Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-nh
March 06, 2014 - March 15, 2014
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419861#419861
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dyno_runa_1percent20small_894.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Egad!! The Top Curmudgeon has abdicated! |
| From: | "tools" <n0kkj(at)yahoo.com> |
Headed north tomorrow to pick up a mortister, I'll look into that! The guy I'm
going with is too scared to drive across the lake... maybe I could talk him
into a voyage even kids will take.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419864#419864
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Douwe Blumberg" <douweblumberg(at)earthlink.net> |
Hey,
It is important to know exactly what prop you're spinning when you do your
static tests to help ascertain what she's doing. I'd be very interested in
hearing the results of the static tests, and what prop it is spinning
Sounds interesting.
Douwe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Piet Wings for Sale + Other Parts |
Brian Durham,=0AThe Cavalier, That is Stan McLeod design isn't it?- All w
ood low wing x-country machine?- I have some old newsletters for the cava
lier from the 60, and 70's.- Contact me of list if you want.=0A-=0AShad
=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0AFrom: Tim White <aa5flyer@gmail
.com>=0ATo: "pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com"
=0ASent: Wednesday, March 5, 2014 9:34 PM=0ASubject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Pi
et Wings for Sale + Other Parts=0A=0A=0A--> Pietenpol-List message posted b
y: Tim White =0A=0AI need instruments.- Are any avail
able?=0A=0ATim White=0A=0A=0A> On Mar 5, 2014, at 2:34 PM, "N219BR" =0A> =0A> Hi All,=0A> =0A> I acquired a Piet
that's taking up valuable space right now. I'm looking at parting it out. I
have an A-65 mount/cowl, 3 piece wings, cub gear, fittings, and 1.5 Corvai
r cores, plus lots of assorted odds and ends. =0A> =0A> The back end was st
icking out of an open hangar here in Washington State, so you can imagine w
hat the vert/and aft end fuse looks like.=0A> =0A> Let me know what you nee
d, and I'll send pictures. I'm looking at trying to get a Cavalier SA102.5
in the air so, I'd be interested any trades to help me toward that end. Alw
ays willing to help another piet get in the air! I'll be driving to San Die
go in April if anybody along the way needs something.=0A> =0A> Thanks,=0A>
=0A> Brian Durham=0A> lake Stevens, WA=0A> =0A> --------=0A> Brian Durham
=0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> Read this topic online here:=0A> =0A> http://forum
s.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419837#419837=0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A
========================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | santiago morete <moretesantiago(at)yahoo.com.ar> |
| Subject: | Rv: Scimitar propeller drawings |
=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AHi everyone!=0A=0A=0A=0AOscar, the crankshaft in the model A
is centered to the fuselage,-but many of the engine components are on th
e port side (camshaft, valves, oil pump etc), so the engine block is not sy
mmetrical to the crankshaft axle. I think that's the main reason why Dan's
and model A powered Piets are heavier on the port side (add to that the int
ake manifold, carburator, exhausts, throttle controls, etc)-=0ASaludos!
=0A=0ASantiago
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Boothe" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Rv: Scimitar propeller drawings |
Yes, but his clever logo is only on the right side.surely that would offset
it.:-0
Gary Boothe
NX308MB
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of santiago
morete
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 8:19 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Rv: Scimitar propeller drawings
Hi everyone!
Oscar, the crankshaft in the model A is centered to the fuselage, but many
of the engine components are on the port side (camshaft, valves, oil pump
etc), so the engine block is not symmetrical to the crankshaft axle. I think
that's the main reason why Dan's and model A powered Piets are heavier on
the port side (add to that the intake manifold, carburator, exhausts,
throttle controls, etc)
Saludos!
Santiago
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Piet Wings for Sale + Other Parts |
| From: | "GrantZ" <grantz5906(at)aol.com> |
Brian,
I would be interested in the cub if it can be shipped reasonably to Tennessee.
Price?
I will understand if the shipping thing is too much of a hassle.
Thanks
Grant Ziebell
Savannah, TN
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419872#419872
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steven Dortch <steven.d.dortch(at)gmail.com> |
The engine sounds great. If it runs good and does what you want, I would
put it on and go with it. I am not advising you to change anything but
during a boring meeting I did the following internet search found the
following ideas to "hop up" a Go-Devil engine:
Airflow is one of the "easier" ways to get more HP:
Burns dual carb intake with dual Solexes.
Supersonic intake.
Make a Dual Intake. (not sure if this will help an aircraft engine as much
as a hot rod) "Any good welding shop should be able to fabricate dual
intakes for you. All you really need is a manifold flange, a 90 degree
tube, and a matching carb flange. Two of those and you have dual carbs.
Compression:
There was a "High altitude" version of this engine with higher compression
of 7 to 1.
The Supersonic cylinder head (Script looks great and you up the
compression ratio a little bit
and http://mightymo.org/public_html/images/AdobeFiles/L_Hd_Perf.pdf
Clifford Performance makes a header for the Go-Devil.
http://www.cliffordperformance.net/Merc ...
_Code=J258<http://www.cliffordperformance.net/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=CP&Product_Code=57-0432&Category_Code=J258>
Or just shave the head a bit.
Also:
A decent camshaft with proper timing and lift, and machine the block for
removable cam bearings. Consider a gear type camshaft drive
You can upgraded the ignition system to a Pertronix setup using 12volts.
Blue Skies,
Steve D
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Doc Mosher <docshop(at)tds.net> |
In the past, as publisher of the BPA News, I thought it inappropriate
to actively
participate in Matt's Matronics Pietenpol discussion group. Now is
the time for
me to again become a participant.
Doc Mosher
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Boothe" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
Doc,
Your participation is eagerly awaited, and would have most likely been
accepted when you were publisher. Surely , you have noted that the position
of Top Curmudgeon appears to now be a shared position...maybe of some
interest to you? ;-)
Gary Boothe
NX308MB
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Doc Mosher
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 1:41 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Hello again
In the past, as publisher of the BPA News, I thought it inappropriate to
actively participate in Matt's Matronics Pietenpol discussion group. Now is
the time for me to again become a participant.
Doc Mosher
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Boatright, Jeffrey" <jeffboatright(at)emory.edu> |
Well if you're going to bring in the Pro from Dover...
--
Jeffrey H. Boatright, PhD, FARVO
Associate Professor of Ophthalmology
Emory University School of Medicine
On 3/6/14 4:50 PM, "Gary Boothe" wrote:
>
>Doc,
>
>Your participation is eagerly awaited, and would have most likely been
>accepted when you were publisher. Surely , you have noted that the
>position
>of Top Curmudgeon appears to now be a shared position...maybe of some
>interest to you? ;-)
>
>Gary Boothe
>NX308MB
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Doc Mosher
>Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 1:41 PM
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: Hello again
>
>
>In the past, as publisher of the BPA News, I thought it inappropriate to
>actively participate in Matt's Matronics Pietenpol discussion group. Now
>is
>the time for me to again become a participant.
>
>Doc Mosher
>
>
________________________________
This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of
the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged
information. If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution
or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly
prohibited.
If you have received this message in error, please contact
the sender by reply e-mail message and destroy all copies of the
original message (including attachments).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[Vantage Partners, LLC]" <michael.d.cuy(at)nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Doc Mosher--- on the Pietenpol List |
Welcome back Doc and nice of you to 'hang around' with us again!
How IS that GN-1 coming along anyway? :))) I heard you and Larry Williams
were building one.......
Mike C!
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: my Uncle Tony talks about how to swing a compass...and |
then
| From: | Steven Dortch <steven.d.dortch(at)gmail.com> |
Actually I have used JET A. Kerosene.
Blue Skies,
Steve D
On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 6:31 AM, Jack Phillips wrote:
> jack(at)bedfordlandings.com>
>
> That reminds me, Oscar - you don't have to buy that expensive compass
> fluid.
> It is nothing more than lighter fluid, like the old Zippo lighters used.
> Gulflite charcoal lighter fluid works just fine for much lower cost.
>
> 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 taildrags
> Sent: Monday, March 03, 2014 10:29 PM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: my Uncle Tony talks about how to swing a
> compass...and then
>
>
> Thank you, Mikee, but this time I already knew how to do what needed to be
> done. I assume that you posted this for the benefit of others who might
> not
> know the correct procedure. A certain [UNCLASSIFIED] friend of mine comes
> to mind ;o)
>
> And my thanks to Ben Charvet for pointing out to me that I can save the
> cost
> of buying a brass screwdriver by taking an old key and
> filing/grinding/shaping it into a screwdriver suitable for adjusting the
> compensator screws on the instrument. A true Pietenpoler.
>
> In preparation for conducting this precision operation, I bought a bottle
> of
> Templeton Rye, should my whiskey compass require topping up.
>
> --------
> Oscar Zuniga
> Medford, OR
> Air Camper NX41CC "Scout"
> A75 power
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419748#419748
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Doc Mosher--- on the Pietenpol List |
| From: | "echobravo4" <eab4(at)comcast.net> |
Welcome back Doc!
--------
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=419892#419892
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack <jack(at)textors.com> |
Doc we welcome you back with open arms!
Sent from my iPad
Jack Textor
> On Mar 6, 2014, at 3:40 PM, Doc Mosher wrote:
>
>
> In the past, as publisher of the BPA News, I thought it inappropriate to actively
> participate in Matt's Matronics Pietenpol discussion group. Now is the time
for
> me to again become a participant.
>
> Doc Mosher
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Boyer <boyerjrb(at)comcast.net> |
Welcome back Doc. Was wondering if we would hear from you and Dee again.
Cheers,
Jim Boyer
=C2-
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Piet parts for sale |
| From: | Timothy Willis <timwillis01(at)gmail.com> |
Brian,
I am interested in your cowl. Please give me your phone # in a direct
reply and let's discuss. Do you have a nose bowl as well?
Also, do you have diagonal cabanes (from top motor mount to wing attach
points)?
Tim in central TX
==================
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Piet Wings for Sale + Other Parts
From: "N219BR" <briankdurham(at)gmail.com>
Hi All,
I acquired a Piet that's taking up valuable space right now. I'm looking at
parting
it out. I have an A-65 mount/cowl, 3 piece wings, cub gear, fittings, and
1.5 Corvair cores, plus lots of assorted odds and ends.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | danhelsper(at)aol.com |
Welcome back Doc! I was wondering what you and Dee were going to do going f
orward. Glad to have you here.
Dan Helsper
Puryear, TN
-----Original Message-----
From: Doc Mosher <docshop(at)tds.net>
Sent: Thu, Mar 6, 2014 3:41 pm
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Hello again
In the past, as publisher of the BPA News, I thought it inappropriate
to actively
participate in Matt's Matronics Pietenpol discussion group. Now is
the time for
me to again become a participant.
Doc Mosher
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Board of Crumudgeons- encouragement from my wife |
| From: | danhelsper(at)aol.com |
The other day, as were doing our usual routine of sipping morning coffee an
d browsing the internet, I happened to mentioned to my wife that I was cont
emplating applying for a position on the new Board. She asked what the qual
ifications were in order to serve. During the course of this conversation,
I explained that one of the duties would be to shame people. She pondered f
or a moment... exclaiming...."you're good at that".....
Dan Helsper
Puryear, TN
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> |
Not sure why you felt it would have been inappropriate for you, as publisher of
the BPA News, to participate in discussions in this group. Nonetheless, welcome
back, Doc.
Let 'er rip.
Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419911#419911
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "AircamperN11MS" <Scott.liefeld(at)lacity.org> |
Welcome back Doc, it will be good to read some of your words again.
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=419912#419912
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Board of Crumudgeons- encouragement from my wife |
| From: | "AircamperN11MS" <Scott.liefeld(at)lacity.org> |
Well Dan,
That sounded like an acceptance speech to me. Have fun with it.
--------
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=419913#419913
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: my Uncle Tony talks about how to swing a compass...and |
then
| From: | "taildrags" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
I'm probably going to get another lashing by Mr. Hyde for keeping the compass thread
alive, but I thought I would mention that the regs consider "topping off"
or refilling the compass in a certified aircraft to be a repair that can legally
only be done by a Certified Repair Station, and only the manufacturer's recommended
and STC'd compass fluid can be used.
In experimentals, anything goes but I have read that the use of kerosene or Jet
A can cause the compass markings to fade to yellow over time.
--------
Oscar Zuniga
Medford, OR
Air Camper NX41CC "Scout"
A75 power
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419920#419920
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: my Uncle Tony talks about how to swing a compass...and |
then
| From: | Ken Bickers <bickers.ken(at)gmail.com> |
"regs consider "topping off" or refilling the compass in a certified
aircraft to be a repair that can legally only be done by a Certified Repair
Station"
Oscar, this helps me understand why for the past couple decades the
mechanics that have worked on my certified plane have not wanted to bother
with the compass when it got low on fluid, instead telling me it was
something I could easily do by buying a kit from ASC. Kept their hands
clean. Kept the compass topped up. Now that I think about it, I think it
is getting low once again. On my Piet, I'm using a sealed marine compass,
but don't tell anyone. Ken
On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 9:44 AM, taildrags wrote:
>
> I'm probably going to get another lashing by Mr. Hyde for keeping the
> compass thread alive, but I thought I would mention that the regs consider
> "topping off" or refilling the compass in a certified aircraft to be a
> repair that can legally only be done by a Certified Repair Station, and
> only the manufacturer's recommended and STC'd compass fluid can be used.
>
> In experimentals, anything goes but I have read that the use of kerosene
> or Jet A can cause the compass markings to fade to yellow over time.
>
> --------
> Oscar Zuniga
> Medford, OR
> Air Camper NX41CC "Scout"
> A75 power
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419920#419920
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Corvair engine core |
| From: | "LNelson" <lk.nelson(at)juno.com> |
There are a few corvair specific yards here in az. Also craigslist in Phoenix
az has a few around 150.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419945#419945
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "john francis" <Mrkringles(at)msn.com> |
I am about to join the two sides of my fuselage together. I found the width dimensions
in the orginal plans but not for the extended fuselage (supplementary
plans). How did you all determine what they are?
John
--------
John Francis
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419958#419958
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/fusesides_722.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Boothe" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
He only changed the length, and the location of the uprights and diag's.
Width stayed the same.
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: Friday, March 07, 2014 5:00 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fuselage Width
-->
I am about to join the two sides of my fuselage together. I found the width
dimensions in the orginal plans but not for the extended fuselage
(supplementary plans). How did you all determine what they are?
John
--------
John Francis
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419958#419958
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/fusesides_722.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fuselage Width |
| From: | "john francis" <Mrkringles(at)msn.com> |
Thanks Gary, Ill look at that in the morning. Im in for the night.
John
--------
John Francis
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419960#419960
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Boothe" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuselage Width |
...but you are right, no width dimension is given on the supplemental...
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: Friday, March 07, 2014 5:14 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuselage Width
-->
Thanks Gary, Ill look at that in the morning. Im in for the night.
John
--------
John Francis
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419960#419960
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | glenschweizer(at)yahoo.com |
It's time to get serious and I could use some advice. How many different sets
of plans are there for piets? I have the set published originally in the flying
and glider manual. Are these different from the ones available from the pietenpol
family? What about those available from St. Croix? How about the biplane
version? Any input would be very appreciated Glen
Sent from my iPhone
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Boothe" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
There is only one Pietenpol...get the plans from the Pietenpol family. They
will have updates available not in the Flying and Glider Manual. Anything
else is not a Pietenpol.
Gary Boothe
NX308MB
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
glenschweizer(at)yahoo.com
Sent: Friday, March 07, 2014 7:23 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Which one?
It's time to get serious and I could use some advice. How many different
sets of plans are there for piets? I have the set published originally in
the flying and glider manual. Are these different from the ones available
from the pietenpol family? What about those available from St. Croix? How
about the biplane version? Any input would be very appreciated
Glen
Sent from my iPhone
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Clif Dawson" <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe? |
According to the Flying and Glider Piet article the Ford
A weighs 244lb.
According to this Wikipedia article the Willys weighs
in at 470 lb!
We just told a certain propmaker that he couldn't use
his VW engine because it's too small and revs too high.
It's 2500cc. The Willys is 2200cc.
The c-65 is 2830cc and the Corvair starts at 2700cc.
The Ford is a wopping 3400cc! and 128 ft-lb torque.
The c65 has 148lb torque. The little Willys? 114 ft-lb.
The Corvair appears to be 155 but at 2800 rpm.
So, perusing the above, in direct drive, will the Willys
be able to pull it off?
I think nostalgia is colouring perceptions here.
Nothing wrong with nostalgia but as Mark Twain said;
"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble.
It's what you know for sure that just ain't so."
But;
"Life is trying things to see if they work." (Ray Bradbury)
OK, I'll stop now.
Bad Clif
A crank is a very elegant device. It's small,
it's strong, it's lightweight, energy efficient
and it makes revolutions.
E F Schumacher
>
> By the way, I found a dyno simulation for the L134 engine that produced
> the power and torque curves in the graph that I've attached. It may be
> possible to make this work, just looking at the curves. At "normal" prop
> speeds of 2200-2300 RPM, the power looks to be about 36-37HP (solid red
> curve). Run it up to 2400-2500 and it climbs into the 40-42HP range,
> which is comparable to the Ford "A" engine. Run it at 3000 RPM with a
> ground-adjustable 68" Warp Drive like the Corvair uses and it might put
> out 50HP.
>
> The dry weight of the engine is given in the Willys specs as 365 lbs. but
> people on the Jeep CJ chat sites say it weighs about the same as a
> small-block Chevy. The Ford A engine weighs about the same, I think...
> specs that I found show weight of engine and transmission to be 475, so
> the engine alone should be about the same weight as the Willys.
>
> --------
> Oscar Zuniga
> Medford, OR
> Air Camper NX41CC "Scout"
> A75 power
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419861#419861
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/dyno_runa_1percent20small_894.jpg
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | danhelsper(at)aol.com |
Glen,
Mr. Boothe is correct. This is a great way to start. Listen to all advise b
ut be careful to evaluate where it is coming from. While I was building I g
ave the advise from the fellows who had built and flown their airplanes the
heaviest weighting. Like anything else, there is no substitute for experie
nce.
Bi-plane version? No such thing. This is not a Pietenpol. I can just hear t
he report from the Board of Curmudgeons now .....
Dan Helsper
Puryear, TN
-----Original Message-----
From: glenschweizer <glenschweizer(at)yahoo.com>
Sent: Fri, Mar 7, 2014 9:23 pm
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Which one?
It's time to get serious and I could use some advice. How many different s
ets
of plans are there for piets? I have the set published originally in the f
lying
and glider manual. Are these different from the ones available from the
pietenpol family? What about those available from St. Croix? How about th
e
biplane version? Any input would be very appreciated Glen
Sent from my iPhone
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | advice on how to fix an error |
| From: | "pringljo" <joseph.pringle(at)gmail.com> |
I am laying out the sides of my fuselage and realized this morning that I made
an error. On the left side interior, I accidentally glued a small gusset to the
first joint behind the pilot's seat. Now I realize that I am supposed to put
a long gusset that extends all the way from the joint at the base of the rear
seat back to that joint.
What do you think I should do? Should I try to sand that whole gusset off and replace
it? Does that long gusset add structural strength there?
Seeking advice? Thanks
--------
Joe Pringle
Atlanta, GA
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419974#419974
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | glenschweizer(at)yahoo.com |
| Subject: | Re: advice on how to fix an error |
Hi Joe
What kind of glue did you use? If t-88 then you're in luck. Simply heat the gusset
with your covering iron. When it's too hot to touch , it will peel off like
a post it note.
When you are done, consider carefully what you just learned about epoxy.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Mar 8, 2014, at 6:08 AM, "pringljo" wrote:
>
>
> I am laying out the sides of my fuselage and realized this morning that I made
an error. On the left side interior, I accidentally glued a small gusset to
the first joint behind the pilot's seat. Now I realize that I am supposed to put
a long gusset that extends all the way from the joint at the base of the rear
seat back to that joint.
>
> What do you think I should do? Should I try to sand that whole gusset off and
replace it? Does that long gusset add structural strength there?
>
> Seeking advice? Thanks
>
> --------
> Joe Pringle
> Atlanta, GA
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419974#419974
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | larharris2 Harris <larharris2(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | advice on how to fix an error |
The gusset IS the strength of the joint. There is no strength in the end-gr
ain joint without the gusset. Repair it now and be worry-free later.
Lorenzo
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: advice on how to fix an error
> From: joseph.pringle(at)gmail.com
> Date: Sat=2C 8 Mar 2014 06:08:39 -0800
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>
m>
>
> I am laying out the sides of my fuselage and realized this morning that I
made an error. On the left side interior=2C I accidentally glued a small g
usset to the first joint behind the pilot's seat. Now I realize that I am s
upposed to put a long gusset that extends all the way from the joint at the
base of the rear seat back to that joint.
>
> What do you think I should do? Should I try to sand that whole gusset off
and replace it? Does that long gusset add structural strength there?
>
> Seeking advice? Thanks
>
> --------
> Joe Pringle
> Atlanta=2C GA
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419974#419974
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charles Burkholder <born2fly(at)abcmailbox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: advice on how to fix an error |
wow. I never knew you could do that with T-88. Good to know
Charles B
On 3/8/2014 9:35 AM, glenschweizer(at)yahoo.com wrote:
>
> Hi Joe
> What kind of glue did you use? If t-88 then you're in luck. Simply heat the
gusset with your covering iron. When it's too hot to touch , it will peel off
like a post it note.
> When you are done, consider carefully what you just learned about epoxy.
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Mar 8, 2014, at 6:08 AM, "pringljo" wrote:
>>
>>
>> I am laying out the sides of my fuselage and realized this morning that I made
an error. On the left side interior, I accidentally glued a small gusset to
the first joint behind the pilot's seat. Now I realize that I am supposed to
put a long gusset that extends all the way from the joint at the base of the rear
seat back to that joint.
>>
>> What do you think I should do? Should I try to sand that whole gusset off and
replace it? Does that long gusset add structural strength there?
>>
>> Seeking advice? Thanks
>>
>> --------
>> Joe Pringle
>> Atlanta, GA
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419974#419974
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Boatright, Jeffrey" <jeffboatright(at)emory.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: advice on how to fix an error |
I would remove the small gusset and replace it with what is called out in
the plans. When we rebuilt our fuselage, we found that removing the old
gussets ranged from easy (which is bad because it suggests poor gluing in
the original build) to difficult. So I don't know how are this will be to
do cleanly. I, too, was unaware of the hit trick. My only concern there is
that the rest of the joint may be weakened, but since the gusset really is
what provides the strength, then this isn't that much of a concern.
I'm happy to drop by and look at what you have (I don't think I live that
far away). It's not like I'm an expert, but I have had to do similar
operations on my Piet.
--
Jeffrey H. Boatright, PhD, FARVO
Associate Professor of Ophthalmology
Emory University School of Medicine
On 3/8/14 10:18 AM, "Charles Burkholder" wrote:
>
>
>wow. I never knew you could do that with T-88. Good to know
>Charles B
>On 3/8/2014 9:35 AM, glenschweizer(at)yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> Hi Joe
>> What kind of glue did you use? If t-88 then you're in luck. Simply
>>heat the gusset with your covering iron. When it's too hot to touch , it
>>will peel off like a post it note.
>> When you are done, consider carefully what you just learned about epoxy.
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>> On Mar 8, 2014, at 6:08 AM, "pringljo"
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I am laying out the sides of my fuselage and realized this morning
>>>that I made an error. On the left side interior, I accidentally glued a
>>>small gusset to the first joint behind the pilot's seat. Now I realize
>>>that I am supposed to put a long gusset that extends all the way from
>>>the joint at the base of the rear seat back to that joint.
>>>
>>> What do you think I should do? Should I try to sand that whole gusset
>>>off and replace it? Does that long gusset add structural strength there?
>>>
>>> Seeking advice? Thanks
>>>
>>> --------
>>> Joe Pringle
>>> Atlanta, GA
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>
>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419974#419974
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________
This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of
the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged
information. If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution
or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly
prohibited.
If you have received this message in error, please contact
the sender by reply e-mail message and destroy all copies of the
original message (including attachments).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Kenney <brian.kenney(at)live.ca> |
This is a misleading answer and not correct.
For example there are four "Pietenpol" fuselages
There are two from the 1931 flying and glider magazine - a wood one and a s
teel one.
There is a 1933 improved version with steel gear
and there is a 1966 fuselage for the corvair engine.
there are at least three engine mounts.
The suggestion that something is not a Pietenpol would have upset Bernie Pi
etenpol and he was nothing like that protective.. He was an experimenter an
d tried all kinds of things. The Air Camper has used more engines than like
ly any other aircraft type.
So those protective of the Pietenpol name are really counter productive to
the idea of this blog and "experimental" aircraft in my opinion.
Brian
> From: gboothe5(at)comcast.net
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Which one?
> Date: Fri=2C 7 Mar 2014 19:44:49 -0800
>
>
>
> There is only one Pietenpol...get the plans from the Pietenpol family. Th
ey
> will have updates available not in the Flying and Glider Manual. Anything
> else is not a Pietenpol.
>
> Gary Boothe
> NX308MB
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> glenschweizer(at)yahoo.com
> Sent: Friday=2C March 07=2C 2014 7:23 PM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Which one?
>
>
> It's time to get serious and I could use some advice. How many different
> sets of plans are there for piets? I have the set published originally i
n
> the flying and glider manual. Are these different from the ones availabl
e
> from the pietenpol family? What about those available from St. Croix? H
ow
> about the biplane version? Any input would be very appreciated
> Glen
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Kenney <brian.kenney(at)live.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe? |
I know that 2200 cc will fly a Pietenpol because I just had a ride in one i
n New Zealand.
It needed 3000 rpm to get enough power and was an overhead valve engine. It
was from a Toyota Hilux.
As for weight=2C published weights are usually misleading.
As for your general points=2C they are valid questions and worthy of consid
eration.
Brian
> From: cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?
> Date: Sat=2C 8 Mar 2014 01:50:16 -0800
>
>
> According to the Flying and Glider Piet article the Ford
> A weighs 244lb.
> According to this Wikipedia article the Willys weighs
> in at 470 lb!
> We just told a certain propmaker that he couldn't use
> his VW engine because it's too small and revs too high.
> It's 2500cc. The Willys is 2200cc.
> The c-65 is 2830cc and the Corvair starts at 2700cc.
> The Ford is a wopping 3400cc! and 128 ft-lb torque.
> The c65 has 148lb torque. The little Willys? 114 ft-lb.
> The Corvair appears to be 155 but at 2800 rpm.
>
> So=2C perusing the above=2C in direct drive=2C will the Willys
> be able to pull it off?
>
> I think nostalgia is colouring perceptions here.
> Nothing wrong with nostalgia but as Mark Twain said=3B
> "It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble.
> It's what you know for sure that just ain't so."
>
> But=3B
> "Life is trying things to see if they work." (Ray Bradbury)
>
> OK=2C I'll stop now.
>
> Bad Clif
>
> A crank is a very elegant device. It's small=2C
> it's strong=2C it's lightweight=2C energy efficient
> and it makes revolutions.
> E F Schumacher
>
>
> >
> > By the way=2C I found a dyno simulation for the L134 engine that produc
ed
> > the power and torque curves in the graph that I've attached. It may be
> > possible to make this work=2C just looking at the curves. At "normal"
prop
> > speeds of 2200-2300 RPM=2C the power looks to be about 36-37HP (solid r
ed
> > curve). Run it up to 2400-2500 and it climbs into the 40-42HP range=2C
> > which is comparable to the Ford "A" engine. Run it at 3000 RPM with a
> > ground-adjustable 68" Warp Drive like the Corvair uses and it might put
> > out 50HP.
> >
> > The dry weight of the engine is given in the Willys specs as 365 lbs. b
ut
> > people on the Jeep CJ chat sites say it weighs about the same as a
> > small-block Chevy. The Ford A engine weighs about the same=2C I think.
..
> > specs that I found show weight of engine and transmission to be 475=2C
so
> > the engine alone should be about the same weight as the Willys.
> >
> > --------
> > Oscar Zuniga
> > Medford=2C OR
> > Air Camper NX41CC "=3BScout"=3B
> > A75 power
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419861#419861
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Attachments:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com//files/dyno_runa_1percent20small_894.jpg
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----
> > No virus found in this message.
> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> >
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Douwe Blumberg" <douweblumberg(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | whoa, I got to fly!! |
Guess what my Piet did today? It actually got to fly!!!
It's been two months since I squeezed in a flight between the weather. 58
degrees and sunny with a tiny crosswind. Had patrolled the front for thirty
minutes but the skies were clear of the Hun so returned to base and made two
pretty nice landings on the asphalt.
It was a good day.
Keep building!!
Douwe
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: advice on how to fix an error |
| From: | "pringljo" <joseph.pringle(at)gmail.com> |
Wow. That gusset popped off in about 60 seconds. Thanks.
--------
Joe Pringle
Atlanta, GA
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419981#419981
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Instrument mounting hint |
| From: | Steven Dortch <steven.d.dortch(at)gmail.com> |
Just saw this on the Bonanza list.
One setup for instruments is to angle the top of the artificial horizon to
ensure it is level in flight.
A side effect is that angling the instrument toward the pilot can help
eliminate glare on the glass face.
One instrument is available straight or with the top angled 8 degrees.
What do y'all think. Is glare a problem in your piets? or is this a
solution looking for a problem?
Blue Skies,
Steve D
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steven Dortch <steven.d.dortch(at)gmail.com> |
Here is a personal locator app for android GPS equipped phones and tablets.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.sygem.android.trackme
A cheap solution.
Blue Skies,
Steve D
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Kenney <brian.kenney(at)live.ca> |
| Subject: | Instrument mounting hint |
My idea on instruments is Jim Hammonds approach on his Hatz. A single knife
switch on his dash labelled on and off.
Burt Rutan's rule on the Voyager was if you throw an accessory up and it co
mes down it is too heavy to go on the aircraft
Then there is the adage - If it ain't there if can't break
I know your question was about angles and not about an artificial horizon b
ut I can't help myself
Angling the dashboard might be an idea=2C not the instruments.
Date: Sat=2C 8 Mar 2014 11:36:38 -0600
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Instrument mounting hint
From: steven.d.dortch(at)gmail.com
Just saw this on the Bonanza list.
One setup for instruments is to angle the top of the artificial horizon to
ensure it is level in flight.
A side effect is that angling the instrument toward the pilot can help elim
inate glare on the glass face.
=0A
One instrument is available straight or with the top angled 8 degrees.
What do y'all think. Is glare a problem in your piets? or is this a solutio
n looking for a problem?
Blue Skies=2C
=0A
Steve D
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
============0A
============0A
============0A
============0A
=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Instrument mounting hint |
| From: | Steven Dortch <steven.d.dortch(at)gmail.com> |
Correct Brian, I don't want to add any unneeded instrument to my plane.
Just to be clear, I was not advocating for an artificial horizon, But
wanting to discuss the reflective glare on the few instrument panels I do
have.
Some Bonanza owners have done the tilt by putting washers under their
instruments until it is just right. Some have tilted the instrument panel
(using washers)
Blue Skies,
Steve D
On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Brian Kenney wrote:
> My idea on instruments is Jim Hammonds approach on his Hatz. A single
> knife switch on his dash labelled on and off.
>
> Burt Rutan's rule on the Voyager was if you throw an accessory up and it
> comes down it is too heavy to go on the aircraft
>
> Then there is the adage - If it ain't there if can't break
>
> I know your question was about angles and not about an artificial horizon
> but I can't help myself
>
> Angling the dashboard might be an idea, not the instruments.
>
> ------------------------------
> Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2014 11:36:38 -0600
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Instrument mounting hint
> From: steven.d.dortch(at)gmail.com
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
> Just saw this on the Bonanza list.
>
> One setup for instruments is to angle the top of the artificial horizon to
> ensure it is level in flight.
>
> A side effect is that angling the instrument toward the pilot can help
> eliminate glare on the glass face.
>
> One instrument is available straight or with the top angled 8 degrees.
>
> What do y'all think. Is glare a problem in your piets? or is this a
> solution looking for a problem?
>
> Blue Skies,
>
> Steve D
>
> *
>
> ==========
> st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
> ==========
> http://forums.matronics.com
> ==========
> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ==========
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Honda CB350 wheel modification directions |
| From: | "Brian C-FAUK" <brian.kenney(at)live.ca> |
I hope this works it is my first attempt to post a file
As requested here is my notes on modifying the wheels used on my airplane
--------
Brian Kenney
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419992#419992
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/wheel_mod_801.docx
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Kenney <brian.kenney(at)live.ca> |
| Subject: | Instrument mounting hint |
Mine are not angled and they are not a problem.
Date: Sat=2C 8 Mar 2014 12:29:46 -0600
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Instrument mounting hint
From: steven.d.dortch(at)gmail.com
Correct Brian=2C I don't want to add any unneeded instrument to my plane.
Just to be clear=2C I was not advocating for an artificial horizon=2C But w
anting to discuss the reflective glare on the few instrument panels I do ha
ve.
=0A
Some Bonanza owners have done the tilt by putting washers under their instr
uments until it is just right. Some have tilted the instrument panel (using
washers)
Blue Skies=2C
Steve D
=0A
On Sat=2C Mar 8=2C 2014 at 12:19 PM=2C Brian Kenney
wrote:
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
My idea on instruments is Jim Hammonds approach on his Hatz. A single knife
switch on his dash labelled on and off.
Burt Rutan's rule on the Voyager was if you throw an accessory up and it co
mes down it is too heavy to go on the aircraft
=0A
Then there is the adage - If it ain't there if can't break
I know your question was about angles and not about an artificial horizon b
ut I can't help myself
Angling the dashboard might be an idea=2C not the instruments.
=0A
Date: Sat=2C 8 Mar 2014 11:36:38 -0600
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Instrument mounting hint
From: steven.d.dortch(at)gmail.com
Just saw this on the Bonanza list.
One setup for instruments is to angle the top of the artificial horizon to
ensure it is level in flight.
A side effect is that angling the instrument toward the pilot can help elim
inate glare on the glass face.
=0A
=0A
One instrument is available straight or with the top angled 8 degrees.
What do y'all think. Is glare a problem in your piets? or is this a solutio
n looking for a problem?
Blue Skies=2C
=0A
=0A
Steve D
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List=0A
http://forums.matronics.com=0A
="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List=0A
tp://forums.matronics.com=0A
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
============0A
============0A
============0A
============0A
=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Honda CB350 wheel modification directions |
| From: | Steven Dortch <steven.d.dortch(at)gmail.com> |
Brian, it did load well. I could open it.
Is this for the Piper cub style gear?
Blue Skies,
Steve D
On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 12:32 PM, Brian C-FAUK wrote:
> >
>
> I hope this works it is my first attempt to post a file
>
> As requested here is my notes on modifying the wheels used on my airplane
>
> --------
> Brian Kenney
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419992#419992
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/wheel_mod_801.docx
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | larharris2 Harris <larharris2(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Honda CB350 wheel modification directions |
Thanks for this post. I am in the process of doing this. Your techniques wi
ll be valuable to me.
Lorenzo
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Honda CB350 wheel modification directions
> From: brian.kenney(at)live.ca
> Date: Sat=2C 8 Mar 2014 10:32:06 -0800
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>
a>
>
> I hope this works it is my first attempt to post a file
>
> As requested here is my notes on modifying the wheels used on my airplane
>
> --------
> Brian Kenney
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419992#419992
>
>
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/wheel_mod_801.docx
>
>
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Honda CB350 wheel modification directions |
| From: | Brian Kenney <brian.kenney(at)live.ca> |
The wheels I have are on the wood straight axle gear. they are now 27 years y
oung.
.
Sent from my iPad
> On Mar 8, 2014, at 1:49 PM, "Steven Dortch" wr
ote:
>
> Brian, it did load well. I could open it.
>
> Is this for the Piper cub style gear?
>
> Blue Skies,
> Steve D
>
>
>> On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 12:32 PM, Brian C-FAUK wrot
e:
a>
>>
>> I hope this works it is my first attempt to post a file
>>
>> As requested here is my notes on modifying the wheels used on my airplane
>>
>> --------
>> Brian Kenney
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419992#419992
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Attachments:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com//files/wheel_mod_801.docx
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ==========
>> st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
>> ==========
>> http://forums.matronics.com
>> ==========
>> le, List Admin.
>> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> ==========
>
>
>
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
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=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
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Honda CB350 wheel modification directions |
| From: | Brian Kenney <brian.kenney(at)live.ca> |
I will be doing it again for I friend. I will take some pictures as I go.
Sent from my iPad
> On Mar 8, 2014, at 2:14 PM, "larharris2 Harris" wrote
:
>
> Thanks for this post. I am in the process of doing this. Your techniques w
ill be valuable to me.
>
> Lorenzo
>
>
>
> > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Honda CB350 wheel modification directions
> > From: brian.kenney(at)live.ca
> > Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2014 10:32:06 -0800
> > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> >
ca>
> >
> > I hope this works it is my first attempt to post a file
> >
> > As requested here is my notes on modifying the wheels used on my airplan
e
> >
> > --------
> > Brian Kenney
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419992#419992
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Attachments:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com//files/wheel_mod_801.docx= Archive Search &
Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
> &g= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
> > ========================
> >
> >
> >
>
>
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
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=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
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Greg Cardinal" <gcardinal(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument mounting hint |
Gauges are not angled on NX18235 and glare is no problem. Other than glanci
ng at the oil temp and pressure once in awhile I rarely look at them.
Greg C.
----- Original Message -----
From: Steven Dortch
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2014 11:36 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Instrument mounting hint
Just saw this on the Bonanza list.
One setup for instruments is to angle the top of the artificial horizon t
o ensure it is level in flight.
A side effect is that angling the instrument toward the pilot can help el
iminate glare on the glass face.
One instrument is available straight or with the top angled 8 degrees.
What do y'all think. Is glare a problem in your piets? or is this a solut
ion looking for a problem?
Blue Skies,
Steve D
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protec
tion is active.
http://www.avast.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 22 Msgs - 03/07/14 |
| From: | Ryan Mueller <ryan(at)rmueller.org> |
You subscribed yourself, you need to remove yourself:
http://www.matronics.com/subscribe/
On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Ellen wrote:
>
> Please remove this email address from your distribution. Second request.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | larharris2 Harris <larharris2(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Honda CB350 wheel modification directions |
Your writeup says that you got the idea from a photo on WestCoastPiet. Any
idea of the name of the listing=2C since photos are categorized by name of
the owner/builder? I think I may need all the photo reference I can get. Th
anks.
Lorenzo
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Honda CB350 wheel modification directions
From: brian.kenney(at)live.ca
Date: Sat=2C 8 Mar 2014 14:40:45 -0500
I will be doing it again for I friend. I will take some pictures as I go.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kip and Beth Gardner <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe? |
I think that somebody already suggested that the published wt. for the
Wileys included the transmission, which, of course, would not be
included.
On Mar 8, 2014, at 11:00 AM, Brian Kenney wrote:
> I know that 2200 cc will fly a Pietenpol because I just had a ride
> in one in New Zealand.
> It needed 3000 rpm to get enough power and was an overhead valve
> engine. It was from a Toyota Hilux.
>
> As for weight, published weights are usually misleading.
>
> As for your general points, they are valid questions and worthy of
> consideration.
>
> Brian
>
> > From: cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca
> > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?
> > Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2014 01:50:16 -0800
> >
> >
> >
> > According to the Flying and Glider Piet article the Ford
> > A weighs 244lb.
> > According to this Wikipedia article the Willys weighs
> > in at 470 lb!
> > We just told a certain propmaker that he couldn't use
> > his VW engine because it's too small and revs too high.
> > It's 2500cc. The Willys is 2200cc.
> > The c-65 is 2830cc and the Corvair starts at 2700cc.
> > The Ford is a wopping 3400cc! and 128 ft-lb torque.
> > The c65 has 148lb torque. The little Willys? 114 ft-lb.
> > The Corvair appears to be 155 but at 2800 rpm.
> >
> > So, perusing the above, in direct drive, will the Willys
> > be able to pull it off?
> >
> > I think nostalgia is colouring perceptions here.
> > Nothing wrong with nostalgia but as Mark Twain said;
> > "It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble.
> > It's what you know for sure that just ain't so."
> >
> > But;
> > "Life is trying things to see if they work." (Ray Bradbury)
> >
> > OK, I'll stop now.
> >
> > Bad Clif
> >
> > A crank is a very elegant device. It's small,
> > it's strong, it's lightweight, energy efficient
> > and it makes revolutions.
> > E F Schumacher
> >
> >
> > >
> > > By the way, I found a dyno simulation for the L134 engine that
> produced
> > > the power and torque curves in the graph that I've attached. It
> may be
> > > possible to make this work, just looking at the curves. At
> "normal" prop
> > > speeds of 2200-2300 RPM, the power looks to be about 36-37HP
> (solid red
> > > curve). Run it up to 2400-2500 and it climbs into the 40-42HP
> range,
> > > which is comparable to the Ford "A" engine. Run it at 3000 RPM
> with a
> > > ground-adjustable 68" Warp Drive like the Corvair uses and it
> might put
> > > out 50HP.
> > >
> > > The dry weight of the engine is given in the Willys specs as 365
> lbs. but
> > > people on the Jeep CJ chat sites say it weighs about the same as a
> > > small-block Chevy. The Ford A engine weighs about the same, I
> think...
> > > specs that I found show weight of engine and transmission to be
> 475, so
> > > the engine alone should be about the same weight as the Willys.
> > >
> > > --------
> > > Oscar Zuniga
> > > Medford, OR
> > > Air Camper NX41CC "Scout"
> > > A75 power
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Read this topic online here:
> > >
> > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=419861#419861
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Attachments:
> > >
> > > http://forums.matronics.com//files/dyno_runa_1percent20small_894.jpg
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----
> > > No virus found in this message.
> > > Checked b=====================
> >======
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Kenney <brian.kenney(at)live.ca> |
| Subject: | Honda CB350 wheel modification directions |
No not a photo on West Coast Piet but a Piet from the west coast. It was i
n a magazine and the owner was from the S.F. area and the registration was
something like N113 but that is all from memory. I probably still have the
article.
From: larharris2(at)msn.com
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Honda CB350 wheel modification directions
Date: Sat=2C 8 Mar 2014 16:43:34 -0500
=0A
=0A
=0A
Your writeup says that you got the idea from a photo on WestCoastPiet. Any
idea of the name of the listing=2C since photos are categorized by name of
the owner/builder? I think I may need all the photo reference I can get. Th
anks.
Lorenzo
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Honda CB350 wheel modification directions
From: brian.kenney(at)live.ca
Date: Sat=2C 8 Mar 2014 14:40:45 -0500
I will be doing it again for I friend. I will take some pictures as I go.
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
============0A
============0A
============0A
============0A
=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Old BPA newsletters |
| From: | "Brian C-FAUK" <brian.kenney(at)live.ca> |
This is an idea for discussion. I have a large binder of Buckeye Pietenpol Newsletters.
I would like to see them scanned and put somewhere on the net for public
access. There is a lot of timeless information in them. I would be willing
to do some or all of the work to do this but I have no idea the best way to
do this and what the reaction would be if I did it. Your comments are welcome.
Perhaps this has already been discussed.
--------
Brian Kenney
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420012#420012
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Kenney <brian.kenney(at)live.ca> |
| Subject: | Honda CB350 wheel modification directions |
I found a picture of the airplane - It is N3133
From: brian.kenney(at)live.ca
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Honda CB350 wheel modification directions
Date: Sat=2C 8 Mar 2014 16:56:53 -0500
=0A
=0A
=0A
No not a photo on West Coast Piet but a Piet from the west coast. It was i
n a magazine and the owner was from the S.F. area and the registration was
something like N113 but that is all from memory. I probably still have the
article.
From: larharris2(at)msn.com
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Honda CB350 wheel modification directions
Date: Sat=2C 8 Mar 2014 16:43:34 -0500
=0A
=0A
=0A
Your writeup says that you got the idea from a photo on WestCoastPiet. Any
idea of the name of the listing=2C since photos are categorized by name of
the owner/builder? I think I may need all the photo reference I can get. Th
anks.
Lorenzo
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Honda CB350 wheel modification directions
From: brian.kenney(at)live.ca
Date: Sat=2C 8 Mar 2014 14:40:45 -0500
I will be doing it again for I friend. I will take some pictures as I go.
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
============0A
st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List=0A
============0A
http://forums.matronics.com=0A
============0A
="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution=0A
============0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
============0A
============0A
============0A
============0A
=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kip and Beth Gardner <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Old BPA newsletters |
This has been hashed over many times in the past. Grant McClaren, a
past publisher of the BPA News, won't allow this type of copying.
It's too bad, but he feels that he was done wrong by the Piet
community some years ago & asserts his copyright rights.
Kip Gardner
On Mar 8, 2014, at 5:04 PM, Brian C-FAUK wrote:
> >
>
> This is an idea for discussion. I have a large binder of Buckeye
> Pietenpol Newsletters. I would like to see them scanned and put
> somewhere on the net for public access. There is a lot of timeless
> information in them. I would be willing to do some or all of the
> work to do this but I have no idea the best way to do this and what
> the reaction would be if I did it. Your comments are welcome.
>
> Perhaps this has already been discussed.
>
> --------
> Brian Kenney
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420012#420012
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Honda CB350 wheel modification directions |
| From: | "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> |
For anyone interested, attached are a few photos of what the finished product looks
like.
Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420015#420015
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/20060617_112_120.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/20060617_113_578.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/20070616_062_184.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/20070616_063_857.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/20070616_066_108.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | larharris2 Harris <larharris2(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Old BPA newsletters |
I am all in favor of this. I have an incomplete set I would be willing to c
ontribute to the effort.
Lorenzo
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Old BPA newsletters
> From: brian.kenney(at)live.ca
> Date: Sat=2C 8 Mar 2014 14:04:34 -0800
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>
a>
>
> This is an idea for discussion. I have a large binder of Buckeye Pietenpo
l Newsletters. I would like to see them scanned and put somewhere on the ne
t for public access. There is a lot of timeless information in them. I wou
ld be willing to do some or all of the work to do this but I have no idea t
he best way to do this and what the reaction would be if I did it. Your com
ments are welcome.
>
> Perhaps this has already been discussed.
>
> --------
> Brian Kenney
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420012#420012
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | larharris2 Harris <larharris2(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Old BPA newsletters |
Are the rights owned by him personally? Or by the BPA?
Lorenzo
> From: kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Old BPA newsletters
> Date: Sat=2C 8 Mar 2014 17:34:35 -0500
>
rthlink.net>
>
> This has been hashed over many times in the past. Grant McClaren=2C a
> past publisher of the BPA News=2C won't allow this type of copying.
> It's too bad=2C but he feels that he was done wrong by the Piet
> community some years ago & asserts his copyright rights.
>
> Kip Gardner
>
> On Mar 8=2C 2014=2C at 5:04 PM=2C Brian C-FAUK wrote:
>
.ca
> > >
> >
> > This is an idea for discussion. I have a large binder of Buckeye
> > Pietenpol Newsletters. I would like to see them scanned and put
> > somewhere on the net for public access. There is a lot of timeless
> > information in them. I would be willing to do some or all of the
> > work to do this but I have no idea the best way to do this and what
> > the reaction would be if I did it. Your comments are welcome.
> >
> > Perhaps this has already been discussed.
> >
> > --------
> > Brian Kenney
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420012#420012
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Speaking of Doc... |
| From: | "kevinpurtee" <kevin.purtee(at)us.army.mil> |
William Wynne has a nice article on flycorvair.net about Doc. Here's the link:
http://flycorvair.net/2014/03/08/pietenpol-weight-and-balance-article-source/
Welcome back, Doc!
--------
Kevin "Axel" Purtee
Rebuilding NX899KP
Austin/San Marcos, TX
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420018#420018
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | larharris2 Harris <larharris2(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Honda CB350 wheel modification directions |
Thank you. Very helpful.
Lorenzo
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Honda CB350 wheel modification directions
> From: billspiet(at)sympatico.ca
> Date: Sat=2C 8 Mar 2014 14:37:43 -0800
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>
ca>
>
> For anyone interested=2C attached are a few photos of what the finished p
roduct looks like.
>
> Bill C.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kip and Beth Gardner <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Old BPA newsletters |
As I said, this has all been discussed before, it's in the archives.
He asserts the rights to all the issues that were published by him, he
essentially WAS the BPA at the time, and copyright law is pretty clear
that he can assert those rights. I have no idea how Frank Pavliga
would feel about the copying of the issues published when his Dad was
the editor.
Kip Gardner
On Mar 8, 2014, at 5:52 PM, larharris2 Harris wrote:
> Are the rights owned by him personally? Or by the BPA?
>
> Lorenzo
>
>
> > From: kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net
> > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Old BPA newsletters
> > Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2014 17:34:35 -0500
> >
> >
> >
> > This has been hashed over many times in the past. Grant McClaren, a
> > past publisher of the BPA News, won't allow this type of copying.
> > It's too bad, but he feels that he was done wrong by the Piet
> > community some years ago & asserts his copyright rights.
> >
> > Kip Gardner
> >
> > On Mar 8, 2014, at 5:04 PM, Brian C-FAUK wrote:
> >
> > > >
> > >
> > > This is an idea for discussion. I have a large binder of Buckeye
> > > Pietenpol Newsletters. I would like to see them scanned and put
> > > somewhere on the net for public access. There is a lot of timeless
> > > information in them. I would be willing to do some or all of the
> > > work to do this but I have no idea the best way to do this and
> what
> > > the reaction would be if I did it. Your comments are welcome.
> > >
> > > Perhaps this has already been discussed.
> > >
> > > --------
> > > Brian Kenney
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Read this topic online here:
> > >
> > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420012#420012
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | glenschweizer(at)yahoo.com |
| Subject: | Re: Old BPA newsletters |
Can copyrights for a nonprofit org member communications be owned by an indi
vidual or does that belong to the org?
Sent from my iPhone
> On Mar 8, 2014, at 2:52 PM, larharris2 Harris wrote:
>
> Are the rights owned by him personally? Or by the BPA?
>
> Lorenzo
>
>
>
> > From: kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net
> > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Old BPA newsletters
> > Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2014 17:34:35 -0500
> >
arthlink.net>
> >
> > This has been hashed over many times in the past. Grant McClaren, a
> > past publisher of the BPA News, won't allow this type of copying.
> > It's too bad, but he feels that he was done wrong by the Piet
> > community some years ago & asserts his copyright rights.
> >
> > Kip Gardner
> >
> > On Mar 8, 2014, at 5:04 PM, Brian C-FAUK wrote:
> >
e.ca
> > > >
> > >
> > > This is an idea for discussion. I have a large binder of Buckeye
> > > Pietenpol Newsletters. I would like to see them scanned and put
> > > somewhere on the net for public access. There is a lot of timeless
> > > information in them. I would be willing to do some or all of the
> > > work to do this but I have no idea the best way to do this and what
> > > the reaction would be if I did it. Your comments are welcome.
> > >
> > > Perhaps this has already been discussed.
> > >
> > > --------
> > > Brian Kenney
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Read this topic online here:
> > >
> > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420012#420012
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
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
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=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
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Old BPA newsletters |
| From: | "jarheadpilot82" <jarheadpilot82(at)hotmail.com> |
Brian,
They do it with a fish scale, so why not this?
Maybe it would be possible to loan your binder out so others can see the old newsletters.
When one builder finishes, it gets sent to the next, and so on. There
may be a discussion in the archives about copyrights.However, there is nothing
that says I, or any other builder, can't read your copies.
If you are interested, let me know off-line, and I would be happy to assist in
any way I can. I just want to be in the queue.
--------
Semper Fi,
Terry Hand
Athens, GA
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420023#420023
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Instrument mounting hint |
| From: | Steven Dortch <steven.d.dortch(at)gmail.com> |
OK So it was a solution looking for a Problem that was not there.
It is bad here so the garage is dark. We are having "South Texas Snow" aka
Drizzle all day.
Thanks Guys,
Steve D
On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 2:10 PM, Greg Cardinal wrote:
> Gauges are not angled on NX18235 and glare is no problem. Other than
> glancing at the oil temp and pressure once in awhile I rarely look at them.
>
> Greg C.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Steven Dortch
> *To:* pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> *Sent:* Saturday, March 08, 2014 11:36 AM
> *Subject:* Pietenpol-List: Instrument mounting hint
>
> Just saw this on the Bonanza list.
>
> One setup for instruments is to angle the top of the artificial horizon to
> ensure it is level in flight.
>
> A side effect is that angling the instrument toward the pilot can help
> eliminate glare on the glass face.
>
> One instrument is available straight or with the top angled 8 degrees.
>
> What do y'all think. Is glare a problem in your piets? or is this a
> solution looking for a problem?
>
> Blue Skies,
>
> Steve D
>
> *
>
> ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
> ics.com <http://ics.com>
> .matronics.com/contribution <http://matronics.com/contribution>
>
> *
>
>
> ------------------------------
> <http://www.avast.com/>
>
> This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus<http://www.avast.com/>protection is active.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | AMsafetyC(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Old BPA newsletters |
If those are the lost issues, Dan Halsper is your man. Entrusted with only
the most secret of secret documents and informational treasures. you need
to be talking to Dan the man! Please make sure you tell him that I sent you
John
In a message dated 3/8/2014 5:49:33 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
larharris2(at)msn.com writes:
I am all in favor of this. I have an incomplete set I would be willing to
contribute to the effort.
Lorenzo
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Old BPA newsletters
> From: brian.kenney(at)live.ca
> Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2014 14:04:34 -0800
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Brian C-FAUK"
>
> This is an idea for discussion. I have a large binder of Buckeye
Pietenpol Newsletters. I would like to see them scanned and put somewhere on the
net for public access. There is a lot of timeless information in them. I
would be willing to do some or all of the work to do this but I have no idea
the best way to do this and what the reaction would be if I did it. Your
comments are welcome.
>
> Perhaps this has already been discussed.
>
> --------
> Brian Kenney
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420012#420012
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>======================
&g======
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Kenney <brian.kenney(at)live.ca> |
| Subject: | Old BPA newsletters |
Ok let's not debate the ownership of the old newsletters
I would still like input on how to download information that is available w
ith permission for access by others. Is this blog the best way to do it or
is there a better way?
Brian
From: kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Old BPA newsletters
Date: Sat=2C 8 Mar 2014 18:04:30 -0500
As I said=2C this has all been discussed before=2C it's in the archives. H
e asserts the rights to all the issues that were published by him=2C he ess
entially WAS the BPA at the time=2C and copyright law is pretty clear that
he can assert those rights. I have no idea how Frank Pavliga would feel ab
out the copying of the issues published when his Dad was the editor.
Kip Gardner
On Mar 8=2C 2014=2C at 5:52 PM=2C larharris2 Harris wrote:Are the rights ow
ned by him personally? Or by the BPA?
Lorenzo
> From: kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Old BPA newsletters
> Date: Sat=2C 8 Mar 2014 17:34:35 -0500
>
rthlink.net>
>
> This has been hashed over many times in the past. Grant McClaren=2C a
> past publisher of the BPA News=2C won't allow this type of copying.
> It's too bad=2C but he feels that he was done wrong by the Piet
> community some years ago & asserts his copyright rights.
>
> Kip Gardner
>
> On Mar 8=2C 2014=2C at 5:04 PM=2C Brian C-FAUK wrote:
>
.ca
> > >
> >
> > This is an idea for discussion. I have a large binder of Buckeye
> > Pietenpol Newsletters. I would like to see them scanned and put
> > somewhere on the net for public access. There is a lot of timeless
> > information in them. I would be willing to do some or all of the
> > work to do this but I have no idea the best way to do this and what
> > the reaction would be if I did it. Your comments are welcome.
> >
> > Perhaps this has already been discussed.
> >
> > --------
> > Brian Kenney
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420012#420012
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
=0A
=0A
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.matro
nics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List=0A
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com=0A
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/con
tribution=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
============0A
============0A
============0A
============0A
=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Darrel Jones <wd6bor(at)vom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Old BPA newsletters |
There are also International Pietenpol Association newsletters out there
from before the time the AAA took over the organization. I have some
that I would be happy to contribute.
Darrel Jones
Sonoma, CA
On 3/8/2014 2:49 PM, larharris2 Harris wrote:
> I am all in favor of this. I have an incomplete set I would be willing
> to contribute to the effort.
>
> Lorenzo
>
>
> > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Old BPA newsletters
> > From: brian.kenney(at)live.ca
> > Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2014 14:04:34 -0800
> > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> >
>
> >
> > This is an idea for discussion. I have a large binder of Buckeye
> Pietenpol Newsletters. I would like to see them scanned and put
> somewhere on the net for public access. There is a lot of timeless
> information in them. I would be willing to do some or all of the work
> to do this but I have no idea the best way to do this and what the
> reaction would be if I did it. Your comments are welcome.
> >
> > Perhaps this has already been discussed.
> >
> > --------
> > Brian Kenney
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420012#420012
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >======================
> &g======
> >
> >
> >
> *
>
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Old BPA newsletters |
| From: | "jarheadpilot82" <jarheadpilot82(at)hotmail.com> |
Here is what I propose, if the 2 of you are willing to share. I am willing to pay
the postage to get both sets of newsletters together. I will pay to send them
to my address. I will then pay the postage to get them to the next guy. When
he is done, then he pays to mail it on to the next guy, etc, etc.
By doing it that way, nobody reimburses anybody for postage, they just pay to
send it on.
Lest you think I am being pushy to be the first in line, that is why I am willing
to pay for postage to me as well as from me to the next guy. I am also willing
to collect the names and addresses of those builders interested in being a
part of the mobile library.
Let us know if you think that would work. But thanks for considering the possibility
of sharing your newsletters.
--------
Semper Fi,
Terry Hand
Athens, GA
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420028#420028
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Old BPA newsletters |
| From: | Steven Dortch <steven.d.dortch(at)gmail.com> |
Who runs the BPA and has the right to OK the publication? Perhaps they
would be posted in a Members only area. (Members Only jacket required)
With my next paycheck I am joining the BPA.
Blue Skies,
Steve D
On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Darrel Jones wrote:
> There are also International Pietenpol Association newsletters out there
> from before the time the AAA took over the organization. I have some that I
> would be happy to contribute.
>
> Darrel Jones
> Sonoma, CA
>
> On 3/8/2014 2:49 PM, larharris2 Harris wrote:
>
> I am all in favor of this. I have an incomplete set I would be willing to
> contribute to the effort.
>
> Lorenzo
>
>
> > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Old BPA newsletters
> > From: brian.kenney(at)live.ca
> > Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2014 14:04:34 -0800
> > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> >
>
> >
> > This is an idea for discussion. I have a large binder of Buckeye
> Pietenpol Newsletters. I would like to see them scanned and put somewhere
> on the net for public access. There is a lot of timeless information in
> them. I would be willing to do some or all of the work to do this but I
> have no idea the best way to do this and what the reaction would be if I
> did it. Your comments are welcome.
> >
> > Perhaps this has already been discussed.
> >
> > --------
> > Brian Kenney
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420012#420012
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >======================
> &g======
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Boothe" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
Glen,
The attached picture, taken today just before a flight with Lee Graybill and
his Baby Ace, is of a Pietenpol.
not a GN-1 Aircamper.
or a re-designed St. Croix Pietenpol Aircamper.
It is a long fuselage, corvair powered Piet.all variations available only
through the Pietenpol family. Since you asked specifically about Pietenpols,
my answer was not intended to be a commentary on the variations of this fine
airplane, nor an analysis of what Mr. Pietenpol represented in the world of
experimental aviation.
FYI - Today's flight was with two 200 lb crew members! Good luck with your
decision.
Gary Boothe
NX308MB
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian Kenney
Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2014 7:31 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Which one?
This is a misleading answer and not correct.
For example there are four "Pietenpol" fuselages
There are two from the 1931 flying and glider magazine - a wood one and a
steel one.
There is a 1933 improved version with steel gear
and there is a 1966 fuselage for the corvair engine.
there are at least three engine mounts.
The suggestion that something is not a Pietenpol would have upset Bernie
Pietenpol and he was nothing like that protective.. He was an experimenter
and tried all kinds of things. The Air Camper has used more engines than
likely any other aircraft type.
So those protective of the Pietenpol name are really counter productive to
the idea of this blog and "experimental" aircraft in my opinion.
Brian
> From: gboothe5(at)comcast.net
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Which one?
> Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2014 19:44:49 -0800
>
>
> There is only one Pietenpol...get the plans from the Pietenpol family.
They
> will have updates available not in the Flying and Glider Manual. Anything
> else is not a Pietenpol.
>
> Gary Boothe
> NX308MB
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> glenschweizer(at)yahoo.com
> Sent: Friday, March 07, 2014 7:23 PM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Which one?
>
>
> It's time to get serious and I could use some advice. How many different
> sets of plans are there for piets? I have the set published originally in
> the flying and glider manual. Are these different from the ones available
> from the pietenpol family? What about those available from St. Croix? How
> about the biplane version? Any input would be very appreciated
> Glen
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>
>
============
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Clif Dawson" <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe? |
Your right, In researching further another site
turned up that didn't the first time. They say
the go devil engine itself weighs 148 lb.
That NZ Piet, was it operating with or without
a reduction unit?
Jim Malley's Piet has a 98hp Ford Fiesta in
it but with a psru.
Clif
----- Original Message -----
From: Brian Kenney
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2014 8:00 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?
I know that 2200 cc will fly a Pietenpol because I just had a ride in
one in New Zealand.
It needed 3000 rpm to get enough power and was an overhead valve
engine. It was from a Toyota Hilux.
As for weight, published weights are usually misleading.
As for your general points, they are valid questions and worthy of
consideration.
Brian
>
> According to the Flying and Glider Piet article the Ford
> A weighs 244lb.
> According to this Wikipedia article the Willys weighs
> in at 470 lb!
> We just told a certain propmaker that he couldn't use
> his VW engine because it's too small and revs too high.
> It's 2500cc. The Willys is 2200cc.
> The c-65 is 2830cc and the Corvair starts at 2700cc.
> The Ford is a wopping 3400cc! and 128 ft-lb torque.
> The c65 has 148lb torque. The little Willys? 114 ft-lb.
> The Corvair appears to be 155 but at 2800 rpm.
>
> So, perusing the above, in direct drive, will the Willys
> be able to pull it off?
> Bad Clif
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Douwe Blumberg" <douweblumberg(at)earthlink.net> |
Hey Bill,
Out of curiosity, how do those brakes hold and over the last 27 years, how
often would you guess you've had to replace the pads, if at all?
Douwe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Kenney <brian.kenney(at)live.ca> |
I have never replaced the pads and used the old ones that came with the whe
els. I only recently adjusted the cable for the first time after over 25 ye
ars.. I am using only one of the two shoes in each wheel. I use the leadin
g shoe only ( the one that self energizes). I can lock the wheels on grass
and have pulled the tail off the ground on payment but only under extreme b
reaking. They won't really hold under full throttle but that doesn't mean t
hey are not good as they really shorten the roll and are I think they are
the perfect balance. They worked out great and I lucked out with the set u
p.
From: douweblumberg(at)earthlink.net
Subject: Pietenpol-List: CB350 wheels
Date: Sun=2C 9 Mar 2014 04:48:03 -0400
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
Hey Bill=2C=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
Out of curiosity=2C how do those brakes hold and over the last=0A
27 years=2C how often would you guess you=92ve had to replace the pads=2C i
f at=0A
all?=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
Douwe=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
============0A
============0A
============0A
============0A
=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Kenney <brian.kenney(at)live.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe? |
It is direct drive. The guy that did it has three of them in different type
s of airplanes and there are two others on Air Campers down under. I saw on
e but didn't get to talk to the owner who was out of town.
From: cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?
Date: Sun=2C 9 Mar 2014 00:39:19 -0800
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
Your right=2C In researching further another =0A
site=0A
turned up that didn't the first time. They =0A
say=0A
the go devil engine itself weighs 148 =0A
lb.=0A
=0A
That NZ Piet=2C was it operating with or =0A
without=0A
a reduction unit? =0A
=0A
Jim Malley's Piet has a 98hp Ford Fiesta =0A
in=0A
it but with a psru.=0A
=0A
Clif=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
----- Original Message ----- =0A
From: =0A
Brian =0A
Kenney =0A
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com =0A
=0A
Sent: Saturday=2C March 08=2C 2014 8:00 =0A
AM=0A
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys =0A
jeep pietenpol engine maybe?=0A
=0A
I know that 2200 cc will fly a Pietenpol because I just had a =0A
ride in one in New Zealand.
It needed 3000 rpm to get enough power and was =0A
an overhead valve engine. It was from a Toyota Hilux.
As for =0A
weight=2C published weights are usually misleading.
As for your =0A
general points=2C they are valid questions and worthy of consideration.
=0A
Brian
=0A
>
> According to the Flying and Glider Piet article the =0A
Ford
> A weighs 244lb.
> According to this Wikipedia article the =0A
Willys weighs
> in at 470 lb!
> We just told a certain propmaker =0A
that he couldn't use
> his VW engine because it's too small and revs too =0A
high.
> It's 2500cc. The Willys is 2200cc.
> The c-65 is 2830cc =0A
and the Corvair starts at 2700cc.
> The Ford is a wopping 3400cc! and =0A
128 ft-lb torque.
> The c65 has 148lb torque. The little Willys? 114 =0A
ft-lb.
> The Corvair appears to be 155 but at 2800 rpm.
>
> =0A
So=2C perusing the above=2C in direct drive=2C will the Willys
> be able to =0A
pull it off?
> Bad Clif
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
============0A
============0A
============0A
============0A
=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Kenney <brian.kenney(at)live.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe? |
By the way Clif I believe that a model A engine in a Piet produces more pow
er than the rated horsepower stated by Ford. I think it is at least 50 hors
epower or perhaps a little more. This is due to better breathing and perha
ps the aluminum head. It has to produce more because of the way it performs
. Some folks that have used higher rpm likely have even more but it is alwa
ys the power versus reliability trade-off to consider. That 200 cu in is ha
rd to beat.
From: brian.kenney(at)live.ca
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?
Date: Sun=2C 9 Mar 2014 07:16:19 -0400
=0A
=0A
=0A
It is direct drive. The guy that did it has three of them in different type
s of airplanes and there are two others on Air Campers down under. I saw on
e but didn't get to talk to the owner who was out of town.
From: cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?
Date: Sun=2C 9 Mar 2014 00:39:19 -0800
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
Your right=2C In researching further another =0A
site=0A
turned up that didn't the first time. They =0A
say=0A
the go devil engine itself weighs 148 =0A
lb.=0A
=0A
That NZ Piet=2C was it operating with or =0A
without=0A
a reduction unit? =0A
=0A
Jim Malley's Piet has a 98hp Ford Fiesta =0A
in=0A
it but with a psru.=0A
=0A
Clif=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
----- Original Message ----- =0A
From: =0A
Brian =0A
Kenney =0A
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com =0A
=0A
Sent: Saturday=2C March 08=2C 2014 8:00 =0A
AM=0A
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys =0A
jeep pietenpol engine maybe?=0A
=0A
I know that 2200 cc will fly a Pietenpol because I just had a =0A
ride in one in New Zealand.
It needed 3000 rpm to get enough power and was =0A
an overhead valve engine. It was from a Toyota Hilux.
As for =0A
weight=2C published weights are usually misleading.
As for your =0A
general points=2C they are valid questions and worthy of consideration.
=0A
Brian
=0A
>
> According to the Flying and Glider Piet article the =0A
Ford
> A weighs 244lb.
> According to this Wikipedia article the =0A
Willys weighs
> in at 470 lb!
> We just told a certain propmaker =0A
that he couldn't use
> his VW engine because it's too small and revs too =0A
high.
> It's 2500cc. The Willys is 2200cc.
> The c-65 is 2830cc =0A
and the Corvair starts at 2700cc.
> The Ford is a wopping 3400cc! and =0A
128 ft-lb torque.
> The c65 has 148lb torque. The little Willys? 114 =0A
ft-lb.
> The Corvair appears to be 155 but at 2800 rpm.
>
> =0A
So=2C perusing the above=2C in direct drive=2C will the Willys
> be able to =0A
pull it off?
> Bad Clif
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
============0A
st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List=0A
============0A
http://forums.matronics.com=0A
============0A
="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution=0A
============0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
============0A
============0A
============0A
============0A
=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> |
Glen,
As mentioned, there are the original Pietenpol Air Camper plans, that were published
in the 1932 Flying and Glider magazine, and which you have a copy of. Then
there are the plans available from the Pietenpol family.
http://community.pressenter.net/~apietenp/BHPietenpolAndSonsAirCamperAircraftPurchasePlans.html
In addition to these, there were a couple of different sets of plans for "modernized"
versions of the Air Camper that were sold. One set was the St. Croix Air
Camper, and the other was the Grega GN-1 Aircamper. Neither of these are
available for sale anymore.
While some have built their aircraft strictly from the Flying and Glider plans,
I believe it would be a real challenge to do so, since the reprints are so small,
and are simply lacking some details. My recommendation would be to obtain
a set of the plans from the Pietenpol family, to complement the Flying and
Glider plans.
Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420038#420038
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steven Dortch <steven.d.dortch(at)gmail.com> |
Bill, Just to muddy the water. I have a Pietenpol With plans that were
modified by Grega. But it is not a Grega! It is a Pietenpol fuselage with
mods that later became the Grega wing. I think. It is just enough hybrid
that I cannot firmly tell you where the Grega mods definitely begin or end.
Blue Skies,
Steve D
Pietenpol Air-Camper
On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Bill Church wrote:
> billspiet(at)sympatico.ca>
>
> Glen,
> As mentioned, there are the original Pietenpol Air Camper plans, that were
> published in the 1932 Flying and Glider magazine, and which you have a copy
> of. Then there are the plans available from the Pietenpol family.
>
> http://community.pressenter.net/~apietenp/BHPietenpolAndSonsAirCamperAircraftPurchasePlans.html
>
> In addition to these, there were a couple of different sets of plans for
> "modernized" versions of the Air Camper that were sold. One set was the
> St. Croix Air Camper, and the other was the Grega GN-1 Aircamper. Neither
> of these are available for sale anymore.
>
> While some have built their aircraft strictly from the Flying and Glider
> plans, I believe it would be a real challenge to do so, since the reprints
> are so small, and are simply lacking some details. My recommendation would
> be to obtain a set of the plans from the Pietenpol family, to complement
> the Flying and Glider plans.
>
> Bill C.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420038#420038
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Weston <smikewest(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe? |
a 134 cu in jeep engine sans manifolds and sans flywheel weighs #245 pounds with
iron head according to the scale in my friends milk barn however, i would be
carefull to compare it to the oft quoted weight of #241 lbs with magneto for
the model A because i know none of you guys has actually done it. just my two
cents
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Boothe" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
Then, there's this, from Grant MacLaren, circa 1999:
Like many other modifications to an airplane's design -- one change
requires many other changes. If a "new" biplane is designed, it will be just
that --
a new design. It should not carry the name "Pietenpol."
Pietenpols forever!
-=Grant MacLaren=-
Gary Boothe
NX308MB
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Steven
Dortch
Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2014 10:56 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Which one?
Bill, Just to muddy the water. I have a Pietenpol With plans that were
modified by Grega. But it is not a Grega! It is a Pietenpol fuselage with
mods that later became the Grega wing. I think. It is just enough hybrid
that I cannot firmly tell you where the Grega mods definitely begin or end.
Blue Skies,
Steve D
Pietenpol Air-Camper
On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Bill Church wrote:
Glen,
As mentioned, there are the original Pietenpol Air Camper plans, that were
published in the 1932 Flying and Glider magazine, and which you have a copy
of. Then there are the plans available from the Pietenpol family.
http://community.pressenter.net/~apietenp/BHPietenpolAndSonsAirCamperAircraf
tPurchasePlans.html
In addition to these, there were a couple of different sets of plans for
"modernized" versions of the Air Camper that were sold. One set was the St.
Croix Air Camper, and the other was the Grega GN-1 Aircamper. Neither of
these are available for sale anymore.
While some have built their aircraft strictly from the Flying and Glider
plans, I believe it would be a real challenge to do so, since the reprints
are so small, and are simply lacking some details. My recommendation would
be to obtain a set of the plans from the Pietenpol family, to complement
the Flying and Glider plans.
Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420038#420038
==========
st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
==========
http://forums.matronics.com
==========
le, List Admin.
="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe? |
| From: | "William Wynne" <WilliamTCA(at)aol.com> |
Kenny,
I watched the Youtube clip several times, and I think you are doing something
pretty neat. I have been a life long fan of flatheads, Grace and I have a little
collection in the hangar.
I read all the notes, and for my 2 cents, I think that you have a power plant that
will work within limitations, (just as all engines do). I was headed over
to my neighbors with the scale, but Mr. Mdw, covered this, and effectively showed
both the weight is comparable to a Ford, and also how unreliable internet
data can be. I think most people miss that there are both L-134's and OHV F-134's.
Scale in a milk barn always beats the internet for useful data,
Clif listed the displacements and rpm ranges of several engines, and to it I would
like to add the consideration of compression ratio. We have been testing this
for a year, back to back, same airframe, etc, and it is surprising the difference
between 8.0 and 10.25 to one. The relationship holds true with most engines.
I am sure that an O-200 with 8:1 and OHV can be tuned to make more power
at any given rpm than a 200 cid Ford. Displacement alone is an incomplete picture.
On 'tight' motors: If everything else is set right, it is ring drag on the surface
finish of the bores that makes it hard to prop. In my experience, 10 hours
of ground runs at 50-60% power has the same smoothing effect as one takeoff and
climb to 3,000' at wot. 280 finish on bores is better than 220, but it is time
at wot that helps.
An optical tach like a Proptach 2545 and a ground adjustable prop are a good 'comparative'
Dyno. Get the prop in the test range, check the static rpm, make the
change and compare rpm. I have loaner WD props, (in both rotations), glad to
send one to you for testing.
If Oz's chart is good, targeting 3000 rpm instead of 2500 will buy you a 28% hp
increase. The loss of prop efficiency will be in the single digits, and you will
have a large net thrust increase. Test this with the loaner prop, you will
become convinced.
You will have plenty of people tell you it will/won't work. Their belief is based
on stories, and since every Pietenpol is a 'snowflake' unto itself, much of
the commentary does not apply. You should be able to use The Ford weight and
Balance data we collected. My website tells how to get this directly from Doc
Mosher.
I do not think the success of Fords is because they make 'more than 50 hp' The
W&B tests showed that the Ford guys build lighter planes than many A-65 guys.
The Ford guys also use better matched props on average. They go into their build
knowing they don't have weight or power to waste. It is the opposite attitude
of a guy who thinks 'I have a light motor, I don't have to care'.
Last thought: There will never be any psru that will be as light, reliable nor
as cheap as a 12 pound, $500 new turbocharger. I am not kidding, they are very
easy to plumb on flatheads, they don't stress engines, they function as mufflers,
and 134 cid at 36" MAP is 200 cid of airflow. Look up the turbo testing on
my webpage, email me direct or call anytime.-ww.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420053#420053
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Kenney <brian.kenney(at)live.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe? |
Compression ratio increases can be impractical in a L head because cross se
ction area reduction as the head gets shaved. The engine breathes less (int
ake and exhaust) as the area get smaller. Therefore the more practical way
to increase power is to compress the intake charge by super or turbo chargi
ng as William suggests. Turbocharging has one danger in that hot exhaust ge
ts compressed too and therefore the consequences of an exhaust leak increas
e as a result. Just thoughts to ponder.
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?
> From: WilliamTCA(at)aol.com
> Date: Sun=2C 9 Mar 2014 14:48:54 -0700
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
>
> Kenny=2C
> I watched the Youtube clip several times=2C and I think you are doing so
mething pretty neat. I have been a life long fan of flatheads=2C Grace and
I have a little collection in the hangar.
>
> I read all the notes=2C and for my 2 cents=2C I think that you have a pow
er plant that will work within limitations=2C (just as all engines do). I w
as headed over to my neighbors with the scale=2C but Mr. Mdw=2C covered thi
s=2C and effectively showed both the weight is comparable to a Ford=2C and
also how unreliable internet data can be. I think most people miss that the
re are both L-134's and OHV F-134's. Scale in a milk barn always beats the
internet for useful data=2C
>
> Clif listed the displacements and rpm ranges of several engines=2C and to
it I would like to add the consideration of compression ratio. We have bee
n testing this for a year=2C back to back=2C same airframe=2C etc=2C and it
is surprising the difference between 8.0 and 10.25 to one. The relationshi
p holds true with most engines. I am sure that an O-200 with 8:1 and OHV ca
n be tuned to make more power at any given rpm than a 200 cid Ford. Displac
ement alone is an incomplete picture.
>
> On 'tight' motors: If everything else is set right=2C it is ring drag on
the surface finish of the bores that makes it hard to prop. In my experienc
e=2C 10 hours of ground runs at 50-60% power has the same smoothing effect
as one takeoff and climb to 3=2C000' at wot. 280 finish on bores is better
than 220=2C but it is time at wot that helps.
>
> An optical tach like a Proptach 2545 and a ground adjustable prop are a g
ood 'comparative' Dyno. Get the prop in the test range=2C check the static
rpm=2C make the change and compare rpm. I have loaner WD props=2C (in both
rotations)=2C glad to send one to you for testing.
>
> If Oz's chart is good=2C targeting 3000 rpm instead of 2500 will buy you
a 28% hp increase. The loss of prop efficiency will be in the single digits
=2C and you will have a large net thrust increase. Test this with the loane
r prop=2C you will become convinced.
>
> You will have plenty of people tell you it will/won't work. Their belief
is based on stories=2C and since every Pietenpol is a 'snowflake' unto itse
lf=2C much of the commentary does not apply. You should be able to use The
Ford weight and Balance data we collected. My website tells how to get this
directly from Doc Mosher.
>
> I do not think the success of Fords is because they make 'more than 50 hp
' The W&B tests showed that the Ford guys build lighter planes than many A
-65 guys. The Ford guys also use better matched props on average. They go i
nto their build knowing they don't have weight or power to waste. It is the
opposite attitude of a guy who thinks 'I have a light motor=2C I don't hav
e to care'.
>
> Last thought: There will never be any psru that will be as light=2C relia
ble nor as cheap as a 12 pound=2C $500 new turbocharger. I am not kidding
=2C they are very easy to plumb on flatheads=2C they don't stress engines
=2C they function as mufflers=2C and 134 cid at 36" MAP is 200 cid of airfl
ow. Look up the turbo testing on my webpage=2C email me direct or call anyt
ime.-ww.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420053#420053
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | danhelsper(at)aol.com |
Amen.
Dan Helsper
Puryear, TN
cc: Board of Curmudgeons
-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Boothe <gboothe5(at)comcast.net>
Sent: Sun, Mar 9, 2014 1:28 pm
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Which one?
Then, there=99s this, from Grant MacLaren, circa 1999:
Like many other modifications to an airplane's design -- one change
requires many other changes. If a "new" biplane is designed, it will be jus
t that --
a new design. It should not carry the name "Pietenpol."
Pietenpols forever!
-=Grant MacLaren=-
Gary Boothe
NX308MB
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-lis
t-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Steven Dortch
Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2014 10:56 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Which one?
Bill, Just to muddy the water. I have a Pietenpol With plans that were modi
fied by Grega. But it is not a Grega! It is a Pietenpol fuselage with mods
that later became the Grega wing. I think. It is just enough hybrid that I
cannot firmly tell you where the Grega mods definitely begin or end.
Blue Skies,
Steve D
Pietenpol Air-Camper
On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Bill Church wrote
:
>
Glen,
As mentioned, there are the original Pietenpol Air Camper plans, that were
published in the 1932 Flying and Glider magazine, and which you have a copy
of. Then there are the plans available from the Pietenpol family.
http://community.pressenter.net/~apietenp/BHPietenpolAndSonsAirCamperAircra
ftPurchasePlans.html
In addition to these, there were a couple of different sets of plans for "m
odernized" versions of the Air Camper that were sold. One set was the St.
Croix Air Camper, and the other was the Grega GN-1 Aircamper. Neither of
these are available for sale anymore.
While some have built their aircraft strictly from the Flying and Glider pl
ans, I believe it would be a real challenge to do so, since the reprints ar
e so small, and are simply lacking some details. My recommendation would b
e to obtain a set of the plans from the Pietenpol family, to complement th
e Flying and Glider plans.
Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420038#420038
st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
http://forums.matronics.com
le, List Admin.
="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe? |
| From: | "William Wynne" <WilliamTCA(at)aol.com> |
Brian,
You are correct on the limits of compression increase on flatheads. The point I
was trying to make is that Kenny's HP per cubic inch at 6.5:1 should be better
than the Ford HP per cubic inch at 4.25 to 5.25:l. The limits for increasing
on the Jeep may be higher still, as it has a wildly under square bore and stroke
ratio.
Manifolds on flatheads are on the same side and short, good for compact turbo installation.
The exhaust pressure is less than you may suspect, the energy of
the exhaust gasses is primarily heat. In an enclosed compartment always a concern,
especially with a lot of joints, but I was kind of picturing it out in the
slipstream. I am pretty sure someone brought a turbocharged Piet to Brodhead
in the last decade, but I can't remember who it was.
Part of the reason why I am optimistic about Kenny's project is thinking about
A-37 and A-40 Continentals. They are flatheads also, they have less cubic inches.
They are maybe 80 pounds lighter, but they did fly a lot of stuff like J-3s
on floats with light people.-ww
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420056#420056
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> |
Steve,
Not sure I follow. You have a set of Pietenpol plans that John Grega modified?
And your fuselage was modified to become a wing? :)
There are a lot of homebuilts out there that were begun from a set of plans, and
got modified along the way. For instance, from looking at old photos, back
in the 60's it seemed to be a popular modification to add spill plates to the
tips of Pietenpol wings. Since the practice did not continue, one can likely
deduce that the modification did not improve performance. Likewise, it is also
clear that the mod did not improve appearance either. It is pretty common with
this design for buiilders to make changes. Some changes are very subtle, and
others are not so subtle. it is quite possible that the original builder of
your plane started with a set od Pietenpol plans, and incorporated selected details
borrowed from the Grega plans.
Bill C.
> Bill, Just to muddy the water. I have a Pietenpol With plans that were modified
by Grega. But it is not a Grega! It is a Pietenpol fuselage with mods that
later became the Grega wing. I think. It is just enough hybrid that I cannot firmly
tell you where the Grega mods definitely begin or end.
>
> Blue Skies,
>
> Steve D
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420057#420057
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steven Dortch <steven.d.dortch(at)gmail.com> |
Bill,
*The logbook on my Piet says it is a "Pietenpol aircamper......in
accordance with the original drawings as amended by John w. Grega to
include...." forward section of the fuselage is extended 6 inches for the
different motor (Grega drawing). Wing built in 3 sections *(
*the air foil looks like a Pietenpol)with a 9.5 gallon gas tank in upper
wing. also the Right gear is J3 cub. Left gear was fabricated to match (a
Grega idea). *
*The Fuselage follows the Pietenpol plans by Orrin Hoopman. The bolts
attaching the Cabanes to the Fuselage runs right to left like the Pietenpol
plans. The bolts attaching the cabanes to the wing run from front to rear
and attach a 3 piece wing with a wing tank, A la Grega. . *
*Sorry if I don't get to join the club. But everyone already calls me a
Bastard;+}*
*Blue Skies,*
*Steve D.*
On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 6:39 PM, Bill Church wrote:
> billspiet(at)sympatico.ca>
>
> Steve,
> Not sure I follow. You have a set of Pietenpol plans that John Grega
> modified? And your fuselage was modified to become a wing? :)
> There are a lot of homebuilts out there that were begun from a set of
> plans, and got modified along the way. For instance, from looking at old
> photos, back in the 60's it seemed to be a popular modification to add
> spill plates to the tips of Pietenpol wings. Since the practice did not
> continue, one can likely deduce that the modification did not improve
> performance. Likewise, it is also clear that the mod did not improve
> appearance either. It is pretty common with this design for buiilders to
> make changes. Some changes are very subtle, and others are not so subtle.
> it is quite possible that the original builder of your plane started with
> a set od Pietenpol plans, and incorporated selected details borrowed from
> the Grega plans.
>
> Bill C.
>
>
> > Bill, Just to muddy the water. I have a Pietenpol With plans that were
> modified by Grega. But it is not a Grega! It is a Pietenpol fuselage with
> mods that later became the Grega wing. I think. It is just enough hybrid
> that I cannot firmly tell you where the Grega mods definitely begin or end.
> >
> > Blue Skies,
> >
> > Steve D
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420057#420057
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> |
So, Steve, it sounds like you have an example of what I was referring to - A plane
built using the Pietenpol plans, with selected modifications (in this case,
borrowed from the GN-1). Good that the original builder chose to retain the
original fuselage design , as the Grega modifications (added plywood sheathing
unnecessarily added weight to the aft fuselage structure.
Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420059#420059
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "taildrags" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
Steve;
I think you can run two quick DNA tests to check for paternity.
1. Can the angle of the cabanes be changed; i.e., if there were no cabane brace
struts or cables, can the wing physically be pivoted forward or aft by changing
the angle of the cabanes? If the answer is 'no', Mr. Pietenpol is not the
father.
2. Do the landing gear leg attach points meet the lower longerons at the wing strut
attach points, both forward and aft? If the answer is 'no', Mr. Pietenpol
is not the father.
If you're still holding out a thread of hope, you can try one last check but it's
not definitive: are the tailwheel control cables connected to the bottom of
the rudder using brackets on the rudder rather than running forward to the rudder
bar? Grega connected them in that fashion but others have used the same
method in the interest of eliminating a second set of control cables the length
of the empennage.
--------
Oscar Zuniga
Medford, OR
Air Camper NX41CC "Scout"
A75 power
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420060#420060
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steven Dortch <steven.d.dortch(at)gmail.com> |
Biggest drawback to the Grega mod is that the wing cannot be moved fore and
aft to help with CG.
The Three piece wing makes it handy to work on here in the garage. I like
the Wing tank as well.
It is what I have. Several of the old pilots at 8T8 say who have flown it
say it flies really well.
Blue Skies
Steve D.
On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 8:06 PM, Bill Church wrote:
> billspiet(at)sympatico.ca>
>
> So, Steve, it sounds like you have an example of what I was referring to -
> A plane built using the Pietenpol plans, with selected modifications (in
> this case, borrowed from the GN-1). Good that the original builder chose
> to retain the original fuselage design , as the Grega modifications (added
> plywood sheathing unnecessarily added weight to the aft fuselage structure.
>
> Bill C.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420059#420059
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steven Dortch <steven.d.dortch(at)gmail.com> |
1. Can the angle of the cabanes be changed; i.e., if there were no cabane
brace struts or cables, can the wing physically be pivoted forward or aft
by changing the angle of the cabanes? If the answer is 'no', Mr. Pietenpol
is not the father.
NO, but the bottoms would pivot fore and aft. the tops pivot port and
starboard. Hybrid.
2. Do the landing gear leg attach points meet the lower longerons at the
wing strut attach points, both forward and aft? If the answer is 'no', Mr.
Pietenpol is not the father.
YES, They do. but the Logbook confesses that they are Cub gear.
3. Are the tailwheel control cables connected to the bottom of the rudder
using brackets on the rudder rather than running forward to the rudder
bar?
NO, the cables go to the rudder on top. There was no steering on the
tailwheel until John K put it on. It now has a Cessna tailwheel and we
still have to finish putting in Pulleys and such to complete the tail
steering.
Blue Skies,
Steve D
On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 8:14 PM, taildrags wrote:
>
> Steve;
>
> I think you can run two quick DNA tests to check for paternity.
>
> 1. Can the angle of the cabanes be changed; i.e., if there were no cabane
> brace struts or cables, can the wing physically be pivoted forward or aft
> by changing the angle of the cabanes? If the answer is 'no', Mr. Pietenpol
> is not the father.
>
> 2. Do the landing gear leg attach points meet the lower longerons at the
> wing strut attach points, both forward and aft? If the answer is 'no', Mr.
> Pietenpol is not the father.
>
> If you're still holding out a thread of hope, you can try one last check
> but it's not definitive: are the tailwheel control cables connected to the
> bottom of the rudder using brackets on the rudder rather than running
> forward to the rudder bar? Grega connected them in that fashion but others
> have used the same method in the interest of eliminating a second set of
> control cables the length of the empennage.
>
> --------
> Oscar Zuniga
> Medford, OR
> Air Camper NX41CC "Scout"
> A75 power
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420060#420060
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Kenney <brian.kenney(at)live.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe? |
I think Frank L. from the Milwaukee area put a turbo or supercharger on hi
s Funk? engine. You are probably correct that the exhaust pressure may not
be that high but there is still the concern that the exhaust piping and fla
nges need to be made carefully as most factory turbos are piped with alloy
tubing and rightfully so. I personally would not want to fly in a turbo eng
ine aircraft in a tight cowled aircraft with homemade exhaust piping and m
aybe not even with factory piping because a crack could/would mean a fire.
That is just my fear limitation.
Flat heads are not that much of a penalty on a slow turning engines and why
auto engines don't need overhead cams in direct drive applications on airp
lanes. The point I was making that to go more power the right direction is
to pressurize the intake not to modify it internally.
Don't take my comments as a challenge to your knowledge but really to vali
date what you said and to educate others that might not be so acquainted w
ith the all the limitations.
I confess that I don't know much about the engine in question. What will th
e increased rpm and/or power do to the bottom engine or to the breathing of
the engine? I think it has a chance=2C the question more relates to wheth
er the end result is a one or two seater.
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?
> From: WilliamTCA(at)aol.com
> Date: Sun=2C 9 Mar 2014 16:38:56 -0700
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
>
> Brian=2C
> You are correct on the limits of compression increase on flatheads. The p
oint I was trying to make is that Kenny's HP per cubic inch at 6.5:1 should
be better than the Ford HP per cubic inch at 4.25 to 5.25:l. The limits f
or increasing on the Jeep may be higher still=2C as it has a wildly under s
quare bore and stroke ratio.
>
> Manifolds on flatheads are on the same side and short=2C good for compact
turbo installation. The exhaust pressure is less than you may suspect=2C t
he energy of the exhaust gasses is primarily heat. In an enclosed compartme
nt always a concern=2C especially with a lot of joints=2C but I was kind of
picturing it out in the slipstream. I am pretty sure someone brought a tur
bocharged Piet to Brodhead in the last decade=2C but I can't remember who i
t was.
>
> Part of the reason why I am optimistic about Kenny's project is thinking
about A-37 and A-40 Continentals. They are flatheads also=2C they have less
cubic inches. They are maybe 80 pounds lighter=2C but they did fly a lot o
f stuff like J-3s on floats with light people.-ww
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420056#420056
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Kenney <brian.kenney(at)live.ca> |
This is my take on this debate. Anyone that is building an aircraft like th
e one we are all interested has much in common. Debating on the originality
of a particular design is counter productive as all it does is subdivide a
small group into even smaller groups. I hate when people appear to act sup
erior because they think they are more authentic or more pure. I know it is
human nature but it is stupid. We should embrace all that is Pietenpol-lik
e and in doing so we are all better off and that allows us to educate all i
n all the ways of doing this and let them decide what is the best way to d
o something rather than being shamed into like it is some form of Victorian
racism. Come on people don't be so judgemental=2C Bernie Pietenpol certai
nly wasn't!
I might be reading this wrong and that might not be the intention but if I
am taking it that way than so are others!
Date: Sun=2C 9 Mar 2014 20:32:10 -0500
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Which one?
From: steven.d.dortch(at)gmail.com
1. Can the angle of the cabanes be changed=3B i.e.=2C if there were no =0A
cabane brace struts or cables=2C can the wing physically be pivoted =0A
forward or aft by changing the angle of the cabanes? If the answer is =0A
'no'=2C Mr. Pietenpol is not the father.
NO=2C but the bottoms would pivot fore and aft. the tops pivot port and sta
rboard. Hybrid.
2. Do the landing gear leg attach points meet the lower longerons at the=0A
wing strut attach points=2C both forward and aft? If the answer is 'no'
=2C=0A
Mr. Pietenpol is not the father.
YES=2C They do. but the Logbook confesses that they are Cub gear.
3. Are the tailwheel control cables connected to the bottom of the rudder
=0A
using brackets on the rudder rather than running forward to the rudder =0A
bar?
NO=2C the cables go to the rudder on top. There was no steering on the tail
wheel until John K put it on. It now has a Cessna tailwheel and we still ha
ve to finish putting in Pulleys and such to complete the tail steering.
=0A
Blue Skies=2C
Steve D
=0A
On Sun=2C Mar 9=2C 2014 at 8:14 PM=2C taildrags wro
te:
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
Steve=3B
=0A
=0A
I think you can run two quick DNA tests to check for paternity.
=0A
=0A
1. Can the angle of the cabanes be changed=3B i.e.=2C if there were no caba
ne brace struts or cables=2C can the wing physically be pivoted forward or
aft by changing the angle of the cabanes? If the answer is 'no'=2C Mr. Pie
tenpol is not the father.
=0A
=0A
=0A
2. Do the landing gear leg attach points meet the lower longerons at the wi
ng strut attach points=2C both forward and aft? If the answer is 'no'=2C M
r. Pietenpol is not the father.
=0A
=0A
If you're still holding out a thread of hope=2C you can try one last check
but it's not definitive: are the tailwheel control cables connected to the
bottom of the rudder using brackets on the rudder rather than running forwa
rd to the rudder bar? Grega connected them in that fashion but others have
used the same method in the interest of eliminating a second set of contro
l cables the length of the empennage.
=0A
=0A
=0A
--------
=0A
Oscar Zuniga
=0A
Medford=2C OR
=0A
Air Camper NX41CC "Scout"
=0A
A75 power
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
Read this topic online here:
=0A
=0A
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420060#420060
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
=0A
=0A
http://forums.matronics.com
=0A
=0A
le=2C List Admin.
=0A
="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
============0A
============0A
============0A
============0A
=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fuselage Width |
| From: | "john francis" <Mrkringles(at)msn.com> |
Tomorrow it may get to 60 degrees here. I am hoping to begin to glue the fuse sides
together. I looked at a lot of pictures on westcoastpiet and it appears
people start all over the place. I think the front two connectors are not put
into place because of the addition of the engine mount later? Some add the 3/8's
plywood floor before adding the additional connectors while others add the
connectors first then lay the flooring on top. What should I not do when connecting
the fuselage together that would cause problems later?
Thanks,
John
--------
John Francis
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420065#420065
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe? |
| From: | Steven Dortch <steven.d.dortch(at)gmail.com> |
One "hot" setup on a Go-Devil Jeep (circa 1960) was
Dual carbs
compression raised to 7.5 to 1 with Hickey Head
bored to 141 cubic inches.
reground camshaft with proper timing and lift,
and improved headers (20-25% HP increase)
These mods were available at one time (1970s) but I am not sure you could
find them now.
Blue Skies,
Steve
On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 8:36 PM, Brian Kenney wrote:
> I think Frank L. from the Milwaukee area put a turbo or supercharger on
> his Funk? engine. You are probably correct that the exhaust pressure may
> not be that high but there is still the concern that the exhaust piping and
> flanges need to be made carefully as most factory turbos are piped with
> alloy tubing and rightfully so. I personally would not want to fly in a
> turbo engine aircraft in a tight cowled aircraft with homemade exhaust
> piping and maybe not even with factory piping because a crack could/would
> mean a fire. That is just my fear limitation.
>
> Flat heads are not that much of a penalty on a slow turning engines and
> why auto engines don't need overhead cams in direct drive applications on
> airplanes. The point I was making that to go more power the right direction
> is to pressurize the intake not to modify it internally.
>
> Don't take my comments as a challenge to your knowledge but really to
> validate what you said and to educate others that might not be so
> acquainted with the all the limitations.
>
> I confess that I don't know much about the engine in question. What will
> the increased rpm and/or power do to the bottom engine or to the breathing
> of the engine? I think it has a chance, the question more relates to
> whether the end result is a one or two seater.
>
>
> > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Willys jeep pietenpol engine maybe?
> > From: WilliamTCA(at)aol.com
> > Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2014 16:38:56 -0700
>
> > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> >
> WilliamTCA(at)aol.com>
> >
> > Brian,
> > You are correct on the limits of compression increase on flatheads. The
> point I was trying to make is that Kenny's HP per cubic inch at 6.5:1
> should be better than the Ford HP per cubic inch at 4.25 to 5.25:l. The
> limits for increasing on the Jeep may be higher still, as it has a wildly
> under square bore and stroke ratio.
> >
> > Manifolds on flatheads are on the same side and short, good for compact
> turbo installation. The exhaust pressure is less than you may suspect, the
> energy of the exhaust gasses is primarily heat. In an enclosed compartment
> always a concern, especially with a lot of joints, but I was kind of
> picturing it out in the slipstream. I am pretty sure someone brought a
> turbocharged Piet to Brodhead in the last decade, but I can't remember who
> it was.
> >
> > Part of the reason why I am optimistic about Kenny's project is thinking
> about A-37 and A-40 Continentals. They are flatheads also, they have less
> cubic inches. They are maybe 80 pounds lighter, but they did fly a lot of
> stuff like J-3s on floats with light people.-ww
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=420056#420056
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > =============
> >
> >
> >
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | DNA analysis please |
| From: | "M. Zeke Zechini" <marcus.zechini(at)gmail.com> |
I think I have GN-1. The wings are clipped Cub (aluminum ribs). Was built by
Bob Odegaard in 1991. Started life with A65, now has C-85-12. Still swingin
g same 74x41 McCauley. Will try to get it to Brodhed this year.
About to replace Cub legs, as I am covering a new set. Certainly am enjoying
flying it!
Sent from my iPad