Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-mr
June 05, 2013 - June 23, 2013
The airplane itself felt OK.. off the ground quick.. ailerons are just as advertised
.. a little slow.. elevator a little sensitive..but nothing weird at all.
that was fun
jeff
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402070#402070
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: N1929F Flight |
From: | "BYD" <billsayre(at)ymail.com> |
FANTASTIC!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402076#402076
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: N1929F Flight |
From: | "VanDy" <matthew.vandervort(at)gmail.com> |
Congrats!! I bet that is quite the feeling of accomplishment right there!
--------
A&P/IA
Recreational Pilot - working on Private
http://www.buckeye-aviation.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402077#402077
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: horizontal stabilizer not perfectly flat |
From: | "taildrags" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
Joe;
I would take my measuring tape and erase every other mark on it if it's marked
in 1/16", and twice that many if it's marked in 1/32". You won't need those when
you build a 1929 aircraft out of wood and fabric, especially if you build
it on the floor of your barn like Mr. Pietenpol did. The point on the stub of
a yellow No. 2 pencil draws a line thicker than 1/16" ;o)
Seriously, I think just tautening the fabric on these surfaces could change your
"right on the money" uncovered surface by 1/16", so don't sweat it. Also, like
Mike and others have pointed out, you can play with the tail surface angles
and warp by using the tail brace wires, if yours are adjustable. The purists
who use twisted hard wire ferrules with no turnbuckles don't have as much luxury
that way, but they do save weight and cost by not installing turnbuckles
with clevises back there.
--------
Oscar Zuniga
Medford, OR
Air Camper NX41CC "Scout"
A75 power
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402078#402078
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: squirrelly on the gear |
From: | "Mark Roberts" <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
Thanks Chuck.
I bought the entire set of plans and manual from Andrew, but was going from memory
last night, as the plans are out in the shop. The concern I have had is I
am a Tricyle gear only pilot at this point, and will benefit from making the gear
as stable as I can... I am thinking a wider gear stance and not higher than
the plans call for is best, but here again, input from the initiated is best,
rather than my guesswork :D
Thanks again for the feedback!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402079#402079
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Jim Boyer <boyerjrb(at)comcast.net> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Picnic |
Thats okay Gary, maybe we can go together next year.
Yesterday's trip went okay?
Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "C N Campbell" <cncampbell(at)windstream.net> |
Subject: | Re: Cream puff ? |
Scott, what -- pray tell -- is a rag wing? That's one I missed. C
----- Original Message -----
From: "AircamperN11MS" <Scott.liefeld(at)lacity.org>
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2013 8:14 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Cream puff ?
>
>
> Jeff, I have about 11 hours in my buddies rag wing. In fact I did the
> first flights on it. His rag wing liked three point takeoffs and
> landings. Wheel landings and takeoffs were difficult and a waste of time
> since it would be air born :n half the distance it would take to get the
> tail off the ground. That said. Once in the air, they fly very much alike
> and bleed off airspeed very quickly during the flare. I would think that
> if you understand the rag wing you will not have any problems with the
> Piet. Go fly it and have fun.
>
> Great looking plane
>
> Happy Landings,
>
> --------
> Scott Liefeld
> Flying N11MS since March 1972
> Steel Tube
> C-85-12
> Wire Wheels
> Brodhead in 1996
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402011#402011
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Cream puff ? |
From: | "AircamperN11MS" <Scott.liefeld(at)lacity.org> |
Chuck,
It is actually a Ragwing Special. My cell phone was auto-correcting the spelling
for me which was wrong when it corrected it. It is an ultralight that looks
like a Pitts special. It has a very large cockpit. The one I flew had a Kawasaki
440 snowmobile engine in it. It broke a crank and was later replaced
with a Hirth engine which is still in the plane. Fun little airplane to fly and
built from wood.
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.biplaneforum.com/uploads/20110213_103357_DSC_0649.JPG&imgrefurl=http://www.biplaneforum.com/f41/ragwing-rw26-special-ii-two-seater-760/&h=1496&w=2256&sz=407&tbnid=wdA1xmEjMfWlwM:&tbnh=90&tbnw=136&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dragwing%2Bspecial%2Bbiplane%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=ragwing+special+biplane&usg=__N54QDcokw8TVZEFh4W2v9hWahuo=&docid=CidG4rq63G0rEM&sa=X&ei=T2ivUbPIBsKRiQLGlIHIBA&ved=0CDoQ9QEwAQ&dur=9158
--------
Scott Liefeld
Flying N11MS since March 1972
Steel Tube
C-85-12
Wire Wheels
Brodhead in 1996
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402084#402084
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Cream puff ? |
From: | "AircamperN11MS" <Scott.liefeld(at)lacity.org> |
The one in the top right corner of one of the smaller pics is the one I used to
fly. It has the girl on the tail. See above link.
--------
Scott Liefeld
Flying N11MS since March 1972
Steel Tube
C-85-12
Wire Wheels
Brodhead in 1996
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402085#402085
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: West Coast Pietenpol Gathering (aka: "Brodhead West") |
From: | "echobravo4" <eab4(at)comcast.net> |
Well, as Paul said, that does suck
But glad you caught it in time!
--------
Earl Brown
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I
intended to be.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402086#402086
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Dortch, Steven D MAJ MIL USA NGB" <steven.d.dortch(at)us.army.mil> |
Subject: | Re: squirrelly on the gear |
UNCLASSIFIED
The Piper Cub gear on my plane is 70 inches from center to center of the tires.
Blue Skies,
Steve D
On 06/05/13, Mark Roberts wrote:
>
> Thanks Chuck.
>
> I bought the entire set of plans and manual from Andrew, but was going from memory
last night, as the plans are out in the shop. The concern I have had is
I am a Tricyle gear only pilot at this point, and will benefit from making the
gear as stable as I can... I am thinking a wider gear stance and not higher than
the plans call for is best, but here again, input from the initiated is best,
rather than my guesswork :D
>
> Thanks again for the feedback!
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402079#402079
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
UNCLASSIFIED
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Gary Boothe" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
Subject: | Pietenpol Picnic |
Yes! We were loaded and having chicken fried steak by noon!
Gary Boothe
NX308MB
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jim
Boyer
Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2013 9:10 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Pietenpol Picnic
Thats okay Gary, maybe we can go together next year.
Yesterday's trip went okay?
Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Tight bungees |
From: | "tools" <n0kkj(at)yahoo.com> |
I rewrapped mine after rebuilding the gear, before I put on the wheels, uh, with
the fuse upside down on sawhorses.
It was actually very easy and I got them WAY tighter than before.
Sooo, the point is, do most folks do them with the wheels on, or off? Dick and
I did them together the first time with everything together, just jacking up
the plane, and it was MUCH more difficult.
I'm not sure how much of the "easy" I'll retain by doing them with the wheels off,
but upside right...
It sure handled a lot better with them tighter than looser.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402093#402093
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Dortch, Steven D MAJ MIL USA NGB" <steven.d.dortch(at)us.army.mil> |
Subject: | Re: Piet plans as amended by Grega |
UNCLASSIFIED
Oscar, I think I have a Pietenpol Fuselage with an extended nose and engine mount.
The Wing appears to be a mix of the Grega three piece and the Pietenpol three
piece. All with minor mods from the plans.
I prefer to call it a pure bred Mongrel. :-}
Steve D
On 06/03/13, taildrags wrote:
>
> In case nobody mentioned it yet, most Gregas mount the landing gear legs to the
fuselage with one mount point where the wing lift strut also joins to the fuselage,
but with the other mount point non-concurrent with the other lift strut
mount point. If you look at the pix that Chris Rusch just posted of his beautiful
airplane, the side shot shows that the gear legs mount at the same spots
as the wing lift struts. Classic Air Camper configuration.
>
> Steve, I believe you have yourself a hermaphroditic agglomeration with accretions
and synthetizations. It's an AirGregation of Piet Camper parts. I'll bet
it will fly, though. And if we were in Great Britain, you would give the Brit
"airplane spotters" a devil of a time trying to figure out what it is ;o)
>
> --------
> Oscar Zuniga
> Medford, OR
> Air Camper NX41CC "Scout"
> A75 power
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=401937#401937
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
UNCLASSIFIED
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[Vantage Partners, LLC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov> |
Subject: | bungee tips--long |
To make life easier in wrapping bungees don't order your by-the-foot bungee
from Aircraft Spruce or Wicks. They both
list it as 1/2" but it is actually 5/8" diameter which is magnitudes more d
ifficult to wrap and secure.
I will check where I purchased my last batch when I go to the hangar but it
was some marine supply place in New England
and it is a true 1/2" and good quality. Avoid buying bungee/ shock cord fr
om flea markets and places like Harbor Freight.
This is one area where you want good stuff and it really isn't that expensi
ve, even for the good shock cord.
>From the get-go 15 years ago I went with 6' x =BD" diameter for each axel e
nd. Works fine. One year I ordered "1/2 inch" from
Wicks or ACS and it was way thicker- more like 5/8" and without even trying
it I returned it. I admire you guys who can actually
wrap and secure that stuff. I think Steve Irwin had an easier time wrest
ling alligators than he would have had wrapping 5/8" bungee.
I lift up my Jenny gear by putting a bottle jack under each ash member. M
y 1/8" safety loop cable will catch the axel before it bashes
up into the lower longeron should the gear slip off the jack.
I use a figure-eight kind of wrap and start it with one loop and several (l
ike 4 or 5) use high quality tye-wraps with a tye-wrap gun to
secure the first loop. Snip and file clean those sharp ends of the cut exc
ess. Wrap tighter than you think you'll need and the secure
the other end with about 5-6 closely spaced tye-wraps, snip the ends and fi
le them smooth. All tye-wraps are not created equal.
I only use the Ty-Rap brand. (photo below) After about 4 years the UV an
d smoke oil tire out the bungee rubber and wraps (especially
the smoke oil side.) but by then they are usually dirty enough where a make
over looks nice anyway. More below.
[cid:image001.jpg(at)01CE620C.B408D390] [cid:image002.jpg(at)01CE620C.B408D3
90]
[cid:image003.jpg(at)01CE620C.B408D390] [cid:image004.jpg(at)01CE62
0C.B408D390]
I wrap and secure both sides and if the axel is off the ash blocks at all,
the bungees are too loose. With a passenger and full fuel the axel will be
up
2, 3" off the blocks and that isn't what you want. Time to re-wrap. Once
you have it go out to your wing struts and rock the plane on the gear I ca
n
lift each wheel off the ground when I do my test but there should be about
an inch or inch and a half movement of the axel off the block before you ca
n
lift it off the ground. You also can go side-to-side and see if one bunge
e is significantly tighter than the other. There have been times when I h
ad to
re-wrap 2, 3 times to get it right. They don't have to be perfectly even b
ut you'll know---especially when you go out for a taxi test. Watch that bu
mping
and how far each axle comes off the ash blocks and you'll see clearly what
you have. I generally have about zero to =BD" of axel-to-ash clearance whe
n
I'm taxiing out with a full tank of fuel. With a passenger I usually have
about an inch of axel off the ash blocks depending how much they weigh.
Hope this helps all of you Infidels:).
Mike C.
PS-did I mention that my Uncle Tony talks about bungee cords? He mostly co
vers the loop-style for the other type gear legs if you're not using the sp
rings.
[cid:image005.jpg(at)01CE620C.B408D390]
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: squirrelly on the gear |
From: | "Mark Roberts" <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
70" just sounds better to me ;-)
I don't know if there are major draw backs to a wider gear, or if there is a magic
formula for width of gear to fuse length that needs to be considered, but
what would be wrong with a wider gear like 70" ...
I know, its wrong because the original design wasn't 70" and its been flying for
80+ years.... :-)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402098#402098
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | V Groah <vgroah(at)hotmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: Tight bungees |
We did ours with the wheels off but right side up. It was a chore for the
two of us and Mike is young and tough. He had a little extra length and a
good pair of vise grips. It was a chore to remember=2C even in my old age.
We stated with as hard a pull as we could muster and held that tension al
l the way through the wrap. It is not a cushy ride but stable on the groun
d.
Mike had to make an off field in the dirt landing with the engine not runni
ng and had no control issues at all. This was with a passenger in the fron
t seat. I think the stiff suspension was a factor in the ultimate success
on a bad day. Vic 414MV
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Tight bungees
> From: n0kkj(at)yahoo.com
> Date: Wed=2C 5 Jun 2013 12:33:58 -0700
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
> I rewrapped mine after rebuilding the gear=2C before I put on the wheels
=2C uh=2C with the fuse upside down on sawhorses.
>
> It was actually very easy and I got them WAY tighter than before.
>
> Sooo=2C the point is=2C do most folks do them with the wheels on=2C or of
f? Dick and I did them together the first time with everything together=2C
just jacking up the plane=2C and it was MUCH more difficult.
>
> I'm not sure how much of the "easy" I'll retain by doing them with the wh
eels off=2C but upside right...
>
> It sure handled a lot better with them tighter than looser.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402093#402093
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Charles Burkholder" <born2fly(at)abcmailbox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Picnic |
I plan to be there! What I'm hoping for is a chance for 10-15 min of stick
time in a somebody's Piet....
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2013 8:27 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Pietenpol Picnic
>
>
> Just received this announcement, with instructions to "spread the word".
> So that's what I'm doing now. This will be of interest to anyone within
> traveling distance of southern Ontario (Canada). If you need more
> detailed directions or info, please contact me.
>
>
>> June 15th ?" Twenty third annual Pietenpol Picnic at the farm of Hope
>> and Brian Kenney ?" for lovers of this iconic open cockpit homebuilt
>> aircraft. 10 am to dusk ?" lunch provided. Farm located at 374
>> Concession 7E in East Flamborough. Camping spots for Friday or Saturday
>> are available. RAA chapter barbeque on the field Friday evening. Runway
>> is 14-32 and we ask spam-cans to park at the south end of the field.
>> Circuits for 32 are right hand.
>
>
> Bill C.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402059#402059
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Jack Phillips" <jack(at)bedfordlandings.com> |
Subject: | Re: squirrelly on the gear |
My gear has a tread of 69", and has handled numerous gusty crosswinds. To
me it doesn't look too terribly wide, but see what you think:
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 Mark Roberts
Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2013 5:04 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: squirrelly on the gear
70" just sounds better to me ;-)
I don't know if there are major draw backs to a wider gear, or if there is a
magic formula for width of gear to fuse length that needs to be considered,
but what would be wrong with a wider gear like 70" ...
I know, its wrong because the original design wasn't 70" and its been flying
for 80+ years.... :-)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402098#402098
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Clif Dawson" <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Picnic |
And you guys from down south, make sure to
wear your heavy winter coats. Theres an instant
temperature shear at the 49th parallel.
Clif
Q: Are there supermarkets in Toronto and is milk available all year round?
( Germany )
A: No, we are a peaceful civilization of Vegan hunter/gatherers. Milk is
illegal.
>
>
> Of all the luck...
>
> On the other hand, you could still drive. Google maps says it would only
> be a 37 hour drive (each way) for you, Gary.
>
> To put things in perspective for others, it's about 1 1/2 hours drive from
> Buffalo, NY, and about 3 hours drive from Detroit, MI.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: N1929F Flight |
From: | "Mark Roberts" <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
VERY nice!! Thanks for sharing that!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402108#402108
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Picnic |
From: | "tdudley(at)umn.edu" <tdudley(at)umn.edu> |
Okay, Bill, I am completely embarrassed by my maintained knowledge of geography.
I am from Minnesota and duck hunt every year in Ontario. I thought it'd be
doable to drive a couple hours to see some Piets in 'Southern Ontario'. Guess
I forgot the Providence stretched all the way to New York. Guess I will spend
that weekend studying an atlas as a refresher. Wish I could make it as I have
to work over Brodhead this year. . .
Tom
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402110#402110
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Picnic |
From: | "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> |
Tom,
Ontario IS big. To put it in perspective, it's about 1.5 times the size of Texas.
Your couple of hours drive would put you in Southern Northwestern Ontario.
:)
I have family up there (just north of Minnesota), and to visit involves an 18 -
20 hour drive - and I don't even leave the province. We once had a visitor from
Germany that we took on one of those journeys. She couldn't believe how long
the drive was. In Europe, such a long trip would have encompassed half a
dozen countries, whereas in Canada, we didn't even leave the province.
Too bad you will miss Brodhead this year.
Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402113#402113
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: squirrelly on the gear |
From: | "AircamperN11MS" <Scott.liefeld(at)lacity.org> |
Mark,
Just for the sake of perspective. Mine is 52" (per gary's measurement) just like
Gary's. Although my gear is not as tall as his. Mine works very well.
--------
Scott Liefeld
Flying N11MS since March 1972
Steel Tube
C-85-12
Wire Wheels
Brodhead in 1996
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402116#402116
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[Vantage Partners, LLC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov> |
Subject: | Broken Bungee & How I repaired it |
Looks like a very nice solution to your fraying bungee issues Jerry. The bungee
wrap nearly covers your
entire leather wrap. Looks really good to me and you should get much longer life
out of your bungee shock cords.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: squirrelly on the gear |
From: | "Mark Roberts" <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
I see your point Scott, BUT, you're a better pilot than I am :D
Kinda like training wheels for me :o
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402122#402122
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: squirrelly on the gear |
From: | "AircamperN11MS" <Scott.liefeld(at)lacity.org> |
Great topic. Does anyone know what the track is on a cub or a champ?
Oh, Just a thought here. The wider the track is, the harder it will be to hold
a wing down in a crosswind. How wide is too wide? I don't know.
--------
Scott Liefeld
Flying N11MS since March 1972
Steel Tube
C-85-12
Wire Wheels
Brodhead in 1996
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402124#402124
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
Subject: | Alt Eng Round-up |
>From Round-Up host=2C Pat Panzera:
LAST CALL!
Join us at the Alternative Engine Roundup this weekend!!!
Saturday=2C June 8th=2C 2013 is the date.
If you=92ve already registered but have not received your placard for getti
ng in for free=2C PLEASE email me and let me know!
If you=92d like to present a forum=2C we can still accommodate you!
If you=92ve not yet registered=2C now=92s the time!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CONTACT! Magazine has been sponsoring a free fly-in for the past 10 years.
This year it will continue to be held in conjunction with the Golden West F
ly-in (as it was for the past two years) located in Marysville (Olivehurst)
=2C California (KMYV) and will be held on Saturday=2C June 8th=2C 2013. The
Golden West Fly-in on the other hand will be all three days=2C June 7th
' 9th and they permit camping if you are so inclined.
And as usual=2C it's FREE for those who elect to exhibit their plane=2C pro
ject=2C or engine with us.
http://www.ContactMagazine.com/roundup.html
The catch? In order for it to be free=2C you must fly in (or trailer in) wi
th an experimental aircraft that has an "alternative engine" and be willing
to put it on display with the others. This will entitle you and the occupa
nts who flew in with you to attend the fly-in for free- but you must prereg
ister.
And for those of you who have an experimental (data plate removed) hot-rod
Lycoming=2C Continental=2C or any number of non-certified=2C non-auto conve
rsion engines (UL=2C Jabiru=2C Hirth=2C Deltahawk=2C etc.) we consider thos
e an "alternative engine" too.
Please visit http://www.ContactMagazine.com/roundup.html for preregistratio
n information.
If you are flying-in with an aircraft powered by a Subaru=2C Corvair=2C Rot
ary=2C Honda=2C Geo/Suzuki=2C Ford=2C Chevrolet=2C or any other auto conver
sion and would like to present a forum (or even if you are currently buildi
ng one and can't bring it- or CAN bring it on a trailer)=2C please contact
me.
Editor(at)ContactMagazine.com
We'd love to include you in the fun!
And so that those who are unable to make it to the show this year won't fee
l left out=2C here's some free stuff: http://www.contactmagazine.com/FreeLu
nch.html
--
If you receive more than one of these notices=2C please accept my humble ap
ology. It most likely means that we are on more than one of the same email
lists.
And PLEASE help us spread the word by forwarding this note to anyone you th
ink might benefit from this information.
--
Thanks!
Patrick Panzera
Editor(at)ContactMagazine.com
www.ContactMagazine.com
The next issue of CONTACT! Magazine is seriously delinquent but we hope to
have it in hand in time for this event.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: squirrelly on the gear |
From: | "Mark Roberts" <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
That's a great point that I hadn't thought of: the crosswind factor. Since the
ailerons are not known to be overly effective, I too wonder how wide is too wide.
The cub gear is 70", and it is close to the Piet in size (6 feet more wing,
but still in the ball park).
Any aero-scholars out there have any ideas?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402129#402129
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
Subject: | Re: Broken Bungee & How I repaired it |
Paul, I started down that road, but abandoned the idea because of added weight
that I did not want on the plane. I really didn't get very far with it.
Michael Perez
Pietenpol HINT Videos
Karetaker Aero
www.karetakeraero.com
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: squirrelly on the gear |
From: | "Catdesigns" <Catdesigns(at)att.net> |
Hopefully I don't get in trouble for posting this but here is an article about
landing gear design. The biggest problem is we don't know where the true center
of gravity (center of mass is probably a better term) on a Pietenpol is located
which makes all this information difficult to apply on our plane. Note: the
true center of gravity is not along the wing cord like all the drawings of
a planes weight and balance seem to show.
--------
Chris
Sacramento, CA
WestCoastPiet.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402140#402140
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/landing_gear_design_178.pdf
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: squirrelly on the gear |
From: | Rick <lmforge(at)earthlink.net> |
It's 77" on a Taylorcraft L2
Rick Schreiber
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 6, 2013, at 9:57 AM, "AircamperN11MS" wrote:
>
> Great topic. Does anyone know what the track is on a cub or a champ?
>
> Oh, Just a thought here. The wider the track is, the harder it will be to hold
a wing down in a crosswind. How wide is too wide? I don't know.
>
> --------
> Scott Liefeld
> Flying N11MS since March 1972
> Steel Tube
> C-85-12
> Wire Wheels
> Brodhead in 1996
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402124#402124
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: squirrelly on the gear |
From: | "AircamperN11MS" <Scott.liefeld(at)lacity.org> |
Thanks Chris,
I will have a look at that when I get home. Looks interesting.
--------
Scott Liefeld
Flying N11MS since March 1972
Steel Tube
C-85-12
Wire Wheels
Brodhead in 1996
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402149#402149
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: squirrelly on the gear |
From: | airlion2(at)gmail.com |
On the airlion my gear is 57 inches and have not had any trouble with it. gardiner.
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 6, 2013, at 3:12 PM, Rick wrote:
>
> It's 77" on a Taylorcraft L2
> Ith
> Rick Schreiber
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Jun 6, 2013, at 9:57 AM, "AircamperN11MS" wrote:
>
>>
>> Great topic. Does anyone know what the track is on a cub or a champ?
>>
>> Oh, Just a thought here. The wider the track is, the harder it will be to
hold a wing down in a crosswind. How wide is too wide? I don't know.
>>
>> --------
>> Scott Liefeld
>> Flying N11MS since March 1972
>> Steel Tube
>> C-85-12
>> Wire Wheels
>> Brodhead in 1996
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402124#402124
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: squirrelly on the gear |
From: | "taildrags" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
The distance between centers of tire tread on Scout (with split J-3 style gear)
is right at 57" with nobody in the airplane.
Is somebody going to put all these data points into Excel and generate a nifty
statistical bell curve showing the most popular spacing? ;o)
--------
Oscar Zuniga
Medford, OR
Air Camper NX41CC "Scout"
A75 power
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402158#402158
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Gary Boothe" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
Subject: | Re: squirrelly on the gear |
Yes, Oscar...you are! ;-)
But allow me to clarify...there's a difference between squirrely and tippy.
My problem is tippy. Gear too narrow for its height. I don't think all this
data would mean anything without taking height into consideration to solve a
tippy problem.
BTW - "Tippy" is the word supplied by Kevin, so I'm sure it's
UNCLASSIFIED....
Gary Boothe
NX308MB
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of taildrags
Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2013 3:50 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: squirrelly on the gear
-->
The distance between centers of tire tread on Scout (with split J-3 style
gear) is right at 57" with nobody in the airplane.
Is somebody going to put all these data points into Excel and generate a
nifty statistical bell curve showing the most popular spacing? ;o)
--------
Oscar Zuniga
Medford, OR
Air Camper NX41CC "Scout"
A75 power
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402158#402158
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: squirrelly on the gear |
From: | "Mark Roberts" <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
Hey! I'd like to read that chart Chris! All this is coming at a good time for my
planning... I want to make the gear next...
Catdesigns wrote:
> Oscar
>
> Gary is absolutely right, it is very dependent on the height to width. That
> is exactly what the article tells us. You can have the same width with
> taller gear and it gets tipsy, er I mean tippy. What we really need to make
> all this data relevant is the height of the top longeron with the top
> longeron level and the gear width. Then we can compare all the data. I
> will volunteer to collect the data, make some pretty graphs and crunch the
> data IF people will send the gear width AND height of the longeron in a the
> level position as measured on their flying Pietenpol. A qualitative report
> about you tippyness would also be appreciated. Will it tell us something?
> Who knows but it would be fun to find out.
>
> Oscar you could be the first to send in your data? Or you can fly that plane
> down here and I will measure it while you and Gary swap stories of broken
> planes over a few beers.
>
> Chris
> Sacramento, Ca
> Westcoastpiet.com
>
>
> --
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402168#402168
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: squirrelly on the gear |
From: | "taildrags" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
Chris; I understand the concept of overturning moment ;o) I'll be at the hangar
this weekend and will level up the airplane and measure from the top of the
top longeron to the ground. I know I've done it before, but I don't remember
where I wrote it down.
And not to contradict what Ken said, just getting back to the design article and
a technical point, it may be that the CG is vertically positioned somewhere
near the top longeron. Look at the head-on diagram in the article and the CG
is shown roughly on the nose of the airplane, which (unless you have a Ford A-powered
Piet), is close to the level of the top longeron. Not exactly, but close.
The overturning moment is created in part by the mass at the CG acting on a moment
arm equal to its height above the ground. The higher the CG is, the 'tippier'
the airplane will be in roll, strictly talking about gravity here (no aerodynamic
forces). Resisting this tippiness are the main gear, with a wider stance
presenting more resistance to the rolling tendency or 'tippiness'.
So, while measuring to the top of the wing as Ken suggests might be useful if there
were significant mass up there, we already know that a pair of wings and
struts is only going to amount to about 1/4 the total weight of the plane... the
other 3/4 is down around where the heavier parts are. I think it would be
worthwhile to gather some numbers such as width of track and height to top of
the top longeron and then put them on a graph of some sort. If several well-established
airplanes and pilots can then provide qualitative reports on 'tippiness'
of their airplanes and those reports can be compared to where the data points
for those airplanes fall on the graph, we may see a pattern emerge. Some
of it is intuitive, of course... a ship with extended cabanes, tall wheels,
narrow gear, and a Ford A engine and radiator might be expected to be tippier
than a split-gear, wide-stance, fat tired, flat-4 engined ship would be.
All of this is stuff that we should only be doing when it's rainy, windy, and cold
out though. Right now we should be flying ;o)
--------
Oscar Zuniga
Medford, OR
Air Camper NX41CC "Scout"
A75 power
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402177#402177
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Picnic |
From: | "tdudley57(at)gmail.com" <tdudley57(at)gmail.com> |
It's been bugging me all day Bill--province, not Providence [Wink] .
Tom
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402179#402179
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: squirrelly on the gear |
From: | "bubbleboy" <scott.dawson3(at)bigpond.com> |
Great timing...I am about to flip my fuselage over and build the gear!
Scotty
--------
Tamworth, Australia
Building a Corvair Powered Pietenpol Air Camper
www.scottyspietenpol.com
Tail and Ribs built...Building fuselage & undercarriage...Corvair engine at
Roy's Garage waiting to be modified.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402183#402183
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Picnic |
From: | "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> |
I've been biting my tongue.
The whole of Rhode Island isn't even that big - let alone one city.
:)
BC
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402191#402191
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Douwe Blumberg" <douweblumberg(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | bungee chafing etc |
Hi all,
Instead of leather, I cut up some really thick rubber inner tube protectors
I had laying around. Leather is probably more "period" though.
Likely heavier, but I know that the Germans in WW1 sprung some of their
axles using long springs wrapped around the axle just like bungees. I think
it was they had more steel than rubber. They looked like screen door
springs stretched and wrapped. Looked bulkier than bungee, and is heavier
(I weighed a foot of each back when I was considering it) BUT. it wouldn't
chafe.
Douwe
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Chris" <catdesigns(at)att.net> |
Subject: | bungee chafing etc |
Greg and Dale used the leather wrap method
"I purchased the leather from a local saddle shop. It was referred to as
"sole leather" because it is relatively thick, about 1/8". It was very stiff
but leather can be formed easily by soaking it in water for a few minutes.
It is attached to the bottom of the ash block with a couple of small screws
but the bungees keep it held in place.
Round headed rivets per the original plans instead of threaded fasteners in
this location would most likely eliminate the need for the leather cuff.
Greg Cardinal"
Link to a drawing of their setup
http://westcoastpiet.com/images/Greg%20and%20Dale/images/Anti%20Chafe%20Cuff
.pdf
Another idea I have seen is to place a wide board on the bottom of the ash
block so the bungees are not al likely to touch the bolt heads.
You can see it in this picture.
http://westcoastpiet.com/images/Larry%20Williams/images/Air_Venture_2003_tri
p_104.jpg
Chris
Sacramento, Ca
Westcoastpiet.com
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Douwe
Blumberg
Sent: Friday, June 07, 2013 4:41 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: bungee chafing etc
Hi all,
Instead of leather, I cut up some really thick rubber inner tube protectors
I had laying around. Leather is probably more "period" though.
Likely heavier, but I know that the Germans in WW1 sprung some of their
axles using long springs wrapped around the axle just like bungees. I think
it was they had more steel than rubber. They looked like screen door
springs stretched and wrapped. Looked bulkier than bungee, and is heavier
(I weighed a foot of each back when I was considering it) BUT. it wouldn't
chafe.
Douwe
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Any Scottish Piets oh list? |
From: | Kip and Beth Gardner <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net> |
I am sitting in the Cleveland airport waiting for a flight to Edinburgh Scotland.
I'll be touring with a group, but I'm wondering if there are any Scots or
Brits between Edinburgh and York that I might be able to catch up with sometime
in the next week?
Thanks!
Kip Gardner
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Any Scottish Piets oh list? |
From: | "AircamperN11MS" <Scott.liefeld(at)lacity.org> |
I'm part Scottish and in CA. I'll visit with you if detour through this neck of
the woods. Enjoy your trip. The wife says we are going there in three years
for our 25th. Cheers,
--------
Scott Liefeld
Flying N11MS since March 1972
Steel Tube
C-85-12
Wire Wheels
Brodhead in 1996
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402242#402242
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: squirrelly on the gear |
From: | Michael Groah <dskogrover(at)yahoo.com> |
Ok Gary. My straight axle gear has a width (center to center of tire) of 62.75
inches. With the upper longeron level the distance from the ground to the top
of the upper longeron is 54.75 inches.
I have 90 landings on it so far and I think the handling is far better and easier
to land than the Champ I did my tail wheel endorsement in.
Mike Groah
414MV
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 6, 2013, at 3:58 PM, "Gary Boothe" wrote:
>
> Yes, Oscar...you are! ;-)
>
> But allow me to clarify...there's a difference between squirrely and tippy.
> My problem is tippy. Gear too narrow for its height. I don't think all this
> data would mean anything without taking height into consideration to solve a
> tippy problem.
>
> BTW - "Tippy" is the word supplied by Kevin, so I'm sure it's
> UNCLASSIFIED....
>
> Gary Boothe
> NX308MB
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of taildrags
> Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2013 3:50 PM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: squirrelly on the gear
>
> -->
>
> The distance between centers of tire tread on Scout (with split J-3 style
> gear) is right at 57" with nobody in the airplane.
>
> Is somebody going to put all these data points into Excel and generate a
> nifty statistical bell curve showing the most popular spacing? ;o)
>
> --------
> Oscar Zuniga
> Medford, OR
> Air Camper NX41CC "Scout"
> A75 power
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402158#402158
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: West Coast Pietenpol Gathering (aka: "Brodhead West") |
From: | "Mark Roberts" <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
I agree totally with Vic's post!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402266#402266
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: squirrelly on the gear |
From: | "Mark Roberts" <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
Good stuff guys. Keep it comin'...
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402267#402267
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Dortch, Steven D MAJ MIL USA NGB" <steven.d.dortch(at)us.army.mil> |
UNCLASSIFIED
Monday night James May from Top gear will be in a show called Flight Club. it is
about planes and model planes.
I personally love Flying Wild Alaska. While it is very scripted, I hope that it
attracts students to flying.
Blue Skies,
Steven D.
UNCLASSIFIED
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: squirrelly on the gear |
From: | Gary Boothe <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
My wheels are 52" to center. Upper longeron is 54 1/2".
Additionally, thanks to note from Jerry Dotson, I see that my tail wheel swivels
at a greater rate than the rudder. A longer tail wheel control arm will correct
that. Seems that the wheel should either match the rudder or be slightly less.
Gary
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 7, 2013, at 3:02 PM, Michael Groah wrote:
>
> Ok Gary. My straight axle gear has a width (center to center of tire) of 62.75
inches. With the upper longeron level the distance from the ground to the
top of the upper longeron is 54.75 inches.
>
> I have 90 landings on it so far and I think the handling is far better and easier
to land than the Champ I did my tail wheel endorsement in.
>
>
> Mike Groah
> 414MV
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
> On Jun 6, 2013, at 3:58 PM, "Gary Boothe" wrote:
>
>>
>> Yes, Oscar...you are! ;-)
>>
>> But allow me to clarify...there's a difference between squirrely and tippy.
>> My problem is tippy. Gear too narrow for its height. I don't think all this
>> data would mean anything without taking height into consideration to solve a
>> tippy problem.
>>
>> BTW - "Tippy" is the word supplied by Kevin, so I'm sure it's
>> UNCLASSIFIED....
>>
>> Gary Boothe
>> NX308MB
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of taildrags
>> Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2013 3:50 PM
>> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: squirrelly on the gear
>>
>> -->
>>
>> The distance between centers of tire tread on Scout (with split J-3 style
>> gear) is right at 57" with nobody in the airplane.
>>
>> Is somebody going to put all these data points into Excel and generate a
>> nifty statistical bell curve showing the most popular spacing? ;o)
>>
>> --------
>> Oscar Zuniga
>> Medford, OR
>> Air Camper NX41CC "Scout"
>> A75 power
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402158#402158
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael Weston <smikewest(at)comcast.net> |
so,here is my little question.where is the angle of incidence on the 30-612 profile
measured from? the chord line? the bottoms of the spars? the bottom of the
airfoil? any ideas?
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: riblett attack |
From: | "Mark Roberts" <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
Good Question.
I thought I knew until I started to write a reply, and in my reply I began to question
my own understanding of it, so help us here all you aerodynamically qualified
people!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402286#402286
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: riblett attack |
From: | "tools" <n0kkj(at)yahoo.com> |
As I recall from all the aero classes I've taken, it's measured from the chord
line.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402287#402287
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: riblett attack |
From: | "tkreiner" <tkreiner(at)gmail.com> |
>From that quintessential tome, Theory of Wing Sections, the angle of attack is
"the angle between the plane of the wing and the direction of motion."
Not totally clear. If only the authors had stated whether the chord is, in fact,
the chord of the wing. In fact, however, it would appear that the plane of
the airfoil is indeed, the mean aerodynamic chord.
Perhaps someone more knowledgeable can chime in?
--------
Tom Kreiner
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402289#402289
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Wire spoke wheels size... |
From: | "Mark Roberts" <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
In the current discussion of the height of the landing gear, I am wondering if
you wire spoked wheel guys can tell me what wheels you chose, what size they are
when inflated, and where you got them.
I am drawing out my landing gear design from the "improved" gear design, but plan
to use wire spoked wheels, not 6" tires.
So, I want to keep the overall height of the top of the fuse in the same location
as plans, but, that will require compensation for the additional height of
the spoked wheels...
Since I have not purchased the wheels, I am wondering what size I should be designing
to match.
Thanks!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402291#402291
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Greg Cardinal" <gcardinal(at)comcast.net> |
Subject: | Re: squirrelly on the gear |
On NX18235 the track is 56" and the top longeron is at 50".
Greg Cardinal
----- Original Message -----
From: "taildrags" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2013 7:58 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: squirrelly on the gear
>
> I changed the subject line ;o) Gary, what is the track (distance between
> contact patches) of your mains? I know there's a word for it but I can't
> remember it right now. Just interested in comparing that dimension
> between airplanes, as I'm sure it does have some effect on ground
> handling.
>
> --------
> Oscar Zuniga
> Medford, OR
> Air Camper NX41CC "Scout"
> A75 power
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402012#402012
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Pietenpol " Wing Kit ' FOR SALE |
From: | "Pietflyer1977" <rob(at)stoinoff.com> |
Hello all, I have moved on to other airplanes and decided not to continue on with
my Piet project. I have a really nice " Wing Kit " to give someone a nice start
on there wings. Everything is spruce and mahogany plywood. I have all the
ribs built, the spruce spars have all the plywood plates on and holes drilled.
Was at the point of starting to to put the ribs on and wings together but never
glued so all the ribs are slid back off. Center section is glued up and all
is squared perfect. All holes are right on and all slides right together with
perfect fit. Have all the wood to build wings and ailerons. All spruce. Had
a wood shop make a cutter and make the leading edge to a smooth rounded edge.
Also had trailing edge milled to fit tongue and groove in trailing edge of ribs.
All is in a 15' box for easy hauling. Have all Ken Perkins water jet fittings
that were epoxy primed and painted satin black. Will sell for less than half
of what I have in materials and labor is free. You all know what spruce cost
and Ken's parts alone are almost work what I am asking. Will sell all for $ 1,500.00
and someone would have a jump start on a nice set of wings. All workmanship
is quality. You will not be disappointed. Will try and post some pictures
here. In the pictures the wings are sitting together but not glued. As I say
they are all apart now and everything is in a easy haul-able size. If anyone
would like more pictures or info. email me direct to my email. Thanks Rob 812-932-9000
or 812-689-1254
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402295#402295
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/ad_pic_2_146.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/center_135.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/ad_pic_397.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | 4130 tubing FOR SALE |
From: | "Pietflyer1977" <rob(at)stoinoff.com> |
I have moved on to other airplanes that have came up and stoped work on my Piet.
Was planning on building a steel tube fuselage and tail feathers. I have all
the 4130 tubing to build the fuselage per plans the correct size and wall thickness.
Also the correct size tubing for the tail feathers. All in long 20' to
24' pieces and upper longerons can be made one piece. All is either USA or Germany
made. No stuff from China! My loss is your gain. Will sell for less than
half of what it cost new. Will sell for $ 900.00. Thanks Rob 812-932-9000 or
812-689-1254
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402296#402296
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Attaching ribs to spars question |
From: | "Mark Roberts" <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
I feel a bit embarrassed to ask, but I am curious about rib attachment to the spars.
I remember reading once that the ribs can be simply nailed to the spars
as they are held to the spars with the drag anti-drag wires and compression strut
assembly. This makes it easier to replace broken ribs and spars as necessary
if damaged.
I had planned to glue everything together.
Again, seems like a stupid question unless you need a wing repair. Gary's new "project"
caused me to think of the issue. Seems like you would need more than
4 nails tacked into both spars and the drag/anti drag wires and compression struts...
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402297#402297
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Attaching ribs to spars question |
From: | Gary Boothe <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
Once covered and stitched, those ribs ain't goin' nowhere! My spar replace project
got infinitely easier without glued ribs!!
Gary
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 8, 2013, at 4:28 PM, "Mark Roberts" wrote:
>
> I feel a bit embarrassed to ask, but I am curious about rib attachment to the
spars. I remember reading once that the ribs can be simply nailed to the spars
as they are held to the spars with the drag anti-drag wires and compression
strut assembly. This makes it easier to replace broken ribs and spars as necessary
if damaged.
>
> I had planned to glue everything together.
>
> Again, seems like a stupid question unless you need a wing repair. Gary's new
"project" caused me to think of the issue. Seems like you would need more than
4 nails tacked into both spars and the drag/anti drag wires and compression
struts...
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402297#402297
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Attaching ribs to spars question |
From: | "dwilson" <marwilson(at)charter.net> |
Once the fabric covering is applied and rib stitched where can that entire assembly
really go anyway...
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402299#402299
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Greg Cardinal" <gcardinal(at)comcast.net> |
Subject: | Re: Wire spoke wheels size... |
Mark,
On NX18235 we have 19" rims and the tires are Chen Shin 19 X 3.50 with the
treads shaved off. Fully inflated they are about 25" tall.
The tires were purchased from JC Whitney.
Greg Cardinal
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Roberts" <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2013 3:28 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Wire spoke wheels size...
>
>
> In the current discussion of the height of the landing gear, I am
> wondering if you wire spoked wheel guys can tell me what wheels you chose,
> what size they are when inflated, and where you got them.
>
> I am drawing out my landing gear design from the "improved" gear design,
> but plan to use wire spoked wheels, not 6" tires.
>
> So, I want to keep the overall height of the top of the fuse in the same
> location as plans, but, that will require compensation for the additional
> height of the spoked wheels...
>
> Since I have not purchased the wheels, I am wondering what size I should
> be designing to match.
>
> Thanks!
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402291#402291
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: riblett attack |
From: | "jarheadpilot82" <jarheadpilot82(at)hotmail.com> |
Tom,
he is asking about angle of incidence, not angle of attack.
Wolfgang Langewiesche in his great book, Stick and Rudder, defined angle of incidence
as "the angle at which your wings are set with reference to the lengthwise
axis of your airplane."
Navy Flight School textbooks define it as "The acute angle between the chord line
of the airfoil and a selected reference plane, usually the longitudinal axis
of the aircraft."
So, I believe Tools' earlier post is the more correct definition.
As to earlier posts of a few days ago, it doesn't matter as much if your ribs are
set so the chord is perpendicular to the spars. What matters is how they eventually
are set with reference to the longitudinal axis, most likely measured
from the upper longeron on the fuselage.
My $.02
--------
Semper Fi,
Terry Hand
Athens, GA
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402302#402302
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: squirrelly on the gear |
From: | "taildrags" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
Okay. I was at the hangar and measured 50-3/4" from the top of the top longeron
to the ground with Scout in the level attitude. Right in line with most other
folks' measurements.
I happen to have a somewhat unique situation, in that I have a complete set of
"Daddy Longlegs" spoked motorcycle wheel landing gear in the hangar. I assembled
the pieces onto the jig and made a few measurements; see photo. Pay no attention
to the fact that one bungee shock strut is mounted 180 degrees out of
whack. You get the idea.
Surprisingly, the track (width) of the motorcycle wheel landing gear setup is within
1/2" of the Cub-style gear that I have mounted, and the distance from the
ground to the bottom of the bottom longeron is only 1-1/2" more with the motorcycle
tire setup than with the Cub-style split gear. I guess Piets just look
taller and tippier with skinny spoked wheels and tires on them ;o)
--------
Oscar Zuniga
Medford, OR
Air Camper NX41CC "Scout"
A75 power
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402303#402303
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_0531_774.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | landing gear weight |
From: | "taildrags" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
To go back to a topic that was discussed a couple of weeks ago, I weighed the motorcycle
wheel/tire gear leg setup that I have. See picture; it's a very conventional
setup with Buchanan's spoke and wheel work, aluminum rims. The gear,
brakes, tires, legs, bungees, etc. MINUS the wooden jig weighs 53.5 lbs.
The wooden jig, which is oak and also mounts the two gear leg/wing strut fittings
that go on the lower longerons, weighs 13 lbs. with the gear leg mounting bolts
on it ;o)
--------
Oscar Zuniga
Medford, OR
Air Camper NX41CC "Scout"
A75 power
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402304#402304
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_0527_211.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | John Woods <johnwoods(at)westnet.com.au> |
Subject: | Re: riblett attack |
Michael,
Here is an extract of email from Graham Hewitt who is flying a Riblett 612
Pietenpol=C2-down here=C2-in Australia.....
How to set the incidence of the 612 Riblett airfoil
It is based on the True Chord line=C2- this is a straight line connecting
the exact center of the L/E to the center of the T/E
Draw this line clearly on your center section Rib, clamp a straight edge to
it,=C2- then with a smart level set this one degree positive to the Datu
m of the top longeron
Cut your cabanes to achieve this
Hope this helps.
John Woods
Perth Western Australia
----- "Michael Weston" wrote:
>
so,here is my little question.where is the angle of incidence on the 30-612
profile measured from? the chord line? the bottoms of the spars? the botto
m of the airfoil? any ideas?
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Jim Boyer <boyerjrb(at)comcast.net> |
Subject: | Re: Attaching ribs to spars question |
HI Mark,
My ribs are glued to the spars on the one wing I have built so far. Second
wing will be the same.
Jim B.
=C2-
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Attaching ribs to spars question |
From: | "Mark Roberts" <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
Thanks guys. It is good to know that they can just be tacked into place and hold
just fine. I had thought they needed to be glued, and I started thinking about
it in light of your repair project Gary... So it's good to know for my future
build of the wing.
Thanks!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402309#402309
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: riblett attack |
From: | "Mark Roberts" <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
God bless you my brotha' from down unda'! That just helped me a bunch!
Saving this text thread for future reference....
Mark
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402310#402310
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Ash fuse gear block mounts... Just realized are 3/4 not |
1&qu
From: | "Mark Roberts" <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
I just realized I have built my fuse with 3/4" thick ash mounts, not 1" thick tapering
to 3/4" at the ends where they meet the fuse.
I really don't know of this is a big deal or not. Strength there is a good thing,
but I don't know if the extra 1/4" is going to keep me from a gear collapse
or what. I have already painted over both pieces with 2 coats of spar varnish.
Thoughts? Reassurances? Bets from the gallery as to when my gear collapses on me?
Measure twice, install once... :?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402311#402311
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: riblett attack |
From: | "jarheadpilot82" <jarheadpilot82(at)hotmail.com> |
Mark,
Here is a link to a previous thread discussing the Riblett incidence.
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?t=83884&highlight=riblett+incidence
I agree that the Aussie answer makes the most sense from a practical, builder point
of view.
--------
Semper Fi,
Terry Hand
Athens, GA
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402313#402313
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Ash fuse gear block mounts... Just realized are 3/4 |
not 1&qu
From: | "jarheadpilot82" <jarheadpilot82(at)hotmail.com> |
Mark,
> Thoughts? Reassurances? Bets from the gallery as to when my gear collapses on
me?
I don't see those mounts as part of my set of plans, so I do not 100% understand
what you are asking. I am sure that plenty of other guys can chime in that do.
So, my question is this - what is the lost mass of the quarter inch relative
to the plans mount? Obviously, you are 25% thinner (3/4 inch vice 1 inch), but
that line tapers. So you are not 25% less overall mass. Are you 10%? 15%? 17.5%?
I constantly see people write that this airplane is "overbuilt" (meaning that it
is an overly strong design), but is that good enough for you to go fly your
family with this change to the mount? That is your call, and that is the real
question. I guess that is one of the reasons that they call it experimental amateur
built. You can be your own test pilot on your personally designed mount.
But ask Tools how much fun it is to replace gear when it collapses. Not fun,
I would expect.
--------
Semper Fi,
Terry Hand
Athens, GA
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402314#402314
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: riblett attack |
From: | "Mark Roberts" <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
Thanks Terry.
I had forgotten all about that post. I read it when it was first listed, but forgot
all about it. Thanks for the reminder!
Mark
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402315#402315
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: 4130 tubing FOR SALE |
From: | "stearmandriver" <pwr2800(at)gmail.com> |
pm sent
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402319#402319
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | new member in Cincinnati area |
From: | "stearmandriver" <pwr2800(at)gmail.com> |
Hello,
I have recently acquired the bug to build a steel tube Pietenpol. Spending my
entire life in the air, in hangers and barns has left me with a love of craftsmanship.
I am not ready to start actually building but more in the research stage.
if anyone in the Cincinnati area will be in their shop or hanger this week,
I would love to stop by and have a look at your project or completed aircraft.
Thanks in advance for patience offered to a Pietenpol scrod...
Best Regards,
Dave
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402320#402320
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael Weston <smikewest(at)comcast.net> |
Subject: | Re: riblett attack |
thanks guys. that should do it. thanks.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Ash fuse gear block mounts... Just realized are 3/4 |
not 1&qu
From: | "tools" <n0kkj(at)yahoo.com> |
Hmmm, are you talking about the ash pieces that go from side to side on the fuse?
I broke one and replaced it, thought it was supposed to be 3/4, it was 3/4 and
I replaced it with 3/4, thinking I should go check the plans more carefully!
Ergo, I think 3/4 is fine, the break was due to the fuse dropping onto the axle,
not normal use. If it's supposed to be 1 tapering to 3/4, you won't lose any
strength in the area of the joint, as it's predicated on 3/4 clearly.
Also, I'm not certain it EVER broke either. When I removed it, what looked like
a crack to me, was a chip of wood that was more likely broken out when the original
fittings were installed. Wasn't difficult to replace (at that point),
so did it anyway.
IF you have any doubts to reconcile, laminate on a piece to bring up the plans
dimensions. Simply carve or sand away the varnish beforehand. The laminated
piece, done correctly, will be as strong (or stronger).
I'm not sure why it would be 1 tapering to 3/4 anyway. When the plane was designed,
1" lumber was indeed 1" thick. Getting 1" thick ash these days would require
laminating, cutting down from 8 (or maybe 6/4) or more rarely, buying 5/4
lumber. It's possible Pietenpol was using what was generally available. Much
of the cross section strength here is coming from that piece being laminated
onto the belly pan piece of 1/4 plywood.
Good well fitted fittings are necessary though.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402323#402323
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Dortch, Steven D MAJ MIL USA NGB" <steven.d.dortch(at)us.army.mil> |
Subject: | Re: Ash fuse gear block mounts... Just realized are |
3/4 not 1&qu
UNCLASSIFIED
> I'm not sure why it would be 1 tapering to 3/4 anyway. When the plane was designed,
1" lumber was indeed 1" thick. Getting 1" thick ash these days would require
laminating, cutting down from 8 (or maybe 6/4) or more rarely, buying 5/4
lumber. It's possible Pietenpol was using what was generally available. Much
of the cross section strength here is coming from that piece being laminated
onto the belly pan piece of 1/4 plywood.
I am not sure when the market changed but the "rationale" from the lumber industry
is:
In the past, you could buy "rough" lumber, wood that actually met the dimensions
but it was measured green and not planed or shaped, at the lumber yard. Most
home framing and construction was done with rough lumber.
It may not have a straight edge and almost looked "fuzzy" but it was in 1 inch
increments
Lumber's nominal dimensions are given in terms of green (not dried), rough (unfinished)
dimensions. The finished size is smaller, as a result of drying (which
shrinks the wood), and planing to smooth the wood. However, the difference between
"nominal" and "finished" lumber size can vary.
Now you get "finished" lumber that has been planed and shaped. BUT it is smaller
in all dimensions than rough lumber. You can order lumber in the bigger dimensions
but it is just about as cheap to buy a larger size and rip it down.
My experience in this area is in working with historic homes. We often had to rip
bigger wood down to a full specification. The best thing was to be able to
salvage wood from a period home that was being destroyed.
Blue Skies,
Steve D
Just found this on Wikipedia (so it must be true):
Early standards called for green rough lumber to be of full nominal dimension when
dry. However, the dimensions have diminished over time. In 1910, a typical
finished 1-inch- (25mm) board was 1316in (21mm). In 1928, that was reduced by
4%, and yet again by 4% in 1956. In 1961, at a meeting in Scottsdale, Arizona,
the Committee on Grade Simplification and Standardization agreed to what is
now the current U.S. standard: in part, the dressed size of a 1inch (nominal)
board was fixed at 34inch; while the dressed size of 2inch (nominal) lumber was
reduced from 1 58inch to the current 1 12inch.
UNCLASSIFIED
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Dortch, Steven D MAJ MIL USA NGB" <steven.d.dortch(at)us.army.mil> |
Subject: | Re: Floorboard refinish |
UNCLASSIFIED
OK, Here with another silly question. Under the floorboards and anywhere inside
that I see bare wood. What should i use to seal the wood? I think West system
is way overkill for items not suffering wear.
Inspection shows that it is all good wood. No rot no softness. Some is obviously
sealed, some I am not sure about. As recommended, I would like to seal this
wood. How can I tell if it is sealed?
Blue Skies,
Steve D
UNCLASSIFIED
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Jack Phillips" <jack(at)bedfordlandings.com> |
Subject: | Wire spoke wheels size... |
Mark,
Mine are 21" x 3.00" aluminum rims, with Avon Speedmaster tyres (from
England). The wheels have 36 spokes, the hubs are 6" wide of my own design,
machined from a solid billet of 6061 T651 aluminum. Spokes were custom made
(rolled threads) and laced by Buchanan's in California. Brakes are
Cleveland 6" hydraulic disc brakes. Total weight of each wheel, complete
with tire, tube and brake disc is 25 lbs.
Anything else you need to know?
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 Mark Roberts
Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2013 4:29 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Wire spoke wheels size...
In the current discussion of the height of the landing gear, I am wondering
if you wire spoked wheel guys can tell me what wheels you chose, what size
they are when inflated, and where you got them.
I am drawing out my landing gear design from the "improved" gear design, but
plan to use wire spoked wheels, not 6" tires.
So, I want to keep the overall height of the top of the fuse in the same
location as plans, but, that will require compensation for the additional
height of the spoked wheels...
Since I have not purchased the wheels, I am wondering what size I should be
designing to match.
Thanks!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402291#402291
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Jack Phillips" <jack(at)bedfordlandings.com> |
Subject: | squirrelly on the gear |
On NX899JP, the tread is 69" and the top longeron is at 52"
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 Greg
Cardinal
Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2013 4:33 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: squirrelly on the gear
On NX18235 the track is 56" and the top longeron is at 50".
Greg Cardinal
----- Original Message -----
From: "taildrags" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2013 7:58 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: squirrelly on the gear
>
> I changed the subject line ;o) Gary, what is the track (distance between
> contact patches) of your mains? I know there's a word for it but I can't
> remember it right now. Just interested in comparing that dimension
> between airplanes, as I'm sure it does have some effect on ground
> handling.
>
> --------
> Oscar Zuniga
> Medford, OR
> Air Camper NX41CC "Scout"
> A75 power
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402012#402012
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Ash fuse gear block mounts... Just realized are 3/4 |
not 1&qu
From: | "Mark Roberts" <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
Thanks guys... I was thinking that I might lay a .090 steel strap over the top
of the ash and use plenty of bolts to sandich the ash block, but it sounds like
some of yu are using 3/4" ash, so maybe it is a moot point. I just needed to
have some input as to whether I was in the "safe" zone. I plan to make the bottom
steel straps all the way across the belly as well, as I can see hard landings
potentially an issue with my skill set :?
Thanks for the feedback.
Mark
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402354#402354
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Wire spoke wheels size... |
From: | "Mark Roberts" <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
> Anything else you need to know?
Uh yeah Jack: How can I get me a pair of them nice lookin' hubs! :)
Thanks for the input. I am assuming a 21" rim is not the finished size with tire?
Would those be 3" wide or 3" high? I am not familiar with tires yet (kind ignorant
actually... can you tell by the question?)
My plan is to use Spoked Tires with "Improved" gear, and it would seem that if
I did, I would raise the top of the longerons when level by much more than the
design intended. Since the bigger wheels are taller than the wide tires of the
improved gear, it wold seem that using the wire spoked on the improved gear
would require a slight modification in the height of the gear legs, Right?
Or is this overthinking things, and it is not that critical?
Many thanks!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402355#402355
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Ash fuse gear block mounts... Just realized are 3/4 |
not 1&q
From: | "Mark Roberts" <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
Thanks Steve.... I might be over thinking the whole thing, but I want to be safe!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402356#402356
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Wire spoke wheels size... |
From: | "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> |
Mark,
My rule of thumb is "when all else fails, read the instructions (plans)".
In this case, referring to drawing No. 3 (split axle LG), we see that the drawings
recommend 19" x 9" air wheels, but say that 24" x 4" or similar wheels may
also be used. The 24" x 4" wheels would be the tall, skinny "motorcycle" wheels.
As Greg mentioned, his wheels with 19" rims are about 25" tall when the
tires are added. 21" rims typically produce a wheel that is about 27" diameter,
when the tires get installed. Remember that the axle height is affected by
the RADIUS of the wheels. A 25" diameter wheel will have an axle that is 12
1/2" off the ground, and a 27" wheel will have an axle that is only 1" higher
(13 1/2").
Going back to drawing No. 1, we see that the dimensions provided for W&B indicate
a recommended longeron height of 51" - based on using 24" x 4" wheels.
So, in summary, the landing gear should work fine as drawn, with tall wheels.
If you choose to use taller wheels, it won't make much difference, but you could
adjust the geometry slightly to maintain the longeron height called for in
the plans.
Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402359#402359
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dwg_no_3_lg_604.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dwg_no_1_lg_207.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Wire spoke wheels size... |
From: | "Mark Roberts" <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
Thanks Bill... how many times have I looked at the plans and not registered those
sizes?
Kinda like looking for car keys that are on the kitchen table but all you focus
on is the salt and pepper shakers.... Doap!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402360#402360
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: new member in Cincinnati area |
From: | "DaveG601XL" <david.m.gallagher(at)ge.com> |
Dave,
I see your tag says you live in Pleasant Plain, OH. Well, I also live in Pleasant
Plain and it's not that big of a town so we have got to be just a few miles
apart. I will warn you in advance that I have a GN-1 project out of wood, but
you are welcome to stop over anyway and we can talk airplane building. I will
try to send you a PM through Matronics with contact info.
--------
David Gallagher
Zodiac 601 XL-B: flying, 250+ hours now
Next project under construction: Finish my father's Aircamper
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402361#402361
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Ash fuse gear block mounts... Just realized are 3/4 |
not 1&qu
From: | "tools" <n0kkj(at)yahoo.com> |
For the data point, mine is 3/4 all the way, no strap across, WELL TESTED. However,
mine doesn't have the beveling, the bolts all JUST fit...
I rebuilt it just like it was and tested it again! Seems to be just fine. Seriously,
I believe the biggest issue is getting things to fit properly so there's
no movement.
Tools
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402364#402364
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Clif Dawson" <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca> |
Subject: | Re: Ash fuse gear block mounts... Just realized are |
3/4 not 1&qu
The plans in the 1932 Flying and Glider Manual show
the steel straps across the top of the cross-members.
My understanding is that they are there to tie the left
and right wing struts together, not the landing gear as
the stress there is in compression while the lower strut
fittings, indeed, the entire strut system, is in tension
while in the air.
Clif
>
> Thanks guys... I was thinking that I might lay a .090 steel strap over the
> top of the ash and use plenty of bolts to sandich the ash block, but it
> sounds like some of yu are using 3/4" ash, so maybe it is a moot point. I
> just needed to have some input as to whether I was in the "safe" zone. I
> plan to make the bottom steel straps all the way across the belly as well,
> as I can see hard landings potentially an issue with my skill set :?
>
> Thanks for the feedback.
>
> Mark
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402354#402354
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com> |
Subject: | Re: new member in Cincinnati area |
Welcome Dave!- I am up here north of Columbus OH about 25 miles in Center
burg.- I live here on Chapman Memorial Field 6CM, if you are up in this a
rea let me know and you are welcome to stop by.- My Dad's Pietenpol is he
re in my hangar, as well as a Baby Lakes biplane I am in the finishing stag
es before final assembly, and a Jungster 1 biplane I hope to have done befo
re Christmas 2099.
-
Shad
--- On Sun, 6/9/13, stearmandriver wrote:
From: stearmandriver <pwr2800(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: new member in Cincinnati area
Date: Sunday, June 9, 2013, 9:11 AM
Hello,
I have recently acquired the bug to build a steel tube Pietenpol.- Spendi
ng my entire life in the air, in hangers and barns has left me with a love
of craftsmanship. I am not ready to start actually building but more in the
research stage. if anyone in the Cincinnati area will be in their shop or
hanger this week, I would love to stop by and have a look at your project o
r completed aircraft.
Thanks in advance for patience offered to a Pietenpol scrod...
Best Regards,
Dave
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402320#402320
le, List Admin.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Wire spoke wheels size... |
From: | "taildrags" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
Okay. Back at the hangar today and measured the spoked rims that I posted pix
of a day or two ago. What I have are Takasago EXCEL aluminum rims with IRC tires
that are 3.50-16, 4 ply rating. There are disk brakes fitted that appear
to be Airheart 150x1 hydraulics. From the hangar floor to the top of the inflated
tire is about 23-1/4".
Spoked wheels and narrow tires with brakes look like a really sweet combination,
although I've never flown them.
--------
Oscar Zuniga
Medford, OR
Air Camper NX41CC "Scout"
A75 power
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402368#402368
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Jack Phillips" <jack(at)bedfordlandings.com> |
Subject: | Re: Wire spoke wheels size... |
21" x 3.00" is the tire size. The rim is 21" in diameter, and 3" wide.
Outside diameter of the tire is 27", as Bill Church said.
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 Mark Roberts
Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2013 6:38 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wire spoke wheels size...
> Anything else you need to know?
Uh yeah Jack: How can I get me a pair of them nice lookin' hubs! :)
Thanks for the input. I am assuming a 21" rim is not the finished size with
tire? Would those be 3" wide or 3" high? I am not familiar with tires yet
(kind ignorant actually... can you tell by the question?)
My plan is to use Spoked Tires with "Improved" gear, and it would seem that
if I did, I would raise the top of the longerons when level by much more
than the design intended. Since the bigger wheels are taller than the wide
tires of the improved gear, it wold seem that using the wire spoked on the
improved gear would require a slight modification in the height of the gear
legs, Right?
Or is this overthinking things, and it is not that critical?
Many thanks!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402355#402355
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: new member in Cincinnati area |
From: | airlion2(at)gmail.com |
Shad, do you still have the nose bowl mold? I am thinking of a new nose to b
e less Blount. My fuse is 26 inches wide so don't know if that would work. C
heers Gardiner
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 10, 2013, at 12:35 AM, shad bell wrote:
>
> Welcome Dave! I am up here north of Columbus OH about 25 miles in Centerb
urg. I live here on Chapman Memorial Field 6CM, if you are up in this area l
et me know and you are welcome to stop by. My Dad's Pietenpol is here in my
hangar, as well as a Baby Lakes biplane I am in the finishing stages before
final assembly, and a Jungster 1 biplane I hope to have done before Christm
as 2099.
>
> Shad
>
> --- On Sun, 6/9/13, stearmandriver wrote:
>
> From: stearmandriver <pwr2800(at)gmail.com>
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: new member in Cincinnati area
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Date: Sunday, June 9, 2013, 9:11 AM
>
>
> Hello,
>
> I have recently acquired the bug to build a steel tube Pietenpol. Spendin
g my entire life in the air, in hangers and barns has left me with a love of
craftsmanship. I am not ready to start actually building but more in the re
search stage. if anyone in the Cincinnati area will be in their shop or hang
er this week, I would love to stop by and have a look at your project or com
pleted aircraft.
>
> Thanks in advance for patience offered to a Pietenpol scrod...
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Dave
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402320#40232= - T
he Pietenpol-List Email Forum -http://www.matronics.com/Na======
=================
>
>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com> |
Subject: | Re: new member in Cincinnati area |
Kurt Shipman had it last, It would not be too hard to carve a new one thoug
h.- I can send you some measurements if you like.
-
Shad
--- On Mon, 6/10/13, airlion2(at)gmail.com wrote:
From: airlion2(at)gmail.com <airlion2(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: new member in Cincinnati area
Date: Monday, June 10, 2013, 8:16 AM
Shad, do you still have the nose bowl mold? I am thinking of a new nose to
be less Blount. My fuse is 26 inches wide so don't know if that would work.
Cheers Gardiner
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 10, 2013, at 12:35 AM, shad bell wrote:
Welcome Dave!- I am up here north of Columbus OH about 25 miles in Center
burg.- I live here on Chapman Memorial Field 6CM, if you are up in this a
rea let me know and you are welcome to stop by.- My Dad's Pietenpol is he
re in my hangar, as well as a Baby Lakes biplane I am in the finishing stag
es before final assembly, and a Jungster 1 biplane I hope to have done befo
re Christmas 2099.
-
Shad
--- On Sun, 6/9/13, stearmandriver wrote:
From: stearmandriver <pwr2800(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: new member in Cincinnati area
Date: Sunday, June 9, 2013, 9:11 AM
Hello,
I have recently acquired the bug to build a steel tube Pietenpol.- Spendi
ng my entire life in the air, in hangers and barns has left me with a love
of craftsmanship. I am not ready to start actually building but more in the
research stage. if anyone in the Cincinnati area will be in their shop or
hanger this week, I would love to stop by and have a look at your project o
r completed aircraft.
Thanks in advance for patience offered to a Pietenpol scrod...
Best Regards,
Dave
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402320#40232=- - -
- - - The Pietenpol-List Email Forum - http://www.matronics.com/Na=
======================
=========
>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
=========
cs.com
=========
matronics.com/contribution
=========
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: new member in Cincinnati area |
From: | Ken Bickers <bickers.ken(at)gmail.com> |
Shad, I would appreciate those measurements, too. I've admired the nose
bowl on your Dad's Piet, as well as Kurt's, for several years now. Cheers,
Ken
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:10 AM, shad bell wrote:
> Kurt Shipman had it last, It would not be too hard to carve a new one
> though. I can send you some measurements if you like.
>
> Shad
>
> --- On *Mon, 6/10/13, airlion2(at)gmail.com * wrote:
>
>
> From: airlion2(at)gmail.com <airlion2(at)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: new member in Cincinnati area
> To: "pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com"
> Date: Monday, June 10, 2013, 8:16 AM
>
> Shad, do you still have the nose bowl mold? I am thinking of a new nose
> to be less Blount. My fuse is 26 inches wide so don't know if that would
> work. Cheers Gardiner
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Jun 10, 2013, at 12:35 AM, shad bell http://us.mc1612.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=aviatorbell@yahoo.com>>
> wrote:
>
> Welcome Dave! I am up here north of Columbus OH about 25 miles in
> Centerburg. I live here on Chapman Memorial Field 6CM, if you are up in
> this area let me know and you are welcome to stop by. My Dad's Pietenpol
> is here in my hangar, as well as a Baby Lakes biplane I am in the finishing
> stages before final assembly, and a Jungster 1 biplane I hope to have done
> before Christmas 2099.
>
> Shad
>
> --- On *Sun, 6/9/13, stearmandriver http://us.mc1612.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=pwr2800@gmail.com>
> >* wrote:
>
>
> From: stearmandriver <pwr2800@gmail.com<http://us.mc1612.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=pwr2800@gmail.com>
> >
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: new member in Cincinnati area
> To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com<http://us.mc1612.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=pietenpol-list@matronics.com>
> Date: Sunday, June 9, 2013, 9:11 AM
>
> >
>
> Hello,
>
> I have recently acquired the bug to build a steel tube Pietenpol.
> Spending my entire life in the air, in hangers and barns has left me with a
> love of craftsmanship. I am not ready to start actually building but more
> in the research stage. if anyone in the Cincinnati area will be in their
> shop or hanger this week, I would love to stop by and have a look at your
> project or completed aircraft.
>
> Thanks in advance for patience offered to a Pietenpol scrod...
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Dave
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402320#40232= - The
> Pietenpol-List Email Forum -
> http://www.matronics.com/Na=======================
>
>
> <http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402320#402320>
>
> *
>
> =========
> >http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
> ==========cs.com
> ==========matronics.com/contribution
> =========
> *
>
> *
>
> " rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
> et=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com
> llow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> *
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | new member in Cincinnati area |
Shad,
I would also be interested in the measurements.
Brian
SLC-UT
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ken
Bickers
Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 8:19 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: new member in Cincinnati area
Shad, I would appreciate those measurements, too. I've admired the nose
bowl on your Dad's Piet, as well as Kurt's, for several years now.
Cheers, Ken
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:10 AM, shad bell
wrote:
Kurt Shipman had it last, It would not be too hard to carve a new one
though. I can send you some measurements if you like.
Shad
--- On Mon, 6/10/13, airlion2(at)gmail.com wrote:
From: airlion2(at)gmail.com <airlion2(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: new member in Cincinnati area
To: "pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com"
Date: Monday, June 10, 2013, 8:16 AM
Shad, do you still have the nose bowl mold? I am thinking of a
new nose to be less Blount. My fuse is 26 inches wide so don't know if
that would work. Cheers Gardiner
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 10, 2013, at 12:35 AM, shad bell http://us.mc1612.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=aviatorbell@yahoo.com>
>
wrote:
Welcome Dave! I am up here north of Columbus OH about 25 miles in
Centerburg. I live here on Chapman Memorial Field 6CM, if you are up in
this area let me know and you are welcome to stop by. My Dad's
Pietenpol is here in my hangar, as well as a Baby Lakes biplane I am in
the finishing stages before final assembly, and a Jungster 1 biplane I
hope to have done before Christmas 2099.
Shad
--- On Sun, 6/9/13, stearmandriver http://us.mc1612.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=pwr2800@gmail.com> >
wrote:
From: stearmandriver <pwr2800(at)gmail.com
<http://us.mc1612.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=pwr2800@gmail.com> >
Subject: Pietenpol-List: new member in Cincinnati area
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
<http://us.mc1612.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=pietenpol-list@matronics
.
com>
Date: Sunday, June 9, 2013, 9:11 AM
http://us.mc1612.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=pwr2800@gmail.com> >
Hello,
I have recently acquired the bug to build a steel tube
Pietenpol. Spending my entire life in the air, in hangers and barns has
left me with a love of craftsmanship. I am not ready to start actually
building but more in the research stage. if anyone in the Cincinnati
area will be in their shop or hanger this week, I would love to stop by
and have a look at your project or completed aircraft.
Thanks in advance for patience offered to a Pietenpol scrod...
Best Regards,
Dave
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402320#40232
- The Pietenpol-List Email Forum -
http://www.matronics.com/Na================
=======
<http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402320#402320>
=========
>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
=========
cs.com
=========
matronics.com/contribution
=========
" rel=nofollow
target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
et=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com
llow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: new member in Cincinnati area |
From: | airlion2(at)gmail.com |
Thanks shad, do you. Have Kurt's email and phone?
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 10, 2013, at 10:10 AM, shad bell wrote:
>
> Kurt Shipman had it last, It would not be too hard to carve a new one thou
gh. I can send you some measurements if you like.
>
> Shad
>
> --- On Mon, 6/10/13, airlion2(at)gmail.com wrote:
>
> From: airlion2(at)gmail.com <airlion2(at)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: new member in Cincinnati area
> To: "pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com"
> Date: Monday, June 10, 2013, 8:16 AM
>
> Shad, do you still have the nose bowl mold? I am thinking of a new nose to
be less Blount. My fuse is 26 inches wide so don't know if that would work.
Cheers Gardiner
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Jun 10, 2013, at 12:35 AM, shad bell wrote:
>
>>
>> Welcome Dave! I am up here north of Columbus OH about 25 miles in Center
burg. I live here on Chapman Memorial Field 6CM, if you are up in this area
let me know and you are welcome to stop by. My Dad's Pietenpol is here in m
y hangar, as well as a Baby Lakes biplane I am in the finishing stages befor
e final assembly, and a Jungster 1 biplane I hope to have done before Christ
mas 2099.
>>
>> Shad
>>
>> --- On Sun, 6/9/13, stearmandriver wrote:
>>
>> From: stearmandriver <pwr2800(at)gmail.com>
>> Subject: Pietenpol-List: new member in Cincinnati area
>> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>> Date: Sunday, June 9, 2013, 9:11 AM
>>
>
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I have recently acquired the bug to build a steel tube Pietenpol. Spendi
ng my entire life in the air, in hangers and barns has left me with a love o
f craftsmanship. I am not ready to start actually building but more in the r
esearch stage. if anyone in the Cincinnati area will be in their shop or han
ger this week, I would love to stop by and have a look at your project or co
mpleted aircraft.
>>
>> Thanks in advance for patience offered to a Pietenpol scrod...
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402320#40232= - T
he Pietenpol-List Email Forum - http://www.matronics.com/Na======
=================
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> =========
>> >http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
>> =========
>> cs.com
>> =========
>> matronics.com/contribution
>> =========
>>
>
>
> " rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pieten
pol-List
> et=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com
> llow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: new member in Cincinnati area |
From: | "jarheadpilot82" <jarheadpilot82(at)hotmail.com> |
Shad,
You are getting a bunch of requests - myself included. Is it possible to post the
information on the Forum, so everyone can have it as well as it going into
the archives.
Thanks!
--------
Semper Fi,
Terry Hand
Athens, GA
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402402#402402
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: riblett attack |
From: | "Pieti Lowell" <Lowellcfrank(at)yahoo.com> |
The angle you are concerned about does not effect my Piet , I have tried my clipped
wing 612 since 2004, with 1 inch longer front cabanes as well as the equal
length . The biggest Item that was noticed is the landing speed is reduced about
3 MPH when I had the longer cabanes forward. I never tested the top speed.
I do not fly as much as, time catches up with the years.
Pieti Lowell
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402403#402403
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: riblett attack |
From: | "Mark Roberts" <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
Hey Lowell:
Was there any noticeable difference in the back pressure you held on the stick
at cruise speed when you added incidence?
Thanks for all that you have shared on this over the years! You've been a great
resource for many of us!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402405#402405
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: new member in Cincinnati area |
From: | Lion Mason <airlion2(at)gmail.com> |
I. Would appreciate it shad if you would send me the measurents. I don't kn
ow what it takes to form a cowl as I have never worked with this medium bef
ore. I hope I can talk with you more about this in brodhead. Might be a go
od subject to talk about on Saturday
Cheers , Gardiner
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 10, 2013, at 10:10 AM, shad bell wrote:
>
> Kurt Shipman had it last, It would not be too hard to carve a new one thou
gh. I can send you some measurements if you like.
>
> Shad
>
> --- On Mon, 6/10/13, airlion2(at)gmail.com wrote:
>
> From: airlion2(at)gmail.com <airlion2(at)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: new member in Cincinnati area
> To: "pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com"
> Date: Monday, June 10, 2013, 8:16 AM
>
> Shad, do you still have the nose bowl mold? I am thinking of a new nose to
be less Blount. My fuse is 26 inches wide so don't know if that would work.
Cheers Gardiner
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Jun 10, 2013, at 12:35 AM, shad bell wrote:
>
>>
>> Welcome Dave! I am up here north of Columbus OH about 25 miles in Center
burg. I live here on Chapman Memorial Field 6CM, if you are up in this area
let me know and you are welcome to stop by. My Dad's Pietenpol is here in m
y hangar, as well as a Baby Lakes biplane I am in the finishing stages befor
e final assembly, and a Jungster 1 biplane I hope to have done before Christ
mas 2099.
>>
>> Shad
>>
>> --- On Sun, 6/9/13, stearmandriver wrote:
>>
>> From: stearmandriver <pwr2800(at)gmail.com>
>> Subject: Pietenpol-List: new member in Cincinnati area
>> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>> Date: Sunday, June 9, 2013, 9:11 AM
>>
>
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I have recently acquired the bug to build a steel tube Pietenpol. Spendi
ng my entire life in the air, in hangers and barns has left me with a love o
f craftsmanship. I am not ready to start actually building but more in the r
esearch stage. if anyone in the Cincinnati area will be in their shop or han
ger this week, I would love to stop by and have a look at your project or co
mpleted aircraft.
>>
>> Thanks in advance for patience offered to a Pietenpol scrod...
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402320#40232= - T
he Pietenpol-List Email Forum - http://www.matronics.com/Na======
=================
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> =========
>> >http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
>> =========
>> cs.com
>> =========
>> matronics.com/contribution
>> =========
>>
>
>
> " rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pieten
pol-List
> et=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com
> llow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com> |
Subject: | Re: new member in Cincinnati area |
I wont be making Brodhead this year but I will try to get you the measureme
nts as soon as I can, not much to it, just carve a foam block to shape and
smooth it out, coat it so the resin won't eat the foam and lay the fibergla
ss on.- After that just flat wrap the aluminum for the rest of the cowlin
g.- Basically that is the short winded version of the process.
-
Shad
--- On Mon, 6/10/13, Lion Mason wrote:
From: Lion Mason <airlion2(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: new member in Cincinnati area
Date: Monday, June 10, 2013, 1:29 PM
I. Would appreciate -it shad if you would send me the measurents. I don't
know what it takes to form a cowl as I have never worked -with this medi
um before. -I hope I can talk with you more about this in brodhead. -Mi
ght be a good subject -to talk about on Saturday
Cheers , -Gardiner
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 10, 2013, at 10:10 AM, shad bell wrote:
Kurt Shipman had it last, It would not be too hard to carve a new one thoug
h.- I can send you some measurements if you like.
-
Shad
--- On Mon, 6/10/13, airlion2(at)gmail.com wrote:
From: airlion2(at)gmail.com <airlion2(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: new member in Cincinnati area
Date: Monday, June 10, 2013, 8:16 AM
Shad, do you still have the nose bowl mold? I am thinking of a new nose to
be less Blount. My fuse is 26 inches wide so don't know if that would work.
Cheers Gardiner
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 10, 2013, at 12:35 AM, shad bell wrote:
Welcome Dave!- I am up here north of Columbus OH about 25 miles in Center
burg.- I live here on Chapman Memorial Field 6CM, if you are up in this a
rea let me know and you are welcome to stop by.- My Dad's Pietenpol is he
re in my hangar, as well as a Baby Lakes biplane I am in the finishing stag
es before final assembly, and a Jungster 1 biplane I hope to have done befo
re Christmas 2099.
-
Shad
--- On Sun, 6/9/13, stearmandriver wrote:
From: stearmandriver <pwr2800(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: new member in Cincinnati area
Date: Sunday, June 9, 2013, 9:11 AM
Hello,
I have recently acquired the bug to build a steel tube Pietenpol.- Spendi
ng my entire life in the air, in hangers and barns has left me with a love
of craftsmanship. I am not ready to start actually building but more in the
research stage. if anyone in the Cincinnati area will be in their shop or
hanger this week, I would love to stop by and have a look at your project o
r completed aircraft.
Thanks in advance for patience offered to a Pietenpol scrod...
Best Regards,
Dave
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402320#40232=- - -
- - - The Pietenpol-List Email Forum - http://www.matronics.com/Na=
======================
=========
>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
=========
cs.com
=========
matronics.com/contribution
=========
" rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenp
ol-List
et=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com
llow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Issue Posting TEST |
From: | "taildrags" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
Mike; the test seems to have come through with a new subject (thread) line.
--------
Oscar Zuniga
Medford, OR
Air Camper NX41CC "Scout"
A75 power
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402412#402412
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[Vantage Partners, LLC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov> |
Subject: | an inexpensive headset offer from Wicks |
Just got this in my in-box for those of you looking for a reasonably priced
headset.
Mike C.
[cid:image001.png(at)01CE65F0.4DBEA820]
http://aircraftproducts.wicksaircraft.com/item/all-categories/-supplies-hea
dsets-supplies-eleonice-corp-headsets/fs-150?plpver=10&categid=100&prod
id=4229&origin=keyword&utm_source=Headsets&utm_campaign=Steel+Box&u
tm_medium=email
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: new member in Cincinnati area |
From: | "stearmandriver" <pwr2800(at)gmail.com> |
Thanks Dave and Shad for the welcome posts! Shad, I get to Columbus every now and
again and look forward to stopping by. Dave, as far as you're concerned, being
1 3/4 miles away may end up being a curse! Just kidding, I respect privacy!
I am looking forward to meeting you in the very near future and seeing your
project.
Best Regards,
Dave Hughes
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402439#402439
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Issue Posting TEST |
From: | "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> |
Nope. That didn't work either.
BC
That was a joke, son... I said a joke... (to be read in Foghorn Leghorn's voice)
> It appears I can't post a new topic to the list. This is actually a "reply" to
an existing post with the subject changed and the body of the original removed.
Just testing to see if this goes through.
>
> Michael Perez
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402451#402451
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Center Section Covering |
From: | "giacummo" <mario.giacummo(at)gmail.com> |
Hello,
I am covering the center section with a plywood foil of 3mm, a little fixed piece
in the leading edge, and a full one for the rest. I plan to attach it with
screws over the rib separated 4 inchs as you can see in the photo. I plan just
barnish it. the other side is the same, but instead of screwa it is attached
with epoxy.
I ask, this is the way to go?.
thank you
--------
Mario Giacummo
Photos here: http://goo.gl/wh7M4
Little Blog : http://vgmk1.blogspot.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402491#402491
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc05195_803.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Gary Boothe" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
Subject: | Center Section Covering |
Hi Mario,
It's your decision. Most builders epoxy plywood to the bottom for two
reasons: 1) To keep the center section square; 2) To act as a floor for
either a fuel tank or baggage. In either case, most are merely covered with
an aluminum top, fastened in a variety of methods. If you don't wish to put
anything in your center section, there is no reason why you couldn't add a
center rib and cover same as the wings.
Other than a different look and a little weight, I'm not sure what you gain
with a plywood top...but it won't hurt anything, either.
Gary Boothe
NX308MB
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of giacummo
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 7:14 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Center Section Covering
-->
Hello,
I am covering the center section with a plywood foil of 3mm, a little fixed
piece in the leading edge, and a full one for the rest. I plan to attach it
with screws over the rib separated 4 inchs as you can see in the photo. I
plan just barnish it. the other side is the same, but instead of screwa it
is attached with epoxy.
I ask, this is the way to go?.
thank you
--------
Mario Giacummo
Photos here: http://goo.gl/wh7M4
Little Blog : http://vgmk1.blogspot.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402491#402491
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc05195_803.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: squirrelly on the gear |
From: | "pineymb" <airltd(at)mts.net> |
C-GGLU is 72" C/L on wheels & 49" from ground to top longeron.
--------
Adrian M
Winnipeg, MB
Canada
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402504#402504
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: new member in Cincinnati area |
From: | airlion2(at)gmail.com |
Shad, do you have Kurt's phone and email address? gardiner
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 10, 2013, at 1:45 PM, shad bell wrote:
>
> I wont be making Brodhead this year but I will try to get you the measurem
ents as soon as I can, not much to it, just carve a foam block to shape and s
mooth it out, coat it so the resin won't eat the foam and lay the fiberglass
on. After that just flat wrap the aluminumdo you have Kurt's p for the res
t of the cowling. Basically that is the short winded version of the process
.
>
> Shad
>
> --- On Mon, 6/10/13, Lion Mason wrote:
>
> From: Lion Mason <airlion2(at)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: new member in Cincinnati area
> To: "pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com"
> Date: Monday, June 10, 2013, 1:29 PM
>
> I. Would appreciate it shad if you would send me the measurents. I don't k
now what it takes to form a cowl as I have never worked with this medium be
fore. I hope I can talk with you more about this in brodhead. Might be a g
ood subject to talk about on Saturday
> Cheers , Gardiner
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jun 10, 2013, at 10:10 AM, shad bell wrote:
>
>>
>> Kurt Shipman had it last, It would not be too hard to carve a new one tho
ugh. I can send you some measurements if you like.
>>
>> Shad
>>
>> --- On Mon, 6/10/13, airlion2(at)gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> From: airlion2(at)gmail.com <airlion2(at)gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: new member in Cincinnati area
>> To: "pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com"
>> Date: Monday, June 10, 2013, 8:16 AM
>>
>> Shad, do you still have the nose bowl mold? I am thinking of a new nose t
o be less Blount. My fuse is 26 inches wide so don't know if that would work
. Cheers Gardiner
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On Jun 10, 2013, at 12:35 AM, shad bell wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Welcome Dave! I am up here north of Columbus OH about 25 miles in Cente
rburg. I live here on Chapman Memorial Field 6CM, if you are up in this are
a let me know and you are welcome to stop by. My Dad's Pietenpol is here in
my hangar, as well as a Baby Lakes biplane I am in the finishing stages bef
ore final assembly, and a Jungster 1 biplane I hope to have done before Chri
stmas 2099.
>>>
>>> Shad
>>>
>>> --- On Sun, 6/9/13, stearmandriver wrote:
>>>
>>> From: stearmandriver <pwr2800(at)gmail.com>
>>> Subject: Pietenpol-List: new member in Cincinnati area
>>> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>>> Date: Sunday, June 9, 2013, 9:11 AM
>>>
m>
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I have recently acquired the bug to build a steel tube Pietenpol. Spend
ing my entire life in the air, in hangers and barns has left me with a love o
f craftsmanship. I am not ready to start actually building but more in the r
esearch stage. if anyone in the Cincinnati area will be in their shop or han
ger this week, I would love to stop by and have a look at your project or co
mpleted aircraft.
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance for patience offered to a Pietenpol scrod...
>>>
>>> Best Regards,
>>>
>>> Dave
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>
>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402320#40232= -
The Pietenpol-List Email Forum - http://www.matronics.com/Na=====
==================
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> =========
>>> >http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
>>> =========
>>> cs.com
>>> =========
>>> matronics.com/contribution
>>> =========
>>>
>>
>>
>> " rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Piete
npol-List
>> et=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com
>> llow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
> 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> npol-List
> 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> >
> 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com> |
Subject: | Re: new member in Cincinnati area |
No I do not, not sure if anyone else on here would have it.
-
Shad
--- On Tue, 6/11/13, airlion2(at)gmail.com wrote:
From: airlion2(at)gmail.com <airlion2(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: new member in Cincinnati area
Date: Tuesday, June 11, 2013, 11:56 AM
Shad, -do you have Kurt's phone and email address? gardiner
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 10, 2013, at 1:45 PM, shad bell wrote:
I wont be making Brodhead this year but I will try to get you the measureme
nts as soon as I can, not much to it, just carve a foam block to shape and
smooth it out, coat it so the resin won't eat the foam and lay the fibergla
ss on.- After that just flat wrap the aluminumdo you have Kurt's p for th
e rest of the cowling.- Basically that is the short winded version of the
process.
-
Shad
--- On Mon, 6/10/13, Lion Mason wrote:
From: Lion Mason <airlion2(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: new member in Cincinnati area
Date: Monday, June 10, 2013, 1:29 PM
I. Would appreciate -it shad if you would send me the measurents. I don't
know what it takes to form a cowl as I have never worked -with this medi
um before. -I hope I can talk with you more about this in brodhead. -Mi
ght be a good subject -to talk about on Saturday
Cheers , -Gardiner
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 10, 2013, at 10:10 AM, shad bell wrote:
Kurt Shipman had it last, It would not be too hard to carve a new one thoug
h.- I can send you some measurements if you like.
-
Shad
--- On Mon, 6/10/13, airlion2(at)gmail.com wrote:
From: airlion2(at)gmail.com <airlion2(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: new member in Cincinnati area
Date: Monday, June 10, 2013, 8:16 AM
Shad, do you still have the nose bowl mold? I am thinking of a new nose to
be less Blount. My fuse is 26 inches wide so don't know if that would work.
Cheers Gardiner
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 10, 2013, at 12:35 AM, shad bell wrote:
Welcome Dave!- I am up here north of Columbus OH about 25 miles in Center
burg.- I live here on Chapman Memorial Field 6CM, if you are up in this a
rea let me know and you are welcome to stop by.- My Dad's Pietenpol is he
re in my hangar, as well as a Baby Lakes biplane I am in the finishing stag
es before final assembly, and a Jungster 1 biplane I hope to have done befo
re Christmas 2099.
-
Shad
--- On Sun, 6/9/13, stearmandriver wrote:
From: stearmandriver <pwr2800(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: new member in Cincinnati area
Date: Sunday, June 9, 2013, 9:11 AM
Hello,
I have recently acquired the bug to build a steel tube Pietenpol.- Spendi
ng my entire life in the air, in hangers and barns has left me with a love
of craftsmanship. I am not ready to start actually building but more in the
research stage. if anyone in the Cincinnati area will be in their shop or
hanger this week, I would love to stop by and have a look at your project o
r completed aircraft.
Thanks in advance for patience offered to a Pietenpol scrod...
Best Regards,
Dave
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402320#40232=- - -
- - - The Pietenpol-List Email Forum - http://www.matronics.com/Na=
======================
=========
>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
=========
cs.com
=========
matronics.com/contribution
=========
" rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenp
ol-List
et=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com
llow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
npol-List
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
>
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Mario Giacummo <mario.giacummo(at)gmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: Center Section Covering |
Realy, I ask because I do not see any center section cover. I always
thought plywood (or aluminium) is ok, but.. may be there is a reason why
not. I am going to put a tank in it, so the middle of the areas is a little
bit.... soft, that is why I ask, may be you do/put something inside, like
add a curved section to keep it a little more rigid, or not, it could be
unnecesary (I think is unnecesary, but I do not know)
It's ok. thank you
Mario Giacummo
2013/6/11 Gary Boothe
>
> Hi Mario,
>
> It's your decision. Most builders epoxy plywood to the bottom for two
> reasons: 1) To keep the center section square; 2) To act as a floor for
> either a fuel tank or baggage. In either case, most are merely covered with
> an aluminum top, fastened in a variety of methods. If you don't wish to put
> anything in your center section, there is no reason why you couldn't add a
> center rib and cover same as the wings.
>
> Other than a different look and a little weight, I'm not sure what you gain
> with a plywood top...but it won't hurt anything, either.
>
> Gary Boothe
> NX308MB
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of giacummo
> Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 7:14 AM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Center Section Covering
>
> -->
>
> Hello,
>
> I am covering the center section with a plywood foil of 3mm, a little fixed
> piece in the leading edge, and a full one for the rest. I plan to attach it
> with screws over the rib separated 4 inchs as you can see in the photo. I
> plan just barnish it. the other side is the same, but instead of screwa it
> is attached with epoxy.
> I ask, this is the way to go?.
>
> thank you
>
> --------
> Mario Giacummo
> Photos here: http://goo.gl/wh7M4
> Little Blog : http://vgmk1.blogspot.com
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402491#402491
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc05195_803.jpg
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Jack" <jack(at)textors.com> |
Subject: | Center Section Covering |
Mario, I have a plywood bottom and plan on an aluminum top.
Jack Textor
Des Moines, IA
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mario
Giacummo
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 11:59 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Center Section Covering
Realy, I ask because I do not see any center section cover. I always thought
plywood (or aluminium) is ok, but.. may be there is a reason why not. I am
going to put a tank in it, so the middle of the areas is a little bit....
soft, that is why I ask, may be you do/put something inside, like add a
curved section to keep it a little more rigid, or not, it could be
unnecesary (I think is unnecesary, but I do not know)
It's ok. thank you
Mario Giacummo
2013/6/11 Gary Boothe
Hi Mario,
It's your decision. Most builders epoxy plywood to the bottom for two
reasons: 1) To keep the center section square; 2) To act as a floor for
either a fuel tank or baggage. In either case, most are merely covered with
an aluminum top, fastened in a variety of methods. If you don't wish to put
anything in your center section, there is no reason why you couldn't add a
center rib and cover same as the wings.
Other than a different look and a little weight, I'm not sure what you gain
with a plywood top...but it won't hurt anything, either.
Gary Boothe
NX308MB
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of giacummo
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 7:14 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Center Section Covering
-->
Hello,
I am covering the center section with a plywood foil of 3mm, a little fixed
piece in the leading edge, and a full one for the rest. I plan to attach it
with screws over the rib separated 4 inchs as you can see in the photo. I
plan just barnish it. the other side is the same, but instead of screwa it
is attached with epoxy.
I ask, this is the way to go?.
thank you
--------
Mario Giacummo
Photos here: http://goo.gl/wh7M4
Little Blog : http://vgmk1.blogspot.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402491#402491
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc05195_803.jpg
<http://forums.matronics.com/files/dsc05195_803.jpg>
==========
st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
==========
http://forums.matronics.com
==========
le, List Admin.
="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "TriScout" <apfelcyber(at)yahoo.com> |
Hi Folks,
For the Continental powered machines: Just like to pass along some courtesy info,
incase someone building might be interested. If you like the older-style 270
deg sweep to your oil Temp/Press gauges w/out the clutter of wording written
all over the face of the gauge, I found that the WW2 Jeeps have the perfect Temp/Press
scale for small Continentals. Here is the Intel on where/how I got mine...
www.kaiserwillies.com
Oil Psi Item#A8190 $34
Oil Temp #A8188 $50
--------------------------
I needed a 90" Capillary line for my Temp Probe, so I mailed the gauge to:
Jeff Sunzeri
981 Alder Street
Hollister, CA 95023
jeffsunzeri(at)gmail.com
Having new Capillary put on and calibrated to read accurately costed me $95 including
shipping. Will attempt to attach short video inflight..
--------
L.Metzel
KLNC
A65-8
N2308C
AN Hardware
Airframe 712TT
W72CK-42 Sensenich
Standard Factory GN-1
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402514#402514
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ken Bickers <bickers.ken(at)gmail.com> |
Guys,
This past weekend, I was discussing the question of potential tippiness of
parasol winged airplanes with a flying buddy of mine who happens to be a
physicist at the University of Colorado.
The question I posed was how could we estimate the location of the center
of gravity in the vertical dimension, based on doing weight and balance
calculations. Knowing that location would allow for precise estimates of
the relative tippiness of different airplanes.
He thought this would make a great homework question for his
undergraduates. He sent me the solution, which I've attached for you.
To do the math, you'll need to do weight and balance measurements with the
fuselage in at least two different orientations. The easiest would be one
while the plane rests on the landing gear and one with the tail elevated to
make the top longeron level with the ground. Key here is that you'll need
to measure the change in angle at the top longeron, using an angle finder
that you can buy at any hardware store.
After that you just need to plug values into a calculator that can take
sines and cosines using the formula that is in the attached document. The
one you want is the one marked (4).
One more thing. I'd suggest loading the cockpits and fuel tank with normal
weights that would be seen on takeoff or landing, as this will affect the
vertical center of gravity just as surely as it will affect the
longitudinal center of gravity in any standard weight and balance
calculation.
Cheers, Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Center Section Covering |
From: | "giacummo" <mario.giacummo(at)gmail.com> |
thank you all, that's what I want to listen.
regards.
--------
Mario Giacummo
Photos here: http://goo.gl/wh7M4
Little Blog : http://vgmk1.blogspot.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402516#402516
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: WW2 Jeep Gauges |
From: | "TriScout" <apfelcyber(at)yahoo.com> |
..couldn't get movie to load, but here's a fuzzy pic (idle power) from computer...as
you can see, the gauges fit the standard 2 1/8 inch holes in the instrument
panel. Taken before I added the tape markings for the limitations.
--------
L.Metzel
KLNC
A65-8
N2308C
AN Hardware
Airframe 712TT
W72CK-42 Sensenich
Standard Factory GN-1
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402517#402517
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/g_318.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: riblett attack |
From: | "Pieti Lowell" <Lowellcfrank(at)yahoo.com> |
Any stick pressure, that I felt, I adjusted with a bungee fore or aft,
Also I have a shaky right hand that needs more pressure than trying to keep Piet
flying at a constant altitude. He who has passed that mid eighties knows what
I am referring to.
When the angle of incident is always referenced to the cord of the airfoil, the
612 on my wing, should be shorten on my front cabanes by 1/2 " to have a more
balanced flight, but I adjust the air speed if stick pressure buggs me. If speed
is required, lower the front cabane and burn more fuel I.E. with more RPM.
Pieti Lowell
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402520#402520
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: WW2 Jeep Gauges |
From: | "jarheadpilot82" <jarheadpilot82(at)hotmail.com> |
Kaiserwillys.com
--------
Semper Fi,
Terry Hand
Athens, GA
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402527#402527
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: WW2 Jeep Gauges |
From: | airlion2(at)gmail.com |
You sure are dating yourself terry. I Am a lot older than you and I used to have
a jeepster and a kaiser Frazier sedan. gardiner
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 11, 2013, at 5:39 PM, "jarheadpilot82" wrote:
>
> Kaiserwillys.com
>
> --------
> Semper Fi,
>
> Terry Hand
> Athens, GA
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402527#402527
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: WW2 Jeep Gauges |
From: | "jarheadpilot82" <jarheadpilot82(at)hotmail.com> |
Gardiner, I just look that old. :D
--------
Semper Fi,
Terry Hand
Athens, GA
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402531#402531
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Mark Roberts" <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
Thanks for sharing this Ken! It will help me as I plan my gear build!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402539#402539
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ray Krause <raykrause(at)frontiernet.net> |
Subject: | Re: WW2 Jeep Gauges |
Are the gauges "mechanical", do they work without an electrical system? The reference
in the catalogue to 12-24 volts refers to the lighting of the gauge only,
right?
Thanks,
Ray Krause
SkyScout
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 11, 2013, at 11:07 AM, "TriScout" wrote:
>
> ..couldn't get movie to load, but here's a fuzzy pic (idle power) from computer...as
you can see, the gauges fit the standard 2 1/8 inch holes in the instrument
panel. Taken before I added the tape markings for the limitations.
>
> --------
> L.Metzel
> KLNC
> A65-8
> N2308C
> AN Hardware
> Airframe 712TT
> W72CK-42 Sensenich
> Standard Factory GN-1
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402517#402517
>
>
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/g_318.jpg
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: WW2 Jeep Gauges |
From: | "TriScout" <apfelcyber(at)yahoo.com> |
Yes...they are mechanical gauges. The electrical reference must mean for lighting...
Larry
--------
L.Metzel
KLNC
A65-8
N2308C
AN Hardware
Airframe 712TT
W72CK-42 Sensenich
Standard Factory GN-1
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402542#402542
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Gary Boothe" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
Nicely done, Ken. I live on 'precise estimates!' J
Gary Boothe
NX308MB
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ken Bickers
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 10:54 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Tippiness
Guys,
This past weekend, I was discussing the question of potential tippiness of
parasol winged airplanes with a flying buddy of mine who happens to be a
physicist at the University of Colorado.
The question I posed was how could we estimate the location of the center of
gravity in the vertical dimension, based on doing weight and balance
calculations. Knowing that location would allow for precise estimates of
the relative tippiness of different airplanes.
He thought this would make a great homework question for his undergraduates.
He sent me the solution, which I've attached for you.
To do the math, you'll need to do weight and balance measurements with the
fuselage in at least two different orientations. The easiest would be one
while the plane rests on the landing gear and one with the tail elevated to
make the top longeron level with the ground. Key here is that you'll need
to measure the change in angle at the top longeron, using an angle finder
that you can buy at any hardware store.
After that you just need to plug values into a calculator that can take
sines and cosines using the formula that is in the attached document. The
one you want is the one marked (4).
One more thing. I'd suggest loading the cockpits and fuel tank with normal
weights that would be seen on takeoff or landing, as this will affect the
vertical center of gravity just as surely as it will affect the longitudinal
center of gravity in any standard weight and balance calculation.
Cheers, Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Gary Boothe" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
Nicely done, Ken. I live on 'precise estimates!' J
Gary Boothe
NX308MB
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ken Bickers
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 10:54 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Tippiness
Guys,
This past weekend, I was discussing the question of potential tippiness of
parasol winged airplanes with a flying buddy of mine who happens to be a
physicist at the University of Colorado.
The question I posed was how could we estimate the location of the center of
gravity in the vertical dimension, based on doing weight and balance
calculations. Knowing that location would allow for precise estimates of
the relative tippiness of different airplanes.
He thought this would make a great homework question for his undergraduates.
He sent me the solution, which I've attached for you.
To do the math, you'll need to do weight and balance measurements with the
fuselage in at least two different orientations. The easiest would be one
while the plane rests on the landing gear and one with the tail elevated to
make the top longeron level with the ground. Key here is that you'll need
to measure the change in angle at the top longeron, using an angle finder
that you can buy at any hardware store.
After that you just need to plug values into a calculator that can take
sines and cosines using the formula that is in the attached document. The
one you want is the one marked (4).
One more thing. I'd suggest loading the cockpits and fuel tank with normal
weights that would be seen on takeoff or landing, as this will affect the
vertical center of gravity just as surely as it will affect the longitudinal
center of gravity in any standard weight and balance calculation.
Cheers, Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Attaching ribs to spars question |
From: | "John Francis" <Mrkringles(at)msn.com> |
[quote="gboothe"]Once covered and stitched, those ribs ain't goin' nowhere! My
spar replace project got infinitely easier without glued ribs!!
Gary,
But maybe that spar wouldn't of broken if the ribs were glued to it???
Just saying.....
--------
John Francis
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402568#402568
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Attaching ribs to spars question |
From: | Gary Boothe <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
Don't see how they would add any strength. They did not move, and they did not
break. I don't know, but I think slapping 1,000 lbs of aircraft down on one spar
was the culprit! ;-)
Gary
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 12, 2013, at 2:54 PM, "John Francis" wrote:
>
> [quote="gboothe"]Once covered and stitched, those ribs ain't goin' nowhere! My
spar replace project got infinitely easier without glued ribs!!
>
> Gary,
>
> But maybe that spar wouldn't of broken if the ribs were glued to it???
> Just saying.....
>
> --------
> John Francis
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402568#402568
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Attaching ribs to spars question |
From: | Gary Boothe <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
That came out a little harsh...sorry John!
What I really mean to say is that, after completing and flying my plane, I am amazed
by how little I know. If someone can explain how fastening the ribs to the
spar will increase strength...I'm all ears!
Gary
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 12, 2013, at 3:01 PM, Gary Boothe wrote:
>
> Don't see how they would add any strength. They did not move, and they did not
break. I don't know, but I think slapping 1,000 lbs of aircraft down on one
spar was the culprit! ;-)
>
> Gary
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jun 12, 2013, at 2:54 PM, "John Francis" wrote:
>
>>
>> [quote="gboothe"]Once covered and stitched, those ribs ain't goin' nowhere!
My spar replace project got infinitely easier without glued ribs!!
>>
>> Gary,
>>
>> But maybe that spar wouldn't of broken if the ribs were glued to it???
>> Just saying.....
>>
>> --------
>> John Francis
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402568#402568
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Attaching ribs to spars question |
From: | Lion Mason <airlion2(at)gmail.com> |
I thought that's what rib lacing is for
. Gardiner
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 12, 2013, at 6:14 PM, Gary Boothe wrote:
>
> That came out a little harsh...sorry John!
>
> What I really mean to say is that, after completing and flying my plane, I am
amazed by how little I know. If someone can explain how fastening the ribs to
the spar will increase strength...I'm all ears!
>
> Gary
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jun 12, 2013, at 3:01 PM, Gary Boothe wrote:
>
>>
>> Don't see how they would add any strength. They did not move, and they did not
break. I don't know, but I think slapping 1,000 lbs of aircraft down on one
spar was the culprit! ;-)
>>
>> Gary
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Jun 12, 2013, at 2:54 PM, "John Francis" wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> [quote="gboothe"]Once covered and stitched, those ribs ain't goin' nowhere!
My spar replace project got infinitely easier without glued ribs!!
>>>
>>> Gary,
>>>
>>> But maybe that spar wouldn't of broken if the ribs were glued to it???
>>> Just saying.....
>>>
>>> --------
>>> John Francis
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>
>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402568#402568
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Attaching ribs to spars question |
From: | "John Francis" <Mrkringles(at)msn.com> |
Gary, I really have no idea what I'm talking about. How's the rebuild going?
--------
John Francis
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402572#402572
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Attaching ribs to spars question |
From: | Gary Boothe <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
Slowly. We had just moved, and my wife thinks that un-packing is more important
than fixing airplanes....haven't come up with a good argument! So far, just got
the fabric off...
Gary
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 12, 2013, at 3:36 PM, "John Francis" wrote:
>
> Gary, I really have no idea what I'm talking about. How's the rebuild going?
>
> --------
> John Francis
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402572#402572
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "jarheadpilot82" <jarheadpilot82(at)hotmail.com> |
Ken,
I have only briefly looked at your attachment. My question is this- based on the
formulas you have provided, how will that influence/affect my build?
I am familiar with the concept of a lateral CG when flying helicopters. What do
I do to make this vertical CG a part of my project? I am just not sure I see
the significance.
Thanks for your help on this.
--------
Semper Fi,
Terry Hand
Athens, GA
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402583#402583
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "tools" <n0kkj(at)yahoo.com> |
I was wondering at first too, but came up with this...
I imagine nearly ALL our planes will have similar vert cg locations with respect
to, say, the top longeron.
However, the distance of the vert cg to the ground... is going to be quite different.
I suspect what that will tell us is, you're best to keep the location of the vert
CG near where it was originally. OR, if it's gonna be much higher, you might
be better off with a stiffer than average suspension to help maintain control.
I'm now starting to understand rigid gear like a Fly Baby. Probably makes
it a bit tamer on the gear, not necessarily GETTING it on the gear. Seems EVERYTHING
has its compromises.
Quick caveat. MANY of our planes have the wing raised a bit. THAT is gonna change
the vert cg really fast, which will affect ground handling.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402585#402585
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ken Bickers <bickers.ken(at)gmail.com> |
Terry,
The formulas may or may not be of use to you in building your plane.
I was prompted to see if there was a way to identify the CG in the vertical
dimension by the article on Pazmany's thoughts on landing gear design
posted by Chris Tracy on June 6th (re-attached here). Maybe it would be
more accurate to say that I was prompted by Gary's incident dragging a wing
tip. One of the key variables in the design of landing gears is the
location of the CG vertically. It affects both how far forward or aft to
place the gear (especially on tail wheel airplanes) and how wide to make
the wheel base.
As all of us make decisions about where to locate fuel tanks (nose or
center section or both), lengthening cabane struts, sticking to the wheel
base called out in the original plans or widening the wheel base, extending
the motor mount, etc., it is useful to be able to think through the
implications of those decisions. Having the ability to run through
different scenarios using the formula that I forwarded, along with the
Pazmany formulas Chris provided, might lead to better decisions. Or it
might allow for some diagnostics after the fact to figure out why a
particular airplane behaved in a particular way.
Personally, I enjoy stuff like this. For others, mileage may vary.
Cheers, Ken
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 7:36 PM, jarheadpilot82
wrote:
> jarheadpilot82(at)hotmail.com>
>
> Ken,
>
> I have only briefly looked at your attachment. My question is this- based
> on the formulas you have provided, how will that influence/affect my build?
>
> I am familiar with the concept of a lateral CG when flying helicopters.
> What do I do to make this vertical CG a part of my project? I am just not
> sure I see the significance.
>
> Thanks for your help on this.
>
> --------
> Semper Fi,
>
> Terry Hand
> Athens, GA
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402583#402583
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "jarheadpilot82" <jarheadpilot82(at)hotmail.com> |
Ken,
Thanks for uploading the Forum paper about landing gear design.
The last paragraph on page 1 gave me what I was looking for-
"On a front view, the angle between vertical and a line from CG to point of wheel
contact with ground should not be less than 25 degrees."
That is what I was looking for. With so many differing dimensions of gear width
that have been mentioned, I agree that some guidance needs to be published, and
this article gives it. My question pertained to the usefulness of the information,
and this article does put it to use. Thanks for bringing that out.
I guess the Grumman engineers slept through the landing gear design class in college
when they designed the gear on the F4F Wildcat!
--------
Semper Fi,
Terry Hand
Athens, GA
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402593#402593
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/f4f_4a_145.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Picnic |
From: | "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> |
Weather forecast for Saturday looks really good. Should be a good day.
Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402615#402615
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/weather_115.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ray Krause <raykrause(at)frontiernet.net> |
Ok: now is that the vertical CG or aircraft CG. Is that with the plane viewed from
the front (when considering vertical CG), or viewed from the side ( when considering
the plane CG) and if considering the plane CG is that with the plane
leveled with the top longeron, or in the standard gear position with the tail
wheel on the ground? As you can tell, I'm not and engineer, just an LAR (looks
about right) person who most always follows the plans.
In Kitplanes sometime back (in the Dawn Patrol section), they discussed landing
gear position and concluded that moving the gear forward or backwards (can't
remember which) on their WW1 planes. The results of the movement was dramatic!
I am not sure this is a contribution!
Thanks,
Ray Krause
SkyScout
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 12, 2013, at 10:58 PM, "jarheadpilot82" wrote:
>
> Ken,
>
> Thanks for uploading the Forum paper about landing gear design.
>
> The last paragraph on page 1 gave me what I was looking for-
>
> "On a front view, the angle between vertical and a line from CG to point of wheel
contact with ground should not be less than 25 degrees."
>
> That is what I was looking for. With so many differing dimensions of gear width
that have been mentioned, I agree that some guidance needs to be published,
and this article gives it. My question pertained to the usefulness of the information,
and this article does put it to use. Thanks for bringing that out.
>
> I guess the Grumman engineers slept through the landing gear design class in
college when they designed the gear on the F4F Wildcat!
>
> --------
> Semper Fi,
>
> Terry Hand
> Athens, GA
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402593#402593
>
>
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/f4f_4a_145.jpg
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
Subject: | Champion C-26 Plugs |
Crew, I have acquired (8) C-26 plugs and am curious how these compare to so
me other older plugs, such as the C-27, as well as the newer "M" type plugs
. These will be used on my A-65-8...any concerns?=0A=0A-=0AMichael Perez
=0APietenpol HINT Videos=0AKaretaker Aero=0Awww.karetakeraero.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Gary Boothe" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
Ray - That is as viewed from the front, which would affect 'tippiness.'
Ken's brainiacs went on to consider that the vertical cg changes from tail
up to tail down....very clever...
I'm with you. LAR, and I knew my gear looked narrow!
Gary Boothe
NX308MB
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ray Krause
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 9:00 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Tippiness
-->
Ok: now is that the vertical CG or aircraft CG. Is that with the plane
viewed from the front (when considering vertical CG), or viewed from the
side ( when considering the plane CG) and if considering the plane CG is
that with the plane leveled with the top longeron, or in the standard gear
position with the tail wheel on the ground? As you can tell, I'm not and
engineer, just an LAR (looks about right) person who most always follows the
plans.
In Kitplanes sometime back (in the Dawn Patrol section), they discussed
landing gear position and concluded that moving the gear forward or
backwards (can't remember which) on their WW1 planes. The results of the
movement was dramatic!
I am not sure this is a contribution!
Thanks,
Ray Krause
SkyScout
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 12, 2013, at 10:58 PM, "jarheadpilot82"
wrote:
> -->
>
> Ken,
>
> Thanks for uploading the Forum paper about landing gear design.
>
> The last paragraph on page 1 gave me what I was looking for-
>
> "On a front view, the angle between vertical and a line from CG to point
of wheel contact with ground should not be less than 25 degrees."
>
> That is what I was looking for. With so many differing dimensions of gear
width that have been mentioned, I agree that some guidance needs to be
published, and this article gives it. My question pertained to the
usefulness of the information, and this article does put it to use. Thanks
for bringing that out.
>
> I guess the Grumman engineers slept through the landing gear design class
in college when they designed the gear on the F4F Wildcat!
>
> --------
> Semper Fi,
>
> Terry Hand
> Athens, GA
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402593#402593
>
>
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/f4f_4a_145.jpg
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ken Bickers <bickers.ken(at)gmail.com> |
Ray,
The way to think about this is that there is only one Center of Gravity
(CG). It is a single point where all of the mass of the airplane is
centered.
Usually, we are concerned about where it is in the longitudinal
orientation, i.e., viewed from the side of the airplane to see how far
forward or back the CG is. That is how we determine whether the CG is in
front of the center of lift. If it s, then an airplane is considered
stable in the sense that when the wing is stalled, releasing the controls
will cause the nose to fall, speed to increase, and a return to the wing
producing lift. If the CG is behind the center of lift, very bad things can
and will happen when the airplane stalls and even before that point if the
distance between the two is very great.
Looking from the front of the airplane, you can see whether the CG is
located left or right of the prop spinner (on a single engine airplane).
This is the lateral dimension of the CG. This dimension determines
whether there is more weight on one wing than the other. If you've flown
airplanes with wing tanks, you'll recognize this as a trim issue. Draining
more fuel from one wing than the other forces you to fly with constant
aileron inputs to try to raise the heavy wing. Cessna tries to get around
this by letting you drain from both tanks simultaneously. Piper requires
you to select one tank at a time. I've owned Pipers for the past 22 years,
so the aileron thing is something I take for granted, sort of like holding
rudder on climb out.
You can see the vertical dimension of the CG from either the side or the
front. Basically, you are looking to see how far above the bottom of the
wheels the CG is located. When viewed in the vertical dimension, the CG
determines tippiness. For the moment, however, consider its location when
looking at the front of the airplane. If you compare two airplanes, one
with a wide wheel base and one with a narrow wheel base but CGs in the same
location vertically, the first will be less tippy than the second. Or put
differently, if you compare two airplanes with the same wheel base but one
with a low CG and the other with a high CG, the first will again be less
tippy than the second.
On my airplane, I've done two things that will make it more tippy. One, I
have a center section fuel tank capable of holding 11 gallons. That is a
lot of weight given the length of the lever arm from the CG (viewed
vertically). Two, making this problem worse, I extended the cabane struts
by just over 2 inches, increasing the lever arm even more. To compensate,
I increased the wheel base by several inches. My wheel base is similar to
Jack's at approximately 69 inches.
I hope this helps, Ken
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 12:25 PM, Gary Boothe wrote:
>
> Ray - That is as viewed from the front, which would affect 'tippiness.'
> Ken's brainiacs went on to consider that the vertical cg changes from tail
> up to tail down....very clever...
>
> I'm with you. LAR, and I knew my gear looked narrow!
>
> Gary Boothe
> NX308MB
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ray Krause
> Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 9:00 AM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Tippiness
>
> -->
>
> Ok: now is that the vertical CG or aircraft CG. Is that with the plane
> viewed from the front (when considering vertical CG), or viewed from the
> side ( when considering the plane CG) and if considering the plane CG is
> that with the plane leveled with the top longeron, or in the standard gear
> position with the tail wheel on the ground? As you can tell, I'm not and
> engineer, just an LAR (looks about right) person who most always follows
> the
> plans.
>
> In Kitplanes sometime back (in the Dawn Patrol section), they discussed
> landing gear position and concluded that moving the gear forward or
> backwards (can't remember which) on their WW1 planes. The results of the
> movement was dramatic!
>
> I am not sure this is a contribution!
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ray Krause
> SkyScout
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Jun 12, 2013, at 10:58 PM, "jarheadpilot82" >
> wrote:
>
> > -->
> >
> > Ken,
> >
> > Thanks for uploading the Forum paper about landing gear design.
> >
> > The last paragraph on page 1 gave me what I was looking for-
> >
> > "On a front view, the angle between vertical and a line from CG to point
> of wheel contact with ground should not be less than 25 degrees."
> >
> > That is what I was looking for. With so many differing dimensions of gear
> width that have been mentioned, I agree that some guidance needs to be
> published, and this article gives it. My question pertained to the
> usefulness of the information, and this article does put it to use. Thanks
> for bringing that out.
> >
> > I guess the Grumman engineers slept through the landing gear design class
> in college when they designed the gear on the F4F Wildcat!
> >
> > --------
> > Semper Fi,
> >
> > Terry Hand
> > Athens, GA
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402593#402593
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Attachments:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com//files/f4f_4a_145.jpg
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ray Krause <raykrause(at)frontiernet.net> |
Thanks, Gary. After sending my comment, I realized that using the plane's CG (
with tail up, or tail down) would not matter if measuring the 25 degree angle
for the foot print to the plane's CG as viewed from the side.
Now, what the hell was I trying to say?
Thanks,
Ray Krause
Just a SkyScout builder
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 13, 2013, at 11:25 AM, "Gary Boothe" wrote:
>
> Ray - That is as viewed from the front, which would affect 'tippiness.'
> Ken's brainiacs went on to consider that the vertical cg changes from tail
> up to tail down....very clever...
>
> I'm with you. LAR, and I knew my gear looked narrow!
>
> Gary Boothe
> NX308MB
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ray Krause
> Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 9:00 AM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Tippiness
>
> -->
>
> Ok: now is that the vertical CG or aircraft CG. Is that with the plane
> viewed from the front (when considering vertical CG), or viewed from the
> side ( when considering the plane CG) and if considering the plane CG is
> that with the plane leveled with the top longeron, or in the standard gear
> position with the tail wheel on the ground? As you can tell, I'm not and
> engineer, just an LAR (looks about right) person who most always follows the
> plans.
>
> In Kitplanes sometime back (in the Dawn Patrol section), they discussed
> landing gear position and concluded that moving the gear forward or
> backwards (can't remember which) on their WW1 planes. The results of the
> movement was dramatic!
>
> I am not sure this is a contribution!
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ray Krause
> SkyScout
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Jun 12, 2013, at 10:58 PM, "jarheadpilot82"
> wrote:
>
>> -->
>>
>> Ken,
>>
>> Thanks for uploading the Forum paper about landing gear design.
>>
>> The last paragraph on page 1 gave me what I was looking for-
>>
>> "On a front view, the angle between vertical and a line from CG to point
> of wheel contact with ground should not be less than 25 degrees."
>>
>> That is what I was looking for. With so many differing dimensions of gear
> width that have been mentioned, I agree that some guidance needs to be
> published, and this article gives it. My question pertained to the
> usefulness of the information, and this article does put it to use. Thanks
> for bringing that out.
>>
>> I guess the Grumman engineers slept through the landing gear design class
> in college when they designed the gear on the F4F Wildcat!
>>
>> --------
>> Semper Fi,
>>
>> Terry Hand
>> Athens, GA
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402593#402593
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Attachments:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com//files/f4f_4a_145.jpg
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Attaching ribs to spars question |
From: | "womenfly2" <Love2Fly.KAP(at)gmail.com> |
Aluminum stamped ribs have a flange that you nail through to hold the rib in-place
on the wood spar. No glue. One can do the same with a wood rib to wood spar.
--------
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402642#402642
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ray Krause <raykrause(at)frontiernet.net> |
Great explanation! Even I can understand that! You sound like many of my gr
aduate school profs! Nice that you take the time to "explane" it to those of
us without the engineering degrees.
Thanks,
Ray Krause
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 13, 2013, at 12:35 PM, Ken Bickers wrote:
> Ray,
>
> The way to think about this is that there is only one Center of Gravity (C
G). It is a single point where all of the mass of the airplane is centered.
>
> Usually, we are concerned about where it is in the longitudinal orientatio
n, i.e., viewed from the side of the airplane to see how far forward or back
the CG is. That is how we determine whether the CG is in front of the cente
r of lift. If it s, then an airplane is considered stable in the sense that
when the wing is stalled, releasing the controls will cause the nose to fal
l, speed to increase, and a return to the wing producing lift. If the CG is b
ehind the center of lift, very bad things can and will happen when the airpl
ane stalls and even before that point if the distance between the two is ver
y great.
>
> Looking from the front of the airplane, you can see whether the CG is loca
ted left or right of the prop spinner (on a single engine airplane). This i
s the lateral dimension of the CG. This dimension determines whether there i
s more weight on one wing than the other. If you've flown airplanes with wi
ng tanks, you'll recognize this as a trim issue. Draining more fuel from on
e wing than the other forces you to fly with constant aileron inputs to try t
o raise the heavy wing. Cessna tries to get around this by letting you dra
in from both tanks simultaneously. Piper requires you to select one tank at
a time. I've owned Pipers for the past 22 years, so the aileron thing is so
mething I take for granted, sort of like holding rudder on climb out.
>
> You can see the vertical dimension of the CG from either the side or the f
ront. Basically, you are looking to see how far above the bottom of the whe
els the CG is located. When viewed in the vertical dimension, the CG determ
ines tippiness. For the moment, however, consider its location when looking
at the front of the airplane. If you compare two airplanes, one with a wide
wheel base and one with a narrow wheel base but CGs in the same location ve
rtically, the first will be less tippy than the second. Or put differently,
if you compare two airplanes with the same wheel base but one with a low CG
and the other with a high CG, the first will again be less tippy than the s
econd.
>
> On my airplane, I've done two things that will make it more tippy. One, I
have a center section fuel tank capable of holding 11 gallons. That is a lo
t of weight given the length of the lever arm from the CG (viewed vertically
). Two, making this problem worse, I extended the cabane struts by just ove
r 2 inches, increasing the lever arm even more. To compensate, I increased t
he wheel base by several inches. My wheel base is similar to Jack's at appro
ximately 69 inches.
>
> I hope this helps, Ken
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 12:25 PM, Gary Boothe wrote
:
>
>>
>> Ray - That is as viewed from the front, which would affect 'tippiness.'
>> Ken's brainiacs went on to consider that the vertical cg changes from tai
l
>> up to tail down....very clever...
>>
>> I'm with you. LAR, and I knew my gear looked narrow!
>>
>> Gary Boothe
>> NX308MB
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ray Kraus
e
>> Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 9:00 AM
>> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Tippiness
>>
>> -->
>>
>> Ok: now is that the vertical CG or aircraft CG. Is that with the plane
>> viewed from the front (when considering vertical CG), or viewed from the
>> side ( when considering the plane CG) and if considering the plane CG is
>> that with the plane leveled with the top longeron, or in the standard gea
r
>> position with the tail wheel on the ground? As you can tell, I'm not and
>> engineer, just an LAR (looks about right) person who most always follows t
he
>> plans.
>>
>> In Kitplanes sometime back (in the Dawn Patrol section), they discussed
>> landing gear position and concluded that moving the gear forward or
>> backwards (can't remember which) on their WW1 planes. The results of the
>> movement was dramatic!
>>
>> I am not sure this is a contribution!
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Ray Krause
>> SkyScout
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On Jun 12, 2013, at 10:58 PM, "jarheadpilot82"
>> wrote:
>>
>> > -->
>> >
>> > Ken,
>> >
>> > Thanks for uploading the Forum paper about landing gear design.
>> >
>> > The last paragraph on page 1 gave me what I was looking for-
>> >
>> > "On a front view, the angle between vertical and a line from CG to poin
t
>> of wheel contact with ground should not be less than 25 degrees."
>> >
>> > That is what I was looking for. With so many differing dimensions of ge
ar
>> width that have been mentioned, I agree that some guidance needs to be
>> published, and this article gives it. My question pertained to the
>> usefulness of the information, and this article does put it to use. Thank
s
>> for bringing that out.
>> >
>> > I guess the Grumman engineers slept through the landing gear design cla
ss
>> in college when they designed the gear on the F4F Wildcat!
>> >
>> > --------
>> > Semper Fi,
>> >
>> > Terry Hand
>> > Athens, GA
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Read this topic online here:
>> >
>> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402593#402593
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Attachments:
>> >
>> > http://forums.matronics.com//files/f4f_4a_145.jpg
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ==========
>> st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
>> ==========
>> http://forums.matronics.com
>> ==========
>> le, List Admin.
>> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> ==========
>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | John Weber <ransfly(at)aol.com> |
Subject: | Pietenpol brakes |
Hi all,
I have been a lurker on the list for a few weeks. Our EAA chapter has made
a commitment to help one of our members-an 86 year old gentleman who has been
working on his Piet for 19 years-to help him finish up his Piet and get it flying.
He is building from the "Original Bernie Pietenpol" plans. He has mechanical
brakes on the wheels, but no brake pedals. Hoping not to re-invent the
wheel, I was hoping that someone could share their experiences to help out. Thank
you in advance. Sincerely John Weber(Leesburg, Fl).
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Gary Boothe" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
Subject: | Pietenpol brakes |
John,
Glad to hear your chapter has taken on that challenge!
There are a myriad of solutions to brake questions. You can see many of
those at www.westcoastpiet.com, which is a collection of photos of Pietenpol
projects from around the world. There you will also see mine, which are
simply heel brakes modeled after the T-crafts...all parts home made.
Gary Boothe
NX308MB
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Weber
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 2:07 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Pietenpol brakes
Hi all,
I have been a lurker on the list for a few weeks. Our EAA chapter has
made a commitment to help one of our members-an 86 year old gentleman who
has been working on his Piet for 19 years-to help him finish up his Piet and
get it flying. He is building from the "Original Bernie Pietenpol" plans.
He has mechanical brakes on the wheels, but no brake pedals. Hoping not to
re-invent the wheel, I was hoping that someone could share their experiences
to help out. Thank you in advance. Sincerely John Weber(Leesburg, Fl).
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol brakes |
From: | John Weber <ransfly(at)aol.com> |
Thanks for the quick reply Gary, I have already gotten several ideas from the
pictures and have sent them on to the gang working on the Piet. John
On Jun 13, 2013, at 5:45 PM, Gary Boothe wrote:
>
> John,
>
> Glad to hear your chapter has taken on that challenge!
>
> There are a myriad of solutions to brake questions. You can see many of
> those at www.westcoastpiet.com, which is a collection of photos of Pietenpol
> projects from around the world. There you will also see mine, which are
> simply heel brakes modeled after the T-crafts...all parts home made.
>
> Gary Boothe
> NX308MB
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Weber
> Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 2:07 PM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Pietenpol brakes
>
>
> Hi all,
> I have been a lurker on the list for a few weeks. Our EAA chapter has
> made a commitment to help one of our members-an 86 year old gentleman who
> has been working on his Piet for 19 years-to help him finish up his Piet and
> get it flying. He is building from the "Original Bernie Pietenpol" plans.
> He has mechanical brakes on the wheels, but no brake pedals. Hoping not to
> re-invent the wheel, I was hoping that someone could share their experiences
> to help out. Thank you in advance. Sincerely John Weber(Leesburg, Fl).
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Dortch, Steven D MAJ MIL USA NGB" <steven.d.dortch(at)us.army.mil> |
Subject: | Pietenpol brakes |
UNCLASSIFIED
The brakes on mine are dirt simple. Piper cub drum brakes. activated by a simple
cable like that on a bike. The cable simply attaches to the heel pedals. Pushing
on one end of the pedal pulls the other end with the cable attached. That
pulls the lever on the drums. Simple. I actually over thought this, before giving
in to the simplicity.
Bleu Skies,
Steve D
On 06/13/13, Gary Boothe wrote:
>
> John,
>
> Glad to hear your chapter has taken on that challenge!
>
> There are a myriad of solutions to brake questions. You can see many of
> those at www.westcoastpiet.com, which is a collection of photos of Pietenpol
> projects from around the world. There you will also see mine, which are
> simply heel brakes modeled after the T-crafts...all parts home made.
>
> Gary Boothe
> NX308MB
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com](javascript:main.compose() On Behalf Of John Weber
> Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 2:07 PM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Pietenpol brakes
>
>
> Hi all,
> I have been a lurker on the list for a few weeks. Our EAA chapter has
> made a commitment to help one of our members-an 86 year old gentleman who
> has been working on his Piet for 19 years-to help him finish up his Piet and
> get it flying. He is building from the "Original Bernie Pietenpol" plans.
> He has mechanical brakes on the wheels, but no brake pedals. Hoping not to
> re-invent the wheel, I was hoping that someone could share their experiences
> to help out. Thank you in advance. Sincerely John Weber(Leesburg, Fl).
>
>
>
>
>
UNCLASSIFIED
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | gliderx5(at)comcast.net |
Subject: | Latex Paint Forum |
I just got word that I will be presenting a forum at Airventure on painting your
homebuilt with latex paint, Wednesday, at 11:30. I plan to camp with my Titan
Tornado in the ultralight area. If any of you are attending Airventure please
stop by the forum or the camp site and say hi. I hope to be there from Sunday
through Friday, weather permitting.
I hope to be at Brodhead from Friday night to Sunday morning (weather permitting
and with the Titan Tornado, Piet not done yet)
See you there
Malcolm
http://home.comcast.net/~mmorrison123/Airplanes.htm
http://home.comcast.net/~mmorrison123/Latex.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "bender" <jfaith(at)solairusaviation.com> |
Went for the second flight in the piet today..
Takeoff around the patch. . Touch and go. . And on downwind the engine stopped
Not fuel or fire. . But instant stop. .. the oil pressure was a little low but
it's a model A Ford.
I turned downwind earlier than normal because it seemed like rpm was a little lower.
Was 2000.. on the last climb I could only get 1800....
So engine out call and landing the opposite direction on the runway. .
The tower had basically given me that side. . Parallel runways.
Little wind from the right rear. .. not a lot of altitude. .. hit the runway a
little too step. .a bounce. .. wind portion didn't help. . But caught the wing
tip..I but off fabric to take a look.
Looks like two ribs need repair. .. the rear spar at the strut fitting is cracked.
.
One piece wing. I see a splice and fabric work in my future. . The right wheel
took a beating... and the axel bent at the wheel. . Easy fix. .
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402742#402742
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/20130615_123818_186.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/20130615_123825_483.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: engine out.. |
From: | helspersew(at)aol.com |
Jeff,
Wow that sucks bad. Glad you are OK. Any guesses on the engine?
Dan Helsper
Puryear, TN
-----Original Message-----
From: bender <jfaith(at)solairusaviation.com>
Sent: Sat, Jun 15, 2013 12:03 pm
Subject: Pietenpol-List: engine out..
>
Went for the second flight in the piet today..
Takeoff around the patch. . Touch and go. . And on downwind the engine stop
ped
Not fuel or fire. . But instant stop. .. the oil pressure was a little low
but
it's a model A Ford.
I turned downwind earlier than normal because it seemed like rpm was a litt
le
lower.
Was 2000.. on the last climb I could only get 1800....
So engine out call and landing the opposite direction on the runway. .
The tower had basically given me that side. . Parallel runways.
Little wind from the right rear. .. not a lot of altitude. .. hit the runwa
y a
little too step. .a bounce. .. wind portion didn't help. . But caught the w
ing
tip..I but off fabric to take a look.
Looks like two ribs need repair. .. the rear spar at the strut fitting is
cracked. .
One piece wing. I see a splice and fabric work in my future. . The right w
heel
took a beating... and the axel bent at the wheel. . Easy fix. .
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402742#402742
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/20130615_123818_186.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/20130615_123825_483.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: engine out.. |
From: | "bender" <jfaith(at)solairusaviation.com> |
not really... it was loose after landing... the lack of RPM then sudden stop makes
me think it got hot and tight. I'll check it out.
What kind of oil pressure do you see normally. ? I know the car guys say even
5lbs is good
it does suck a little.. not as bad as Douwes repair... i'll get it going
jeff
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402744#402744
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: engine out.. |
From: | helspersew(at)aol.com |
It registers high (maybe 30) when cold, and routinely reads 5-10 lbs when
hot. I recall Ken Perkins telling me the story of him landing in a bean fi
eld because he was worried his oil pressure was barely reading......turns o
ut everything was OK and normal to resume his journey.
When I first flew mine it had a tendency to want to "quit" on final (I only
allowed this to happen once, carried more power after that) at low RPM. No
w it seems to be better. I am attributing this to tightness.
Dan Helsper
Puryear, TN
-----Original Message-----
From: bender <jfaith(at)solairusaviation.com>
Sent: Sat, Jun 15, 2013 12:20 pm
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: engine out..
>
not really... it was loose after landing... the lack of RPM then sudden sto
p
makes me think it got hot and tight. I'll check it out.
What kind of oil pressure do you see normally. ? I know the car guys say e
ven
5lbs is good
it does suck a little.. not as bad as Douwes repair... i'll get it going
jeff
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402744#402744
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: engine out.. |
From: | Gary Boothe <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
Oh crap! (Having flashbacks...) Hope FAA doesn't get involved....
Gary Boothe
NX308MB
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 15, 2013, at 10:03 AM, "bender" wrote:
>
> Went for the second flight in the piet today..
> Takeoff around the patch. . Touch and go. . And on downwind the engine stopped
> Not fuel or fire. . But instant stop. .. the oil pressure was a little low but
it's a model A Ford.
> I turned downwind earlier than normal because it seemed like rpm was a little
lower.
> Was 2000.. on the last climb I could only get 1800....
> So engine out call and landing the opposite direction on the runway. .
> The tower had basically given me that side. . Parallel runways.
> Little wind from the right rear. .. not a lot of altitude. .. hit the runway
a little too step. .a bounce. .. wind portion didn't help. . But caught the wing
tip..I but off fabric to take a look.
> Looks like two ribs need repair. .. the rear spar at the strut fitting is cracked.
.
> One piece wing. I see a splice and fabric work in my future. . The right wheel
took a beating... and the axel bent at the wheel. . Easy fix. .
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402742#402742
>
>
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/20130615_123818_186.jpg
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/20130615_123825_483.jpg
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Jack Phillips" <jack(at)bedfordlandings.com> |
So sorry to hear this, Jeff. I was hoping to see your new bird at Brodhead
next month. Glad you're ok, but as Dan said, this sucks! I hioe you get
her flying agin soon.
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 bender
Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2013 1:03 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: engine out..
Went for the second flight in the piet today..
Takeoff around the patch. . Touch and go. . And on downwind the engine
stopped
Not fuel or fire. . But instant stop. .. the oil pressure was a little low
but it's a model A Ford.
I turned downwind earlier than normal because it seemed like rpm was a
little lower.
Was 2000.. on the last climb I could only get 1800....
So engine out call and landing the opposite direction on the runway. .
The tower had basically given me that side. . Parallel runways.
Little wind from the right rear. .. not a lot of altitude. .. hit the runway
a little too step. .a bounce. .. wind portion didn't help. . But caught the
wing tip..I but off fabric to take a look.
Looks like two ribs need repair. .. the rear spar at the strut fitting is
cracked. .
One piece wing. I see a splice and fabric work in my future. . The right
wheel took a beating... and the axel bent at the wheel. . Easy fix. .
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402742#402742
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/20130615_123818_186.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/20130615_123825_483.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: engine out.. |
From: | "Pieti Lowell" <Lowellcfrank(at)yahoo.com> |
Jeff
Did your prop survive ? You are fortunate to come out unscathed . Check the Mag
to see if it moved or grounded, for that quick shut-down. A fuel shortage is
a slower engine, but a prime will get you back with a little power.
During the period of 1800 RPM could you get the engine to increase by a slight
primer set to the unlocked position? this will run a bit rich,and slower,was it
locked in the off position, during your first take-off, that caused the engine
stop ? Look at each spark plug for signs of rich or lean conditions .The last
? did you have a problem at full throttle on take off or did you give the Ford
a quick open throttle just as it started to stop ?
Seem the Brain doesn't work as fast when one is in the position of unusual situations,
I have been there, done that.
Pieti Lowell
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402762#402762
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: engine out.. |
From: | "bender" <jfaith(at)solairusaviation.com> |
The prop is ok. .. the only damage is the bent axel and the rear spar.
Two ribs have a member broken. . My oil pressure was never over 10 psi..
Usually around 3-5... but that's what I understood to be normal on the A.
I really wonder if a lack of oil In a new engine is the culprit.
I'll check everything. . Repair the wood and do it again. .
I really like the idea of the A..I've really run it hard on the ground and its
been
Like a clock. .
Jeff
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402768#402768
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
Subject: | Re: wood vs steel struts |
Hi Paul. I can't answer your question directly, only to say that the alumin
um struts will be lighter than any similar sized steel struts.- If you ar
e thinking of using steel tubes to wrap with wood, than those steel tubes a
lone will probably weigh more than the aluminum struts.- Aluminum tubes w
rapped with wood, T-88, varnish/paint may still weigh more than the plain a
luminum struts. =0A-=0AYou may want to buy streamline aluminum struts and
then wrap them with a thin wood-veneer.-(Of course, the added veneer,
adhesive, varnish/paint, etc. add weight...) However, gluing down a thin ve
neer over the streamline tube would be easy and the shape is already perfec
t...no wood fabrication required. The veneer can be purchased just about an
y place you can buy wood.=0A-=0AFWIW, my aluminum struts, complete with
-machined aluminum inserts, SS forks and the nuts/bolts to assemble-the
m, weigh just under 4 lbs. each.=0A-=0AMichael Perez=0APietenpol HINT Vid
eos=0AKaretaker Aero=0Ahttp://www.karetakeraero.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
Subject: | Re: wood vs steel struts |
http://www.carlsonaircraft.com/struts.html
Michael Perez
Pietenpol HINT Videos
Karetaker Aero
www.karetakeraero.com
>________________________________
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Still Learning to Fly |
From: | "John Francis" <Mrkringles(at)msn.com> |
As Bob DeWenter announced last week, I finally soloed. Between Part 141 and the
flying schools' restrictions it became difficult to find a good time for me to
solo. My solo was scheduled 7 times and cancelled due to strong winds
(over 5 knot crosswind component) or a wind speed over 15 knots. It's been a windy
Spring around here! Fortunately I was able to continue to fly and accumulate
hours with my instructor waiting for the solo.
I continue to gain confidence and improvement with each of my flights. I am sure
looking forward to moving on to some cross country navigation and flights.
Landings have been the most difficult part of flying for me. I just can't seem
to get the knack of it. I'll probably just get it in the 172 when I transfer
over to the Piper Cub for the rest of the training. Here is a good example of
one of my landings. Bob is narrating and taking the video. He gets a little
excited and thinks it is my third landing......but it is only my second. I
hope he knows how much I appreciate having this on film. I had a gopro camera
in my flight bag but forgot to take it out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_qzyyNBu0E
The flying lessons have motivated me to work harder on my Piet build just like
attending fly-ins, Brodhead, and EAA meets.
--------
John Francis
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402806#402806
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Gary Boothe" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
Subject: | Still Learning to Fly |
Way to go, John!!
Gary Boothe
NX308MB
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Francis
Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 11:48 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Still Learning to Fly
-->
As Bob DeWenter announced last week, I finally soloed. Between Part 141 and
the flying schools' restrictions it became difficult to find a good time for
me to solo. My solo was scheduled 7 times and cancelled due to strong winds
(over 5 knot crosswind component) or a wind speed over 15 knots. It's been
a windy Spring around here! Fortunately I was able to continue to fly and
accumulate hours with my instructor waiting for the solo.
I continue to gain confidence and improvement with each of my flights. I am
sure looking forward to moving on to some cross country navigation and
flights.
Landings have been the most difficult part of flying for me. I just can't
seem to get the knack of it. I'll probably just get it in the 172 when I
transfer over to the Piper Cub for the rest of the training. Here is a good
example of one of my landings. Bob is narrating and taking the video. He
gets a little excited and thinks it is my third landing......but it is only
my second. I hope he knows how much I appreciate having this on film. I
had a gopro camera in my flight bag but forgot to take it out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_qzyyNBu0E
The flying lessons have motivated me to work harder on my Piet build just
like attending fly-ins, Brodhead, and EAA meets.
--------
John Francis
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402806#402806
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: engine out.. |
From: | "bender" <jfaith(at)solairusaviation.com> |
i got the rear spar cut out today... marked the splice location and now have a
cool reminder to hang on the wall.. the top wing fabric with part of the big numbers.
the damage was right at the attach point.. i glued my ribs and that kinda sucked
to get them loose, but i got it.
shopping for a piece of wood this week.. a splice and a little fabric work. then
to figure out the engine.
jeff
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402812#402812
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Still Learning to Fly |
From: | "jarheadpilot82" <jarheadpilot82(at)hotmail.com> |
Awesome landing, John! Nicely done!
You will be doing your cross country flights before you know it.
Keep us posted.
--------
Semper Fi,
Terry Hand
Athens, GA
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402814#402814
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
Subject: | Re: wood vs steel struts |
Yes.
Michael Perez
Pietenpol HINT Videos
Karetaker Aero
http://www.karetakeraero.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
Subject: | Re: Still Learning to Fly |
As I said, this is the motivation that keeps me going!- STILL hoping to s
tart my flight training this month...=0A=0A=0AMichael Perez=0APietenpol HIN
T Videos=0AKaretaker Aero=0Ahttp://www.karetakeraero.com/=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Jack Phillips" <jack(at)bedfordlandings.com> |
Subject: | Re: engine out.. |
Jeff, I'll tell you the same thing I told Douwe and Gardner and Kevin and
Gary - building a Pietenpol is fun. Rebuilding one is just pure work. (Ask
me how I know). I really admire you for stepping up and accepting the
challenge to rebuild, rather than just sell the pile of scrap and move on,
as some have done.
Keep working at it and you'll have it flying again in no time, and it'll be
better than ever.
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 bender
Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 4:20 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: engine out..
i got the rear spar cut out today... marked the splice location and now have
a cool reminder to hang on the wall.. the top wing fabric with part of the
big numbers.
the damage was right at the attach point.. i glued my ribs and that kinda
sucked to get them loose, but i got it.
shopping for a piece of wood this week.. a splice and a little fabric work.
then to figure out the engine.
jeff
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402812#402812
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: WW2 Jeep Gauges |
From: | "TriScout" <apfelcyber(at)yahoo.com> |
......added pic's (clearer).......end msg
--------
L.Metzel
KLNC
A65-8
N2308C
AN Hardware
Airframe 712TT
W72CK-42 Sensenich
Standard Factory GN-1
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402823#402823
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/1_214.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/photo_150.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: wood vs steel struts |
From: | "Mark Roberts" <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
Does anyone know what the actual stress pressures on the struts? The aluminum struts
seem to me quite strong for normal flight, but when I compared the strength
of the steel vs aluminum, there is so much difference I am curious by what
factor is actually necessary? Anyone able to calculate the strength Needed by
the struts?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402825#402825
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Picnic |
From: | "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> |
Weather co-operated. Sunny and comfortable temperatures all day. Bit of a crosswind.
Lots of people turned out. Only two Piets present, but a selection of
other interesting aircraft showed up.
Unfortunately, I had a bit of mechanical trouble on the way, so I didn't arrive
until almost 2pm. And once I had said hello to all the faces I knew, most of
the aircraft had departed - so I have almost no photos to share. However, I
did take a handful of photos. Here are a few snapped at the end of the day.
Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402827#402827
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_4418_138.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_4426_269.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_4430_183.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Gary Boothe" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Picnic |
Dang horseless contraptions!!
-----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, June 16, 2013 6:41 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Pietenpol Picnic
-->
Weather co-operated. Sunny and comfortable temperatures all day. Bit of a
crosswind. Lots of people turned out. Only two Piets present, but a
selection of other interesting aircraft showed up.
Unfortunately, I had a bit of mechanical trouble on the way, so I didn't
arrive until almost 2pm. And once I had said hello to all the faces I knew,
most of the aircraft had departed - so I have almost no photos to share.
However, I did take a handful of photos. Here are a few snapped at the end
of the day.
Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402827#402827
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_4418_138.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_4426_269.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_4430_183.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ray Krause <raykrause(at)frontiernet.net> |
Subject: | Re: WW2 Jeep Gauges |
Beautiful pictures and plane! I love the clarity of the dials, great for an old
fart to read! I saved the info on the gauges and will order them. Now, how about
some detailed pictures of your 3-piece windscreen?
Thanks,
Ray Krause,
SkyScout in progress
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 16, 2013, at 6:22 PM, "TriScout" wrote:
>
> ......added pic's (clearer).......end msg
>
> --------
> L.Metzel
> KLNC
> A65-8
> N2308C
> AN Hardware
> Airframe 712TT
> W72CK-42 Sensenich
> Standard Factory GN-1
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402823#402823
>
>
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/1_214.jpg
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/photo_150.jpg
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Attaching ribs to spars question |
From: | "Mark Roberts" <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
That's interesting Keri Ann ... Wonder how much lighter the ribs are than a built
up rib. Naw... There I go again trying to change the plans.
I'm starting the order list to get your tail wheel built that I bought plans for.
Hoping the next time I get a job I can pinch a few bucks to buy the parts.
Need the list first, and that doesn't cost me anything to plan out :D
Mark
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402835#402835
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Clif Dawson" <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca> |
Subject: | Re: wood vs steel struts |
Another, much lighter, possibility.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DarTJsvbaQk
Hmmmm......maybe the entire enchelada, er,
airplane even. :-)
Clif
You may want to buy streamline aluminum struts and then wrap them with
a thin wood veneer.
Michael Perez
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Clif Dawson" <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca> |
Subject: | Re: Douwe's truck |
It wasn't singing was it? I'll bet it wasn't.
"Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and it annoys the
pig. " Someone
Clif
> Douwe , I found your truck at the San Antonio airport
> Paul Donahue
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Jack Phillips" <jack(at)bedfordlandings.com> |
Subject: | Re: wood vs steel struts |
Fairly simple to calculate. First, figure out what gross weight your
airplane will have (in order to make this calculation conservative, pick
a
number higher than you really think it will be). For the purpose of
this
exercise, let's say the gross weight is 1300 lbs.
Then multiply that by the highest load factor (G-load) you would expect
to
survive in extreme turbulence or maneuvers. 5 G's is a common number
for
ultimate loading (the load that would cause something to break). So
this
means the wing is carrying 1300 x 5 or 6,500 lbs of load.
Most of the wing load is carried by the lift struts. A Pietenpol has a
29'
wingspan, with a 2' wide centersection, so each wing panel is 13' 6"
wide
and carries 13.5/29 or 47% of the load, which in this example is 3,025
lbs.
Since the lift struts attach in the middle of the wing panel, virtually
all
of the lift load is transferred to the struts, with very little load
carried
by the bolts attaching the wing panel to the centersection (low enough
to be
ignored in this example). So the two lift struts on each side carry
3,025
lbs between them.
Calculating how much of that load is carried by the front strut and how
much
by the rear is a bit more difficult. The distribution of load varies
with
the location of the center of pressure, which moves around as the angle
of
attack changes, and the location of the center of gravity, which varies
with
how the airplane is loaded (fuel and passengers, for example). It is
probably safe to say that the front strut carries up to about 3/4 of the
wing load, since it is pretty close to the C.G.
So that means with a 1300 lb Pietenpol loaded to 5 G's by turbulence or
extreme aerobatics, the front struts each are carrying (3/4)x(3,025) or
2,270 lbs.
OK, we've found the load the struts carry. The stress is simply that
load
divided by the cross sectional area of the strut. For a round tube, the
area is easy to calculate: Area = =F0(d2outside - d2inside)/4
Assuming you are using 1" diameter 4130 steel tubing, with a wall
thickness
of 0.049", the cross-sectional area would be =F0 x (1.0002 - .9022)/4 or
.146
in2 . With 2,270 lbs being carried by .146 in2, the stress in that
strut
would be 2270/.146 or 15,505 psi. Since normalized 4130 has an ultimate
strength of 90,000 psi, this is certainly a safe load for that steel
strut
to carry.
So for wood or aluminum struts, you simply need to know the breaking
strength of the material and the cross-sectional area of the strut and
you
can calculate the stress.
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 Mark
Roberts
Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 9:29 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: wood vs steel struts
Does anyone know what the actual stress pressures on the struts? The
aluminum struts seem to me quite strong for normal flight, but when I
compared the strength of the steel vs aluminum, there is so much
difference
I am curious by what factor is actually necessary? Anyone able to
calculate
the strength Needed by the struts?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402825#402825
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Michael Orth" <mosurf(at)xplornet.com> |
Subject: | Re: wood vs steel struts |
Excellent explanation.
Thank you,
Michael
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
From: Jack Phillips
Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 4:54 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: wood vs steel struts
Fairly simple to calculate. First, figure out what gross weight your
airplane will have (in order to make this calculation conservative, pick
a number higher than you really think it will be). For the purpose of
this exercise, let's say the gross weight is 1300 lbs.
Then multiply that by the highest load factor (G-load) you would expect
to survive in extreme turbulence or maneuvers. 5 G's is a common number
for ultimate loading (the load that would cause something to break). So
this means the wing is carrying 1300 x 5 or 6,500 lbs of load.
Most of the wing load is carried by the lift struts. A Pietenpol has a
29' wingspan, with a 2' wide centersection, so each wing panel is 13' 6"
wide and carries 13.5/29 or 47% of the load, which in this example is
3,025 lbs.
Since the lift struts attach in the middle of the wing panel, virtually
all of the lift load is transferred to the struts, with very little load
carried by the bolts attaching the wing panel to the centersection (low
enough to be ignored in this example). So the two lift struts on each
side carry 3,025 lbs between them.
Calculating how much of that load is carried by the front strut and how
much by the rear is a bit more difficult. The distribution of load
varies with the location of the center of pressure, which moves around
as the angle of attack changes, and the location of the center of
gravity, which varies with how the airplane is loaded (fuel and
passengers, for example). It is probably safe to say that the front
strut carries up to about 3/4 of the wing load, since it is pretty close
to the C.G.
So that means with a 1300 lb Pietenpol loaded to 5 G's by turbulence or
extreme aerobatics, the front struts each are carrying (3/4)x(3,025) or
2,270 lbs.
OK, we've found the load the struts carry. The stress is simply that
load divided by the cross sectional area of the strut. For a round
tube, the area is easy to calculate: Area = =CF(d2outside
=93 d2inside)/4
Assuming you are using 1=9D diameter 4130 steel tubing, with a
wall thickness of 0.049=9D, the cross-sectional area would be
=CF x (1.0002 - .9022)/4 or .146 in2 . With 2,270 lbs being carried
by .146 in2, the stress in that strut would be 2270/.146 or 15,505 psi.
Since normalized 4130 has an ultimate strength of 90,000 psi, this is
certainly a safe load for that steel strut to carry.
So for wood or aluminum struts, you simply need to know the breaking
strength of the material and the cross-sectional area of the strut and
you can calculate the stress.
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 Mark
Roberts
Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 9:29 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: wood vs steel struts
Does anyone know what the actual stress pressures on the struts? The
aluminum struts seem to me quite strong for normal flight, but when I
compared the strength of the steel vs aluminum, there is so much
difference I am curious by what factor is actually necessary? Anyone
able to calculate the strength Needed by the struts?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402825#402825
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
06/16/13
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Latex Paint Forum |
From: | "womenfly2" <Love2Fly.KAP(at)gmail.com> |
I would be interested in your forum on this subject. Possible to do a video and
post it on YouTube for us not attending?
WF2
--------
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402854#402854
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Charles Burkholder" <born2fly(at)abcmailbox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol Picnic |
It was great. I got to comb a pietenpol over and I got my first ride in
Brian's Piet C-FAUK... Was a great experience and a great motivator.....
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca>
Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 9:40 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Pietenpol Picnic
>
>
> Weather co-operated. Sunny and comfortable temperatures all day. Bit of
> a crosswind. Lots of people turned out. Only two Piets present, but a
> selection of other interesting aircraft showed up.
>
> Unfortunately, I had a bit of mechanical trouble on the way, so I didn't
> arrive until almost 2pm. And once I had said hello to all the faces I
> knew, most of the aircraft had departed - so I have almost no photos to
> share. However, I did take a handful of photos. Here are a few snapped
> at the end of the day.
>
> Bill C.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402827#402827
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_4418_138.jpg
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_4426_269.jpg
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_4430_183.jpg
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Charles Burkholder" <born2fly(at)abcmailbox.net> |
Subject: | Re: Still Learning to Fly |
Is this at Red Stewart or Dayton Wright Bro?
CB
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Francis" <Mrkringles(at)msn.com>
Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 2:47 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Still Learning to Fly
>
> As Bob DeWenter announced last week, I finally soloed. Between Part 141
> and the flying schools' restrictions it became difficult to find a good
> time for me to solo. My solo was scheduled 7 times and cancelled due to
> strong winds
> (over 5 knot crosswind component) or a wind speed over 15 knots. It's
> been a windy Spring around here! Fortunately I was able to continue to
> fly and accumulate hours with my instructor waiting for the solo.
>
> I continue to gain confidence and improvement with each of my flights. I
> am sure looking forward to moving on to some cross country navigation and
> flights.
>
> Landings have been the most difficult part of flying for me. I just can't
> seem to get the knack of it. I'll probably just get it in the 172 when I
> transfer over to the Piper Cub for the rest of the training. Here is a
> good example of one of my landings. Bob is narrating and taking the
> video. He gets a little excited and thinks it is my third
> landing......but it is only my second. I hope he knows how much I
> appreciate having this on film. I had a gopro camera in my flight bag but
> forgot to take it out.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_qzyyNBu0E
>
> The flying lessons have motivated me to work harder on my Piet build just
> like attending fly-ins, Brodhead, and EAA meets.
>
> --------
> John Francis
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402806#402806
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | <r.r.hall(at)cox.net> |
Subject: | Re: WW2 Jeep Gauges |
I have a O-200 any idea how the temperature gauge would work with the probe on
it?
Rodney Hall
---- TriScout wrote:
>
> ......added pic's (clearer).......end msg
>
> --------
> L.Metzel
> KLNC
> A65-8
> N2308C
> AN Hardware
> Airframe 712TT
> W72CK-42 Sensenich
> Standard Factory GN-1
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402823#402823
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/1_214.jpg
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/photo_150.jpg
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: WW2 Jeep Gauges |
From: | "TriScout" <apfelcyber(at)yahoo.com> |
That's a "penzon"..........penzon if you have an 0200A or not. The A has same limit
as A65... Up to 225deg limit. Later models go up to 240deg...and higher limitations
on certain models of that motor.
--------
L.Metzel
KLNC
A65-8
N2308C
AN Hardware
Airframe 712TT
W72CK-42 Sensenich
Standard Factory GN-1
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402859#402859
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Still Learning to Fly |
From: | "John Francis" <Mrkringles(at)msn.com> |
Dayton Wight Brothers Rwy 2
--------
John Francis
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402860#402860
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: WW2 Jeep Gauges |
From: | "TriScout" <apfelcyber(at)yahoo.com> |
Oh...windscreen. I'm out on a trip at moment...just have this apple product to
work with, or I would get some close shots of windscreen posted.
--------
L.Metzel
KLNC
A65-8
N2308C
AN Hardware
Airframe 712TT
W72CK-42 Sensenich
Standard Factory GN-1
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402861#402861
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: 4130 tubing FOR SALE |
From: | "Trevor" <trushton(at)magsol.co.uk> |
We are soon to do a production run here in the UK of 4130 lift strut tubing 2.69
x 1.44 x 0.049 if anyone is interested or you have a group requirement please
contact with quantity.
It may be very interesting if a good freight cost can be found.
--------
Building a Pietenpol-a lot to learn!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402864#402864
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | rudder & elevator hinges |
From: | "Trevor" <trushton(at)magsol.co.uk> |
Can anyone advise what grade of aluminium is used for the cast hinges.
Has a machined hinge been used as a replacement ?
Thanks
Trevor
--------
Building a Pietenpol-a lot to learn!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402865#402865
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: engine out.. |
From: | "bender" <jfaith(at)solairusaviation.com> |
My spars are douglas fir.. and I found some within an hour from here.
plan to pick of a board or 2 today and start scarfing.
the repair other than scarfing the joint that is still on the plane looks pretty
easy.
A couple of the pilots here at work are asking when i'm going to put an airplane
engine on it. I really hate to do that because the A is really cool.
I do know of an A75 locally that I could get for a good price.. needs overhaul,
but that's easy. I hope to keep the A.. going to tear it apart unless I find
an ignition or carb prob just to figure this out.
but the wing is first.. gotta have that no matter the engine choice.
I'm thinking a lot about the oil pressure.. or lack of..being the possible issue.
jeff
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402866#402866
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | John Woods <johnwoods(at)westnet.com.au> |
Subject: | Re: wood vs steel struts |
Jack,
One thing you missed.....
The struts are at an angle to the wing, so this must be taken into account.
If the included=C2-angle is=C2-30 degrees down from the wing then you h
ave to divide the load by sin30.
Effectively this doubles the strut tension load from 2270 lbs to 4540 lbs.
Best regards,
John Woods
----- "Jack Phillips" wrote:
>
>
Fairly simple to calculate.=C2- First, figure out what gross weight your
airplane will have (in order to make this calculation conservative, pick a
number higher than you really think it will be).=C2- For the purpose of t
his exercise, let's say the gross weight is 1300 lbs.
Then multiply that by the highest load factor (G-load) you would expect to
survive in extreme turbulence or maneuvers.=C2- 5 G's is a common number
for ultimate loading (the load that would cause something to break).=C2-
So this means the wing is carrying 1300 x 5 or 6,500 lbs of load.
Most of the wing load is carried by the lift struts.=C2- A Pietenpol has
a 29' wingspan, with a 2' wide centersection, so each wing panel is 13' 6"
wide and carries 13.5/29 or 47% of the load, which in this example is 3,025
lbs.
Since the lift struts attach in the middle of the wing panel, virtually all
of the lift load is transferred to the struts, with very little load carri
ed by the bolts attaching the wing panel to the centersection (low enough t
o be ignored in this example).=C2- So the two lift struts on each side ca
rry 3,025 lbs between them.
Calculating how much of that load is carried by the front strut and how muc
h by the rear is a bit more difficult.=C2- The distribution of load varie
s with the location of the center of pressure, which moves around as the an
gle of attack changes, and the location of the center of gravity, which var
ies with how the airplane is loaded (fuel and passengers, for example).=C2
- It is probably safe to say that the front strut carries up to about 3/4
of the wing load, since it is pretty close to the C.G.
So that means with a 1300 lb Pietenpol loaded to 5 G's by turbulence or ext
reme aerobatics, the front struts each are carrying (3/4)x(3,025) or 2,270
lbs.
OK, we've found the load the struts carry.=C2- The stress is simply that
load divided by the cross sectional area of the strut.=C2- For a round tu
be, the area is easy to calculate:=C2- Area = =CF(d 2 outside
=93 d 2 inside )/4
Assuming you are using 1=9D diameter 4130 steel tubing, with a wall t
hickness of 0.049=9D, the cross-sectional area would be =CF x (1.0
00 2 - .902 2 )/4 or .146 in 2 .=C2- With 2,270 lbs being carried by .146
in 2 , the stress in that strut would be 2270/.146 or 15,505 psi.=C2- Si
nce normalized 4130 has an ultimate strength of 90,000 psi, this is certain
ly a safe load for that steel strut to carry.
So for wood or aluminum struts, you simply need to know the breaking streng
th of the material and the cross-sectional area of the strut and you can ca
lculate the stress.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
-----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-l
ist-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Roberts
> Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 9:29 PM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: wood vs steel struts
>
Does anyone know what the actual stress pressures on the struts? The alumin
um struts seem to me quite strong for normal flight, but when I compared th
e strength of the steel vs aluminum, there is so much difference I am curio
us by what factor is actually necessary? Anyone able to calculate the stren
gth Needed by the struts?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402825#402825
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
==
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Jack Phillips" <jack(at)bedfordlandings.com> |
Subject: | Re: wood vs steel struts |
Oops! Of course you are right, John. I wondered, because I remember
doing
the analysis years ago when I built my Pietenpol and it seemed like the
struts were a lot more highly loaded than that. That's what I get for
trying to work from memory, instead of drawing a free body diagram.
So in my example, the stress in the steel tube strut would be more like
31,000 psi, which is getting into significant stress range.
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
Woods
Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 5:15 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: wood vs steel struts
Jack,
One thing you missed.....
The struts are at an angle to the wing, so this must be taken into
account.
If the included angle is 30 degrees down from the wing then you have to
divide the load by sin30.
Effectively this doubles the strut tension load from 2270 lbs to 4540
lbs.
Best regards,
John Woods
----- "Jack Phillips" wrote:
>
>
Fairly simple to calculate. First, figure out what gross weight your
airplane will have (in order to make this calculation conservative, pick
a
number higher than you really think it will be). For the purpose of
this
exercise, let's say the gross weight is 1300 lbs.
Then multiply that by the highest load factor (G-load) you would expect
to
survive in extreme turbulence or maneuvers. 5 G's is a common number
for
ultimate loading (the load that would cause something to break). So
this
means the wing is carrying 1300 x 5 or 6,500 lbs of load.
Most of the wing load is carried by the lift struts. A Pietenpol has a
29'
wingspan, with a 2' wide centersection, so each wing panel is 13' 6"
wide
and carries 13.5/29 or 47% of the load, which in this example is 3,025
lbs.
Since the lift struts attach in the middle of the wing panel, virtually
all
of the lift load is transferred to the struts, with very little load
carried
by the bolts attaching the wing panel to the centersection (low enough
to be
ignored in this example). So the two lift struts on each side carry
3,025
lbs between them.
Calculating how much of that load is carried by the front strut and how
much
by the rear is a bit more difficult. The distribution of load varies
with
the location of the center of pressure, which moves around as the angle
of
attack changes, and the location of the center of gravity, which varies
with
how the airplane is loaded (fuel and passengers, for example). It is
probably safe to say that the front strut carries up to about 3/4 of the
wing load, since it is pretty close to the C.G.
So that means with a 1300 lb Pietenpol loaded to 5 G's by turbulence or
extreme aerobatics, the front struts each are carrying (3/4)x(3,025) or
2,270 lbs.
OK, we've found the load the struts carry. The stress is simply that
load
divided by the cross sectional area of the strut. For a round tube, the
area is easy to calculate: Area = =F0(d2outside - d2inside)/4
Assuming you are using 1" diameter 4130 steel tubing, with a wall
thickness
of 0.049", the cross-sectional area would be =F0 x (1.0002 - .9022)/4 or
.146
in2 . With 2,270 lbs being carried by .146 in2, the stress in that
strut
would be 2270/.146 or 15,505 psi. Since normalized 4130 has an ultimate
strength of 90,000 psi, this is certainly a safe load for that steel
strut
to carry.
So for wood or aluminum struts, you simply need to know the breaking
strength of the material and the cross-sectional area of the strut and
you
can calculate the stress.
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 Mark
Roberts
> Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 9:29 PM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: wood vs steel struts
Does anyone know what the actual stress pressures on the struts? The
aluminum struts seem to me quite strong for normal flight, but when I
compared the strength of the steel vs aluminum, there is so much
difference
I am curious by what factor is actually necessary? Anyone able to
calculate
the strength Needed by the struts?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402825#402825
" target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
p://forums.matronics.com
blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Larry Morlock" <l.morlock(at)att.net> |
Need some help on where to mount the ELT and ELT antenna on my
Pietenpol. I had not intended to have an ELT based on reports from this
group that they were not required to have one by their DAR because of
staying within 25 miles of the home airport for the first 40 hours. Now
that my plane is finished (see attached pic), my DAR says I must have
one. So, I am essentially having to retrofit an ELT to a plane I didn't
design to have one.
At this point I am leaning toward putting the ELT between the legs of
the passenger on the floor of the front pit. For the antenna, I am
leaning toward mounting it on the forward portion of the coaming (tho it
will hurt to drill a mounting hole in my finished cowl), as that's the
only existing metal that is large enough to act as a ground plane.
I know its preferred (but not required) to mount the ELT as far aft as
possible, but at this point, I would have to do some major rework to
mount the ELT and create a ground plane anywhere behind the pilot, not
to mention the negative effect on CG.
I've gone through all the Matronics archives without finding a good
solution for my situation, so would invite any input on:
1. Where you mounted the ELT.
2. Where you mounted the ELT antenna.
3. What you used as a ground plane.
Especially if it's mounted in a forward location.
Larry Morlock
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: wood vs steel struts |
From: | "dgaldrich" <dgaldrich(at)embarqmail.com> |
Jack
As one of my engineering profs from back in the stone ages used to say about his
exams -- "No free body diagram, no credit!!!"
Dave
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402898#402898
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Gary Boothe" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
Larry,
I can't help you with the ELT, since mine is behind the pilot.but your Piet
sure turned out nice!!
Gary Boothe
NX308MB
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Larry
Morlock
Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 3:07 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: ELT Location
Need some help on where to mount the ELT and ELT antenna on my Pietenpol. I
had not intended to have an ELT based on reports from this group that they
were not required to have one by their DAR because of staying within 25
miles of the home airport for the first 40 hours. Now that my plane is
finished (see attached pic), my DAR says I must have one. So, I am
essentially having to retrofit an ELT to a plane I didn't design to have
one.
At this point I am leaning toward putting the ELT between the legs of the
passenger on the floor of the front pit. For the antenna, I am leaning
toward mounting it on the forward portion of the coaming (tho it will hurt
to drill a mounting hole in my finished cowl), as that's the only existing
metal that is large enough to act as a ground plane.
I know its preferred (but not required) to mount the ELT as far aft as
possible, but at this point, I would have to do some major rework to mount
the ELT and create a ground plane anywhere behind the pilot, not to mention
the negative effect on CG.
I've gone through all the Matronics archives without finding a good solution
for my situation, so would invite any input on:
1. Where you mounted the ELT.
2. Where you mounted the ELT antenna.
3. What you used as a ground plane.
Especially if it's mounted in a forward location.
Larry Morlock
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: engine out.. |
From: | Gary Boothe <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
Jeff,
Either those guys that want you to change engines are secretly envious, or they
don't want to admit that they don't have the gonads to build and fly a real experimental!
(Not that there's anything wrong with a/c engines...that was simply
not your choice)
They sound like some of the same guys from my airport! I'm not an 'A' guy, but
I know there are plenty of guys on this list who are quite experienced, and just
waiting for you to ask some direct questions.
When you get the bugs worked out, like Dan Helsper did, those guys will be awed
by your cool-sounding engine, take credit for helping you to fix it, then move
on to the next airport to beat up on someone else...
Gary
NX308MB
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 17, 2013, at 7:33 AM, "bender" wrote:
>
> My spars are douglas fir.. and I found some within an hour from here.
> plan to pick of a board or 2 today and start scarfing.
> the repair other than scarfing the joint that is still on the plane looks pretty
easy.
> A couple of the pilots here at work are asking when i'm going to put an airplane
engine on it. I really hate to do that because the A is really cool.
> I do know of an A75 locally that I could get for a good price.. needs overhaul,
but that's easy. I hope to keep the A.. going to tear it apart unless I find
an ignition or carb prob just to figure this out.
> but the wing is first.. gotta have that no matter the engine choice.
> I'm thinking a lot about the oil pressure.. or lack of..being the possible issue.
>
> jeff
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402866#402866
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | gliderx5(at)comcast.net |
Subject: | Re: Latex Paint Forum |
WF2
I will see what I can do about recording the session. At a minimum I will have
an expanded and updated Powerpoint presentation available.
Malcolm
----- Original Message -----
From: "womenfly2" <Love2Fly.KAP(at)gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 9:19:57 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Latex Paint Forum
I would be interested in your forum on this subject. Possible to do a video and
post it on YouTube for us not attending?
WF2
--------
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=402854#402854
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | My "hood ornament" |
From: | Douwe <douweblumberg(at)earthlink.net> |
The dirty rotten fourflusher stole my flying pig!!
Mine's way cooler...
Douwe
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Jack Phillips" <jack(at)bedfordlandings.com> |
Subject: | Re: wood vs steel struts |
Yep - that's a good rule. An FBD tends to point out such little things as
vector components, which would have cued me in on this one. I was so busy
thinking about how to explain how you get from the loading to the stresses
in the strut that I neglected to mention the huge effect the strut geometry
has on the loading (and the stresses).
As long as we're having this discussion, it's probably appropriate to
mention that one of the problems with wooden or aluminum struts is how to
make the attachments to the fittings. Almost invariably such attachments
have to be made with bolts loaded in shear, so the shear strength of the
wood or aluminum must be considered. It is not a trivial exercise.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
A retired engineer, who perhaps should STAY retired
Jack
As one of my engineering profs from back in the stone ages used to say about
his exams -- "No free body diagram, no credit!!!"
Dave
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Gary Boothe" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
Subject: | My "hood ornament" |
...and goes higher.
Gary Boothe
NX308MB
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Douwe
Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 5:46 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: My "hood ornament"
-->
The dirty rotten fourflusher stole my flying pig!!
Mine's way cooler...
Douwe
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Sunset - send in your favorite photo |
From: | Douwe <douweblumberg(at)earthlink.net> |
An evocative pic to spur everyone towards the finish line (even if its the s
econd finish line). How 'bout everyone send in their favorite photo?
Douwe
Sent from my iPhone