OK to do spins in them, until a couple of tails
fell off.
--------
HOMEBUILDER
Will WORK for Spruce
Long flights, smooth air, and soft landings,
GliderMike, aka Mike Glasgow
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348786#348786
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "FlyBoy57" <donato_m(at)hotmail.com> |
Has anyone thought about some type of removable luggage pod that can be installed
under the fuselage on or near the landing gear? Something about the size of
a small carry on for airline travel.
Reason is, I am thinking about installing two fuel tanks. One in front and a few
gallon tank in the center wing section. I will use the pod for overnight trips.
Dumb idea?
Stay well,
Donato
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348804#348804
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "FlyBoy57" <donato_m(at)hotmail.com> |
I agree with Jack, don't do it. However, if you must, a few suggestions. Install
a BRS and have an expert test pilot do it. Be willing to say good bye to
your Piet. if it doesn't go well.
Donato
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348805#348805
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Charvet <bencharvet(at)gmail.com> |
I heard Pat Green tell of a friend spinning his Pietenpol (original
Pietenpol corvair conversion, long fuselage) The guy was wearing a
parachute and Pat was on the ground watching. Evidently it spun so many
times that Pat was hoping the guy would just hit the silk, but he was
able to eventually stop the spin and the airplane was saved. Pat was
telling this story to explain why he had remade his rudder taller than
the plans. It was compelling enough to convince me to make my rudder a
few inches taller. I'm not sure I would fit in my Piet wearing a
parachute, and I'm having enough fun just putting around doing the
occasional lazy-8.
Ben Charvet
Titusville, Fl
Does anyone spin their Piet? Is the general consensus the airframe is
strong enough to do 1 or 2 turn spins, if you don't get drastic with it.
When Beech and Piper came out with the Skipper and Tomahawk, they were
originally supposed to be OK to do spins in them, until a couple of tails
fell off.
--------
HOMEBUILDER
Will WORK for Spruce
Long flights, smooth air, and soft landings,
GliderMike, aka Mike Glasgow
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348786#348786
>
>
-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Charvet <bencharvet(at)gmail.com> |
If you are flying solo it would be better to strap it in the front
seat. I doubt you would be able to carry a passenger with both fuel
tanks full anyway.
Ben Charvet
On 8/7/2011 8:10 AM, FlyBoy57 wrote:
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "FlyBoy57"
>
> Has anyone thought about some type of removable luggage pod that can be installed
under the fuselage on or near the landing gear? Something about the size
of a small carry on for airline travel.
>
> Reason is, I am thinking about installing two fuel tanks. One in front and a
few gallon tank in the center wing section. I will use the pod for overnight
trips. Dumb idea?
>
> Stay well,
> Donato
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
Pete Bowers designed such a belly pod for his FlyBaby. I'm sure the plans
are available somewhere. Try the Fly Baby website:
http://www.bowersflybaby.com
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of FlyBoy57
Sent: Sunday, August 07, 2011 8:11 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Luggage Pod
Has anyone thought about some type of removable luggage pod that can be
installed under the fuselage on or near the landing gear? Something about
the size of a small carry on for airline travel.
Reason is, I am thinking about installing two fuel tanks. One in front and
a few gallon tank in the center wing section. I will use the pod for
overnight trips. Dumb idea?
Stay well,
Donato
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348804#348804
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> |
Something like this?:
https://picasaweb.google.com/TresClements/Thanksgiving2008#5275056994507370914
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348814#348814
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com> |
.com>...............
..........
"Can't you just imagine the terror (or giddy joy) of spinning your Piet thr
ough a thousand feet of solid overcast?".
-
-
-
......................
..................... OR fly into brodhead-through it?
-
Shad
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "FlyBoy57" <donato_m(at)hotmail.com> |
Yea, but I'm not sure I want to make it look like a bomb? Thanks for the pic.
Donato
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348816#348816
________________________________________________________________________________
I'm with Jack Phillips on this one. A few years ago I submitted a post on
this topic and it should be languishing in the archives, so I 'll not repeat
it.
I have been flying my Piet for over forty years and have never spun it. Some
reasons:
1. Type-certified production airplanes are built according to a pretty rigid
specification in order that each aircraft will have predictable and safe
flying characteristics, including spin behavior and spin recovery. One Piper
J3, for example, will behave in the same way as all others of the type,
provided they all conform to the original specification.
2. Homebuilts tend to vary and no two of the same design are exactly
alike.Variations in CG location, rigging and other deviations from the plans
may create problems in spin behaviour and recovery.
3. There is no space for a parachute in my Pietenpol and I am not inclined
to risk losing my airplane by having to abandon it, even if there was room
for both me and a parachute. (Note that the weight of a parachute would be
well aft and could have a bad effect on spin behavior.)
Back in the 1930s several pilots I knew used to spin Pietenpols with heavy
Ford A engines up front, but these guys were young, lean and light (also
brave!). Presumably the CG was far enough forward or they wouldn't have been
able to tell me about it.
Personally, I will spin a type-certified airplane provided it conforms to
the original type specification and is not placarded against spinning, but I
will not do it with my Pietenpol. If I need spin and recovery practice I'll
use an unmodified Luscombe or Taylorcraft..
Graham Hansen Pietenpol Cf-AUN in wet central Alberta, Canada
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mark lee <mlmarkelee7(at)gmail.com> |
Does the Piet behave enough like a cub to be able to practice some spin
recovery and have it translate.It doesn't sound like most Piets are in any
way prone to spinning.Good recovery is a reflex that I want to have anyway.I
will have to start from scratch with the flight training.So I need to get an
idea of what to look for that would help with a Piet.No doubt about it,I'm
going to have a very full dance card for several years.My goal is to never
get a Piet in that situation but build one that would survive at least in
theory.Money,guns,lawyers and good flight training should help with the
other problems,I hope.
Please don't archive.I want them to forget about this in time.
On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 10:03 AM, Graham Hansen <ghans@cable-lynx.net> wrote:
> ghans@cable-lynx.net>
>
> I'm with Jack Phillips on this one. A few years ago I submitted a post on
> this topic and it should be languishing in the archives, so I 'll not repeat
> it.
>
> I have been flying my Piet for over forty years and have never spun it.
> Some reasons:
>
> 1. Type-certified production airplanes are built according to a pretty
> rigid specification in order that each aircraft will have predictable and
> safe flying characteristics, including spin behavior and spin recovery. One
> Piper J3, for example, will behave in the same way as all others of the
> type, provided they all conform to the original specification.
>
> 2. Homebuilts tend to vary and no two of the same design are exactly
> alike.Variations in CG location, rigging and other deviations from the plans
> may create problems in spin behaviour and recovery.
>
> 3. There is no space for a parachute in my Pietenpol and I am not inclined
> to risk losing my airplane by having to abandon it, even if there was room
> for both me and a parachute. (Note that the weight of a parachute would be
> well aft and could have a bad effect on spin behavior.)
>
> Back in the 1930s several pilots I knew used to spin Pietenpols with heavy
> Ford A engines up front, but these guys were young, lean and light (also
> brave!). Presumably the CG was far enough forward or they wouldn't have been
> able to tell me about it.
>
> Personally, I will spin a type-certified airplane provided it conforms to
> the original type specification and is not placarded against spinning, but I
> will not do it with my Pietenpol. If I need spin and recovery practice I'll
> use an unmodified Luscombe or Taylorcraft..
>
> Graham Hansen Pietenpol Cf-AUN in wet central Alberta, Canada
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "GliderMike" <glidermikeg(at)yahoo.com> |
Graham, I'll look thru the archives, and see if I can find your old post about
spins. Thanks.
--------
HOMEBUILDER
Will WORK for Spruce
Long flights, smooth air, and soft landings,
GliderMike, aka Mike Glasgow
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348824#348824
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
That looks just like Dan Yocum's Pietenpol
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Church
Sent: Sunday, August 07, 2011 11:31 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Luggage Pod
Something like this?:
https://picasaweb.google.com/TresClements/Thanksgiving2008#52750569945073709
14
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348814#348814
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Yocum <yocum137(at)gmail.com> |
Yep. I tried to get Tres to sell me the bomb pod, as he called it, but he wouldn't.
Oh, well. Maybe I'll try again noe that he's flying the Boomerang.
Dan
--
Dan Yocum
yocum137(at)gmail.com
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
On Aug 7, 2011, at 10:31 AM, "Bill Church" wrote:
>
> Something like this?:
>
> https://picasaweb.google.com/TresClements/Thanksgiving2008#5275056994507370914
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348814#348814
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> ______________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
Mark,
If you haven't even learned to fly yet, why in the world are you worried
about spinning a Pietenpol? Get your flight training, and insist on spin
training if you can find an instructor and an airplane to do it in. Then
build an airplane that will meet your needs. If you are going to be flying
in the high country I would probably look at something like a Bearhawk
rather than a Pietenpol. Call Bob Barrows and ask him about the spin
characteristics of the Bearhawk.
I can tell you from personal experience that a Pietenpol is not an ideal
mountain flying airplane. On the way back from Oshkosh, as I flew over the
Blue Ridge Mountains at 6,000' there were any number of times when I got
caught in downdrafts and put the plane in climb mode, climbing at full
throttle and best rate of climb speed, and was still losing over 500 feet
per minute. Then a minute or two later, I would be throttled back to idle
and still climbing at 700 feet per minute. I love flying the Pietenpol to
Wisconsin every summer - as soon as I cross the Ohio River and get into the
midwest, where flying is easy. It is not a joy to fly a Pietenpol in the
mountains.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of mark lee
Sent: Sunday, August 07, 2011 2:11 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Spins
Does the Piet behave enough like a cub to be able to practice some spin
recovery and have it translate.It doesn't sound like most Piets are in any
way prone to spinning.Good recovery is a reflex that I want to have anyway.I
will have to start from scratch with the flight training.So I need to get an
idea of what to look for that would help with a Piet.No doubt about it,I'm
going to have a very full dance card for several years.My goal is to never
get a Piet in that situation but build one that would survive at least in
theory.Money,guns,lawyers and good flight training should help with the
other problems,I hope.
Please don't archive.I want them to forget about this in time.
On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 10:03 AM, Graham Hansen <ghans@cable-lynx.net> wrote:
I'm with Jack Phillips on this one. A few years ago I submitted a post on
this topic and it should be languishing in the archives, so I 'll not repeat
it.
I have been flying my Piet for over forty years and have never spun it. Some
reasons:
1. Type-certified production airplanes are built according to a pretty rigid
specification in order that each aircraft will have predictable and safe
flying characteristics, including spin behavior and spin recovery. One Piper
J3, for example, will behave in the same way as all others of the type,
provided they all conform to the original specification.
2. Homebuilts tend to vary and no two of the same design are exactly
alike.Variations in CG location, rigging and other deviations from the plans
may create problems in spin behaviour and recovery.
3. There is no space for a parachute in my Pietenpol and I am not inclined
to risk losing my airplane by having to abandon it, even if there was room
for both me and a parachute. (Note that the weight of a parachute would be
well aft and could have a bad effect on spin behavior.)
Back in the 1930s several pilots I knew used to spin Pietenpols with heavy
Ford A engines up front, but these guys were young, lean and light (also
brave!). Presumably the CG was far enough forward or they wouldn't have been
able to tell me about it.
Personally, I will spin a type-certified airplane provided it conforms to
the original type specification and is not placarded against spinning, but I
will not do it with my Pietenpol. If I need spin and recovery practice I'll
use an unmodified Luscombe or Taylorcraft..
Graham Hansen Pietenpol Cf-AUN in wet central Alberta, Canada
===================================
st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
===================================
http://forums.matronics.com
===================================
le, List Admin.
="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
===================================
________________________________________________________________________________
Has anyone seen these. Seems to be a Pietenpol on view.
Regards
Gerry
________________________________________________________________________________
Here is the Link!!!!
http://www.uflyit.com/cargo_pods.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
I have not spun 41CC, although I've been tempted to a couple of times.
My only hesitation was that my instructor, who is very competent flying
aerobatics, told me that he would prefer that the airplane have a little
more rudder before he would spin it.
Oscar Zuniga
Air Camper NX41CC "Scout"
Flying Squirrel N2069Z "Rocket"
Medford, OR
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "GliderMike" <glidermikeg(at)yahoo.com> |
Jack, it was me that was interested in doing spins. I'm rated in land airplanes
under 12,500 pounds, with at least one reciprocating engine, and free balloons
with airborne heaters. I don't have as much air time as Mark does in the mountains,
but what I do have is in unpowered ultralights. Like Mark, my mountain
flying time is spent looking for the updrafts to gain altitude, and quickly
flying thru the downdrafts, or avoiding the areas where a downdraft is likely
to happen.
--------
HOMEBUILDER
Will WORK for Spruce
Long flights, smooth air, and soft landings,
GliderMike, aka Mike Glasgow
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348873#348873
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charles Campbell" <cncampbell(at)windstream.net> |
Just practice stall recovery. Every spin starts with a stall. If you
can recover from a stall you have already done the important part of
spin recovery. I used to do a spin with a student who was about ready
for solo, just to show him what it was like. I stopped that when one of
my students quit the training because the spin scared the desire to fly
out of him. 2 cents wortth.
----- Original Message -----
From: mark lee
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, August 07, 2011 2:10 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Spins
Does the Piet behave enough like a cub to be able to practice some
spin recovery and have it translate.It doesn't sound like most Piets are
in any way prone to spinning.Good recovery is a reflex that I want to
have anyway.I will have to start from scratch with the flight
training.So I need to get an idea of what to look for that would help
with a Piet.No doubt about it,I'm going to have a very full dance card
for several years.My goal is to never get a Piet in that situation but
build one that would survive at least in theory.Money,guns,lawyers and
good flight training should help with the other problems,I hope.
Please don't archive.I want them to forget about this in time.
On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 10:03 AM, Graham Hansen
<ghans@cable-lynx.net> wrote:
<ghans@cable-lynx.net>
I'm with Jack Phillips on this one. A few years ago I submitted a
post on this topic and it should be languishing in the archives, so I
'll not repeat it.
I have been flying my Piet for over forty years and have never spun
it. Some reasons:
1. Type-certified production airplanes are built according to a
pretty rigid specification in order that each aircraft will have
predictable and safe flying characteristics, including spin behavior and
spin recovery. One Piper J3, for example, will behave in the same way as
all others of the type, provided they all conform to the original
specification.
2. Homebuilts tend to vary and no two of the same design are exactly
alike.Variations in CG location, rigging and other deviations from the
plans may create problems in spin behaviour and recovery.
3. There is no space for a parachute in my Pietenpol and I am not
inclined to risk losing my airplane by having to abandon it, even if
there was room for both me and a parachute. (Note that the weight of a
parachute would be well aft and could have a bad effect on spin
behavior.)
Back in the 1930s several pilots I knew used to spin Pietenpols with
heavy Ford A engines up front, but these guys were young, lean and light
(also brave!). Presumably the CG was far enough forward or they wouldn't
have been able to tell me about it.
Personally, I will spin a type-certified airplane provided it
conforms to the original type specification and is not placarded against
spinning, but I will not do it with my Pietenpol. If I need spin and
recovery practice I'll use an unmodified Luscombe or Taylorcraft..
Graham Hansen Pietenpol Cf-AUN in wet central Alberta, Canada
st"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
http://forums.matronics.com
le, List Admin.
="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Wise words from a wise man |
| From: | "cjborsuk" <cjborsuk(at)yahoo.com> |
In the lated Sport Aviation magazine there is an article written by Dick Vangrunsven
from Van's Aircraft that should be required reading for anyone building
an airplane. He talks about adding weight to the aircraft and making changes to
the plans. Never a hot topic here. ;)
Not sure the link will work, but the article starts on page 96. The story he refers
to in the June edition (p.32), is about a guy who built a beautiful RV-10
(I can't find the link. That website needs some help).
http://www.sportaviationonline.org/sportaviation/201108#pg96
Chuck - Manufacturing metal parts in Raleigh NC!
989CB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348902#348902
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ozarkflyer" <lragan(at)hotmail.com> |
Just curious....how many of you have suffered an engine-out failure? Either in
a Piet or any other aircraft.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348921#348921
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jose Dominguez <jdominguez8826(at)comcast.net> |
I had the left engine quit on takeoff wile flying a Cessna 402 for Cape Air.
Sent from my iPad
On Aug 8, 2011, at 11:32 AM, "Ozarkflyer" wrote:
>
> Just curious....how many of you have suffered an engine-out failure? Either
in a Piet or any other aircraft.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348921#348921
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert S. Edson" <robertse(at)centurytel.net> |
We purchased an 0 200 complete with new mags,a remanufactered marvel
carb with 30 min. run time. It hadn't been run for 2 years and it starts
easy but it has a very bad hesitation when pushing the throttle. The
pump works good and it runs good and sounds good . We put a new kit
($300.00) in it and soaked it for a couple days but it didn't help.Tha
carb is part # 10-4894-1 marvel. We took a carb off a culver cadet and
put it on and it runs beautiful. Does anyone have any suggestions on a
remedy. Thank you,Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov> |
Hi Bob,
Check out the following page of collected wisdom of Harry Fenton:
http://bowersflybaby.com/tech/fenton.htm
In particular search for the term 'Marvel' and you'll find a few
articles regarding these carbs. The one I'm looking at is called "A65
Hesitiation/Miss" (yes, that's a typo). The summary is this:
"You probably have some blocked bleed holes in the carb. If you look
into the carb throat, you will see a series of holes running vertically
in the bore. As the butterfly opens, more of the holes are exposed.
There is an airbleed circuit which provides the transition from idle to
cruise power settings. I'm pretty sure that this is the problem. Could
be that the throttle shaft is too loose in the carb housing and air is
being pulled past the elongated shaft holes. By the way, I'm assuming
that you have a Marvel Schebler MAS carb. The only fix is to get the
carb to a shop to run on a bench."
Best!
Dan
On 08/08/2011 12:06 PM, Robert S. Edson wrote:
> We purchased an 0 200 complete with new mags,a remanufactered marvel
> carb with 30 min. run time. It hadn't been run for 2 years and it starts
> easy but it has a very bad hesitation when pushing the throttle. The
> pump works good and it runs good and sounds good . We put a new kit
> ($300.00) in it and soaked it for a couple days but it didn't help.Tha
> carb is part # 10-4894-1 marvel. We took a carb off a culver cadet and
> put it on and it runs beautiful. Does anyone have any suggestions on a
> remedy. Thank you,Bob
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> ______________________________________________________________________
--
Dan Yocum
Fermilab 630.840.6509
yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gene Rambo <generambo(at)msn.com> |
before you unblock bleed holes=2C you need to make sure what ones are what.
There is a vent hole in some carburetors that has to be blocked in some a
pplications. If you have ever seen a tailwheel aircraft with a C85 that dr
ipped all the time=2C it is a sure bet the carb came off of an Ercoupe or s
ome other nosewheel (training wheel) type aircraft. The solution is to blo
ck a certain port=2C although I cannot recall how to locate and identify it
. A carb shop could probably help.
Gene
> Date: Mon=2C 8 Aug 2011 12:28:10 -0500
> From: yocum(at)fnal.gov
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: marvel carb
>
>
> Hi Bob=2C
>
> Check out the following page of collected wisdom of Harry Fenton:
>
> http://bowersflybaby.com/tech/fenton.htm
>
> In particular search for the term 'Marvel' and you'll find a few
> articles regarding these carbs. The one I'm looking at is called "A65
> Hesitiation/Miss" (yes=2C that's a typo). The summary is this:
>
> "You probably have some blocked bleed holes in the carb. If you look
> into the carb throat=2C you will see a series of holes running vertically
> in the bore. As the butterfly opens=2C more of the holes are exposed.
> There is an airbleed circuit which provides the transition from idle to
> cruise power settings. I'm pretty sure that this is the problem. Could
> be that the throttle shaft is too loose in the carb housing and air is
> being pulled past the elongated shaft holes. By the way=2C I'm assuming
> that you have a Marvel Schebler MAS carb. The only fix is to get the
> carb to a shop to run on a bench."
>
> Best!
> Dan
>
>
>
> On 08/08/2011 12:06 PM=2C Robert S. Edson wrote:
> > We purchased an 0 200 complete with new mags=2Ca remanufactered marvel
> > carb with 30 min. run time. It hadn't been run for 2 years and it start
s
> > easy but it has a very bad hesitation when pushing the throttle. The
> > pump works good and it runs good and sounds good . We put a new kit
> > ($300.00) in it and soaked it for a couple days but it didn't help.Tha
> > carb is part # 10-4894-1 marvel. We took a carb off a culver cadet and
> > put it on and it runs beautiful. Does anyone have any suggestions on a
> > remedy. Thank you=2CBob
> >
> > *
> >
> >
> > *
> >
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________________
> > This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> > For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> > ______________________________________________________________________
>
> --
> Dan Yocum
> Fermilab 630.840.6509
> yocum@fnal.gov=2C http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
> "I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Billy Hi from UK.
Thanks for clearing up the Piet type aircraft. I'm not from the Piet world but
like them a lot.
Belonging to this Pietenpol List is great as I have a similar age of design Parasol,
The Corben Junior Ace.
I'll send you a picture to keep your spirits up before the conquest of the ribs!
Regards
Gerry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ozarkflyer" <lragan(at)hotmail.com> |
Michael
I hope you're on the ground.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348955#348955
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charles Campbell" <cncampbell(at)windstream.net> |
I had an engine failure in a Navy SNJ. I think it was carb ice. I dead
stick landed at an auxilliary air field. Restarted the engine and it
checked out fine so I took off and went back to main base. When that engine
quit, man it really got quiet all of a sudden. Don't want it to happen
again.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ozarkflyer" <lragan(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Monday, August 08, 2011 11:32 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Engine out
>
> Just curious....how many of you have suffered an engine-out failure?
> Either in a Piet or any other aircraft.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348921#348921
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Lagowski Morrow" <jimdeb(at)charter.net> |
My Piet is still for sale and no reasonable offer will be refused.
Built in 2008. TTAE~55hours. Rebuilt Continental 65. Hand prop. Basic
instruments. Steerable Scott tail wheel. Fly Baby landing gear. 800x6
tires. Hangered. In N.W. Michigan. Was asking $14,750--Jim
Lagowski--231-709-1373 (cell )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com> |
Posibly the wrong size main-jet-is installed, The ma3spa has several di
fferent applications, I think there are different size-venturis for the m
a3spa series as well.- If you can identify what pn's (jets, venturi) are
installed you could look up which pn numbers are supposed to be installed i
n an ilistrated parts catalog.- One more thought, Is it a lean condition
or a overly rich hesitation (loading up).- If it is too rich on throttle
up, one W.A.G., maybe the accelrator pump piston arm (actuation arm-to pist
on connection thingy) is in the wrong hole allowing more fuel to be squirte
d into the venturi (longer stroke), thus flooding it out.
-
My 2 cents worth, let us know what fixes it,
Shad
--- On Mon, 8/8/11, Robert S. Edson wrote:
From: Robert S. Edson <robertse(at)centurytel.net>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: marvel carb
Date: Monday, August 8, 2011, 1:06 PM
We purchased- an 0 200 complete with new mags,a remanufactered marvel car
b with 30 min. run time. It hadn't been run for 2 years and it starts easy
but it has a very bad hesitation when pushing the throttle. The pump works
good and it runs good and sounds good . We put a new kit ($300.00) in it-
and soaked it for a couple days but it didn't help.Tha carb is part # 10-48
94-1 marvel.-We took a carb off a culver cadet and put it on and it runs
beautiful.-Does anyone have any suggestions on a remedy.--Thank you,B
ob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hans Van Der Voort <hvandervoo(at)aol.com> |
I did, three weeks after my first flight in my Pietenpol.
Engine out was caused by my flawed fuel system.
I orginally had a 2 1/2 gallon header tank behind the firewall this header
tank was vented in a high pressure area.
While the main tank was vented in low pressure area.
The short of it, when the 2 1/2 gallon Header tank was empty the engine qui
t.
The header tank started filling again when I was stationary on the Ground.
No damage, just a lesson learned.
Needles to say fuel system has been changed.
Hans
NX15KV
-----Original Message-----
From: Ozarkflyer <lragan(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Mon, Aug 8, 2011 10:57 am
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Engine out
Just curious....how many of you have suffered an engine-out failure? Eithe
r in
a Piet or any other aircraft.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348921#348921
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Billy McCaskill" <billmz(at)cox.net> |
i just got back from the Brodhead Piet reunion/ fly-in a few weeks ago, so my spirits
are still quite high Gerry! But the entire Piet list and I are always
suckers for pictures, so send them on! And welcome to the list!
--------
Billy McCaskill
Urbana, IL
tail section almost done, starting on ribs soon
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348965#348965
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "tdudley(at)umn.edu" <tdudley(at)umn.edu> |
I was thirteen in a Quicksilver MX Ultralight. My dad said "always have a landing
spot in mind". Good advice. I even landed with wheels between the bean rows.
First time I remember swearing out loud.
Tom
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348982#348982
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Annual Inspection Checklist |
| From: | "TriScout" <apfelcyber(at)yahoo.com> |
Hello all..
Does anyone use a checklist of items to tackle on an annual conditional inpection?
I'm about to annual the GN-1 w/the help of a DAR. I thought there was once
a list or two floating around the forum a yr or so ago that had some good stuff
on it. Cannot seem to find it in the archives. Thx in advance..
Larry
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348984#348984
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Annual Inspection Checklist |
Larry,
This is the list I use for my annual Condition Inspection. It is geared
towards my airplane, which has wire wheels and a straight axle, but should
give you a good starting point.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of TriScout
Sent: Monday, August 08, 2011 8:11 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Annual Inspection Checklist
Hello all..
Does anyone use a checklist of items to tackle on an annual conditional
inpection? I'm about to annual the GN-1 w/the help of a DAR. I thought there
was once a list or two floating around the forum a yr or so ago that had
some good stuff on it. Cannot seem to find it in the archives. Thx in
advance..
Larry
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348984#348984
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kenneth M. Heide" <kmheidecpo(at)yahoo.com> |
When I started flying challenger ultralights the first thing I learned was to cut
power at 3 thousand feet and land back at the airport! That airplane could
gulide anywhere! No fear of engine out as it taught me to fly the plane and land
safe.
KMH Sent from my iPhone
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Annual Inspection Checklist |
| From: | Dan Yocum <yocum137(at)gmail.com> |
Larry,
Don't search on "annual". Search on "condition inspection.". Jack posted his, and
someone else posted theirs... I think there are 3 Word docs in the matronics
archives. I'm not near my laptop, so I can't send you one directly.
Dan
--
Dan Yocum
yocum137(at)gmail.com
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
On Aug 8, 2011, at 7:11 PM, "TriScout" wrote:
>
> Hello all..
>
> Does anyone use a checklist of items to tackle on an annual conditional inpection?
I'm about to annual the GN-1 w/the help of a DAR. I thought there was once
a list or two floating around the forum a yr or so ago that had some good stuff
on it. Cannot seem to find it in the archives. Thx in advance..
>
> Larry
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348984#348984
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> ______________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Annual Inspection Checklist |
| From: | "TriScout" <apfelcyber(at)yahoo.com> |
Thanks..
I printed your stuff Jack. I think that's the one I saw before. There's alot of
good detail in it. Thanks all..
Larry
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348999#348999
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Baldeagle" <baldeagle27(at)earthlink.net> |
13691 with a broken crankshaft, in the beans near Momence, IL in July 2009
-
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349000#349000
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | New Crankshafts for Fords |
I just ran across an announcement that SCAT Enterprises, which is
well-known for cranks for racing VWs and lately for newer Ford V-8 blocks,
is now offering Chromoly forged cranks for Model As and Ts.
They are apparently counterweighted, accurately machined and balanced and
micropolished. I assume they are for insert bearings, but the
announcement didn't say one way or the other.
Sound interesting for Ford aficionados who can't find a good, straight,
stock crank.
--Mac in Oregon
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: New Crankshafts for Fords |
| From: | mark lee <mlmarkelee7(at)gmail.com> |
There have been counter balanced cranks available for Ts for years.They are
made from heat treated Spheroidal Graphite Iron.It is a surprise that this
is new for the A.The T cranks were over 1,400 dollars three years ago.I
don't remember them being drilled.They make a lot of difference to the T
engines bearing life.These Chromoly Forged A Cranks might really be a good
thing.
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 8:37 PM, wrote:
>
> I just ran across an announcement that SCAT Enterprises, which is
> well-known for cranks for racing VWs and lately for newer Ford V-8 blocks,
> is now offering Chromoly forged cranks for Model As and Ts.
>
> They are apparently counterweighted, accurately machined and balanced and
> micropolished. I assume they are for insert bearings, but the
> announcement didn't say one way or the other.
>
> Sound interesting for Ford aficionados who can't find a good, straight,
> stock crank.
>
> --Mac in Oregon
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Yocum <yocum137(at)gmail.com> |
But, didn't the engine block crack the day before?
--
Dan Yocum
yocum137(at)gmail.com
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
On Aug 8, 2011, at 9:52 PM, "Baldeagle" wrote:
>
> 13691 with a broken crankshaft, in the beans near Momence, IL in July 2009
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349000#349000
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> ______________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Scott Knowlton " <flyingscott_k(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: New Crankshafts for Fords |
Burlington Crank has offered the same for many years. Priced at about $1000.00.
Scott Knowlton
-----Original Message-----
From: macz(at)peak.org
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2011 03:37:52
Subject: Pietenpol-List: New Crankshafts for Fords
I just ran across an announcement that SCAT Enterprises, which is
well-known for cranks for racing VWs and lately for newer Ford V-8 blocks,
is now offering Chromoly forged cranks for Model As and Ts.
They are apparently counterweighted, accurately machined and balanced and
micropolished. I assume they are for insert bearings, but the
announcement didn't say one way or the other.
Sound interesting for Ford aficionados who can't find a good, straight,
stock crank.
--Mac in Oregon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "tools" <n0kkj(at)yahoo.com> |
I probably have 6 or 7 thousand hours, and no engine failures. I've shut a few
down in twin engine jets, no big deal at all. Lost ALL my oil in a single engine
jet, and had several other problems (took out the hydraulic flight controls,
there was a manual back up), but managed to get it on the ground in under
ten minutes. The engine ran flawlessly throughout, which I thought was amazing.
That thing was cranking some 10K rpms, for ten minutes, with NO oil.
Purely an estimate, but I probably have more than 2 thousand hours in simulators...
there, on the other hand, I've lost so many engines for a while I wasn't
sure I could land a plane with both engines running!
I'm new to this light civil aviation thing. It's amazing how much I have to learn,
and change my mindset. In the military, where all the above happened, I
had an ejection seat. That TOTALLY changes your mindset. In the airlines, I've
NEVER had an engine problem ANYWHERE other than on the start. And flying them
single engine really is no big deal. Crazy reliable and spoils you.
I got a ride in a Bonanza one day. The pilot took off, waited a while, muttered
a safe landing could no longer be made and retracted the gear. My whole life,
a safe STOP can't even be made quite some time before you even get airborne.
Lots of little things like that.
Then there's the old B-57 guys and the dreaded SEVEN engine approach!
Tools
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349019#349019
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Max Hegler <maxhegler(at)msn.com> |
Actually the B-57 only had two engines... of course a flight of four could
have had a 7 engine approach...
Max
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Engine out
> From: n0kkj(at)yahoo.com
> Date: Tue=2C 9 Aug 2011 07:10:59 -0700
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
> I probably have 6 or 7 thousand hours=2C and no engine failures. I've sh
ut a few down in twin engine jets=2C no big deal at all. Lost ALL my oil i
n a single engine jet=2C and had several other problems (took out the hydra
ulic flight controls=2C there was a manual back up)=2C but managed to get i
t on the ground in under ten minutes. The engine ran flawlessly throughout
=2C which I thought was amazing. That thing was cranking some 10K rpms=2C
for ten minutes=2C with NO oil.
>
> Purely an estimate=2C but I probably have more than 2 thousand hours in s
imulators... there=2C on the other hand=2C I've lost so many engines for a
while I wasn't sure I could land a plane with both engines running!
>
> I'm new to this light civil aviation thing. It's amazing how much I have
to learn=2C and change my mindset. In the military=2C where all the above
happened=2C I had an ejection seat. That TOTALLY changes your mindset. I
n the airlines=2C I've NEVER had an engine problem ANYWHERE other than on t
he start. And flying them single engine really is no big deal. Crazy reli
able and spoils you.
>
> I got a ride in a Bonanza one day. The pilot took off=2C waited a while
=2C muttered a safe landing could no longer be made and retracted the gear.
My whole life=2C a safe STOP can't even be made quite some time before yo
u even get airborne. Lots of little things like that.
>
> Then there's the old B-57 guys and the dreaded SEVEN engine approach!
>
> Tools
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349019#349019
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Baldeagle" <baldeagle27(at)earthlink.net> |
yocum137(at)gmail.com wrote:
> But, didn't the engine block crack the day before?
>
[/quote]
The mag mount cracked the day before, and was welded. It broke again when the
crankshaft broke, I think because the jagged halves of the crank were pounding
back against the mag drive.
Pulling the engine the day before to repair the mag mount, under the proverbial
shade tree:
-
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349027#349027
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ozarkflyer" <lragan(at)hotmail.com> |
Actually, having been around a bunch (SAC) of B52's and a few B57's (Viet Nam)
there's more than a seven engine difference.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349029#349029
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mark lee <mlmarkelee7(at)gmail.com> |
Were you able to establish why that crank failed?
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 8:25 AM, Baldeagle wrote:
> baldeagle27(at)earthlink.net>
>
>
> yocum137(at)gmail.com wrote:
> > But, didn't the engine block crack the day before?
> >
> [/quote]
>
> The mag mount cracked the day before, and was welded. It broke again when
> the crankshaft broke, I think because the jagged halves of the crank were
> pounding back against the mag drive.
>
> Pulling the engine the day before to repair the mag mount, under the
> proverbial shade tree:
>
>
> -
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349027#349027
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com> |
The B-52, Man it would be scary to loose an engine in one of those, you wou
ld have to shoot the dreaded 7 engine approach.
-
Shad
don't archive
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com> |
Well I hate to admit-it but I know how it feels.- Good luck rebuilding
her.- Was there any damage to the airframe, engine mount etc?- Hope to
see you flying again soon.
-
Shad
--- On Mon, 8/8/11, Baldeagle wrote:
From: Baldeagle <baldeagle27(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Engine out
Date: Monday, August 8, 2011, 10:52 PM
t>
13691 with a broken crankshaft, in the beans near Momence, IL in July 2009
-
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349000#349000
le, List Admin.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "womenfly2" <Love2Fly.KAP(at)gmail.com> |
FAA:
Sec. 91.303
Aerobatic flight.
No person may operate an aircraft in aerobatic flight--
(a) Over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement;
(b) Over an open air assembly of persons;
(c) Within the lateral boundaries of the surface areas of Class B, Class C, Class
D, or Class E airspace designated for an airport;
(d) Within 4 nautical miles of the center line of any Federal airway;
(e) Below an altitude of 1,500 feet above the surface; or
(f) When flight visibility is less than 3 statute miles.
For the purposes of this section, aerobatic flight means an intentional maneuver
involving an abrupt change in an aircraft's attitude, an abnormal attitude,
or abnormal acceleration, not necessary for normal flight.
What are the safety margins designed into the Pietenpol? What is the designed wing
loads and stress at designed weight? What does yours weight? Any mod's?
.... any questions?
--------
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349046#349046
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Yocum <yocum137(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | three A65-12 engines for sale with all accessories, starters |
Hi all,
I just got off the phone with Rob Bach and he informs me that Ray Allen
(of the Mooney Mite club) in Camp Verde, AZ has 3 low time A65-12
engines sitting on stands waiting to be installed on a/c. These engines
come with carbs, mags, and best of all, starters.
Two engines have 600 hrs total time and I think he's asking around
$6-7K. One engine has 2000 hrs total time and I think he's asking
around $9k because it has new Millenium cylinders. All engines are 0
time SMOH.
If anyone is interested, drop me a line off list and I'll help you get
the info.
Cheers,
Dan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brett Phillips" <bphillip(at)shentel.net> |
I think I recognize several good eggs in that shot. Did Frank ever find out why
or where the crank broke?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349069#349069
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov> |
Andrew,
What kind/size of tires are on 13691. Those things are huge!
Dan
On 08/09/2011 10:25 AM, Baldeagle wrote:
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Baldeagle"
>
>
> yocum137(at)gmail.com wrote:
>> But, didn't the engine block crack the day before?
>>
> [/quote]
>
> The mag mount cracked the day before, and was welded. It broke again when the
crankshaft broke, I think because the jagged halves of the crank were pounding
back against the mag drive.
>
> Pulling the engine the day before to repair the mag mount, under the proverbial
shade tree:
>
>
> -
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349027#349027
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> ______________________________________________________________________
--
Dan Yocum
Fermilab 630.840.6509
yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
________________________________________________________________________________
What if you spin a corvair?
-----Original Message-----
From: GliderMike <glidermikeg(at)yahoo.com>
Sent: Tue, Aug 9, 2011 10:36 pm
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Spins
I am beginning to think I should never have brought up the subject of spins
. It
eems spins are more controversial than Corvairs.
o not archive
--------
OMEBUILDER
ill WORK for Spruce
ong flights, smooth air, and soft landings,
liderMike, aka Mike Glasgow
ead this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349092#349092
-= - The Pietenpol-List Email Forum -
-= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse
-= the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription,
-= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
-= Photoshare, and much much more:
-
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
-
-========================
-= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
-= Same great content also available via the Web Forums!
-
-= --> http://forums.matronics.com
-
-========================
-= - List Contribution Web Site -
-= Thank you for your generous support!
-= -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-========================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com> |
Dan, those are 8.50 x 6. I think your Piet needs those too. I've thought about
putting together a set for mine and just switching back and forth between tall
tires and really cool hayfield 8.5 x 6's whenever the mood strikes.
Don Emch
NX899DE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349100#349100
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> |
As a note of interest, Chet Peek writes in his excellent book "The Pietenpol Story"
of an incident involving BHP and spins. From this story, it sounds like spins
had been performed in Air Campers before, but in one instance, with BHP in
the front seat, and a heavier pilot in the rear, they got into a flat spin,
and barely recovered. A cautionary tale. Probably best to just avoid spins with
the Air Camper.
Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349101#349101
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/pietenpolstoryp60_110.pdf
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> |
As a note of interest, Chet Peek writes in his excellent book "The Pietenpol Story"
of an incident involving BHP and spins. From this story, it sounds like spins
had been performed in Air Campers before, but in one instance, with BHP in
the front seat, and a heavier pilot in the rear, they got into a flat spin,
and barely recovered. A cautionary tale. Probably best to just avoid spins with
the Air Camper.
Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349102#349102
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/pietenpolstoryp60_110.pdf
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ozarkflyer" <lragan(at)hotmail.com> |
Thanks for all of the great input and personal experiences. I'm just trying to
find out things others have experienced and hoping to have enough sense to check
for those obvious things that could cause a problem. Even the not-so-obvious
things. My experience has been limited to C-150/52, C-172 and C-182 so you can
see my curiosity regarding other types of ac and engines. I have no experience
with tail-draggers or stick controls but hopefully that issue will be resolved
within the next couple of months.
The value of practicing engine out procedures seems to be in-valuable but my experience
is that it is never practiced during a BFR. Even through 3 CFI's who
have given me the BFR, so I just do it on my own.
Larry Ragan
Mountain View, AR
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349114#349114
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Bickers <bickers.ken(at)gmail.com> |
Larry, in my experience CFIs are generally happy to integrate specific
training requests into BFRs. Explain why you want to emphasize engine
outs and I'll bet the CFI will be delighted to "surprise" you with a
number of different situations. My best, Ken
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Ozarkflyer wrote:
>
> Thanks for all of the great input and personal experiences. I'm just trying to
find out things others have experienced and hoping to have enough sense to check
for those obvious things that could cause a problem. Even the not-so-obvious
things. My experience has been limited to C-150/52, C-172 and C-182 so you
can see my curiosity regarding other types of ac and engines. I have no experience
with tail-draggers or stick controls but hopefully that issue will be resolved
within the next couple of months.
>
> The value of practicing engine out procedures seems to be in-valuable but my
experience is that it is never practiced during a BFR. Even through 3 CFI's who
have given me the BFR, so I just do it on my own.
>
>
> Larry Ragan
> Mountain View, AR
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349114#349114
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "TriScout" <apfelcyber(at)yahoo.com> |
Ran the engine yesterday prior to DAR arrival to start the Annual. Only got 1900
RPM at firewall thrust (full throttle). Hmm.. there's a 2300RPM redline. I'm
running a Sensi W72CK-42 prop. He (DAR) said that's about right for static runup.
It was 41 deg C at the time. Does that concur w/youguys?.. Thx in advance..
Ler
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349121#349121
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov> |
All,
I've said it before and I'll say it again - getting my glider rating was
one of the best things ever I ever did and made me a much better pilot
over all.
Talk about the ultimate engine out experience. Every time you pull the
tow release knob you are committed to land exactly one time. And the
winner is the one who can stay aloft the longest, glide the farthest,
and spot land that sucker exactly on a dime.
That is all. As you were.
Dan
On 08/10/2011 09:58 AM, Ozarkflyer wrote:
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Ozarkflyer"
>
> Thanks for all of the great input and personal experiences. I'm just trying to
find out things others have experienced and hoping to have enough sense to check
for those obvious things that could cause a problem. Even the not-so-obvious
things. My experience has been limited to C-150/52, C-172 and C-182 so you
can see my curiosity regarding other types of ac and engines. I have no experience
with tail-draggers or stick controls but hopefully that issue will be resolved
within the next couple of months.
>
> The value of practicing engine out procedures seems to be in-valuable but my
experience is that it is never practiced during a BFR. Even through 3 CFI's who
have given me the BFR, so I just do it on my own.
>
>
> Larry Ragan
> Mountain View, AR
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349114#349114
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> ______________________________________________________________________
--
Dan Yocum
Fermilab 630.840.6509
yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: A65-8 Run Up |
| From: | "899PM" <rockriverrifle(at)hotmail.com> |
I think you should be seeing about 2100 static with that prop. Carb heat?
--------
PAPA MIKE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349122#349122
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
Hi Larry,
Outstanding that you practice engine out procedures on your own! Just
don=92t
get too low before adding the power back in. As a CFI, I make sure that
I
cover engine out procedures on every BFR I do. I usually pick a field
that
is not readily visible to the pilot, then have him/her do a maneuver (I
actually prefer to pull the throttle while they are doing "clearing
turns"
prior to beginning a maneuver so it takes a few seconds to wrap their
head
around the fact that they just lost the engine). It doesn't matter if
they
find the field that I had chosen, as long as a) they choose a field
suitable
to land in and, b) they set up a glide that will actually make the
field.
Once the glide is established I'll put the power back in, without ever
letting them get lower than about 500' AGL. Then we=92ll discuss the
likely
results. I remember one pilot at Smith Mountain Lake that chose a field
and
remembered the wind direction and set up his landing into the wind.
Unfortunately, the terrain around the lake is fairly mountainous and his
choice to land into the wind (which was only blowing about 5 knots)
meant he
was landing downhill and heading for the water. He realized his mistake
but
too late to make it to another field. Had this been a real forced
landing,
he would have been swimming. If he had chosen to land uphill, it would
have
been a very easy landing to make, even if it was downwind.
It's good practice (and helps pass the time on a long cross-country) to
constantly be looking for fields where you can make a successful forced
landing, and keep that field in mind until you find another one further
ahead, then start looking again. Understand that in a Pietenpol, the
glide
ratio is not very good (actually, it is similar to that of the Space
Shuttle, which is awful), so your radius of search is pretty small. The
good news is it doesn't take a very big field to put a Pietenpol down
in,
but you might have to take it out by truck.
I've never had a total power failure, but I have had two forced landings
due
to partial power failures. Both were preventable. The first was in a
J-3
Cub in Tennessee many years ago. The local A&P had pulled the spark
plugs
to clean them (we had been having magneto problems that summer) and
forgot
to torque one of them. The plug blew out while I was on a
cross-country,
and the engine would only maintain about 1200 RPM - not enough to keep
it in
the air. I was over Interstate 40 but didn't want to land on the busy
highway and remembered a pasture about a mile back. I made a safe
landing
in the pasture and found the plug still hanging on the harness. After
borrowing a 7/8" deep socket from the farmer I re-installed the plug and
flew the plane out of the pasture and back home.
The second was with my Pietenpol, after I had inserted some stainless
steel
wool in the carb heat muffs to increase heat transfer. I did some
fairly
extensive ground testing and verified (I thought) the wool was secure,
and
then flew it for several hours, checking it after each flight. Then I
flew
a photo mission on a cold (29=B0 F) morning over a lake just west of
Raleigh,
NC. I was having trouble keeping up with the Aviat Husky photo plane
and
was picking up carburetor ice. I pulled on full carburetor heat and
continued flying at full throttle to keep up with the Husky. Just as we
finished the shoot, the wool came loose and was immediately sucked into
the
carburetor (obviously, my testing should have been done at full
throttle,
and cruise speeds). The RPM dropped to about 1200 and I immediately
went to
best glide speed, which on my plane is 55 mph. I was 800=92 AGL and the
VSI
said I was coming down at 400 fpm. I was over a forest but heading for
the
closest airfield, which was about 4 miles away. As I came over US
Highway
64 I was at 200=92 and still well over a mile from the strip so I opted
to
land on the highway. As I set up to land, I realized a pickup truck was
right where I needed to be, so I had to pull the nose up and let him get
in
front of me. Then, to keep from stalling I nosed down and literally
flew it
into the ground, hitting fairly hard and bouncing. I recovered from the
bounce and landed it 3-point and was congratulating myself for having
survived when the right wing started to drop. Full left aileron and
full
left rudder weren=92t enough to keep it on the road and it went off into
the
ditch on the right and groundlooped. Only after it stopped did I
realize
the axle had broken when I first hit and I was trailing the right wheel
by
the brakeline. Only time I=92ve ever put a scratch on an airplane.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Ozarkflyer
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 10:59 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Engine out
Thanks for all of the great input and personal experiences. I'm just
trying
to find out things others have experienced and hoping to have enough
sense
to check for those obvious things that could cause a problem. Even the
not-so-obvious things. My experience has been limited to C-150/52, C-172
and
C-182 so you can see my curiosity regarding other types of ac and
engines. I
have no experience with tail-draggers or stick controls but hopefully
that
issue will be resolved within the next couple of months.
The value of practicing engine out procedures seems to be in-valuable
but my
experience is that it is never practiced during a BFR. Even through 3
CFI's
who have given me the BFR, so I just do it on my own.
Larry Ragan
Mountain View, AR
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349114#349114
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: A65-8 Run Up |
I agree. Until I got my Coudcars prop, I had a Sensenich W72CK40 prop and
got 2150 RPM static. On climbout it also got about 2150.
You might check your throttle linkage and make sure it is allowing the
throttle to go to wide open.
On the other hand, those old tachometers can sometimes be inaccurate. If
you know someone with an optical tach have them see what your engine is
actually doing. It might be getting much more than 1900.
Check out Harry Fenton's website. He is pretty much the Guru of the small
Continentals. http://www.bowersflybaby.com/tech/fenton.htm
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of 899PM
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 11:40 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: A65-8 Run Up
I think you should be seeing about 2100 static with that prop. Carb heat?
--------
PAPA MIKE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349122#349122
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | steve(at)wotelectronics.com |
| Subject: | Re: A65-8 Run Up |
That sounds really low, even with carb heat on. At that RPM, you are
making far less than rated power. I thought mechanical tachs tend to
indicate a little low with some age, can't remember for sure. As
someone said, borrow an optical tach to check it.
My A-75 turns about 2,500RPM static. It is very much a climb A-75
prop. With a little more coarse prop it still turned about 2,425RPM.
Granted an A-75 should turn more than an A-65 due to the smaller prop,
but it shouldn't be 600RPM more.
Check the continental manual, it may specify a minimum static RPM. I
know newer manuals or POHs specify this, I can't remember if the -65
does or not. Here is a link to the overhaul manual on my website:
http://www.wotelectronics.com/airplane/Continental%20A-65/Overhaul%20Manual%20-%20A65_75.pdf
Steve Ruse
Norman, OK
>
>
> Ran the engine yesterday prior to DAR arrival to start the Annual.
> Only got 1900 RPM at firewall thrust (full throttle). Hmm.. there's a
> 2300RPM redline. I'm running a Sensi W72CK-42 prop. He (DAR) said
> that's about right for static runup. It was 41 deg C at the time.
> Does
> that concur w/youguys?.. Thx in advance..
>
> Ler
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349121#349121
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov> |
On 08/10/2011 01:06 PM, mark lee wrote:
> Jack thanks for sharing your experiences with us. At a future point that
> may be soon or later I'll be looking for a relevant CFI. You may be able
> to help in that dept.Or you may be able to tell me where to find what I
National Institute of Flight Instructors:
http://www.nafi.org/
Get one with TW experience, but some don't list that in their
endorsements, so just ask.
--
Dan Yocum
Fermilab 630.840.6509
yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov> |
On 08/10/2011 06:57 AM, Don Emch wrote:
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Don Emch"
>
> Dan, those are 8.50 x 6. I think your Piet needs those too. I've thought about
putting together a set for mine and just switching back and forth between
tall tires and really cool hayfield 8.5 x 6's whenever the mood strikes.
My 8.00x4 Cub tires are pretty good, but those 8.50x6 look like I could
get into (and out of) a bunch more bean, corn, or hay fields.
Thanks!
Dan
--
Dan Yocum
Fermilab 630.840.6509
yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mild Bill" <whfrank(at)charter.net> |
Does a Pietenpol really need any wash-out for purposes of taming the stalling characteristics?
Hershey bar wings that have no wash-out have a stall that starts
at the root and progresses toward the tips anyway. I've been trying various
thought experiments involving dihedral vs. no dihedral and don't see how the
basic stall behavior of a wing with no wash-out would be affected either way.
(Unless perhaps there is large angle of cross flow, but didn't our flight instructors
constantly harangue us about the desirability, even the absolute necessity,
of keeping the ball centered?)
Well, a little bit of wash-out will make an already manageable stall behavior even
more pleasant. With wash-out beginning at the inboard end of the aileron,
you wouldn't need more than 1 deg or so at the tip (trailing edge up 1" at tip),
which would conveniently reduce the induced drag a little at climbing angle
of attack.
Yes, reducing the angle of attack toward the tips to implement the wash-out will
reduce the total wing lift slightly at the same angle of attack at the wing
root. However, the average reduction in angle of attack from the inboard end of
the aileron to the tip will be 1/2 deg and, since the aileron takes up a little
less than half the semispan, the net effect would be to require increasing
the wing incidence at the root by a little less than 1/4 deg. This is something
a builder starting from scratch may want to consider, but it's not too critical
because compensation can be made by adjusting the angle of the horizontal
stabilizer or changing the angle of the elevator (nice to have a trim tab in
the latter case).
There have been a number of airplanes with wing incidence adjustable in flight.
The ultimate was George Spratt's Control Wing, which has an airfoil with a positive
pitching moment, which allows the wing to pivot freely around a spanwise
hinge axis to accommodate changes in the relative wind. If you fly into a sharp-edged
updraft, the wing simply noses down on its own to maintain a constant
angle of attack. Since the wing has a lot less rotational inertia than the entire
airframe (fuselage, tail, and rigidly attached wing) and doesn't have to
wait for the horizontal tail to enter the gust, the g loads in turbulence are
reduced by about 75%.
http://speleotrove.com/wings/controlwing_plans.html
Hmmm..... That site's link to http://www.georgespratt.org/ kept timing out on me. Hopefully some or all of the links at this archive site will produce results:
http://web.archive.org/web/20090524180813/http://www.georgespratt.org/
--------
Bill Frank
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349140#349140
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov> |
I had the condition inspection done on N8031 the other day. Almost felt
my wallet jump out of my back pocket when the left rear cylinder
wouldn't initially hold more than 30lbs of pressure, but after whacking
the valves with a rubber mallet and wiggling the prop back and forth a
little it came up to 70lbs. The engine was cold - I should have run her
a little to loosen up the rings. Live an' learn.
My A&P/IA says I should get 4 new bottom plugs. I've got Auburn 185T-8
plugs almost all the way around, but Auburn was sold to Champion a while
back so I probably won't be able to find those, again (maybe at Fresno
Air Parts...).
Does any other Continental pilot have any suggestions on what I should
get, instead?
Thanks!
Dan
--
Dan Yocum
Fermilab 630.840.6509
yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Piet vs. GN-1 |
| From: | "Mild Bill" <whfrank(at)charter.net> |
SteveR wrote:
> I have a GN-1, built (finished) in 1983. It has about 700 hours total time on
it, about 400 of those are mine. I've also flow "true" Piets, and they fly nearly
identical. My wing does have negative camber, and to me is visually identical
to the Piet wing.
>
> The wing is much higher than the Piet, which makes getting in and out much easier.
However, I wonder if this doesn't slow my plane down due to the elevator
being trimmed down to counteract the up-pitching moment from the wing's drag
being so far above the cg & thrustline (in addition to the up-pitching moment
of the wing itself).
Well, just playing devil's advocate here, but....
If your wing has negative camber, which I take to mean undercamber, then its pitching
moment is about the same as the infamous FC-10's, namely, a walloping big
dose of negative pitching moment. Since this means that the wing by itself
wants to pitch the whole airplane nose down, the increased nose up moment from
the higher placed wing may provide a better "counterbalance" to the wing's pitching
moment, thereby reducing the amount of downward lift required from the
horizontal tail to balance things out, thereby reducing the induced drag from
the horizontal tail, thereby....
INCREASING the cruising speed of your GN-1 !!!
By a tenth of a mile per hour or so. :D
--------
Bill Frank
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349143#349143
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | steve(at)wotelectronics.com |
| Subject: | Re: A65 spark plugs |
I use the REM-37BY projected nose plugs in my A-75. When I bought them
about 3 years ago they were Autolite/Unison and about $15 each.
Autolite stopped production and Tempest took over. Now they are about
$23. Champion's version is nearly $30.
The 37BY was made specifically for the C-152 with the O-235 I believe.
The projected nose design is to prevent lead fouling. It also results
in I believe about a 3%-5% increase in horsepower...I forget where I
read that. I thought those were both good things so that is what I am
using. I believe these are recommended for the O-320 and O-360 also.
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/eppages/temptestplugs8.php
Steve Ruse
Norman, OK
>
> I had the condition inspection done on N8031 the other day. Almost
> felt my wallet jump out of my back pocket when the left rear cylinder
> wouldn't initially hold more than 30lbs of pressure, but after
> whacking the valves with a rubber mallet and wiggling the prop back
> and forth a little it came up to 70lbs. The engine was cold - I
> should have run her a little to loosen up the rings. Live an' learn.
>
> My A&P/IA says I should get 4 new bottom plugs. I've got Auburn
> 185T-8 plugs almost all the way around, but Auburn was sold to
> Champion a while back so I probably won't be able to find those,
> again
> (maybe at Fresno Air Parts...).
>
> Does any other Continental pilot have any suggestions on what I
> should get, instead?
>
> Thanks!
> Dan
>
> --
> Dan Yocum
> Fermilab 630.840.6509
> yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
> "I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
I'm slowly replacing the Unison plugs in my A65 with Champions. The
Champions cost more but seem to last much longer and resist fouling better.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
steve(at)wotelectronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 3:18 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: A65 spark plugs
I use the REM-37BY projected nose plugs in my A-75. When I bought them
about 3 years ago they were Autolite/Unison and about $15 each.
Autolite stopped production and Tempest took over. Now they are about
$23. Champion's version is nearly $30.
The 37BY was made specifically for the C-152 with the O-235 I believe.
The projected nose design is to prevent lead fouling. It also results
in I believe about a 3%-5% increase in horsepower...I forget where I
read that. I thought those were both good things so that is what I am
using. I believe these are recommended for the O-320 and O-360 also.
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/eppages/temptestplugs8.php
Steve Ruse
Norman, OK
>
> I had the condition inspection done on N8031 the other day. Almost
> felt my wallet jump out of my back pocket when the left rear cylinder
> wouldn't initially hold more than 30lbs of pressure, but after
> whacking the valves with a rubber mallet and wiggling the prop back
> and forth a little it came up to 70lbs. The engine was cold - I
> should have run her a little to loosen up the rings. Live an' learn.
>
> My A&P/IA says I should get 4 new bottom plugs. I've got Auburn
> 185T-8 plugs almost all the way around, but Auburn was sold to
> Champion a while back so I probably won't be able to find those,
> again
> (maybe at Fresno Air Parts...).
>
> Does any other Continental pilot have any suggestions on what I
> should get, instead?
>
> Thanks!
> Dan
>
> --
> Dan Yocum
> Fermilab 630.840.6509
> yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
> "I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charles Campbell" <cncampbell(at)windstream.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Piet vs. GN-1 |
OK! I'm building my Piet directly according to the plans (with a few minor
changes, like aileron hinges) but, I had a full-size copy of the GN-1 wing
rib before I got my Piet plans. So I built my rib jig and thus the ribs per
the GN-1 wing. So, I will have a GN-1 wing on a Piet body with a Corvair
engine. (What a mish-mash) Sooooo. What cabane dimensions should I use?
I'm almost to that point in the building process. Chuck
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mild Bill" <whfrank(at)charter.net>
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 3:11 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Piet vs. GN-1
>
>
> SteveR wrote:
>> I have a GN-1, built (finished) in 1983. It has about 700 hours total
>> time on it, about 400 of those are mine. I've also flow "true" Piets, and
>> they fly nearly identical. My wing does have negative camber, and to me
>> is visually identical to the Piet wing.
>>
>> The wing is much higher than the Piet, which makes getting in and out
>> much easier. However, I wonder if this doesn't slow my plane down due to
>> the elevator being trimmed down to counteract the up-pitching moment from
>> the wing's drag being so far above the cg & thrustline (in addition to
>> the up-pitching moment of the wing itself).
>
> Well, just playing devil's advocate here, but....
>
> If your wing has negative camber, which I take to mean undercamber, then
> its pitching moment is about the same as the infamous FC-10's, namely, a
> walloping big dose of negative pitching moment. Since this means that the
> wing by itself wants to pitch the whole airplane nose down, the increased
> nose up moment from the higher placed wing may provide a better
> "counterbalance" to the wing's pitching moment, thereby reducing the
> amount of downward lift required from the horizontal tail to balance
> things out, thereby reducing the induced drag from the horizontal tail,
> thereby....
>
> INCREASING the cruising speed of your GN-1 !!!
>
> By a tenth of a mile per hour or so. :D
>
> --------
> Bill Frank
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349143#349143
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charles Campbell" <cncampbell(at)windstream.net> |
I'm using 8.00 X 6 tires. I won't be able to go into quite as many hay
fields as you but almost! Chuck
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Yocum" <yocum(at)fnal.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 2:42 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Engine out
>
>
> On 08/10/2011 06:57 AM, Don Emch wrote:
>> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Don Emch"
>>
>> Dan, those are 8.50 x 6. I think your Piet needs those too. I've
>> thought about putting together a set for mine and just switching back and
>> forth between tall tires and really cool hayfield 8.5 x 6's whenever the
>> mood strikes.
>
> My 8.00x4 Cub tires are pretty good, but those 8.50x6 look like I could
> get into (and out of) a bunch more bean, corn, or hay fields.
>
> Thanks!
> Dan
>
>
> --
> Dan Yocum
> Fermilab 630.840.6509
> yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
> "I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: A65-8 Run Up |
| From: | "TriScout" <apfelcyber(at)yahoo.com> |
Thanks...
I've got the overhaul manual in hard copy. I suspect that I'll have to revisit
the throttle linkage first. It was 41 deg out w/Density Alt about 4k, but I would
still like to see at least 2100 r's to get a warm fozzy. Maybe new plugs would
do the trick as well..
Ler
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349174#349174
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Woodflier(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | RE: Engine Out and Glider Rating |
Dan, I didn't know you were a fellow glider-guider. No wonder I liked you
from the get-go. I've been a glider pilot since I was 16. Did you see Barry
Schiff's article in AOPA Pilot magazine a few months ago on the value of
learning to fly gliders? Great piece.
Matt
From: Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Engine out
All,
I've said it before and I'll say it again - getting my glider rating was
one of the best things ever I ever did and made me a much better pilot
over all.
Talk about the ultimate engine out experience. Every time you pull the
tow release knob you are committed to land exactly one time. And the
winner is the one who can stay aloft the longest, glide the farthest,
and spot land that sucker exactly on a dime.
That is all. As you were.
Dan
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Piet vs. GN-1 |
| From: | "Mild Bill" <whfrank(at)charter.net> |
Do you know exactly which wing section the GN-1 plans use?
Hmm.... This might be informative:
http://gn-1aircamper.blogspot.com/
If the coordinates given under the heading "XFOIL Blended Airfoil Ordinates" on
that site produce a section that looks exactly (or very nearly) like the section
on the ribs you built, then we may be in business. Those coordinates were
presumably fed into XFOIL to generate the plot under the previous heading "XFOIL
Version 6.96 Analysis GN-1 Aircamper Airfoil at Stall Speed". The wing angle
of incidence relative to the top longerons in the cabane area can be determined
by knowing the difference between the zero lift and cruising lift angles of
attack read off the plot. (Plus knowing the angle between the top longerons
and the horizon in level cruising flight in case they are not parallel.)
For those with sharp eyes who noticed that the plot is only for the Reynolds number
at stall speed: Yes, the airfoil will probably be slightly more efficient
at cruise speed, so the angle of attack for the cruise coefficient of lift might
be slightly lower than the value read off the plot, but the difference won't
be significant.
--------
Bill Frank
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349205#349205
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: A65 spark plugs |
I forgot to mention, I've got unshielded plugs and harness - the kind
with the clip on that are exposed to the elements (and rain at Brodhead).
Sorry for the confusion and thanks for your time!
Dan
On 08/10/2011 07:57 PM, Jack Phillips wrote:
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Jack Phillips"
>
> I'm slowly replacing the Unison plugs in my A65 with Champions. The
> Champions cost more but seem to last much longer and resist fouling better.
>
> Jack Phillips
> NX899JP
> Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> steve(at)wotelectronics.com
> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 3:18 PM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: A65 spark plugs
>
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: steve(at)wotelectronics.com
>
> I use the REM-37BY projected nose plugs in my A-75. When I bought them
> about 3 years ago they were Autolite/Unison and about $15 each.
> Autolite stopped production and Tempest took over. Now they are about
> $23. Champion's version is nearly $30.
>
> The 37BY was made specifically for the C-152 with the O-235 I believe.
> The projected nose design is to prevent lead fouling. It also results
> in I believe about a 3%-5% increase in horsepower...I forget where I
> read that. I thought those were both good things so that is what I am
> using. I believe these are recommended for the O-320 and O-360 also.
>
> http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/eppages/temptestplugs8.php
>
> Steve Ruse
> Norman, OK
>
>> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Dan Yocum
>>
>> I had the condition inspection done on N8031 the other day. Almost
>> felt my wallet jump out of my back pocket when the left rear cylinder
>> wouldn't initially hold more than 30lbs of pressure, but after
>> whacking the valves with a rubber mallet and wiggling the prop back
>> and forth a little it came up to 70lbs. The engine was cold - I
>> should have run her a little to loosen up the rings. Live an' learn.
>>
>> My A&P/IA says I should get 4 new bottom plugs. I've got Auburn
>> 185T-8 plugs almost all the way around, but Auburn was sold to
>> Champion a while back so I probably won't be able to find those,
>> again
>> (maybe at Fresno Air Parts...).
>>
>> Does any other Continental pilot have any suggestions on what I
>> should get, instead?
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Dan
>>
>> --
>> Dan Yocum
>> Fermilab 630.840.6509
>> yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
>> "I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
>>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> ______________________________________________________________________
--
Dan Yocum
Fermilab 630.840.6509
yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ryan M <aircamperace(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Jointer - Planer Do I Need It |
Hey guys I have a old Craftsman planer-joiner that's taking up room in my s
hop that I got from a-relative. Do I need it for the Piet or can everythi
ng be done with a table saw? I don't know how to use it, I tried it once an
d it scared the heck out of me.=0A=0ARyan
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Jointer - Planer Do I Need It |
| From: | gboothe5(at)comcast.net |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________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | airlion <airlion(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Jointer - Planer Do I Need It |
Ryan, you can use it to plan down wood for spars. It would pay for itself if you
can find the wood. Cheers, Gardiner
________________________________
From: Ryan M <aircamperace(at)yahoo.com>
Sent: Thu, August 11, 2011 7:30:53 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Jointer - Planer Do I Need It
Hey guys I have a old Craftsman planer-joiner that's taking up room in my shop
that I got from a relative. Do I need it for the Piet or can everything be done
with a table saw? I don't know how to use it, I tried it once and it scared the
heck out of me.
Ryan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gene Rambo <generambo(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Jointer - Planer Do I Need It |
Ryan=2C you do not need or want that. A real planer is a good thing and a
very useful tool=2C but that joiner is not very useful. If you ever see an
old woodworker missing a finger=2C I guarantee it was done on a joiner.
Gene
Date: Thu=2C 11 Aug 2011 16:30:53 -0700
From: aircamperace(at)yahoo.com
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Jointer - Planer Do I Need It
Hey guys I have a old Craftsman planer-joiner that's taking up room in my s
hop that I got from a relative. Do I need it for the Piet or can everything
be done with a table saw? I don't know how to use it=2C I tried it once an
d it scared the heck out of me.
Ryan
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Jointer - Planer Do I Need It |
| From: | "tools" <n0kkj(at)yahoo.com> |
That is actually a jointer. A jointer/planer is a rather specialized combination
tool, that isn't very common.
A planer will have some sort of provision for allowing the tool to merely change
the thickness of the wood while maintaining the planed face parallel to the
other side.
A jointer is designed to get one face of the wood flat, and one edge flat and perpendicular
to that first face. A planer then conditions the remaining face,
a table saw then takes care of the fourth side to a specific width.
This jointer can only surface a 6" wide board. In practice, you would want a jointer
as wide as your planer. Most home shops buy wood already surfaced, so
most jointers are only used to "joint" the wood, which is to say, make one edge
REALLY straight for good glue ups edge to edge, to make a wider board (as in
a table top). This jointer generally had that in mind when made and marketed.
Although made during the years when Craftsman, like many others, had some quality
control issues, it's a really nice design, that uses a parallelogram geometry
for table movement. Properly adjusted, and it's very adjustable, it's a gem.
However, not much resale value, and probably not super useful in building a Piet.
The bed is much too short for proper surfacing of a board 15 feet long. And
once you get one face cleaned up, there is no way to ensure when you do the
opposite side, that it will be parallel to the first in two planes, which it
needs to be.
If my friends over on the old woodworking machine forum catch me saying this, I'll
be ousted... but the little relatively inexpensive 12" "lunchbox" planers
available from Lowes, Home Depot (for example) will do a fine job of dimensioning
your lumber for a piet project.
Tools
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349231#349231
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "tools" <n0kkj(at)yahoo.com> |
Ok guys, already mentioned my lack of experience in the light civil world... I
was talking to my dad, who was taking a BFR some years ago with a guy, that liked
engine out practice...
This guy tricked my dad into doing something with the tank switch in something,
a single engine something with two tanks apparantly, rented for the flight, and
SHUT DOWN THE ENGINE. ALL ONE OF THEM!!!
I was STUNNED. During checkrides when I was flying the twin engine Lockheed S-3B
Viking, we were supposed to shut down an engine and do an inflight restart.
I always flatly refused. While the NATOPS check guys were always senior to
me, I was the aircraft commander, in the left seat. Simply refused. We have
VERY NICE simulators, PERFECT for that sort of thing.
Anyway, my next question was to ask my dad if he then shoved the guy out of the
airplane, to help the glide ratio! Dad picked out a good field, it all looked
good, they restarted the engine and went along with the check ride. Dad thought
it was good practice. Actually, I think it was over the airport they were
flying out of that day.
Is that normal?
Tools
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349232#349232
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Jointer - Planer Do I Need It |
| From: | "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> |
Maybe if you could post a larger photo...
Just kidding.
What you have there is a very useful tool ... if you're joining boards together
- like for a tabletop. For building a Piet, I can think of no parts that would
benefit from it.
Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349237#349237
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Pietenpol Sky Scout 10718 |
| From: | "K5YAC" <hangar10(at)cox.net> |
I stumbled across the original Sky Scout (10718) by complete accident this morning.
A friend informed me that an original Pietenpol airplane was in our area.
I was surprised that I had not heard of this sooner, but as it turns out, the
new owner (Fred Houston - a model T restorer) has only had the airplane for about
a year. Fred runs a storage facility, but several of the buildings along
the front of the property resemble an old 1930s town. Inside his shop are several
antiques and Ford Model-T related items. A pretty neat place to have a look
at a genuine piece of Pietenpol history right in the ol back yard. Enjoy the
photos.
http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.1462061128410.45716.1739931453&l=ef485b561a&type=1
--------
Mark Chouinard
Wings, Center Section and Empannage framed up - Working on Fuselage
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349241#349241
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ryan M <aircamperace(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Jointer - Planer Do I Need It |
Thanks everyone! I've got it listed on craig's list. I'll be happy to get i
t out of my way.=0A-=0ARyan=0A=0AFrom: Bill Church <billspiet(at)sympatico.c
a>=0ATo: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com=0ASent: Thursday, August 11, 2011 10:
25 PM=0ASubject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Jointer - Planer Do I Need It=0A=0A-->
Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Bill Church"
=0A=0AMaybe if you could post a larger photo...=0A=0AJust kidding.=0AWhat y
ou have there is a very useful tool ... if you're joining boards together -
like for a tabletop. For building a Piet, I can think of no parts that wou
ld benefit from it.=0A=0ABill C.=0A=0A=0A=0A=0ARead this topic online here:
=0A=0Ahttp://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349237#349237=0A=0A=0A
===================
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: A65 spark plugs |
| From: | "Piet2112" <curtdm(at)gmail.com> |
I also have the unshielded plugs and harnesses and came across the list from TCM
of approved spark plugs. I hope it helps.
Curt
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349253#349253
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/spark_plugs_838.pdf
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "899PM" <rockriverrifle(at)hotmail.com> |
[/quote]
My 8.00x4 Cub tires are pretty good, but those 8.50x6 look like I could
get into (and out of) a bunch more bean, corn, or hay fields.
Thanks!
Dan
--
Dan Yocum
Fermilab 630.840.6509
yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."[/quote]
Dan,
You're gonna need a lot more than 850's to tackle the beans! I had an an emergency
landing two weekend ago due to an inflight prop failure. 45mph to a full stop
in less than 40ft in those 3 1/2ft tall beans.
--------
PAPA MIKE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349254#349254
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_4042_680.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: A65 spark plugs |
| From: | "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com> |
Dan,
All I've used for the Piet and the Chief are the Champion unshielded M41E plugs.
Never had a problem of any kind. They really don't tend to load up much either.
They are 2 prong. Can be bought new, although a little pricey. If you
can find an old set of the C26 plugs they will work too. They haven't been made
in a long time but you can still find them sometimes. They have 4 prongs
and I've heard they tend to foul a little quicker which is why they went to 2.
Both of these are unshielded.
Don Emch
NX899DE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349257#349257
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Sky Scout 10718 |
| From: | "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com> |
Chris Egsgaard made his mark in Pietenpol history and was quite a character too.
I believe he even had something to do with building the original Batmobile.
Others on the list may know more about this.
Don Emch
NX899DE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349258#349258
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Jointer - Planer Do I Need It |
| From: | mark lee <mlmarkelee7(at)gmail.com> |
Craigs List sounds like a good idea.You have me laughing at my piles of home
workshop tools.Most are good for building 'home workshops".To make it all
worse I will have to move it all over 900 miles.Then set up,you guessed it,a
good home workshop.It's amazingly easy to wind up like a monkey with its
hand in a jar.Also if you need to keep everything clean while building
something like an airplane there are dust collection problems.Your tool
won't be of much use anyway,for anything,unless the blades are sharp and you
know how to safely use it.
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 7:34 AM, Ryan M wrote:
> Thanks everyone! I've got it listed on craig's list. I'll be happy to get
> it out of my way.
>
> Ryan
>
> *From:* Bill Church
> *To:* pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2011 10:25 PM
> *Subject:* Pietenpol-List: Re: Jointer - Planer Do I Need It
>
> billspiet(at)sympatico.ca>
>
> Maybe if you could post a larger photo...
>
> Just kidding.
> What you have there is a very useful tool ... if you're joining boards
> together - like for a tabletop. For building a Piet, I can think of no parts
> that would benefit from it.
>
> Bill C.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349237#3/Navigator?Pietenpol-List"
> target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List>
> _f="http://forums.matronics.com/" target=_blank>
> http://forums.matronics.nbsp; onics.com/contribution"
> ======
>
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: A65 spark plugs |
Don,
Ah, that's the answer I was looking for! I should have asked you
sooner, but I remembered too late that you have the same ignition system
that I do.
Thanks!
Dan
On 08/12/2011 10:47 AM, Don Emch wrote:
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Don Emch"
>
> Dan,
>
> All I've used for the Piet and the Chief are the Champion unshielded M41E plugs.
Never had a problem of any kind. They really don't tend to load up much
either. They are 2 prong. Can be bought new, although a little pricey. If you
can find an old set of the C26 plugs they will work too. They haven't been
made in a long time but you can still find them sometimes. They have 4 prongs
and I've heard they tend to foul a little quicker which is why they went to
2. Both of these are unshielded.
>
> Don Emch
> NX899DE
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349257#349257
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> ______________________________________________________________________
--
Dan Yocum
Fermilab 630.840.6509
yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Sky Scout 10718 |
| From: | "Pieti Lowell" <Lowellcfrank(at)yahoo.com> |
Chris Essgard gave Mr Pietenpol a ride down his run way at a very high speed as
Mr, P told me, he said that one ride was enough, I believe that Chris was also
the driver in a Bat Man movie, Vi Kapler would have more detail.
Pieti Lowell
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349282#349282
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: A65-8 Run Up |
| From: | "skellytown flyer" <skellflyer1(at)yahoo.com> |
might want to check the timing too if the tach checks out.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349291#349291
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Sky Scout 10718 |
| From: | "BYD" <billsayre(at)ymail.com> |
Chris Egsgaard, drove the Batmobile in the television series.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349293#349293
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pieti Lowell" <Lowellcfrank(at)yahoo.com> |
TFR From Minn. MN to Decorah IA, August 15, Close to 35 airports affected.
Pieti Lowell
Don't Archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349308#349308
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pieti Lowell" <Lowellcfrank(at)yahoo.com> |
I just had a friend loose a prop tip and made an emergency landing, with much damage
to his aircraft.
He showed me the brass leading edge separation was due to rivets failing and wood
discoloration around the failed rivets.
Later he said that one can inspect the two sides if each rivet to see if there
is circle type cracking within the diameter of each rivet.
Also he discovered the double overlap drilled rivet holes that may have been done
during the reworked prop by a prop company, This was not detectable by visual
means, before accident. The pilot, also building a Pietenpol, inspected his
76 X 42 Sensenich and found one defective rivet.
SO A WORD TO THE WISE. From the wiser.
Pieti Lowell
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349315#349315
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pieti Lowell" <Lowellcfrank(at)yahoo.com> |
Mike:
I noted in this list, that you had a prop disassemble in flight, and kept the engine
running for your added power to get you where you finally set down.
Is that a bean on the prop ?
How soon did you flip the Mags off ?
Did only one blade separate ? Other than hitting a couple beans, and failing the
other blade
And to think you had just circumcised Lake Michigan 360 degrees in the T craft.
A good survival landing Mike, you and passenger survived without a scratch,
Pieti Lowell
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349319#349319
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Contact info for Ken Perkins |
All,
I understand in the past Ken Perkins has been a good source for some of the
metal Piet parts. I am interested in purchasing wheel hubs if he still
offers them. Does anyone have contact info for Ken?
Thanks,
Don Rucker ' Peyton=92s father
www.firstwings.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Markle <jim_markle(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Contact info for Ken Perkins |
Just found this in an old message on the matronics search engine. I think it's
current:
KenandVernaperkins(at)sbcglobal.net
-----Original Message-----
From: Don Rucker
Sent: Aug 13, 2011 10:25 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Contact info for Ken Perkins
All,
I understand in the past Ken Perkins has been a
good source for some of the metal Piet parts. I am interested in purchasing
wheel hubs if he still offers them. Does anyone have contact info for Ken?
Thanks,
Don Rucker Peytons father
www.firstwings.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Horizontal Stabilizer spacer |
| From: | John Kuhfahl <kuhlcouper(at)gmail.com> |
I am moving along on the Piet restoration. Cleaning, replacing , and
painting. This airplane has a horiz. stab.spacer--guess they needed it. Is
this normal? See attached. Thanks in advance...
--
John Kuhfahl, Lt Col USAF (Ret),
President, KUHLCOUPER LLC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gboothe5" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Horizontal Stabilizer spacer |
No. A little closer attention to weight and balance, and other rigging
issues should help. It is possible to use the horizontal brace wires to
adjust for nose up/down, too.
Gary
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Kuhfahl
Sent: Sunday, August 14, 2011 9:41 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Horizontal Stabilizer spacer
I am moving along on the Piet restoration. Cleaning, replacing , and
painting. This airplane has a horiz. stab.spacer--guess they needed it. Is
this normal? See attached. Thanks in advance...
--
John Kuhfahl, Lt Col USAF (Ret),
President, KUHLCOUPER LLC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Horizontal Stabilizer spacer |
John,
I've never seen a spacer like that on a Pietenpol. Have you run an accurate
weight and balance on the airplane? My guess is the plane was quite
tailheavy and they needed more lift out of the tail. If it is that
tailheavy, you should conisder moving the wing aft to get it somewhere close
to the normal CG. Pietenpols tend to be tailheavy, and while the airfoil
can accommodate cg's slightly aft of 33% MAC (20" from leading edge) I
wouldn't push that.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Kuhfahl
Sent: Sunday, August 14, 2011 12:41 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Horizontal Stabilizer spacer
I am moving along on the Piet restoration. Cleaning, replacing , and
painting. This airplane has a horiz. stab.spacer--guess they needed it. Is
this normal? See attached. Thanks in advance...
--
John Kuhfahl, Lt Col USAF (Ret),
President, KUHLCOUPER LLC
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Tail wheel assembly weight |
| From: | John Kuhfahl <kuhlcouper(at)gmail.com> |
OK thanks to all who responded on the horizontal spacer I found. I
suspected it was a fix for an underlying problem. I have this big old
10-pound tail wheel assembly. Probably too heavy right?
--
John Kuhfahl, Lt Col USAF (Ret),
President, KUHLCOUPER LLC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Tail wheel assembly weight |
Yep. My tailweheel with the entire spring assemby weighs only 5.5 lbs.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Kuhfahl
Sent: Sunday, August 14, 2011 8:15 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Tail wheel assembly weight
OK thanks to all who responded on the horizontal spacer I found. I
suspected it was a fix for an underlying problem. I have this big old
10-pound tail wheel assembly. Probably too heavy right?
--
John Kuhfahl, Lt Col USAF (Ret),
President, KUHLCOUPER LLC
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Tail wheel assembly weight |
| From: | gboothe5(at)comcast.net |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________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Wing spar dimension question |
| From: | "tdudley(at)umn.edu" <tdudley(at)umn.edu> |
Believe me, I searched the archives before asking, but it still isn't entirely
clear for me---
I began cutting 4130 for the metal parts and have moved on to cutting for the cabane
and spar butt joint straps. I had always planned on building the 3-piece
wing but hadn't deliberately studied the plan page until today. I was always
under the assumption from the "Improved Design" that the spar for the forward
wing was 1" wide routed to 1/2" where indicated; the rear spar is a solid 1".
This is how I had planned to do it.
In reviewing the 3-piece center section plans, it says the center section spar
is 3/4" and the wing panel spar is 3/4".
In reviewing the archives, I see people have done it many ways--1" routed wing
spars, 1" non-routed wing spars, 3/4" wing spars.
My question, I suppose, would be this-- I'll plan on using the 1" routed front
wing spars and the 1" solid rear spars as plans indicate, but does this mean per
the 3-piece plans that the center section spar should still be 3/4" (and add
plywood or spruce spacers to match the 1" dimensions of the outer wing spars)
or would I make the center section spars 1" to match the left and right wing
spars exactly? My ribs were built for the 1" spars.
Any thoughts would be appreciated.
Tom
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349453#349453
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Tail wheel assembly weight |
| From: | John Kuhfahl <kuhlcouper(at)gmail.com> |
Not sure what that means? John
On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 7:40 PM, wrote:
> ** Ha-ha! Shim may have been added same day as the tailwheel!
>
> Gary
>
> Sent on the Sprint=AE Now Network from my BlackBerry=AE
> ------------------------------
> *From: * John Kuhfahl <kuhlcouper(at)gmail.com>
> *Sender: * owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> *Date: *Sun, 14 Aug 2011 19:14:54 -0500
> *To: *
> *ReplyTo: * pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> *Subject: *Pietenpol-List: Tail wheel assembly weight
>
> OK thanks to all who responded on the horizontal spacer I found. I
> suspected it was a fix for an underlying problem. I have this big old
> 10-pound tail wheel assembly. Probably too heavy right?
>
> --
> John Kuhfahl, Lt Col USAF (Ret),
> President, KUHLCOUPER LLC
>
--
John Kuhfahl, Lt Col USAF (Ret),
President, KUHLCOUPER LLC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Wing spar dimension question |
Tom,
Since your ribs are built for 1" spars, I would use 1" spars in the
centersection as well. You'll have to modify the plans slightly to make
this happen. Welcome to the wonderful world of Pietenpols!.
Note that you might want to consider making the centersection spars a
slightly different thickness to take into account the overlap of the strap
fittings that attach the outer wing panels to the centersection. Since
there are strap fittings on the spars and strap fittings on the
centersection, it would be nice if the fittings of one would nest inside the
fittings of the other, but with both spars the same thickness, that doesn't
automatically happen. Since you can choose your spar thickness for the
centersection, you can make that thickness whatever convenient value will
allow the centersection strap fittings to nest inside the wing spar
fittings. Be sure to take into account the thickness of the plywood doublers
when determining what thickness spars to use.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
tdudley(at)umn.edu
Sent: Sunday, August 14, 2011 8:52 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Wing spar dimension question
Believe me, I searched the archives before asking, but it still isn't
entirely clear for me---
I began cutting 4130 for the metal parts and have moved on to cutting for
July 26, 2011 - August 14, 2011
Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-kq