Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-ak
November 16, 1998 - December 03, 1998
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "R. Gipson" <flexable(at)onlinemac.com> |
Steve, please subscribe me to the pietenpol list
Thanx,
Ron Gipson
Steve, please subscribe me to the
pietenpol
list
Thanx,
Ron Gipson
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Four cylinder Honda engine |
I think a trip to Brodhead would be really fun, I may not be done with my Piet
by July 2000 so we may just take our truck & camper, pull our motorcycle and
spend a month back during the EAA, we have friends in the Milwaukee area we can
visit and stay with if we want also.
Gordon
John McNarry wrote:
> Gordon: A trip to Brodhead is better than a recording. One thing I noticed
> as a passenger in a Ford Piet vs A continental is that the exhaust sound on
> the continental changed as I turned my head but the ford being all on one
> side didn't. Small thing but I think the Fords soud better.
> J Mc
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gordon Brimhall
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Date: Sunday, November 15, 1998 1:22 PM
> Subject: Re: Four cylinder Honda engine
>
> >With the two choices of either Mpdel "A" or Corvair to be a true Pietenpol
> I feel
> >using the Model "A" Engine just for what you just said. A simple design.
> Have you
> >looked around for availability of the Ford engine? I have been out of the
> Model
> >"A" Loop for 8 years now so other than Hemmings Motor News I don't know
> where any
> >sources are. It would be nice to find an engine in running condition rather
> than a
> >basket case. I did find the Model "A" Web site so I may find the source
> their.
> >
> >I would just love to hear a Pietenpol W/Mdl "A" engine Fly-By. Anybody have
> a
> >sound track on the web someplace?
> >
> >Gordon
> >
> >Rcaprd(at)aol.com wrote:
> >
> >> I think Honda engines are among the most reliable, and dependable engines
> on
> >> the planet. The problem with all of those Jap engines is that they
> produce
> >> their horsepower up high in the RPM range, so a prop speed reduction unit
> >> would be required, which adds complexity, expense, and reduces
> reliability.
> >> The beauty of the Pietenpol is it's simplicity. Mr. Pietenpol designed
> it
> >> that way to keep it within reach of a majority of the population. I
> trust
> >> his research, and plan on using the Ford Model A engine in my Air Camper.
> >> This engine, with its long stroke, has so much torque that the prop
> doesen't
> >> even unload when airborne !! Also, the low RPM keeps the prop efficient,
> no
> >> need for the PSRU.
> >>
> >> Chuck Gantzer
> >> Wichita KS
> >>
> >> "One can get proper insight into the practice of flying, only by actual
> flying
> >
> >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JRoss10612(at)aol.com |
Steve, please unsubscribe me from the Pietenpol List
Thanx,
Jon Ross
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: Frequently Asked Questions about Home-built Aircraft |
>>>>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 08:39:48 -0500
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <<Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: Frequently Asked Questions about Home-built Aircraft |
>
>
> Mike I was reading this and was wondering where did you put the
>experimental sign in 2 inch letters min.
0000,8080,8080JIM !!!!! Boy am I Glad you asked
this question. Guess what ??
You don't need the EXPERIMENTAL sign ANYWHERE on a
Pietenpol. How do you get around this ?? When you apply for
an N number registration apply for and use NX........ not just N.
The X designates that your aircraft is in fact experimental and can
be used in lieu of the bumper sticker thing for experimental designs
OVER 30 years old. I can't quote you the FAR on this but I
printed it out and had it on hand for the FAA guy when he came out
to inspect my plane. He was not aware of this loophole but now he
is. Please note that when you get your FAA paperwork back they
will not show the NX only the N, but don't worry...as long as you
use this on the aircraft and all your paperwork you will be fine.
I'll look up the FAR if you remind me.
I didn't know an ELT was a
>requirment. Where did you locate the ELT and where did you get it.
How
>much did that cost? jas
0000,8080,8080The ELT is only required once you are
done flying off your
restrictions and go outside the flight test area designated by the FAA.
I haven't actually purchased an ELT yet.....I'm hoping Santa will
bring one....
0000,8080,8080Mike C.
<<<<<<<<
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David B. Schober" <dbs(at)fscvax.wvnet.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Four cylinder Honda engine |
I just got 2 Model A engines for $100. The first is one that has been sitting for
a
long time. I started to take it apart but I'm having trouble with the flywheel.
It
came from an AA since the transmision has a PTO. (Anyone interested in a tranny
with a
PTO?). This engine is locked up so I don't know what I'll find once it's open.
The
head is also cracked but I plan on using an aluminum head. The second engine is
a
little unique in that it was converted to be used as an air compressor. The front
and
rear cylinders run the engine and the 2 center cylinders pump air.
I hope I can build up the first one for a Piet and then restore the second for
a
compressor for the hangar!
Gordon Brimhall wrote:
> With the two choices of either Mpdel "A" or Corvair to be a true Pietenpol I
feel
> using the Model "A" Engine just for what you just said. A simple design. Have
you
> looked around for availability of the Ford engine? I have been out of the Model
> "A" Loop for 8 years now so other than Hemmings Motor News I don't know where
any
> sources are. It would be nice to find an engine in running condition rather than
a
> basket case. I did find the Model "A" Web site so I may find the source their.
>
> I would just love to hear a Pietenpol W/Mdl "A" engine Fly-By. Anybody have a
> sound track on the web someplace?
>
> Gordon
>
> Rcaprd(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> > I think Honda engines are among the most reliable, and dependable engines on
> > the planet. The problem with all of those Jap engines is that they produce
> > their horsepower up high in the RPM range, so a prop speed reduction unit
> > would be required, which adds complexity, expense, and reduces reliability.
> > The beauty of the Pietenpol is it's simplicity. Mr. Pietenpol designed it
> > that way to keep it within reach of a majority of the population. I trust
> > his research, and plan on using the Ford Model A engine in my Air Camper.
> > This engine, with its long stroke, has so much torque that the prop doesen't
> > even unload when airborne !! Also, the low RPM keeps the prop efficient, no
> > need for the PSRU.
> >
> > Chuck Gantzer
> > Wichita KS
> >
> > "One can get proper insight into the practice of flying, only by actual flying
--
David B.Schober, CPE
Instructor, Aviation Maintenance
Fairmont State College
National Aerospace Education Center
Rt. 3 Box 13
Bridgeport, WV 26330-9503
(304) 842-8300
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: [Fwd: File - Welcome File] |
Gordon, I took this directly from the attachment that you sent. Just
include it as text next time please. -stevee
Please people, don't send attachments to this list (or any other list
without explicit permission). It is considered one of the most common
newbee mistakes on the internet. There are many people subscribed here
who have to pay for the time it takes them to download long messages,
and others who's mail systems barf (usually on me) on long messages.
The proper thing to do is to offer to email directly said attachment on
request or to post it somewhere for download via WWW or FTP.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Four cylinder Honda engine |
No David
Use the second engine for your piet as you will have two cylinders to fly the plane
and a
built in air compressor to pump up your tires if you get a flat.:-)
Where did you find such a deal already?
Gordon (Saving for Plans)
"David B. Schober" wrote:
> I just got 2 Model A engines for $100. The first is one that has been sitting
for a
> long time. I started to take it apart but I'm having trouble with the flywheel.
It
> came from an AA since the transmision has a PTO. (Anyone interested in a tranny
with a
> PTO?). This engine is locked up so I don't know what I'll find once it's open.
The
> head is also cracked but I plan on using an aluminum head. The second engine
is a
> little unique in that it was converted to be used as an air compressor. The front
and
> rear cylinders run the engine and the 2 center cylinders pump air.
>
> I hope I can build up the first one for a Piet and then restore the second for
a
> compressor for the hangar!
>
> Gordon Brimhall wrote:
>
> > With the two choices of either Mpdel "A" or Corvair to be a true Pietenpol
I feel
> > using the Model "A" Engine just for what you just said. A simple design. Have
you
> > looked around for availability of the Ford engine? I have been out of the Model
> > "A" Loop for 8 years now so other than Hemmings Motor News I don't know where
any
> > sources are. It would be nice to find an engine in running condition rather
than a
> > basket case. I did find the Model "A" Web site so I may find the source their.
> >
> > I would just love to hear a Pietenpol W/Mdl "A" engine Fly-By. Anybody have
a
> > sound track on the web someplace?
> >
> > Gordon
> >
> > Rcaprd(at)aol.com wrote:
> >
> > > I think Honda engines are among the most reliable, and dependable engines
on
> > > the planet. The problem with all of those Jap engines is that they produce
> > > their horsepower up high in the RPM range, so a prop speed reduction unit
> > > would be required, which adds complexity, expense, and reduces reliability.
> > > The beauty of the Pietenpol is it's simplicity. Mr. Pietenpol designed it
> > > that way to keep it within reach of a majority of the population. I trust
> > > his research, and plan on using the Ford Model A engine in my Air Camper.
> > > This engine, with its long stroke, has so much torque that the prop doesen't
> > > even unload when airborne !! Also, the low RPM keeps the prop efficient,
no
> > > need for the PSRU.
> > >
> > > Chuck Gantzer
> > > Wichita KS
> > >
> > > "One can get proper insight into the practice of flying, only by actual flying
>
> --
>
> David B.Schober, CPE
> Instructor, Aviation Maintenance
> Fairmont State College
> National Aerospace Education Center
> Rt. 3 Box 13
> Bridgeport, WV 26330-9503
> (304) 842-8300
>
________________________________________________________________________________
I still have an extra ELT if anyone want one.=A0 It is the Narco 10 a=
nd has a
battery good till sometime in 2000.=A0 First $110 gets it, shipping i=
ncluded.
=A0
Stevee
-----Original Message-----
f Michael
D Cuy
Sent: Monday, November 16, 1998 6:40 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Frequently Asked Questions about Home-built Aircraft
>>>>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 08:39:48 -0500
=46rom: Michael D Cuy
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Frequently Asked Questions about Home-built Aircraft
>
>
> Mike I was reading this and was wondering where did you put the
>experimental sign in 2 inch letters min.
JIM !!!!! Boy am I Glad you asked this
question. Guess what ??
You don't need the EXPERIMENTAL sign ANYWHERE on a
Pietenpol. How do you get around this ?? When you apply for
an N number registration apply for and use NX........ not just N.
The X designates that your aircraft is in fact experimental and can
be used in lieu of the bumper sticker thing for experimental designs
OVER 30 years old. I can't quote you the FAR on this but I
printed it out and had it on hand for the FAA guy when he came out
to inspect my plane. He was not aware of this loophole but now he
is. Please note that when you get your FAA paperwork back they
will not show the NX only the N, but don't worry...as long as you
use this on the aircraft and all your paperwork you will be fine.
I'll look up the FAR if you remind me.
I didn't know an ELT was a
>requirment. Where did you locate the ELT and where did you get it. H=
ow
>much did that cost? jas
The ELT is only required once you are
done
flying off your
restrictions and go outside the flight test area designated by the FA=
A.
I haven't actually purchased an ELT yet.....I'm hoping Santa will
bring one....
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David B. Schober" <dbs(at)fscvax.wvnet.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Four cylinder Honda engine |
Just keep your ear to the ground. I got the engines through a friend that knew
they were
laying out in a field. He even picked them up and delivered them for me! They were
outside
Elkins, WV but I know of several Model A's just decaying in several other states.
I'm hoping
to pick up a AA flat bed truck in the near future. Price is $500 and it runs!
Gordon Brimhall wrote:
> No David
>
> Use the second engine for your piet as you will have two cylinders to fly the
plane and a
> built in air compressor to pump up your tires if you get a flat.:-)
>
> Where did you find such a deal already?
>
> Gordon (Saving for Plans)
>
> "David B. Schober" wrote:
>
> > I just got 2 Model A engines for $100. The first is one that has been sitting
for a
> > long time. I started to take it apart but I'm having trouble with the flywheel.
It
> > came from an AA since the transmision has a PTO. (Anyone interested in a tranny
with a
> > PTO?). This engine is locked up so I don't know what I'll find once it's open.
The
> > head is also cracked but I plan on using an aluminum head. The second engine
is a
> > little unique in that it was converted to be used as an air compressor. The
front and
> > rear cylinders run the engine and the 2 center cylinders pump air.
> >
> > I hope I can build up the first one for a Piet and then restore the second
for a
> > compressor for the hangar!
> >
> > Gordon Brimhall wrote:
> >
> > > With the two choices of either Mpdel "A" or Corvair to be a true Pietenpol
I feel
> > > using the Model "A" Engine just for what you just said. A simple design.
Have you
> > > looked around for availability of the Ford engine? I have been out of the
Model
> > > "A" Loop for 8 years now so other than Hemmings Motor News I don't know where
any
> > > sources are. It would be nice to find an engine in running condition rather
than a
> > > basket case. I did find the Model "A" Web site so I may find the source their.
> > >
> > > I would just love to hear a Pietenpol W/Mdl "A" engine Fly-By. Anybody have
a
> > > sound track on the web someplace?
> > >
> > > Gordon
> > >
> > > Rcaprd(at)aol.com wrote:
> > >
> > > > I think Honda engines are among the most reliable, and dependable engines
on
> > > > the planet. The problem with all of those Jap engines is that they produce
> > > > their horsepower up high in the RPM range, so a prop speed reduction unit
> > > > would be required, which adds complexity, expense, and reduces reliability.
> > > > The beauty of the Pietenpol is it's simplicity. Mr. Pietenpol designed
it
> > > > that way to keep it within reach of a majority of the population. I trust
> > > > his research, and plan on using the Ford Model A engine in my Air Camper.
> > > > This engine, with its long stroke, has so much torque that the prop doesen't
> > > > even unload when airborne !! Also, the low RPM keeps the prop efficient,
no
> > > > need for the PSRU.
> > > >
> > > > Chuck Gantzer
> > > > Wichita KS
> > > >
> > > > "One can get proper insight into the practice of flying, only by actual
flying
> >
> > --
> >
> > David B.Schober, CPE
> > Instructor, Aviation Maintenance
> > Fairmont State College
> > National Aerospace Education Center
> > Rt. 3 Box 13
> > Bridgeport, WV 26330-9503
> > (304) 842-8300
> >
--
David B.Schober, CPE
Instructor, Aviation Maintenance
Fairmont State College
National Aerospace Education Center
Rt. 3 Box 13
Bridgeport, WV 26330-9503
(304) 842-8300
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Beanlands <kbeanlan(at)spots.ab.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Frequently Asked Questions about Home-built Aircraft |
Most ELT's are relatively inexpensive at $150-$300 USD. Check out
http://www.seaerospace.com/eltenc.htm for the Ameri-King prices.
Having vomunteered with CASARA (Civilian Air Search And Rescue
Association) I can tell you that the difference between finding someone
with an ELT and without can be DAYS! Accidents occurring where ELT's have
gone off are usually located within 2 hours. A lot of airline pilots,
especially here in Canada, tune one of thier radios to 121.5 when flying
outside of the major centers (especially pilots flying up north). Even
with a standard com radio it is possible to find an ELT signal. When you
first hear the signal, continue flying in a strait line. THe signal should
get louder. Keep turning down the radio until it's just audible. When the
signal starts getting weaker, turn 90 degrees left or right. If the signal
continues dropping, turn 180 degrees. Continue on this course until the
signal starts to drop off. You should now be within a mile or two of the
ELT. We've actually practiced this with an ELT generator (on a frequency
other than 121.5) and ended up about .5 miles from the plane.
We also use special direction finders that can get us even closer.
Ken
On Mon, 16 Nov 1998, Michael D Cuy wrote:
> >>>>
>
> Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 08:39:48 -0500
>
> To: jim-sury(at)hlp.com
>
> From: Michael D Cuy <<Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov>
>
> Subject: Re: Frequently Asked Questions about Home-built Aircraft
>
> In-Reply-To: <<862566BD.0074136D.00(at)mta1.hlp.com>
>
>
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Mike I was reading this and was wondering where did you put the
>
> >experimental sign in 2 inch letters min.
>
>
> 0000,8080,8080JIM !!!!! Boy am I Glad you asked
> this question. Guess what ??
>
> You don't need the EXPERIMENTAL sign ANYWHERE on a
>
> Pietenpol. How do you get around this ?? When you apply for
>
> an N number registration apply for and use NX........ not just N.
>
> The X designates that your aircraft is in fact experimental and can
>
> be used in lieu of the bumper sticker thing for experimental designs
>
> OVER 30 years old. I can't quote you the FAR on this but I
>
> printed it out and had it on hand for the FAA guy when he came out
>
> to inspect my plane. He was not aware of this loophole but now he
>
> is. Please note that when you get your FAA paperwork back they
>
> will not show the NX only the N, but don't worry...as long as you
>
> use this on the aircraft and all your paperwork you will be fine.
>
> I'll look up the FAR if you remind me.
>
>
>
> I didn't know an ELT was a
>
> >requirment. Where did you locate the ELT and where did you get it.
> How
>
> >much did that cost? jas
>
> 0000,8080,8080The ELT is only required once you are
> done flying off your
>
> restrictions and go outside the flight test area designated by the FAA.
>
> I haven't actually purchased an ELT yet.....I'm hoping Santa will
>
> bring one....
>
>
> 0000,8080,8080Mike C.
> <<<<<<<<
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Brusilow <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Gordon wrote:
<> With the two choices of either Model "A" or Corvair to be a true
Pietenpol......>
Nonsense! What is a "true Pietenpol"? An aircraft built from the original
plans or from modified plans ( see Vi Kapler ), large wheels or small
wheels, tail skid or tail wheel, one piece wing or three piece wing, "A"
engine, corvair, round engine, continental, Ford escort, "T" engine,
etc.etc. They are all true Pientenpols.
To see one is to know one. It is a classic that can not be mistaken.
Mike B ( Piet N 687MB )
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: [Fwd: File - Welcome File] |
Steve
Excuse Me! For trying to help someone.
Someone sent me a request to send them the information to another list,
that makes about four requests so far I have received on and off this list
so I replied by forwarding the post that was sent to me from the other
list. Now what did I do wrong again? The person sending me the last request
sent it in HTML.
Yes I am a newbie (Almost), retired Computer Spec and was on the internet
when it was a free service as Usenet and a Charter member of CIS.
Gordon
steve(at)byu.edu wrote:
> Gordon, I took this directly from the attachment that you sent. Just
> include it as text next time please. -stevee
>
> Please people, don't send attachments to this list (or any other list
> without explicit permission). It is considered one of the most common
> newbee mistakes on the internet. There are many people subscribed here
> who have to pay for the time it takes them to download long messages,
> and others who's mail systems barf (usually on me) on long messages.
> The proper thing to do is to offer to email directly said attachment on
> request or to post it somewhere for download via WWW or FTP.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: [Fwd: File - Welcome File] |
Steve
I'm Laughing now at my own stupid mistake of sending that file as all I
wanted to send was the subscribing information that was on the top of the
message. Instead I sent the complete message that was maybe 30 lines long,
much shorter than the many posts I see on this list.
And what is so funny is that I never even read the bottom part about not
sending attachments to lists as it is a Newbie Mistake. Hay Man I must be a
newbie again as I just violated the the rule. GEE WIZ
Next time I will have to read my forwarded message more better (How you
like that for grammer) before I send it to a list.
Sorry I won't forward anything else to this list even if it is important.
Gordon (The Newbie)
ret. US Govt. MIS Dept ADP Security Officer.
steve(at)byu.edu wrote:
> Gordon, I took this directly from the attachment that you sent. Just
> include it as text next time please. -stevee
>
> Please people, don't send attachments to this list (or any other list
> without explicit permission). It is considered one of the most common
> newbee mistakes on the internet. There are many people subscribed here
> who have to pay for the time it takes them to download long messages,
> and others who's mail systems barf (usually on me) on long messages.
> The proper thing to do is to offer to email directly said attachment on
> request or to post it somewhere for download via WWW or FTP.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: [Fwd: File - Welcome File] |
Gordon, no need to get hot, (or even warm). I just found that it was a
little ironic that you would forward a message as an attachment, to the
list, that warned against doing so with an explanation as to why. Best
course is to include text that would like forwarded in the body of you first
generation message. Sending graphics to lists cause the same kinds of
problems.
Best Regards,
Steve Eldredge (piet pilot, and list host)
-----Original Message-----
Gordon Brimhall
Sent: Monday, November 16, 1998 10:36 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: [Fwd: File - Welcome File]
Steve
Excuse Me! For trying to help someone.
Someone sent me a request to send them the information to another list,
that makes about four requests so far I have received on and off this list
so I replied by forwarding the post that was sent to me from the other
list. Now what did I do wrong again? The person sending me the last request
sent it in HTML.
Yes I am a newbie (Almost), retired Computer Spec and was on the internet
when it was a free service as Usenet and a Charter member of CIS.
Gordon
steve(at)byu.edu wrote:
> Gordon, I took this directly from the attachment that you sent. Just
> include it as text next time please. -stevee
>
> Please people, don't send attachments to this list (or any other list
> without explicit permission). It is considered one of the most common
> newbee mistakes on the internet. There are many people subscribed here
> who have to pay for the time it takes them to download long messages,
> and others who's mail systems barf (usually on me) on long messages.
> The proper thing to do is to offer to email directly said attachment on
> request or to post it somewhere for download via WWW or FTP.
________________________________________________________________________________
Why did I just rec this message in HTML??
I thought you just told me to send messages in regular text?
Am I mistaken, please clarify this subject Steve.
Gordon
steve(at)byu.edu wrote:
> I still have an extra ELT if anyone want one. It is the Narco 10 and
> has a battery good till sometime in 2000. First $110 gets it,
> shipping included.Stevee
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Behalf Of Michael D Cuy
> Sent: Monday, November 16, 1998 6:40 AM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Re: Frequently Asked Questions about Home-built
> Aircraft
>
> >>>>
>
>
> Mike C. <<<<
>
________________________________________________________________________________
How about building a Pietenpol to the design that was in the 1932 Glider and
Flying Manual and it will be real close to the original Pietenpol.
I guess what you are saying if it looks something like a Pietenpol and was
built with other plans (Their are many) it is still true to design even if it
is powered with some other engine and not a Model "A" or Corvair like Barnard
did. How about a RagWing UL Pietenpol? It looks something like the orig but
only has one seat and is only 254 lbs.
I may very well build both but for the REAL one I will use Barnard Pietenpol
plans and it will be powered by a Model "A" Engine or a Corvair engine.
I have a Original 1930 How To Build It Published By Modern Mechanics and it
has plans for the Lawrence water Glider. For Trade for a set of Barnards
Pietenpol Plans.
Gordon
Michael Brusilow wrote:
> Gordon wrote:
>
> <> With the two choices of either Model "A" or Corvair to be a true
> Pietenpol......>
>
> Nonsense! What is a "true Pietenpol"? An aircraft built from the original
> plans or from modified plans ( see Vi Kapler ), large wheels or small
> wheels, tail skid or tail wheel, one piece wing or three piece wing, "A"
> engine, corvair, round engine, continental, Ford escort, "T" engine,
> etc.etc. They are all true Pientenpols.
>
> To see one is to know one. It is a classic that can not be mistaken.
>
> Mike B ( Piet N 687MB )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robertpw(at)aol.com |
Please unsubscribe me.
________________________________________________________________________________
Why did I just rec this message in HTML??
I thought you just told me to send messages in regular text?
Am I mistaken, please clarify this subject Steve.
Gordon
I haven't had any complaints about sending in html as long as there are not
embedded images. Lots of mailers send out messages in html as default (as
I'm sure you know). Hopefully as newer technology emerges and is embraced
we will be less and less ihibited by the limitations on old hardware and
slower connections. Personally I much rather recieve images and
attachments, but I also value the contributions of others that may not have
the connectivity that some of us enjoy.
Happy flying,
Steve E.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin McDonald <kevin.mcdonald(at)dev.tivoli.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Four cylinder Honda engine |
Brent Reed wrote:
>
> Does anyone know about Honda engines for aircraft use? My
> father-in-law has one available and was thinking about the
> possibilities of putting one in an Air Camper. Any comments are
> welcome.
Besides all the usual problems with a high revving water cooled motor
many of the Honda 4 cylinder engines turn in the oppisite direction.
Just another gotcha to think about...
KtM
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | bad paint scheme idea? |
I was showing a friend of mine some of the possible paint schemes I
was thinking of using, and he brought up something about my favorite
one so far that I hadnt thought of. This is the one I am leaning to now:
http://207.140.1.221/w3builder/piet/images/side2.jpg
My friend's concern was: Is the main color of the plane too close to
sky blue? Would I be nearly invisible from below? Had'nt thought much
about paint schemes/visibility until now.
Richard
==
http://www.wrld.com/w3builder
"All knowledge is of itself of some value. There
is nothing so minute or inconsiderable, that I would
not rather know it than not." --Samuel, Dr. Johnson
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: [Fwd: File - Welcome File] |
Not even warm.
After over 20 years with computers, installing LANS/WANS with over 42 servers
and 3000 users I then in the MIS Dept overseeing all of this I don't get
Hot/Warm fast, just responding to the post sent to me.
My most embarrising moment was when I rec a message from our Captain he sent to
"Everyone" I responded to my friend about it and forgot to change the to line
and ended up sending it to "Everyone" 3000 users. OH Well And I was the
Administrator and Security officer over the whole Bay Area. We had a Contractor
Help Desk and crew to keep all this stuff running, my days of fixing were over
by then as I was a GS 12 finally.
EGG ON MY Face.
Anyway, no harm done.
have a good day Steve.
Gordon
steve(at)byu.edu wrote:
> Gordon, no need to get hot, (or even warm). I just found that it was a
> little ironic that you would forward a message as an attachment, to the
> list, that warned against doing so with an explanation as to why. Best
> course is to include text that would like forwarded in the body of you first
> generation message. Sending graphics to lists cause the same kinds of
> problems.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Steve Eldredge (piet pilot, and list host)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Gordon Brimhall
> Sent: Monday, November 16, 1998 10:36 AM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Re: [Fwd: File - Welcome File]
>
> Steve
>
> Excuse Me! For trying to help someone.
>
> Someone sent me a request to send them the information to another list,
> that makes about four requests so far I have received on and off this list
> so I replied by forwarding the post that was sent to me from the other
> list. Now what did I do wrong again? The person sending me the last request
> sent it in HTML.
>
> Yes I am a newbie (Almost), retired Computer Spec and was on the internet
> when it was a free service as Usenet and a Charter member of CIS.
>
> Gordon
>
> steve(at)byu.edu wrote:
>
> > Gordon, I took this directly from the attachment that you sent. Just
> > include it as text next time please. -stevee
> >
> > Please people, don't send attachments to this list (or any other list
> > without explicit permission). It is considered one of the most common
> > newbee mistakes on the internet. There are many people subscribed here
> > who have to pay for the time it takes them to download long messages,
> > and others who's mail systems barf (usually on me) on long messages.
> > The proper thing to do is to offer to email directly said attachment on
> > request or to post it somewhere for download via WWW or FTP.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: bad paint scheme idea? |
I used to have this concern with model airplanes, since I was always looking
up at them. I wouldn't worry about it on a full size aircraft unless you
are trying to evade anti-aircraft fire. :)
Steve E.
-----Original Message-----
Richard DeCosta
Sent: Monday, November 16, 1998 12:07 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: bad paint scheme idea?
I was showing a friend of mine some of the possible paint schemes I
was thinking of using, and he brought up something about my favorite
one so far that I hadnt thought of. This is the one I am leaning to now:
http://207.140.1.221/w3builder/piet/images/side2.jpg
My friend's concern was: Is the main color of the plane too close to
sky blue? Would I be nearly invisible from below? Had'nt thought much
about paint schemes/visibility until now.
Richard
==
http://www.wrld.com/w3builder
"All knowledge is of itself of some value. There
is nothing so minute or inconsiderable, that I would
not rather know it than not." --Samuel, Dr. Johnson
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: bad paint scheme idea? |
The concern I'd have is being visible to other planes in the air, especially
in the pattern. Right now the Air Force is using a flat grey color on their
fighters because they want to avoid being seen easily. Unfortunately, the
most visible colors are the most garish. For example the "dayglo" lime green
used on fire trucks.
Cub yellow is not bad for visibility but my personal favorite color scheme
is the late 1930's Army Air Corps yellow and blue with the large star
roundel and the stripes on the rudder...
Andy
On Monday, November 16, 1998 11:34 AM, steve(at)byu.edu [SMTP:steve(at)byu.edu]
wrote:
> I used to have this concern with model airplanes, since I was always
looking
> up at them. I wouldn't worry about it on a full size aircraft unless you
> are trying to evade anti-aircraft fire. :)
>
> Steve E.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Richard DeCosta
> Sent: Monday, November 16, 1998 12:07 PM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: bad paint scheme idea?
>
>
> I was showing a friend of mine some of the possible paint schemes I
> was thinking of using, and he brought up something about my favorite
> one so far that I hadnt thought of. This is the one I am leaning to now:
>
> http://207.140.1.221/w3builder/piet/images/side2.jpg
>
> My friend's concern was: Is the main color of the plane too close to
> sky blue? Would I be nearly invisible from below? Had'nt thought much
> about paint schemes/visibility until now.
>
> Richard
>
>
>
> ==
> http://www.wrld.com/w3builder
> "All knowledge is of itself of some value. There
> is nothing so minute or inconsiderable, that I would
> not rather know it than not." --Samuel, Dr. Johnson
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net> |
My 2 cents........
Engine choice is not the dividing line on "real" Piets and other airplanes.
(even though Model A Piets are just a little more real...... ;-) ). Mr.
Pietenpol used everything from small Continentals to Model A's to a Velie
radial on his ships.
A "real" Piet is built to BHP's plans without major design changes. A
Grega, while an enjoyable airplane, is something other than a Pietenpol. A
Piet with a 65 Cont is still a Piet in my book.
Build it with whatever powerplant makes sense to you. The closer you follow
the plans the less trouble you'll have and the more fun.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Gordon Brimhall
Date: Monday, November 16, 1998 12:45 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: engines
>How about building a Pietenpol to the design that was in the 1932 Glider
and
>Flying Manual and it will be real close to the original Pietenpol.
>
>I guess what you are saying if it looks something like a Pietenpol and was
>built with other plans (Their are many) it is still true to design even if
it
>is powered with some other engine and not a Model "A" or Corvair like
Barnard
>did. How about a RagWing UL Pietenpol? It looks something like the orig but
>only has one seat and is only 254 lbs.
>
>I may very well build both but for the REAL one I will use Barnard
Pietenpol
>plans and it will be powered by a Model "A" Engine or a Corvair engine.
>
>I have a Original 1930 How To Build It Published By Modern Mechanics and it
>has plans for the Lawrence water Glider. For Trade for a set of Barnards
>Pietenpol Plans.
>
>Gordon
>
>
>Michael Brusilow wrote:
>
>> Gordon wrote:
>>
>> <> With the two choices of either Model "A" or Corvair to be a true
>> Pietenpol......>
>>
>> Nonsense! What is a "true Pietenpol"? An aircraft built from the
original
>> plans or from modified plans ( see Vi Kapler ), large wheels or small
>> wheels, tail skid or tail wheel, one piece wing or three piece wing, "A"
>> engine, corvair, round engine, continental, Ford escort, "T" engine,
>> etc.etc. They are all true Pientenpols.
>>
>> To see one is to know one. It is a classic that can not be mistaken.
>>
>> Mike B ( Piet N 687MB )
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Greenlee <jgreenlee(at)morgan.net> |
Gordon,
Tell me more about this book. Is it a Flying & Glider Manual?
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Gordon Brimhall
Date: Monday, November 16, 1998 12:45 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: engines
>How about building a Pietenpol to the design that was in the 1932 Glider
and
>Flying Manual and it will be real close to the original Pietenpol.
>
>I guess what you are saying if it looks something like a Pietenpol and was
>built with other plans (Their are many) it is still true to design even if
it
>is powered with some other engine and not a Model "A" or Corvair like
Barnard
>did. How about a RagWing UL Pietenpol? It looks something like the orig but
>only has one seat and is only 254 lbs.
>
>I may very well build both but for the REAL one I will use Barnard
Pietenpol
>plans and it will be powered by a Model "A" Engine or a Corvair engine.
>
>I have a Original 1930 How To Build It Published By Modern Mechanics and it
>has plans for the Lawrence water Glider. For Trade for a set of Barnards
>Pietenpol Plans.
>
>Gordon
>
>
>Michael Brusilow wrote:
>
>> Gordon wrote:
>>
>> <> With the two choices of either Model "A" or Corvair to be a true
>> Pietenpol......>
>>
>> Nonsense! What is a "true Pietenpol"? An aircraft built from the
original
>> plans or from modified plans ( see Vi Kapler ), large wheels or small
>> wheels, tail skid or tail wheel, one piece wing or three piece wing, "A"
>> engine, corvair, round engine, continental, Ford escort, "T" engine,
>> etc.etc. They are all true Pientenpols.
>>
>> To see one is to know one. It is a classic that can not be mistaken.
>>
>> Mike B ( Piet N 687MB )
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: bad paint scheme idea? |
ME Too
That is a nice paint scheme even in other colors it would be nice, I love
the Military WW1 look it gives.
Gordon
Richard DeCosta wrote:
> I was showing a friend of mine some of the possible paint schemes I
> was thinking of using, and he brought up something about my favorite
> one so far that I hadnt thought of. This is the one I am leaning to now:
>
> http://207.140.1.221/w3builder/piet/images/side2.jpg
>
> My friend's concern was: Is the main color of the plane too close to
> sky blue? Would I be nearly invisible from below? Had'nt thought much
> about paint schemes/visibility until now.
>
> Richard
>
> ==
> http://www.wrld.com/w3builder
> "All knowledge is of itself of some value. There
> is nothing so minute or inconsiderable, that I would
> not rather know it than not." --Samuel, Dr. Johnson
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Brusilow <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Andy Wrote:
<<
> My friend's concern was: Is the main color of the plane too close to
> sky blue? Would I be nearly invisible from below? Had'nt thought much
> about paint schemes/visibility until now.
A historical note, Bernard's Piet was robin egg blue.
Mike ( Piet N687MB )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Sayre, William G" <William.Sayre(at)PSS.Boeing.com> |
I worried about that until I realized how well a white airplane shows up
from a distance (they're all black dots right?). You'd think you wouldn't
spot them with clouds behind them. Besides, the roundels will help make you
visible (or provide a target!)
I'd say do it. Ya gota keep your head on a swivel either way!
Bill
> My friend's concern was: Is the main color of the plane too close to
> sky blue? Would I be nearly invisible from below? Had'nt thought much
> about paint schemes/visibility until now.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: bad paint scheme idea? |
Do you (or anyone else) have an URL to a picture of the type of paint
scheme in the quote below? Sounds like fun.
> is the late 1930's Army Air Corps yellow and blue with the large star
> roundel and the stripes on the rudder...
==
http://www.wrld.com/w3builder
"All knowledge is of itself of some value. There
is nothing so minute or inconsiderable, that I would
not rather know it than not." --Samuel, Dr. Johnson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Duprey(at)mailexcite.com |
> If any New England Or New York piet pilots would like someone to share
fuel expences on this trip, I would love to go. Liscensed Pilot, willing
share work& exspences. e-mail me Duprey(at)mailexcite.com
John Duprey
> <
> together in a gaggle (possibly 6-7) for the 70th Anniversary. It should
> prove to be a wonderful experience.>>
>
>
> Hey Dom:
>
> Tell me about that. Got a Piet in Saratoga NY. I may join you. Also,
there
> are some guys in New England.
>
> Mike B ( Piet N687MB )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael King <mikek(at)nstar.net> |
Hi,
Just a point of reference, what makes a Grega
design that much different from a Pietenpol as
to not add it in the mix?
If a Grega, which has the basic design of many of the
Piets I have seen in this group, is not considered a
variation of a Piet, please let me know. Most of the
folks at airports I have flown in have asked me if
my plane is a Pietenpol. My Grega has an A-80
and Cub gear.....not an auto engine and straight
axle. If that is the major difference then so be it.
I enjoy the plane and find it a dependable and safe
plane to fly low and slow.
Thanks guys.......
Mike King
Grega Air Camper
SP-121
Dallas
>My 2 cents........
>
>Engine choice is not the dividing line on "real" Piets and other airplanes.
>(even though Model A Piets are just a little more real...... ;-) ). Mr.
>Pietenpol used everything from small Continentals to Model A's to a Velie
>radial on his ships.
>
>A "real" Piet is built to BHP's plans without major design changes. A
>Grega, while an enjoyable airplane, is something other than a Pietenpol. A
>Piet with a 65 Cont is still a Piet in my book.
>
>Build it with whatever powerplant makes sense to you. The closer you follow
>the plans the less trouble you'll have and the more fun.
>
>John
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Gordon Brimhall
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Date: Monday, November 16, 1998 12:45 PM
>Subject: Re: engines
>
>
>>How about building a Pietenpol to the design that was in the 1932 Glider
>and
>>Flying Manual and it will be real close to the original Pietenpol.
>>
>>I guess what you are saying if it looks something like a Pietenpol and was
>>built with other plans (Their are many) it is still true to design even if
>it
>>is powered with some other engine and not a Model "A" or Corvair like
>Barnard
>>did. How about a RagWing UL Pietenpol? It looks something like the orig but
>>only has one seat and is only 254 lbs.
>>
>>I may very well build both but for the REAL one I will use Barnard
>Pietenpol
>>plans and it will be powered by a Model "A" Engine or a Corvair engine.
>>
>>I have a Original 1930 How To Build It Published By Modern Mechanics and it
>>has plans for the Lawrence water Glider. For Trade for a set of Barnards
>>Pietenpol Plans.
>>
>>Gordon
>>
>>
>>
>>Michael Brusilow wrote:
>>
>>> Gordon wrote:
>>>
>>> <> With the two choices of either Model "A" or Corvair to be a true
>>> Pietenpol......>
>>>
>>> Nonsense! What is a "true Pietenpol"? An aircraft built from the
>original
>>> plans or from modified plans ( see Vi Kapler ), large wheels or small
>>> wheels, tail skid or tail wheel, one piece wing or three piece wing, "A"
>>> engine, corvair, round engine, continental, Ford escort, "T" engine,
>>> etc.etc. They are all true Pientenpols.
>>>
>>> To see one is to know one. It is a classic that can not be mistaken.
>>>
>>> Mike B ( Piet N 687MB )
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
It is not a Flying & Glider Manual. It is 164 pages with plans for 53 things
including to name a few.
15' Sloop "SunRay" By Sam Rabl
Building a Canvas Canoe by Chester Nedwidek
Notes on the design of the Lawrence water Glider
Things to make for the home.
Ice Boat
Log Cabin Design
Electric Auto
Building a one tube radio
Bob Sled
Small electric furnace you can build for 2.00
Compressed Air Drives Model Plane (See EAA Nov 98)
Building a 1930 Model Scooter
I have a couple popular science Nov 1932 & May 1935
Fun reading and no Computer ads.
Gordon
John Greenlee wrote:
> Gordon,
>
> Tell me more about this book. Is it a Flying & Glider Manual?
>
> John
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gordon Brimhall
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Date: Monday, November 16, 1998 12:45 PM
> Subject: Re: engines
>
> >How about building a Pietenpol to the design that was in the 1932 Glider
> and
> >Flying Manual and it will be real close to the original Pietenpol.
> >
> >I guess what you are saying if it looks something like a Pietenpol and was
> >built with other plans (Their are many) it is still true to design even if
> it
> >is powered with some other engine and not a Model "A" or Corvair like
> Barnard
> >did. How about a RagWing UL Pietenpol? It looks something like the orig but
> >only has one seat and is only 254 lbs.
> >
> >I may very well build both but for the REAL one I will use Barnard
> Pietenpol
> >plans and it will be powered by a Model "A" Engine or a Corvair engine.
> >
> >I have a Original 1930 How To Build It Published By Modern Mechanics and it
> >has plans for the Lawrence water Glider. For Trade for a set of Barnards
> >Pietenpol Plans.
> >
> >Gordon
> >
> >
> >
> >Michael Brusilow wrote:
> >
> >> Gordon wrote:
> >>
> >> <> With the two choices of either Model "A" or Corvair to be a true
> >> Pietenpol......>
> >>
> >> Nonsense! What is a "true Pietenpol"? An aircraft built from the
> original
> >> plans or from modified plans ( see Vi Kapler ), large wheels or small
> >> wheels, tail skid or tail wheel, one piece wing or three piece wing, "A"
> >> engine, corvair, round engine, continental, Ford escort, "T" engine,
> >> etc.etc. They are all true Pientenpols.
> >>
> >> To see one is to know one. It is a classic that can not be mistaken.
> >>
> >> Mike B ( Piet N 687MB )
> >
> >
________________________________________________________________________________
I don't know, I am a Newbie.
What about the St. Croix Air camper, Plans 45.00
How are the plans for your Grega at 25.00 each, what do you get and how do they
differ from the wooden piet?
Gordon
Michael King wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just a point of reference, what makes a Grega
> design that much different from a Pietenpol as
> to not add it in the mix?
>
> If a Grega, which has the basic design of many of the
> Piets I have seen in this group, is not considered a
> variation of a Piet, please let me know. Most of the
> folks at airports I have flown in have asked me if
> my plane is a Pietenpol. My Grega has an A-80
> and Cub gear.....not an auto engine and straight
> axle. If that is the major difference then so be it.
>
> I enjoy the plane and find it a dependable and safe
> plane to fly low and slow.
>
> Thanks guys.......
>
> Mike King
> Grega Air Camper
> SP-121
> Dallas
>
> >My 2 cents........
> >
> >Engine choice is not the dividing line on "real" Piets and other airplanes.
> >(even though Model A Piets are just a little more real...... ;-) ). Mr.
> >Pietenpol used everything from small Continentals to Model A's to a Velie
> >radial on his ships.
> >
> >A "real" Piet is built to BHP's plans without major design changes. A
> >Grega, while an enjoyable airplane, is something other than a Pietenpol. A
> >Piet with a 65 Cont is still a Piet in my book.
> >
> >Build it with whatever powerplant makes sense to you. The closer you follow
> >the plans the less trouble you'll have and the more fun.
> >
> >John
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Gordon Brimhall
> >To: Pietenpol Discussion
> >Date: Monday, November 16, 1998 12:45 PM
> >Subject: Re: engines
> >
> >
> >>How about building a Pietenpol to the design that was in the 1932 Glider
> >and
> >>Flying Manual and it will be real close to the original Pietenpol.
> >>
> >>I guess what you are saying if it looks something like a Pietenpol and was
> >>built with other plans (Their are many) it is still true to design even if
> >it
> >>is powered with some other engine and not a Model "A" or Corvair like
> >Barnard
> >>did. How about a RagWing UL Pietenpol? It looks something like the orig but
> >>only has one seat and is only 254 lbs.
> >>
> >>I may very well build both but for the REAL one I will use Barnard
> >Pietenpol
> >>plans and it will be powered by a Model "A" Engine or a Corvair engine.
> >>
> >>I have a Original 1930 How To Build It Published By Modern Mechanics and it
> >>has plans for the Lawrence water Glider. For Trade for a set of Barnards
> >>Pietenpol Plans.
> >>
> >>Gordon
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>Michael Brusilow wrote:
> >>
> >>> Gordon wrote:
> >>>
> >>> <> With the two choices of either Model "A" or Corvair to be a true
> >>> Pietenpol......>
> >>>
> >>> Nonsense! What is a "true Pietenpol"? An aircraft built from the
> >original
> >>> plans or from modified plans ( see Vi Kapler ), large wheels or small
> >>> wheels, tail skid or tail wheel, one piece wing or three piece wing, "A"
> >>> engine, corvair, round engine, continental, Ford escort, "T" engine,
> >>> etc.etc. They are all true Pientenpols.
> >>>
> >>> To see one is to know one. It is a classic that can not be mistaken.
> >>>
> >>> Mike B ( Piet N 687MB )
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael King <mikek(at)nstar.net> |
Gordon,
My Grega was built by a doctor in West Memphis,
Arkansas. He bought the plans in 1980 and finished
the all wood project in 1985. It has been through four
other owners since and has about 200 hours on the 0-time
A-80 and airframe. Included with the plane were the
plans, but have not yet looked at them in detail.
Those in the group who are familiar with both the
Grega and Bernie's plans could tell you bettter
than I what differences there may be between the
two planes. I have seen pictures on this group with
Piets using continental engines and cub gear and
could not see major external differences between
the Grega and Bernie's plans.
I love aviation and think both are great planes to
look at and fly.
Mike K.
>I don't know, I am a Newbie.
>
>What about the St. Croix Air camper, Plans 45.00
>
>How are the plans for your Grega at 25.00 each, what do you get and how do
they
>differ from the wooden piet?
>
>Gordon
>
>Michael King wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Just a point of reference, what makes a Grega
>> design that much different from a Pietenpol as
>> to not add it in the mix?
>>
>> If a Grega, which has the basic design of many of the
>> Piets I have seen in this group, is not considered a
>> variation of a Piet, please let me know. Most of the
>> folks at airports I have flown in have asked me if
>> my plane is a Pietenpol. My Grega has an A-80
>> and Cub gear.....not an auto engine and straight
>> axle. If that is the major difference then so be it.
>>
>> I enjoy the plane and find it a dependable and safe
>> plane to fly low and slow.
>>
>> Thanks guys.......
>>
>> Mike King
>> Grega Air Camper
>> SP-121
>> Dallas
>>
>> >My 2 cents........
>> >
>> >Engine choice is not the dividing line on "real" Piets and other
airplanes.
>> >(even though Model A Piets are just a little more real...... ;-) ). Mr.
>> >Pietenpol used everything from small Continentals to Model A's to a Velie
>> >radial on his ships.
>> >
>> >A "real" Piet is built to BHP's plans without major design changes. A
>> >Grega, while an enjoyable airplane, is something other than a
Pietenpol. A
>> >Piet with a 65 Cont is still a Piet in my book.
>> >
>> >Build it with whatever powerplant makes sense to you. The closer you
follow
>> >the plans the less trouble you'll have and the more fun.
>> >
>> >John
>> >
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: Gordon Brimhall
>> >To: Pietenpol Discussion
>> >Date: Monday, November 16, 1998 12:45 PM
>> >Subject: Re: engines
>> >
>> >
>> >>How about building a Pietenpol to the design that was in the 1932 Glider
>> >and
>> >>Flying Manual and it will be real close to the original Pietenpol.
>> >>
>> >>I guess what you are saying if it looks something like a Pietenpol and
was
>> >>built with other plans (Their are many) it is still true to design
even if
>> >it
>> >>is powered with some other engine and not a Model "A" or Corvair like
>> >Barnard
>> >>did. How about a RagWing UL Pietenpol? It looks something like the
orig but
>> >>only has one seat and is only 254 lbs.
>> >>
>> >>I may very well build both but for the REAL one I will use Barnard
>> >Pietenpol
>> >>plans and it will be powered by a Model "A" Engine or a Corvair engine.
>> >>
>> >>I have a Original 1930 How To Build It Published By Modern Mechanics
and it
>> >>has plans for the Lawrence water Glider. For Trade for a set of Barnards
>> >>Pietenpol Plans.
>> >>
>> >>Gordon
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>Michael Brusilow wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Gordon wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> <> With the two choices of either Model "A" or Corvair to be a true
>> >>> Pietenpol......>
>> >>>
>> >>> Nonsense! What is a "true Pietenpol"? An aircraft built from the
>> >original
>> >>> plans or from modified plans ( see Vi Kapler ), large wheels or small
>> >>> wheels, tail skid or tail wheel, one piece wing or three piece wing,
"A"
>> >>> engine, corvair, round engine, continental, Ford escort, "T" engine,
>> >>> etc.etc. They are all true Pientenpols.
>> >>>
>> >>> To see one is to know one. It is a classic that can not be mistaken.
>> >>>
>> >>> Mike B ( Piet N 687MB )
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Brusilow <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Mike King wrote:
> Just a point of reference, what makes a Grega
> design that much different from a Pietenpol as
> to not add it in the mix?
For one thing, the airfoil is different.
Mike B ( N687MB )
________________________________________________________________________________
A true Pietenpol, has an engine that uses babbot bearings !!
Chuck Gantzer
"A superion pilot uses superior judgment to avoid those situations which
________________________________________________________________________________
The wings are not designed to move to adjust the CG
The Fuse is sheeted back the tailpost
fittings are larger and heavier
some that come to mind
Steve E
-----Original Message-----
Michael Brusilow
Sent: Monday, November 16, 1998 3:30 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Grega
Mike King wrote:
> Just a point of reference, what makes a Grega
> design that much different from a Pietenpol as
> to not add it in the mix?
For one thing, the airfoil is different.
Mike B ( N687MB )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Sury <jimsury(at)fbtc.net> |
The only true Pietenpols are those built by Mr. Pietenpol himself all
others are copys of pietenpols. If Mr. Pietenpol built it and powered it
with rubberbands it is still a pietenpol.jas
>A true Pietenpol, has an engine that uses babbot bearings !!
>
>Chuck Gantzer
>
>"A superion pilot uses superior judgment to avoid those situations which
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: bad paint scheme idea? |
Richard,
Here's a thought drawn from my experience....My Ercoupe is polished,
(sometimes) aluminum with fabric wings. When I purchased it, the wings were
silver. Friends on the ground said the plane simply disappeared in the
pattern. The aluminum reflected sky colors, and the silver dope was too close
to sky color values. I painted the wings yellow, as in pre-war military
colors, and the plane is much more visible.
Don
________________________________________________________________________________
Rcaprd(at)aol.com wrote:
> A true Pietenpol, has an engine that uses babbot bearings !!
>
> Chuck Gantzer
>
>
Did you mean Babbitt Bearings?
I have had Model "A"s and also worked at Long Beach Naval Shipyard when I
was a Machinist doing machining and pouring of Babbitt Bearings. I still
have my bearing scrapers or flakers as I call them.
Gordon
> "A superion pilot uses superior judgment to avoid those situations which
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phil Peck <crusader(at)thegrid.net> |
Rcaprd(at)aol.com wrote:
> A true Pietenpol, has an engine that uses babbot bearings !!
>
> Chuck Gantzer
>
> "A superion pilot uses superior judgment to avoid those situations
> which
I haven't decided what type of engine makes for a TRUE Piet but I do
know one thing - a plane needs an engine to become a Airplane and a Piet
need a reliable engine to be THE reliable Piet!
phil
--
Check out Crusader Toys @
http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/
________________________________________________________________________________
Mike
I really think their are many plans for the Piet that will make a true airplane
to the specs of the old one. some in wood and some in tube/fab.
I just got a brochure today from Replicraft for Pietenpol Air Camper quick build.
Have not looked at it yet and don't even remember sending for it.
Gordon
Michael King wrote:
> Gordon,
>
> My Grega was built by a doctor in West Memphis,
> Arkansas. He bought the plans in 1980 and finished
> the all wood project in 1985. It has been through four
> other owners since and has about 200 hours on the 0-time
> A-80 and airframe. Included with the plane were the
> plans, but have not yet looked at them in detail.
>
> Those in the group who are familiar with both the
> Grega and Bernie's plans could tell you bettter
> than I what differences there may be between the
> two planes. I have seen pictures on this group with
> Piets using continental engines and cub gear and
> could not see major external differences between
> the Grega and Bernie's plans.
>
> I love aviation and think both are great planes to
> look at and fly.
>
> Mike K.
>
> >I don't know, I am a Newbie.
> >
> >What about the St. Croix Air camper, Plans 45.00
> >
> >How are the plans for your Grega at 25.00 each, what do you get and how do
> they
> >differ from the wooden piet?
> >
> >Gordon
> >
> >Michael King wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Just a point of reference, what makes a Grega
> >> design that much different from a Pietenpol as
> >> to not add it in the mix?
> >>
> >> If a Grega, which has the basic design of many of the
> >> Piets I have seen in this group, is not considered a
> >> variation of a Piet, please let me know. Most of the
> >> folks at airports I have flown in have asked me if
> >> my plane is a Pietenpol. My Grega has an A-80
> >> and Cub gear.....not an auto engine and straight
> >> axle. If that is the major difference then so be it.
> >>
> >> I enjoy the plane and find it a dependable and safe
> >> plane to fly low and slow.
> >>
> >> Thanks guys.......
> >>
> >> Mike King
> >> Grega Air Camper
> >> SP-121
> >> Dallas
> >>
> >> >My 2 cents........
> >> >
> >> >Engine choice is not the dividing line on "real" Piets and other
> airplanes.
> >> >(even though Model A Piets are just a little more real...... ;-) ). Mr.
> >> >Pietenpol used everything from small Continentals to Model A's to a Velie
> >> >radial on his ships.
> >> >
> >> >A "real" Piet is built to BHP's plans without major design changes. A
> >> >Grega, while an enjoyable airplane, is something other than a
> Pietenpol. A
> >> >Piet with a 65 Cont is still a Piet in my book.
> >> >
> >> >Build it with whatever powerplant makes sense to you. The closer you
> follow
> >> >the plans the less trouble you'll have and the more fun.
> >> >
> >> >John
> >> >
> >> >-----Original Message-----
> >> >From: Gordon Brimhall
> >> >To: Pietenpol Discussion
> >> >Date: Monday, November 16, 1998 12:45 PM
> >> >Subject: Re: engines
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>How about building a Pietenpol to the design that was in the 1932 Glider
> >> >and
> >> >>Flying Manual and it will be real close to the original Pietenpol.
> >> >>
> >> >>I guess what you are saying if it looks something like a Pietenpol and
> was
> >> >>built with other plans (Their are many) it is still true to design
> even if
> >> >it
> >> >>is powered with some other engine and not a Model "A" or Corvair like
> >> >Barnard
> >> >>did. How about a RagWing UL Pietenpol? It looks something like the
> orig but
> >> >>only has one seat and is only 254 lbs.
> >> >>
> >> >>I may very well build both but for the REAL one I will use Barnard
> >> >Pietenpol
> >> >>plans and it will be powered by a Model "A" Engine or a Corvair engine.
> >> >>
> >> >>I have a Original 1930 How To Build It Published By Modern Mechanics
> and it
> >> >>has plans for the Lawrence water Glider. For Trade for a set of Barnards
> >> >>Pietenpol Plans.
> >> >>
> >> >>Gordon
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>Michael Brusilow wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> Gordon wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> <> With the two choices of either Model "A" or Corvair to be a true
> >> >>> Pietenpol......>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Nonsense! What is a "true Pietenpol"? An aircraft built from the
> >> >original
> >> >>> plans or from modified plans ( see Vi Kapler ), large wheels or small
> >> >>> wheels, tail skid or tail wheel, one piece wing or three piece wing,
> "A"
> >> >>> engine, corvair, round engine, continental, Ford escort, "T" engine,
> >> >>> etc.etc. They are all true Pientenpols.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> To see one is to know one. It is a classic that can not be mistaken.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Mike B ( Piet N 687MB )
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >
> >
________________________________________________________________________________
Sorry about the mis-spelling. I stand courected. :)
Chuck
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | piet image search engine |
At the request of a visitor to my Pietenpol site, I have added
thumbnails to the images for easy downloading. Also, there is a search
engine there now. It currently only searches the image filenames, but
in the future, I will build a database to house image descriptions as
well (I could use a hand with those, if anyone feels they would like
to help).
http://207.140.1.221/w3builder/piet/Images.shtml
Richard
==
http://www.wrld.com/w3builder
"All knowledge is of itself of some value. There
is nothing so minute or inconsiderable, that I would
not rather know it than not." --Samuel, Dr. Johnson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Raffaele Bellissimo <rbelliss(at)yesic.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 110 hp Corvair? |
Ed,
I have pictures of the corvair installation, but not yet scanned. If I can
get them scanned, I can either send them directly to your site or Richards'
so he can post them. I don't think I would bogg down the Discusion Group
site. I have seen what can happen.
As far as choosing a 110 engine, go for the vehicle with the least milage.
Chances are you will probably rebuild it anyway. Clark's Corvair Parts can
help you there.
When I purchased the corvair to pull my engine, I sold off the transaxle and
transmission. So I had no alternative but to make my own wooden patterns to
close the engine. Others just cut out the part to close the engine from the
bell housing. On top of that I've placed a small bell housing that has a
bearing (double row angular- "newdeparture" pressed in to support the shaft.
the shaft has a shoulder which rides the inside of the bearing and acts as a
thrust bearing. The shaft also is screwed into the crankshaft flange(Qty.
6 - 11/32) but you'll need them a little longer than the originals. Don't
worry about the flange pulling off the crankshaft, it can't with the
shoulder/bearing arrangement. I've also removed the bearing shield from the
shoulder side and placed a strategically located oil nozzle for constant
lubrication. This is because the shaft does not have a reverse helical
groove for the oiland I don't trust any lattened oil misting. I have
scetches of what I have done, but are not professional drawings by any
means. Had not planned on getting any of my conversion information organized
until after the bird flys. Must proove everything first before recommending
it to anyone. I still have the wooden master for the engine closure but the
casting house kept the bell housing. It would be simple to make. If you use
the design you couldn't use any available re-drive, but a planetary drive
would fit nicely on the closure part. A new internal gear is available that
may fit, it's available from rayfiset(at)globetrotter.net, phone 888-8713761,
fax 418-8773408. Good for 60 to 450 HP. Will take all props, hydraulically
controlled or constant speed included. And... if you use a re-drive you give
up the starter system. I don't know anyone that can hand prop a corvair. At
least Jack Watson and I couldn't. Well all that said and done I'm currently
having timing problems, and am still waiting for a prop. Nuff for now. I'll
see what I can get together.
Dom. Bellissimo
-----Original Message-----
From: Larsen, Ed <ELarsen(at)flowserve.com>
Date: Friday, November 13, 1998 5:10 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: RE: 140 hp Corvair?
>Dom,
>
> Would you be willing to scan photos of your Covair engine,
>installation, and cowling and attach them to a message to this
>discussion group. I am very interested in the Corvair conversion and I
>really appreciate the information you have provided to this group so
>far.
>
> If you can provide any other suggestions regarding how to select
>the correct Corvair engine for conversion, i.e. which cars and years are
>best, that would be great. For example, I know a guy who has a Corvair
>coupe, a station wagon, and a truck-like vehicle (I don't know the names
>of these models). Do you have any suggestions as to which one would be
>best to go after? I know that the coupe has a standard transmission.
>These cars have been sitting in his yard for many years. He says that he
>will sell them, but he is pretty nervous about letting me go into his
>yard, so I have very little information about the cars or the engines.
>He will not sell the engines separately. Any suggestions?
>
> You said in your attached message, "I made my own castings to
>close the engine and support the shaft." Please elaborate on what this
>means. I don't think that there are very many builders that are casting
>their own engine parts. Thank you.
>
> Ed Larsen - Mapleton, UT
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Raffaele Bellissimo [SMTP:rbelliss(at)yesic.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 12, 1998 6:20 PM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Re: 140 hp Corvair?
>
> Richard,
>
> Stick with the 110 and put the 95 HP cam into it. Check out the
>140 and buy
> it if it's free and not more than $100. Remove the heads and
>keep for a
> spare. You never know when a set of 110 heads will show up.
>They could also
> be purchased from Clark's Corvair Parts in Massachusets (they
>have a
> web-site). I have both the 110 and 140, and a friend gave me a
>set of 110
> heads. Everything else is the same except the 140 crankshaft is
>nitrided and
> is a little superior to the 110. I made my own castings to close
>the engine
> and support the shaft. One of these days I'll get around to
>sending you
> some pictures I promised you. I've been out of touch from this
>discussion
> group for a while. I was working in Halifax for 3 months and
>when I got back
> I had Pietenpol finshing fever. Well, it's all done except I
>have no
> propeller. Have been trying to carve one with the routing
>machine I made
> from plans but have run into some problems. Jack Watson has
>taken the prop.
> home to try and salvage it. Once I hang the prop. I can call for
>final
> Inspection. Everything else is done. I'm in a good position
>(time wise) from
> now till end of July to fly off my initial restricted time, then
>bring it to
> Brodhead. The Canadian Piet. owners in southern Ontario and one
>from
> Rochester, NY (if he gets his completed) are planning to go the
>Brodhead
> together in a gaggle (possibly 6-7) for the 70th Anniversary. It
>should
> prove to be a wonderful experience.
> Regards for now,
> Dom. Bellissimo
> iginal Message-----
> From: Mike Cunningham <mikec(at)microlandusa.com>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Date: Thursday, November 12, 1998 10:42 AM
> Subject: Re: 140 hp Corvair?
>
>
> >If I am not mistaken the 140 horse motor is the one with the
>bigger valves
> >that has a problem with dropping valve seats. Much less
>prefferred for
> >aircraft use.
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Richard DeCosta
> >To: Pietenpol Discussion
> >Date: Thursday, November 12, 1998 6:28 AM
> >Subject: 140 hp Corvair?
> >
> >
> >>I have been planning all along to use a 110 hp Corvair in my
>Piet,
> >>which I found in Pennsylvania (a 15 hour drive from my house).
> >>However, my father, who has connections in the auto repair
>business,
> >>recently told me he knows of a 140 hp Corvair engine in Maine
>(where I
> >>live) that I can get for a song.
> >>
> >>I know 110 is prefered for a Piet, but can a 140 be made to
>work, or
> >>should I get my travelling music...?
> >>
> >>Richard
> >>
> >>p.s. any calandars left? :)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>==
> >>http://www.wrld.com/w3builder
> >>"All knowledge is of itself of some value. There
> >>is nothing so minute or inconsiderable, that I would
> >>not rather know it than not." --Samuel, Dr. Johnson
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Raffaele Bellissimo <rbelliss(at)yesic.com> |
Hi Mike,
I'm pretty sure this will happen. The guys are: Brian Kenney, Peter McHugh,
Jack Watson, Stan Van Der Plouge, Tom Bowdler, not sure about Jim Armstrong
(he volunteers with his wife at the big "O" every year. Its just an idea
right now. We'll probably discuss it further at our 9th Pietenpol Mid-winter
break Party. It's usually held around Valantine's day. It's an internationl
party with Tom Bowdler joining us when he can. I think the party is being
held at Brian's this year. Every year we move it around so as not to
inconvenience any one family. It's great to break up the winter talk Piets
and learn from each other. Recommend others do the same in your own
respective areas of the country. Helps keep the pietenpol family together.
Say, Albany is not that far from Toronto, I'm sure I could extend an
invitation to you. Let me know if you are interested.
Dom. Bellissimo-----Original Message-----
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Brusilow <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
>
> <
>together in a gaggle (possibly 6-7) for the 70th Anniversary. It should
>prove to be a wonderful experience.>>
>
>
>Hey Dom:
>
>Tell me about that. Got a Piet in Saratoga NY. I may join you. Also, there
>are some guys in New England.
>
> Mike B ( Piet N687MB )
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Raffaele Bellissimo <rbelliss(at)yesic.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 140 hp Corvair? |
That's for sure Steve, I had no intension of bogging down the system. Thanks
Dom.
-----Original Message-----
From: steve(at)byu.edu
Date: Friday, November 13, 1998 5:22 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: RE: 140 hp Corvair?
>PLEASE DO NOT send attachments. Send them to Richard and he will post
them.
>
>Steve e.
>
>
>Dom,
>
> Would you be willing to scan photos of your Covair engine,
>installation, and cowling and attach them to a message to this
>discussion group. I am very interested in the Corvair conversion and I
>really appreciate the information you have provided to this group so
>far.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Raffaele Bellissimo <rbelliss(at)yesic.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 110 hp Corvair? |
Contact Tom Bowdler. Email him at: bowdler(at)juno.com, he has writen may time
in the BPAN.
Regards, Dom. Bellissimo
-----Original Message-----
From: Dave and Connie <dmatt(at)frontiernet.net>
Date: Friday, November 13, 1998 8:08 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: 140 hp Corvair?
>
>>Brodhead. The Canadian Piet. owners in southern Ontario and one from
>>Rochester, NY (if he gets his completed) are planning to go the Brodhead
>
>And who might that be? I live near Geneseo, NY. There is a Piet
>at the Perry-Warsaw airport that is owned by one of the CFI's that
>flies out of there. I haven't seen it yet - I am flying with the
>other CFI.
>
>Dave
>Retsof, NY and hoping for decent weather this weekend so he can
>finally solo.....
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Raffaele Bellissimo <rbelliss(at)yesic.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Four cylinder Honda engine |
I purchased the corvair for $300. Sold off the car parts for $200. and
therefore got my engine for $100. Try contacting Corvair clubs in your area.
If you don't know of any contact Clark's Corvair Parts they can probably
direct you to the nearest one in your area. They also have them for sale
from
time to time. Stan Van Der plouge has a subaro for sale for $350. Canadian.
A real good deal for US currency right now and a great engine for the Piet
with a re-drive.
He can be located at: P.O. General Delivery, Grand Valley, Ontario L0N 1G0.
Dom. Bellissimo
-----Original Message-----
From: Gordon Brimhall
Date: Sunday, November 15, 1998 10:20 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Four cylinder Honda engine
>Hi Brent
>
>Don't know anything about Honda engine in aircraft but you may want to
>go to the Other Engine power group list as they talk about just
>averything for power. Right now their is a heavy discussion on about
>Corvairs.
>
>Send me message and I'll get the page info to you.
>
>I am getting close to ordering my plans and still have not decided on
>what engine. I hope I can just start building Pietenpol and decide on
>engine later. I like the Model "A" for tradition but the Corvair gives
>much more power. Thought about a New Evolution harley engine also, the
>ones that don't leak oil, and now they have a brand new Overhead Valve
>engine but both of them are real expensive to buy, like 3000.00 where
>they say you can still get rebuildable corvair engines for 100 bucks and
>their are alot of parts sources.
>
>Gordon
>
>Brent Reed wrote:
>
>> Does anyone know about Honda engines for aircraft use? My
>> father-in-law has one available and was thinking about the
>> possibilities of putting one in an Air Camper. Any comments are
>> welcome. Thanks, Brent ReedKent, WA
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: 140 hp Corvair? |
Hi Ed,
> If you can provide any other suggestions regarding how to select
>the correct Corvair engine for conversion, i.e. which cars and years are
>best, that would be great. For example, I know a guy who has a Corvair
>coupe, a station wagon, and a truck-like vehicle (I don't know the names
>of these models). Do you have any suggestions as to which one would be
>best to go after? I know that the coupe has a standard transmission.
For aircraft use, a 110 hp engine from between 1965 and 1969 is generally
preferred. Although the 1964 engine had the same displacement and hp, the
outside diameter of the cylinder jugs was a bit smaller, so replacement parts
are a bit harder to locate. There are other minor differences.
You will find an identification number stamped on each engine on the day it was
assembled. This number contains the date and a code for the plant in which it
was assembled and a code for the engine configuration. For example, T1215RH
means that it was built at the Tonowanda plant on Dec. 15 and it is a 110hp on
a powerglide tranny. Half of the Corvairs built between 1965 and 1967 have
this engine suffix code, and it is ideal for our application. Other suffix
codes refer to combinations of accessories such as air conditioning, emmission
controls, manual transmission, etc.
The number is stamped on the top surface of the crankcase near the place where
the two halves are joined. It can be seen, under a thick coat of black goo,
without removing any parts. It's on the same surface that the air blower is
attached. If you find the code, you can post it to the Corvair Center Forum:
http://www.loop.com/~yujisilva/ , and the friendly folks there will tell you
everything you want to know about the engine. Here are suffix codes for 95-110
hp engines from 1965 to 1969:
RA,RD,RE,RF,RG,RH,RJ,RK,RR,RS,RU,RV,RW,RX,QO,QP,QS,AC,AD,AE
If you can, I would advise sticking to an engine from a powerglide car, as this
has less potential for abuse. The truck (Greenbrier or Rampside) is more
likely to have a 95 or 80 hp engine, since the torque curve is more suited to
truck applications. Don't know what to expect in the wagon (Lakewood). Both of
these are most likely early model vehicles (pre-'65).
--Peter
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Greg Yotz <gyachts(at)kans.com> |
Please re-add me to the list...
Subscribe...
Greg Yotz
gyachts(at)kans.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | fishin <fishin(at)wwa.com> |
Hi Steveeif ELT is still available, please e-mail me an address where=
to
send the check.
thnx
JoeC
>I still have an extra ELT if anyone want one.=A0 It is the Narco 10 and has=
a
>battery good till sometime in 2000.=A0 First $110 gets it, shipping=
included.
>=A0
>Stevee
>
>-----Original Message-----
Michael
>D Cuy
>Sent: Monday, November 16, 1998 6:40 AM
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Subject: Re: Frequently Asked Questions about Home-built Aircraft
>
>
>>>>>
>
>
>Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 08:39:48 -0500
>To: jim-sury(at)hlp.com
>From: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov>
>Subject: Re: Frequently Asked Questions about Home-built Aircraft
>In-Reply-To: <862566BD.0074136D.00(at)mta1.hlp.com>
>
>>
>>
>> Mike I was reading this and was wondering where did you put the
>>experimental sign in 2 inch letters min.
>
>JIM !!!!! Boy am I Glad you asked this
>question. Guess what ??
>You don't need the EXPERIMENTAL sign ANYWHERE on a
>Pietenpol. How do you get around this ?? When you apply for
>an N number registration apply for and use NX........ not just N.
>The X designates that your aircraft is in fact experimental and can
>be used in lieu of the bumper sticker thing for experimental designs
>OVER 30 years old. I can't quote you the FAR on this but I
>printed it out and had it on hand for the FAA guy when he came out
>to inspect my plane. He was not aware of this loophole but now he
>is. Please note that when you get your FAA paperwork back they
>will not show the NX only the N, but don't worry...as long as you
>use this on the aircraft and all your paperwork you will be fine.
>I'll look up the FAR if you remind me.
>
>I didn't know an ELT was a
>>requirment. Where did you locate the ELT and where did you get it. How
>>much did that cost? jas
>The ELT is only required once you are done
>flying off your
>restrictions and go outside the flight test area designated by the FAA.
>I haven't actually purchased an ELT yet.....I'm hoping Santa will
>bring one....
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "D.J.H." <ve6zh(at)cnnet.com> |
Dom. Bellissimo
-----Original Message-----
From: Larsen, Ed <ELarsen(at)flowserve.com>
Date: Friday, November 13, 1998 5:10 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: RE: 140 hp Corvair?
I don't know anyone that can hand prop a corvair. At
least Jack Watson and I couldn't.
---------I wonder why you can't hand prop your corvair engine??I have the
140 hp vair mill with a direct drive 3 blade warpdrive,while on the test
stand,with base timming set to 0 deg.it will start easily.I removed the vac
advance unit,which leaves a handy arm sticking out of the dist. housing,to
which you can attach a cable to the cockpit.This will allow retarding the
ignition timming ,which is a must for handproping,after start up,the base
timming can be set to the desired setting.
Doug CGCGJ
________________________________________________________________________________
Why don't you put in a Subject line and change the date on your computer.
First time I tried to open your message my computer gave me an error and
shutdown.
Thanks
Gordon
"D.J.H." wrote:
> Dom. Bellissimo
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Larsen, Ed <ELarsen(at)flowserve.com>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion <>
> Date: Friday, November 13, 1998 5:10 PM
> Subject: RE: 140 hp Corvair?
>
>
> I don't know anyone that can hand prop a corvair. At
> least Jack Watson and I couldn't.
>
> ---------I wonder why you can't hand prop your corvair engine??I have the
> 140 hp vair mill with a direct drive 3 blade warpdrive,while on the test
> stand,with base timming set to 0 deg.it will start easily.I removed the vac
> advance unit,which leaves a handy arm sticking out of the dist. housing,to
> which you can attach a cable to the cockpit.This will allow retarding the
> ignition timming ,which is a must for handproping,after start up,the base
> timming can be set to the desired setting.
> Doug CGCGJ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
| Subject: | Re: bad paint scheme idea? |
Richard: It sure is pretty in blue but your concern about visibility is
valid. I have a friend who flys a J3 that was silvery blue with green
leading edges. It was so well camouflaged that I saw it disappear and
reappear many times as he flew with in the pattern. After he watched someone
else fly it he decided to paint it Cub Yellow Now we can all see him! I
think we should also consider how the aircraft appears from above as well as
below.
John Mc
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard DeCosta
Date: Monday, November 16, 1998 12:08 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: bad paint scheme idea?
>I was showing a friend of mine some of the possible paint schemes I
>was thinking of using, and he brought up something about my favorite
>one so far that I hadnt thought of. This is the one I am leaning to now:
>
>http://207.140.1.221/w3builder/piet/images/side2.jpg
>
>My friend's concern was: Is the main color of the plane too close to
>sky blue? Would I be nearly invisible from below? Had'nt thought much
>about paint schemes/visibility until now.
>
>Richard
>
>
>==
>http://www.wrld.com/w3builder
>"All knowledge is of itself of some value. There
>is nothing so minute or inconsiderable, that I would
>not rather know it than not." --Samuel, Dr. Johnson
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
suscribe pietepol
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: bad paint scheme idea? |
Very good point, John. Many Piet drivers don't use radio communication, so
the visual thing is a must. SAFETY FIRST !! For my models, I use bright
colors with different schemes on the top and bottom. At a high roll rate, I
can still tell top from bottom !! The lighter blues are the most difficult
colors to see in the sky, and probably shouldn't even be considered for a
plane like the Pietenpol.
Chuck
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phil Peck <crusader(at)thegrid.net> |
I just got my Piet newsletter. Love those pictures. Noticed that both
Tom Fahy and Mike Cuy have cut out the back end in the middle section of
the wing for better pilot entry. Does this have any effect on lift ?
phil
--
Check out Crusader Toys @
http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Brusilow <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Tom Fahy and Mike Cuy have cut out the back end in the middle section of
the wing for better pilot entry. Does this have any effect on lift ?
phil>>>
No, but it sure makes it easier to get in & out.
Mike B ( Piet N687MB)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alan Davenport <gandalf(at)nospamgoldcom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Four cylinder Honda engine |
Here's the URL for Firewall Forward Aero Engines Inc.
They make the CAM 100 conversion (Honda Civic engine)
http://www.aero-engines.bc.ca/
Brent Reed wrote:
> Does anyone know about Honda engines for aircraft use? My
> father-in-law has one available and was thinking about the
> possibilities of putting one in an Air Camper. Any comments are
> welcome. Thanks, Brent ReedKent, WA
--
"Yes, the president should resign... He is no longer
an effective leader... the only possible solution is
for the president to save some dignity and resign."
Here's the URL for Firewall Forward Aero Engines Inc.
They make the CAM 100 conversion (Honda Civic engine)
http://www.aero-engines.bc.ca/
Brent Reed wrote:
Does anyone
know about Honda engines for aircraft use? My father-in-law has one
available and was thinking about the possibilities of putting one in an
Air Camper. Any comments are welcome.Thanks,Brent
ReedKent, WA
--
Alan Davenport
gandalf at goldcom dot com
"Yes, the president should resign... He is no longer
an effective leader... the only possible solution is
for the president to save some dignity and resign."
-William Jefferson Clinton, 1974
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William Conway <conwayw(at)ricks.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: wing cut out |
I have mine cut out to the spar. I don't know that it causes a problem.
I had to do it to get into the plane. The plane handles well.
>>> Michael Brusilow 11/18 1:41 PM >>>
Tom Fahy and Mike Cuy have cut out the back end in the middle section of
the wing for better pilot entry. Does this have any effect on lift ?
phil>>>
No, but it sure makes it easier to get in & out.
Mike B ( Piet N687MB)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "D.J.H." <ve6zh(at)cnnet.com> |
| Subject: | TO MR.GORDON BRIMHALL RE. SUBJECT LINE |
Tnx.about the date on my pc. I set the date ahead to the year 2000 a
couple of weeks ago to see what would happen,nothing happened to mine but
maybe yours dose not like it.I was sure i set it back again,but in true
windows fashion,it has mind of it's own,and ignores commands etc.Hope i did
not let too much smoke out of your computer.
Doug
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: TO MR.GORDON BRIMHALL RE. SUBJECT LINE |
No I think it was a combination of just too much downloading up to the time I
opened your message, BUt it scared me as I have in the past opened up a file
some stranger sent me and it ate part of my HD before I could hit to off
button.
My system was OK when I booted it back up. Someone else sent me a message about
my comment and said sounded like the Y2K problem some are worried about. I
think I am going to set mine for Dec 31st 1999 some day and see if it comes on
the next morning at what date and time. Be interesting but we are running newer
machines not the old Honeywell DPS 6/45 and 6/75 and older systems like when I
was working as a computer Spec for the govt.
Thanks
Gordon
"D.J.H." wrote:
> Tnx.about the date on my pc. I set the date ahead to the year 2000 a
> couple of weeks ago to see what would happen,nothing happened to mine but
> maybe yours dose not like it.I was sure i set it back again,but in true
> windows fashion,it has mind of it's own,and ignores commands etc.Hope i did
> not let too much smoke out of your computer.
> Doug
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: wing cut out |
>I just got my Piet newsletter. Love those pictures. Noticed that both
>Tom Fahy and Mike Cuy have cut out the back end in the middle section of
>the wing for better pilot entry. Does this have any effect on lift ?
>phil
Phil- This is one of those issues which guys can debate till the cows
come home, but after flying several Piets with and without cutouts
I can't see a bit of difference between them. I say you'll save alot
of money spent at the chiropracter if you put in a cutout.
Mike C.
-
>Check out Crusader Toys @
>http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David B. Schober" <dbs(at)fscvax.wvnet.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: wing cut out |
Mr. Pietenpol had the same problems with entry/exit and on later examples he
raised the wing. I've seen pictures of airplanes with the wing 2" and 4"
higher than the plans. The 2" extension looks the best. Another sollution is
to hinge the trailing edge of the center section so you can lift it up to get
in and out and then set it back in position for flight.
Michael D Cuy wrote:
> >I just got my Piet newsletter. Love those pictures. Noticed that both
> >Tom Fahy and Mike Cuy have cut out the back end in the middle section of
> >the wing for better pilot entry. Does this have any effect on lift ?
> >phil
>
> Phil- This is one of those issues which guys can debate till the cows
> come home, but after flying several Piets with and without cutouts
> I can't see a bit of difference between them. I say you'll save alot
> of money spent at the chiropracter if you put in a cutout.
>
> Mike C.
>
> -
> >Check out Crusader Toys @
> >http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/
> >
> >
> >
> >
--
David B.Schober, CPE
Instructor, Aviation Maintenance
Fairmont State College
National Aerospace Education Center
Rt. 3 Box 13
Bridgeport, WV 26330-9503
(304) 842-8300
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Brusilow <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Steve, I tried to find the pic of your fuel sight gauge on your home page.
No luck.
I made a new tank for my Piet and your gauge sounds interesting. Do you
still have the info available?
Mike B ( Piet N 687MB )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Sayre, William G" <William.Sayre(at)PSS.Boeing.com> |
Just a little warning, be sure and put the flap in the center of the wing
for entry. Some of the fellows building the Air Camper did not do this,
rather they put a large opening in the wing and this reduced the rate of
climb of the airplane. Remember that you cannot have all the features of a
high powered plane in a small Ford powered ship and expect it to fly well.
The flap is one of things that makes these airplanes a success.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Brusilow <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
David B. Schober wrote:
he
raised the wing. I've seen pictures of airplanes with the wing 2" and 4"
higher than the plans. The 2" extension looks the best. Another sollution
is
to hinge the trailing edge of the center section so you can lift it up to
get
in and out and then set it back in position for flight.>
I did excatly that. My wing is raised 2.5 inches & 3.5 inches back from the
vertical. ( 0-200 up front ). The center section hinged trailing edge (
Bernard called it a flop ) dimensions are: 3 ft 8.25 inches X 12 inches.
The flop extends one bay into the left wing. The flop is attached via a
piano hinge to a false spar.
Mike ( Piet ( N 687 MB )
________________________________________________________________________________
I think this topic has been covered before, but does someone have a
list of spruce sources? Preferably one close to Maine. I have been
using Wicks, but they are very slow, and shipping to Maine is high.
RD
==
http://www.wrld.com/w3builder
"All knowledge is of itself of some value. There
is nothing so minute or inconsiderable, that I would
not rather know it than not." --Samuel, Dr. Johnson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Brusilow <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: spruce sources? |
> From: Richard DeCosta
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: spruce sources?
> Date: Thursday, November 19, 1998 11:36 AM
>
> I think this topic has been covered before, but does someone have a
> list of spruce sources? Preferably one close to Maine. I have been
> using Wicks, but they are very slow, and shipping to Maine is high.
>
> RD
>
>
>
>
> ==
> http://www.wrld.com/w3builder
> "All knowledge is of itself of some value. There
> is nothing so minute or inconsiderable, that I would
> not rather know it than not." --Samuel, Dr. Johnson
>
>
>
>
<<<
(2/10/98) (note address correction) Subj: Sitka
Spruce -- Dear Grant; I have a fairly large
quantity of Sitka spruce available. This is high
quality wood and meets the mil spec. If you or
anyone you know needs more information,
please feel free to E-mail me at
murray_johnson(at)bc.sympatico.ca and I will get
right back. Thanks, Murray >>
Richard, this an old post from Grant's web site.It may help.
Mike B ( Piet N 687 MB )
________________________________________________________________________________
Hummm. Let me go check.
Hi I'm back,
Try:
http://steve.byu.edu/sitega.htm
Steve E.
-----Original Message-----
Michael Brusilow
Sent: Thursday, November 19, 1998 7:26 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: sight gauge
Steve, I tried to find the pic of your fuel sight gauge on your home page.
No luck.
I made a new tank for my Piet and your gauge sounds interesting. Do you
still have the info available?
Mike B ( Piet N 687MB )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David B. Schober" <dbs(at)fscvax.wvnet.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: spruce sources? |
You can tryb Condon Lumber in Stormville NY. Don't have a number handy
but they advertise in boat building magazines. They also have an office
in White Plains. Talk to Condon Bennet, he is a pilot (was one of my
students) and knows what you need in terms of quality.
Michael Brusilow wrote:
> ----------
> > From: Richard DeCosta
> > To: Pietenpol Discussion
> > Subject: spruce sources?
> > Date: Thursday, November 19, 1998 11:36 AM
> >
> > I think this topic has been covered before, but does someone have a
> > list of spruce sources? Preferably one close to Maine. I have been
> > using Wicks, but they are very slow, and shipping to Maine is high.
> >
> > RD
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ==
> > http://www.wrld.com/w3builder
> > "All knowledge is of itself of some value. There
> > is nothing so minute or inconsiderable, that I would
> > not rather know it than not." --Samuel, Dr. Johnson
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> <<<
> (2/10/98) (note address correction) Subj: Sitka
> Spruce -- Dear Grant; I have a fairly large
> quantity of Sitka spruce available. This is high
> quality wood and meets the mil spec. If you or
> anyone you know needs more information,
> please feel free to E-mail me at
> murray_johnson(at)bc.sympatico.ca and I will get
> right back. Thanks, Murray >>
>
> Richard, this an old post from Grant's web site.It may help.
>
> Mike B ( Piet N 687 MB )
--
David B.Schober, CPE
Instructor, Aviation Maintenance
Fairmont State College
National Aerospace Education Center
Rt. 3 Box 13
Bridgeport, WV 26330-9503
(304) 842-8300
________________________________________________________________________________
Thanks guys, I am just about ready tackle the fuel tank. The info was
very timely and certainly a lot simpler than what I was contemplating.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Notes on Piet+Corvair+PSRU (long) |
For the few of you that are interested in this subject, I've learned a bit more
over the past couple of weeks. Just thought I'd pass it along. I recently had
a phone conversation with Bob Sheffield, who appeared in the mailbag of the
BPAN #60 with the announcement that he had completed building up a Corvair
engine with a PSRU. In fact, he and a friend of his had each assembled Corvair
mills with their own version of the Rinker Drive. He had strong opinions.
First of all, he confirmed that the VW reduction gear that is used in the
Rinker Drive must be from a Type 2 VW (transporter, kombi, single cab, etc.)
from between 1964 and 1967. Not sure why earlier or later models cannot be
used, but it could be because the '64-'67 have the thickest shafts (1 3/8").
Now, these aren't so hard to find. I've learned that everyone who has a Type 2
from this era wants to get rid of their transaxles for some unrelated reason,
and the guys that build dune buggies collect these for installation in their
baja bugs. They seem to be a pretty good source. The problem is that there
were 3 different gear ratios built during this period, and the rarest is the
one most suited for our purpose. It's known as the Mountainous Terrain gear
ratio, 19 teeth on the drive gear and 27 on the driven gear, for a reduction of
1.42 to 1. However, the most common reduction box has a ratio of 1.39 to 1.
Bob Sheffield assembled his unit with the 1.39 : 1 gear, and he's very happy
with the engine performance, although he has not yet flown. Says it starts on
the first pull every time. He's turning a 72" prop, but doesn't yet know the
pitch. Other characteristics of his engine which diverge from the Pietenpol
conversion are:
1. He removed the fan, alternator, and harmonic balancer (running and impulse
mag).
2. high capacity oil pump.
3. 140 hp motor
4. Cast aluminum oil pan
5. get this...a carburetor from an old outboard motor (from a boat) on a
four-legged intake manifold above the engine.
6. Did not adjust engine mount; he figures the 3 inches gives him more prop
clearance.
In case you're not convinced that this guy really wants to stretch the limits
of the Pietenpol classification, he's building this as a Chad Willie biplane.
He says he'll send me some photos, so I'll scan 'em when they arrive.
I also received a response to questions that I posed to Jim vanDervort. He
built a Corvair/Pietenpol with a Rinker Drive many years ago. I don't know how
many hours he has on it, but the last 225 hours have been without the PSRU. He
said the disadvantages are the added weight (nearly 50 lbs) and added
vibration. Bob Sheffield and his friend avoided much of the weight by casting
the gear housing from aluminum, instead of using the standard VW cast iron, and
their thrust bearing has eliminated vibration. Since Jim removed the PSRU from
his ship, his climb rate has decreased (take off distance went from 400 ft to
800 ft...he's a BIG guy), but top speed is about the same. He's says he's
still faster than nearly every other Piet he's flown with. Never heard of
anybody with problems related to thrust loads on the crankshaft.
So, that's what I've learned so far. I still don't know if I'll continue to
pursue this PSRU idea. Sounds like advantages are just about equal to
disadvantages.
--Peter
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phil Peck <crusader(at)thegrid.net> |
Thank you guys for helping me get my lanky body in the piet without
becoming a pretzel ! Now we only have one more problem to overcome and
I can start building. Using the three piece wing I would like to be
able to remove both wing panels after flying so that I can transport the
piet. I was just wondering how difficult a job this would be
disconnecting the wing and the linkages and if it could be made to make
it easier and quicker to do so. Bear in mine that I have solved the
wing weight problem and the need for 25 people! to hold the wing up. I
realize a folding wing is out of the question but I think we can get the
wings to attach and unattach. I was just looking for a little insight
from someone who has taken their wings off once in a while.
phil
--
Check out Crusader Toys @
http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Brusilow <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Phil wrote:
........I was just looking for a little insight
from someone who has taken their wings off once in a while.
phil >>
There was a piece in the newsletter ( BPA ) a while back about a Piet
in
England with quick detach wings. Maybe Grant can give you the reference.
Removing the the wings of a Piet is a major task.
Mike B ( Piet N687MB )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | duprey(at)mailexcite.com |
| Subject: | E-mail Crashed please help! |
Hi guys:
my e-mail crashed last Sat. am I just got back on after six days. All mail
sent to me in that time was lost.
Could some one send me any responces to my New England Pietempols Question..
Thanks!
John
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David B. Schober" <dbs(at)fscvax.wvnet.edu> |
I wouldn't advise removing the wings each time you fly. I haven't done it
with a Piet but I know that to rig or unrig a Schweizer 2-33 that is
designed to be taken apart it takes about 4 people 45 minutes from flight to
trailer.
The time and manpower are bad enough but the inadvertant damage sustained
would not be good. Leading edge damage, damage to struts, wear and tear on
bolts, nuts, attach fittings . . . . Control cables for the ailerons would
be the biggest problem. Each time you take it apart you would have to rerig
the ailerons. You may also have to add splices in the cable runs.
I know a guy that made a beautiful Avid Flyer only to have someone T-bone
the trailer and destroy the airplane before he had 15 hour on it. The
ability to pack up your airplane and bring it home may sound good but I
think the disadvantages outweigh the advantages!
I don't know where you live but if you search around you should be able to
find a hangar at a reasonable price. My hangar in NY is only $50 a month in
an area where other hangars are running over $300. It's on a private strip
and it's only a shed roof but it keeps the weather out. My hangar in WV is
$115 a month but it's on a larger tower airport.
Phil Peck wrote:
> Thank you guys for helping me get my lanky body in the piet without
> becoming a pretzel ! Now we only have one more problem to overcome and
> I can start building. Using the three piece wing I would like to be
> able to remove both wing panels after flying so that I can transport the
> piet. I was just wondering how difficult a job this would be
> disconnecting the wing and the linkages and if it could be made to make
> it easier and quicker to do so. Bear in mine that I have solved the
> wing weight problem and the need for 25 people! to hold the wing up. I
> realize a folding wing is out of the question but I think we can get the
> wings to attach and unattach. I was just looking for a little insight
> from someone who has taken their wings off once in a while.
> phil
>
> --
> Check out Crusader Toys @
> http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/
--
David B.Schober, CPE
Instructor, Aviation Maintenance
Fairmont State College
National Aerospace Education Center
Rt. 3 Box 13
Bridgeport, WV 26330-9503
(304) 842-8300
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
>England with quick detach wings. Maybe Grant can give you the reference.
>Removing the the wings of a Piet is a major task.
>>Mike B ( Piet N687MB )
Phil- What Mike B. says here is quite true. You'd have to do some
hard thinking to redsign some things prior to building to make this
worth your while. I'd say even with practice it would take at least
one hour each operation......and that's being optomistic.
Mike C. (PS- but don't let that stop you from scribbling on a few
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eli or Robert or Teresa Bozeman |
I bought all my spruce from Jean Peters at Western Aircraft Supplies
in Calgary, Alberta Canada. Bus. 275-3513 Res. 276-3067, this guy has
good wood and you can ship on delta air frieght to any major city near
you, I had to cull one cap strip out of the hole package
Robert B. P.S. I still have that compass and would trade it for a
used 0-290 exhaust system if anyone has any leads mail me, also have
wood prop!!!!!
Robert B.
---Richard DeCosta wrote:
>
> I think this topic has been covered before, but does someone have a
> list of spruce sources? Preferably one close to Maine. I have been
> using Wicks, but they are very slow, and shipping to Maine is high.
>
> RD
>
>
>
>
> ==
> http://www.wrld.com/w3builder
> "All knowledge is of itself of some value. There
> is nothing so minute or inconsiderable, that I would
> not rather know it than not." --Samuel, Dr. Johnson
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eli or Robert or Teresa Bozeman |
I bought all my spruce from Jean Peters at Western Aircraft Supplies
in Calgary, Alberta Canada. Bus. 275-3513 Res. 276-3067, this guy has
good wood and you can ship on delta air frieght to any major city near
you, I had to cull one cap strip out of the hole package
Robert B. P.S. I still have that compass and would trade it for a
used 0-290 exhaust system if anyone has any leads mail me, also have
wood prop!!!!!
Robert B.
---Richard DeCosta wrote:
>
> I think this topic has been covered before, but does someone have a
> list of spruce sources? Preferably one close to Maine. I have been
> using Wicks, but they are very slow, and shipping to Maine is high.
>
> RD
>
>
>
>
> ==
> http://www.wrld.com/w3builder
> "All knowledge is of itself of some value. There
> is nothing so minute or inconsiderable, that I would
> not rather know it than not." --Samuel, Dr. Johnson
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Was there someone here on this forum looking for an 0 -290 exhaust? I found
one advertised for $65. If interested, write to me at peter.p.frantz(at)aero.org
--Peter
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Beanlands <kbeanlan(at)spots.ab.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: spruce sources |
Hi,
Actually, he has moved his operation and has a new business number. It's
(403)250-1955.
I have to agree that the wood he sells is very good. He was a little
reserved about just selling me the spar material prefering to sell me a
complete wood kit. In addition to selling wood, he will also mill your
spars to spec. My spars had a 15 degree bevel on the top edge. He cut that
for me going by a copy of the spar plans I gave to him. They were a
perfect fit and I didn't have to worry about screwing up my spars on the
tablesaw ;-).
The last time I was there he was building a main spar for a customer's
GP-4. Quite a piece of work as it's a full length box spar that tapers in
both direction towards the tips.
Ken
On Fri, 20 Nov 1998, Eli or Robert or Teresa Bozeman wrote:
> I bought all my spruce from Jean Peters at Western Aircraft Supplies
> in Calgary, Alberta Canada. Bus. 275-3513 Res. 276-3067, this guy has
> good wood and you can ship on delta air frieght to any major city near
> you, I had to cull one cap strip out of the hole package
> Robert B. P.S. I still have that compass and would trade it for a
> used 0-290 exhaust system if anyone has any leads mail me, also have
> wood prop!!!!!
> Robert B.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Duprey(at)mailexcite.com |
Does anyone know the dates for the next Broadhead gathering. Will be my
first, believe it or not I have to put in for Vacation time soon. Thanks.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phil Peck <crusader(at)thegrid.net> |
I thought I might better explain why I am working so hard on trying to
trailer my piet. I have a full wood shop in a building thats 60 x 120
and I only use the back third for the wood shop and the rest is just
there collecting dust. Its cold here in Northern Cal. about 7 months
out of the year so I don't envision flying it then,though that doesn't
seem to stop everybody! The airport is 7 miles away and if I pass 10
cars on the way the road is busy so I don't worry about getting
crunched! So while $50. hanger space is not to tough it would buy a lot
of gas!
I was watching a friend of my open his wings on his Kitfox the other day
and noticed that he basically swung them open and put in one front pin.
I remarked that it was strange that Kitfox hadn't come up with a auto
lock on the wings as forgeting that bolt could be big trouble! So the
bottom line here is that with my 20 years of building and flying models
and the experiences and insite from this group I would like to try and
get those wings to come off and on with ease and safety. If not I will
have to build a Kitfox or something and miss out on this great group or
pay for hangar space for a piet. So let me go get a few napkins and
------.
phil
--
Check out Crusader Toys @
http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
Phil;
Did you notice that the Kitfox has its lift struts attached to the fuselage
at one point below the rear spar.
The lift struts in a Piet are parallel. The ailerons in the kitfox are push
tube operated while the Piet uses cables.
There are a lot of differences, I guess maybe that is why one aircraft is
called a Pietenpol and the other is a Kitfox.
However anything probably could be done but again would it be a Piet?
J Mc
PS How can you have a shop with so much empty space? I thought stuff
expanded to fill the space available.;-)
-----Original Message-----
From: Phil Peck <crusader(at)thegrid.net>
Date: Friday, November 20, 1998 7:34 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: wings
>I thought I might better explain why I am working so hard on trying to
>trailer my piet. I have a full wood shop in a building thats 60 x 120
>and I only use the back third for the wood shop and the rest is just
>there collecting dust. Its cold here in Northern Cal. about 7 months
>out of the year so I don't envision flying it then,though that doesn't
>seem to stop everybody! The airport is 7 miles away and if I pass 10
>cars on the way the road is busy so I don't worry about getting
>crunched! So while $50. hanger space is not to tough it would buy a lot
>of gas!
>I was watching a friend of my open his wings on his Kitfox the other day
>and noticed that he basically swung them open and put in one front pin.
>I remarked that it was strange that Kitfox hadn't come up with a auto
>lock on the wings as forgeting that bolt could be big trouble! So the
>bottom line here is that with my 20 years of building and flying models
>and the experiences and insite from this group I would like to try and
>get those wings to come off and on with ease and safety. If not I will
>have to build a Kitfox or something and miss out on this great group or
>pay for hangar space for a piet. So let me go get a few napkins and
>------.
>phil
>
>
>--
>Check out Crusader Toys @
>http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | TLC62770(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Notes on Piet+Corvair+PSRU (long) |
What does the PSRU mean I'm still new at this and have learned a lot just
reading what many of youhave done through . thanks Terry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "D.J.H." <ve6zh(at)cnnet.com> |
Cold in nor.cal. right!
Could'nt resist .
Doug in South Central Alberta Canada(you know,where the igloos and such
are)
> From: Phil Peck <crusader(at)thegrid.net>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: wings
> Date: November 20, 1998 7:33 PM
>
> I thought I might better explain why I am working so hard on trying to
> trailer my piet. I have a full wood shop in a building thats 60 x 120
> and I only use the back third for the wood shop and the rest is just
> there collecting dust. Its cold here in Northern Cal. about 7 months
> out of the year so I don't envision flying it then,though that doesn't
> seem to stop everybody! The airport is 7 miles away and if I pass 10
> cars on the way the road is busy so I don't worry about getting
> crunched! So while $50. hanger space is not to tough it would buy a lot
> of gas!
> I was watching a friend of my open his wings on his Kitfox the other day
> and noticed that he basically swung them open and put in one front pin.
> I remarked that it was strange that Kitfox hadn't come up with a auto
> lock on the wings as forgeting that bolt could be big trouble! So the
> bottom line here is that with my 20 years of building and flying models
> and the experiences and insite from this group I would like to try and
> get those wings to come off and on with ease and safety. If not I will
> have to build a Kitfox or something and miss out on this great group or
> pay for hangar space for a piet. So let me go get a few napkins and
> ------.
> phil
>
>
> --
> Check out Crusader Toys @
> http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "D.J.H." <ve6zh(at)cnnet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Notes on Piet+Corvair+PSRU (long) |
Prop Speed Reduction Unit
> From: TLC62770(at)aol.com
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Re: Notes on Piet+Corvair+PSRU (long)
> Date: November 20, 1998 8:26 PM
>
> What does the PSRU mean I'm still new at this and have learned a lot just
> reading what many of youhave done through . thanks Terry
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: where are you? |
Phil,
Where are you located in N. Cal? I'm in Fairfield, about half way between SF
and SAC on I-80. Always good to know when there are "locals" around.
Don Cooley
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Notes on Piet+Corvair+PSRU (long) |
Propeller Speed Reduction Unit
Don
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: where are you? |
Darn, I used to live in Antioch right across the Delta from you. But when I
retired I moved to my retirement property in the High Desert.
Gordon
ADonJr(at)aol.com wrote:
> Phil,
> Where are you located in N. Cal? I'm in Fairfield, about half way between SF
> and SAC on I-80. Always good to know when there are "locals" around.
> Don Cooley
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phil Peck <crusader(at)thegrid.net> |
John MC, Having helped my friend build his Kitfox I am well aware of
the hundreds of differences between it and a Piet. I only mentioned the
Kitfox and the chances of forgeting the single hinge pin as a way of
letting others know that I was VERY concerned about safety with regards
to any changes involving the piet and removing the wings alot.
As far as the empty shop space it does collect a lot of junk but nothing
that can't be discarded to make room for a piet. ( I keep enough of my
own junk so that my friends can't con me out of free storage space,
kind of selfish huh!) I studied the piet plans last night and I think I
can do what I want to do about the wings and still have less visual
impact on piet changes than say-a tail wheel,hinged door or the various
other changes that every one does to suit their needs. I think if
Mr.Pietenpol himself where still around you would be amazed at all the
things he would be trying !!
John McNarry wrote:
> Phil;
> Did you notice that the Kitfox has its lift struts attached to the
> fuselage
> at one point below the rear spar.
> The lift struts in a Piet are parallel. The ailerons in the kitfox are
> push
> tube operated while the Piet uses cables.
> There are a lot of differences, I guess maybe that is why one aircraft
> is
> called a Pietenpol and the other is a Kitfox.
> However anything probably could be done but again would it be a Piet?
>
> J Mc
>
> PS How can you have a shop with so much empty space? I thought stuff
> expanded to fill the space available.;-)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Phil Peck <crusader(at)thegrid.net>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Date: Friday, November 20, 1998 7:34 PM
> Subject: wings
>
> >I thought I might better explain why I am working so hard on trying
> to
> >trailer my piet. I have a full wood shop in a building thats 60 x
> 120
> >and I only use the back third for the wood shop and the rest is just
> >there collecting dust. Its cold here in Northern Cal. about 7 months
>
> >out of the year so I don't envision flying it then,though that
> doesn't
> >seem to stop everybody! The airport is 7 miles away and if I pass 10
>
> >cars on the way the road is busy so I don't worry about getting
> >crunched! So while $50. hanger space is not to tough it would buy a
> lot
> >of gas!
> >I was watching a friend of my open his wings on his Kitfox the other
> day
> >and noticed that he basically swung them open and put in one front
> pin.
> >I remarked that it was strange that Kitfox hadn't come up with a auto
>
> >lock on the wings as forgeting that bolt could be big trouble! So
> the
> >bottom line here is that with my 20 years of building and flying
> models
> >and the experiences and insite from this group I would like to try
> and
> >get those wings to come off and on with ease and safety. If not I
> will
> >have to build a Kitfox or something and miss out on this great group
> or
> >pay for hangar space for a piet. So let me go get a few napkins and
> >------.
> >phil
> >
> >
> >--
> >Check out Crusader Toys @
> >http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/
> >
> >
> >
--
Check out Crusader Toys @
http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phil Peck <crusader(at)thegrid.net> |
| Subject: | Re: where are you? |
ADonJr(at)aol.com wrote:
> Phil,
> Where are you located in N. Cal? I'm in Fairfield, about half way
> between SF
> and SAC on I-80. Always good to know when there are "locals" around.
> Don Cooley
Don, I am in Yreka on I-5 next to 14000' Mt Shasta ( and it does get
cold) and if my wife can drag me down to see the 49er's(she loves
football and I don't-go figuare) I can drag her your way to talk about
piets!
--
Check out Crusader Toys @
http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: where are you? |
Phil,
I know Yreka a little, and occasionally come your way. Arlington and
Evergreen are two of my favorite fly-ins, (next to Brodhead, of course). Keep
in touch.
Don
________________________________________________________________________________
Phil,
Keep us posted on what you come up with!
Thanks
Brent Reed
Kent, WA
-----Original Message-----
From: Phil Peck <crusader(at)thegrid.net>
Date: Saturday, November 21, 1998 8:56 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: wings
>John MC, Having helped my friend build his Kitfox I am well aware of
>the hundreds of differences between it and a Piet. I only mentioned the
>Kitfox and the chances of forgeting the single hinge pin as a way of
>letting others know that I was VERY concerned about safety with regards
>to any changes involving the piet and removing the wings alot.
>As far as the empty shop space it does collect a lot of junk but nothing
>that can't be discarded to make room for a piet. ( I keep enough of my
>own junk so that my friends can't con me out of free storage space,
>kind of selfish huh!) I studied the piet plans last night and I think I
>can do what I want to do about the wings and still have less visual
>impact on piet changes than say-a tail wheel,hinged door or the various
>other changes that every one does to suit their needs. I think if
>Mr.Pietenpol himself where still around you would be amazed at all the
>things he would be trying !!
>
>
>John McNarry wrote:
>
>> Phil;
>> Did you notice that the Kitfox has its lift struts attached to the
>> fuselage
>> at one point below the rear spar.
>> The lift struts in a Piet are parallel. The ailerons in the kitfox are
>> push
>> tube operated while the Piet uses cables.
>> There are a lot of differences, I guess maybe that is why one aircraft
>> is
>> called a Pietenpol and the other is a Kitfox.
>> However anything probably could be done but again would it be a Piet?
>>
>> J Mc
>>
>> PS How can you have a shop with so much empty space? I thought stuff
>> expanded to fill the space available.;-)
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Phil Peck <crusader(at)thegrid.net>
>> To: Pietenpol Discussion
>> Date: Friday, November 20, 1998 7:34 PM
>> Subject: wings
>>
>> >I thought I might better explain why I am working so hard on trying
>> to
>> >trailer my piet. I have a full wood shop in a building thats 60 x
>> 120
>> >and I only use the back third for the wood shop and the rest is just
>> >there collecting dust. Its cold here in Northern Cal. about 7 months
>>
>> >out of the year so I don't envision flying it then,though that
>> doesn't
>> >seem to stop everybody! The airport is 7 miles away and if I pass 10
>>
>> >cars on the way the road is busy so I don't worry about getting
>> >crunched! So while $50. hanger space is not to tough it would buy a
>> lot
>> >of gas!
>> >I was watching a friend of my open his wings on his Kitfox the other
>> day
>> >and noticed that he basically swung them open and put in one front
>> pin.
>> >I remarked that it was strange that Kitfox hadn't come up with a auto
>>
>> >lock on the wings as forgeting that bolt could be big trouble! So
>> the
>> >bottom line here is that with my 20 years of building and flying
>> models
>> >and the experiences and insite from this group I would like to try
>> and
>> >get those wings to come off and on with ease and safety. If not I
>> will
>> >have to build a Kitfox or something and miss out on this great group
>> or
>> >pay for hangar space for a piet. So let me go get a few napkins and
>> >------.
>> >phil
>> >
>> >
>> >--
>> >Check out Crusader Toys @
>> >http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/
>> >
>> >
>> >
>
>
>--
>Check out Crusader Toys @
>http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Ian,
I'm at the same point of construction, and plan on building a fiberglass fuel
tank. I was wondering what type of material you are going to use.
Chuck
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
Phil:
I in no mean to be disrespectful of your desires and if youve been reading
this list for a while you would know that I too have made the comment that
if Bernie was still with us I'm sure he would still be experimenting with
his design. As for changes made well I can't say I've stuck to the plans
either. But safety comes first, and then , Does it alter the general design
to the point that it no longer looks like a Pietenpol? We have all seen some
pretty strange looking aircraft called by the Pietenpol name. If you do
figure out a simple safe and covenient way to swing the wing let us all know
please.
John Mc
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | TLC62770(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Corvair Engines |
My partner and I found a nest of Corvairs today , they were all lined up
inside this barn . We looked them over carefully, and bought one we could use
. the rest of them didn't even move . We were very quiet about our work so as
not to fretine them away .
We may want to go back and look at them again . there are still many of them
left .
as we left there were others coming to look at them . We left in a hurry as
not to bother them any more .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Corvair Engines |
Where were these? Do you have a #? Adress? Thanks!
---TLC62770(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> My partner and I found a nest of Corvairs today , they were all
lined up
> inside this barn . We looked them over carefully, and bought one we
could use
> . the rest of them didn't even move . We were very quiet about our
work so as
> not to fretine them away .
> We may want to go back and look at them again . there are still many
of them
> left .
> as we left there were others coming to look at them . We left in a
hurry as
> not to bother them any more .
>
==
http://www.wrld.com/w3builder
"All knowledge is of itself of some value. There
is nothing so minute or inconsiderable, that I would
not rather know it than not." --Samuel, Dr. Johnson
________________________________________________________________________________
Chuck, I am basically stuck with aluminum as my workshop is not heated
and I can't fibeglass in the house. I have looked at a whole bunch of
stuff and figure the aluminum is probably going to be the lightest. At
present I am trying to figure out whether to weld (difficult) or rivet
(leaks). The product "Proseal" that was mentioned I am not familiar
with. I think I will go talk to some of the hot rod types in town and
see what they come up with for suggestions. If there is a welder in that
group, I think I will cut the pieces and see if I can contract the
welding.
How does this parallel your activities?
That sight glass is really neat!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Raffaele Bellissimo <rbelliss(at)yesic.com> |
Doug,
The 140 has lower compression. the 110 HP is 9.25. perhaps it's too great a
compression.
Dom.
-----Original Message-----
From: D.J.H. <ve6zh(at)cnnet.com>
Date: Tuesday, November 17, 1998 8:54 PM
> Dom. Bellissimo
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Larsen, Ed <ELarsen(at)flowserve.com>
>To: Pietenpol Discussion <>
>Date: Friday, November 13, 1998 5:10 PM
>Subject: RE: 140 hp Corvair?
>
>
> I don't know anyone that can hand prop a corvair. At
>least Jack Watson and I couldn't.
>
>---------I wonder why you can't hand prop your corvair engine??I have the
>140 hp vair mill with a direct drive 3 blade warpdrive,while on the test
>stand,with base timming set to 0 deg.it will start easily.I removed the vac
>advance unit,which leaves a handy arm sticking out of the dist. housing,to
>which you can attach a cable to the cockpit.This will allow retarding the
>ignition timming ,which is a must for handproping,after start up,the base
>timming can be set to the desired setting.
> Doug CGCGJ
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Raffaele Bellissimo <rbelliss(at)yesic.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Notes on Piet+Corvair+PSRU (long) |
Peter, I've heard over and over that of all the corvair engines the one not
to use is the 140 HP due to the large valves dropping and causing
catestrophic failures. Let us know how yours works out.
Dom. Bellissimo
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter P Frantz
Date: Friday, November 20, 1998 11:18 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Notes on Piet+Corvair+PSRU (long)
>For the few of you that are interested in this subject, I've learned a bit
more
>over the past couple of weeks. Just thought I'd pass it along. I recently
had
>a phone conversation with Bob Sheffield, who appeared in the mailbag of the
>BPAN #60 with the announcement that he had completed building up a Corvair
>engine with a PSRU. In fact, he and a friend of his had each assembled
Corvair
>mills with their own version of the Rinker Drive. He had strong opinions.
>First of all, he confirmed that the VW reduction gear that is used in the
>Rinker Drive must be from a Type 2 VW (transporter, kombi, single cab,
etc.)
>from between 1964 and 1967. Not sure why earlier or later models cannot be
>used, but it could be because the '64-'67 have the thickest shafts (1
3/8").
>Now, these aren't so hard to find. I've learned that everyone who has a
Type 2
>from this era wants to get rid of their transaxles for some unrelated
reason,
>and the guys that build dune buggies collect these for installation in
their
>baja bugs. They seem to be a pretty good source. The problem is that
there
>were 3 different gear ratios built during this period, and the rarest is
the
>one most suited for our purpose. It's known as the Mountainous Terrain
gear
>ratio, 19 teeth on the drive gear and 27 on the driven gear, for a
reduction of
>1.42 to 1. However, the most common reduction box has a ratio of 1.39 to
1.
>
>Bob Sheffield assembled his unit with the 1.39 : 1 gear, and he's very
happy
>with the engine performance, although he has not yet flown. Says it starts
on
>the first pull every time. He's turning a 72" prop, but doesn't yet know
the
>pitch. Other characteristics of his engine which diverge from the
Pietenpol
>conversion are:
>1. He removed the fan, alternator, and harmonic balancer (running and
impulse
>mag).
>2. high capacity oil pump.
>3. 140 hp motor
>4. Cast aluminum oil pan
>5. get this...a carburetor from an old outboard motor (from a boat) on a
>four-legged intake manifold above the engine.
>6. Did not adjust engine mount; he figures the 3 inches gives him more
prop
>clearance.
>
>In case you're not convinced that this guy really wants to stretch the
limits
>of the Pietenpol classification, he's building this as a Chad Willie
biplane.
>He says he'll send me some photos, so I'll scan 'em when they arrive.
>
>I also received a response to questions that I posed to Jim vanDervort. He
>built a Corvair/Pietenpol with a Rinker Drive many years ago. I don't know
how
>many hours he has on it, but the last 225 hours have been without the PSRU.
He
>said the disadvantages are the added weight (nearly 50 lbs) and added
>vibration. Bob Sheffield and his friend avoided much of the weight by
casting
>the gear housing from aluminum, instead of using the standard VW cast iron,
and
>their thrust bearing has eliminated vibration. Since Jim removed the PSRU
from
>his ship, his climb rate has decreased (take off distance went from 400 ft
to
>800 ft...he's a BIG guy), but top speed is about the same. He's says he's
>still faster than nearly every other Piet he's flown with. Never heard of
>anybody with problems related to thrust loads on the crankshaft.
>
>So, that's what I've learned so far. I still don't know if I'll continue
to
>pursue this PSRU idea. Sounds like advantages are just about equal to
>disadvantages.
>
>--Peter
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "D.J.H." <ve6zh(at)cnnet.com> |
The 140 hp and 110hp ENGINES have the same comp.ratios of 9:25to1. Per
service manual specs.
Doug
> From: Raffaele Bellissimo <rbelliss(at)yesic.com>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Re:
> Date: November 21, 1998 8:35 AM
>
> Doug,
> The 140 has lower compression. the 110 HP is 9.25. perhaps it's too great
a
> compression.
> Dom.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: D.J.H. <ve6zh(at)cnnet.com>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Date: Tuesday, November 17, 1998 8:54 PM
>
>
> > Dom. Bellissimo
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Larsen, Ed <ELarsen(at)flowserve.com>
> >To: Pietenpol Discussion <>
> >Date: Friday, November 13, 1998 5:10 PM
> >Subject: RE: 140 hp Corvair?
> >
> >
> > I don't know anyone that can hand prop a corvair. At
> >least Jack Watson and I couldn't.
> >
> >---------I wonder why you can't hand prop your corvair engine??I have
the
> >140 hp vair mill with a direct drive 3 blade warpdrive,while on the test
> >stand,with base timming set to 0 deg.it will start easily.I removed the
vac
> >advance unit,which leaves a handy arm sticking out of the dist.
housing,to
> >which you can attach a cable to the cockpit.This will allow retarding
the
> >ignition timming ,which is a must for handproping,after start up,the
base
> >timming can be set to the desired setting.
> > Doug CGCGJ
> >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | TLC62770(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Corvair Engines |
The mans name is Joe Kaselan 1-616-527-7173 . He is moving to florida in the
Spring .He needs to get these gone before that .They are 61thru 69 Corvair's .
Luck Terry
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Corvair Engines |
Where did you say he lived now?
Gordon
TLC62770(at)aol.com wrote:
> The mans name is Joe Kaselan 1-616-527-7173 . He is moving to florida in the
> Spring .He needs to get these gone before that .They are 61thru 69 Corvair's
.
> Luck Terry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eli or Robert or Teresa Bozeman |
Ian , do you have a realy pretty green and white C-172, if so I work
at the Rogers airport, Rogers Ark.
Robert B.
---Ian Holland wrote:
>
> Chuck, I am basically stuck with aluminum as my workshop is not heated
> and I can't fibeglass in the house. I have looked at a whole bunch of
> stuff and figure the aluminum is probably going to be the lightest. At
> present I am trying to figure out whether to weld (difficult) or rivet
> (leaks). The product "Proseal" that was mentioned I am not familiar
> with. I think I will go talk to some of the hot rod types in town and
> see what they come up with for suggestions. If there is a welder in
that
> group, I think I will cut the pieces and see if I can contract the
> welding.
>
> How does this parallel your activities?
> That sight glass is really neat!
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Raffaele Bellissimo <rbelliss(at)yesic.com> |
Ian,
I also built my tank of 5052 Alum., but did not put the "V" in bottom as
shown in drawings. Put a slosh baffle in the middle with plenty of holes at
the bottom. This also serves to stiffen the tank. The bottom and top were
rolled through a ridge maker, this too stiffens the tank. The sides were
flanged to the outside, as are professional tanks and then tig welded. Be
very careful when testing for leaks with air. Place no more than 1 1/2 to 2
lbs. pressure and leave over night with a balloon attached to an outlet. If
the balloon goes down, you've got a leak. You should weld 4 fuel outlet
bosses: one in the middle/front; 2 together to one side/rear (about 2" from
the edge of the tank); and one on the othe side/rear. This will cover your
fuel requirements in all positional scenarios. Of the 2 together the one on
the outside should be for a fuel drain. Before welding the bosses in place
pean the alum. so as to create a depression about 1/2 larger than the 1"
boss. This will serve to collect any water in the tank. You should also
check the tank for water not just the Gascolator. Flush, Flush, Flush the
tank before placing any gas into it. this will get rid of any alum. debris
that may be inside from your manufacturing it. It may be a good idea to cut
out your hole on top first, both for your fuel inlet neck and fuel sender
unit. Place a doubler on the inside edge of this hole. The doubler also
serves to hold the tinnerman or any other type of nut so you can seal the
tank. If you follow these instructions, you'll have a tank worth about
$1,000.00 US.
Let us know how you make out. I'll be sending pictures of this as well as
others to Richard Dacosta for him to put on his site. Check it out in a few
weeks.
Dom. Bellissimo
-----Original Message-----
From: Ian Holland
Date: Sunday, November 22, 1998 10:41 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: sight gauge
>Chuck, I am basically stuck with aluminum as my workshop is not heated
>and I can't fibeglass in the house. I have looked at a whole bunch of
>stuff and figure the aluminum is probably going to be the lightest. At
>present I am trying to figure out whether to weld (difficult) or rivet
>(leaks). The product "Proseal" that was mentioned I am not familiar
>with. I think I will go talk to some of the hot rod types in town and
>see what they come up with for suggestions. If there is a welder in that
>group, I think I will cut the pieces and see if I can contract the
>welding.
>
>How does this parallel your activities?
>That sight glass is really neat!
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | TLC62770(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Corvair Engines |
Joe lives nortth of Ionia Mich. Ionia is about 35 nw of Lansing Mich. or about
35 miles east of Grand Radids ,Mich.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | TLC62770(at)aol.com |
Is it possible to build a gas tank of plastic ? or light sheet metal and
putting a rubber bladder in side ? I've had very good luck welding plastic
(abs ) .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: To Ian Holland |
Wish I could say yes, but I can't. I am located in Thunder bay, Ontario,
a long way from Rogers. Do I have a long lost relative out there? If so,
i would like to claim halfers on the 172.
________________________________________________________________________________
Many thanks for the info. I was about to go to the EAA and see if they
had some do it yourself booklets worth reading.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Pasley <lpasley(at)aristotle.net> |
| Subject: | Re: To Ian Holland |
Ian,
An old World War 2 bomber pilot from here married a girl from Thunder Bay
way back when. He went to Canada in 1939 and joined up to fight. (The U.S.
wasn't moving fast enough for him.) He flew for Canada, was moved into the
British Air Corp, and later was with the US Forces. He was shot down twice,
excaping capture both times. One of those times he lived with desert nomads
for a month untill they could return him. Later in the war he returned home
and trained other pilots. He sure had some stories. He passed away this
summer. The "girl" from Thunder Bay still lives here.
Larry Pasley
Carlisle, Arkansas
> Wish I could say yes, but I can't. I am located in Thunder bay, Ontario,
> a long way from Rogers. Do I have a long lost relative out there? If so,
> i would like to claim halfers on the 172.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Ian,
This week, I shall begin the construction of two fiberglass fuel tanks (are ya
listening Joe?). This type of tank has a very good reputation as far as
leaks, and ease of construction. I have the mold, a heated dining room, and
plenty of experience working with fiberglass layups. I hesitate installing
any type of fuel quantity indicator, though, because it increases the
possibility of a leak. A single drop of fuel, is an unacceptable leak. The
fuel consumption of an 'A' engine is fairly constant through out the flight of
a Piet, making a stop watch an acceptible fuel indicator.
Chuck
________________________________________________________________________________
If you are considering an aluminum fuel tank, I would recommend riveting one
together and using Pro-seal. I had zero experience with it when I built my
RV-6 and it has worked out well. The only leaks I had in 7 years are the cork
gaskets used on the gage sending units. (easy fix)
The pro-seal is a two part adhesive which is applied between the flanges to be
riveted together. I has a pot life of many hours and it will fill fairly large
voids. But it is messy and smelly!
It also has an affinity for any white or good piece of clothing. I swear that
it can jump out of the container and get on anyone who walks into the work area.
I will certainly build my tank using it.
Bob Seibert
Piet on the gear
________________________________________________________________________________
I am going to buy myself the Brodhead video for Christmas :) Can
someone fill me in on who to send the check to and for how much? Thanks!
Richard
==
http://www.wrld.com/w3builder
"All knowledge is of itself of some value. There
is nothing so minute or inconsiderable, that I would
not rather know it than not." --Samuel, Dr. Johnson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Beanlands <kbeanlan(at)spots.ab.ca> |
Hi,
I picked up a copy of Dec/98 Custom Planes, the new Private Pilot
bi-monthly magazine. There's an article (I have to admit, I haven't read
it yet) on the Piet right at the end of the mag. There's also a good
article on fabric covering. It's only the forth edition but I have to say
that it's quite a good technical magazine.
Ken.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Custom planes |
Ken Beanlands wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I picked up a copy of Dec/98 Custom Planes, the new Private Pilot
> bi-monthly magazine. There's an article (I have to admit, I haven't read
> it yet) on the Piet right at the end of the mag. There's also a good
> article on fabric covering. It's only the forth edition but I have to say
> that it's quite a good technical magazine.
>
> Ken.
>
My friend sent me the magazine and I rec it Saturday. I have read the Piet
article twice already and I really like the magazine as I am going to
subscribe to it.
Gordon
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Warren Shoun <wbnb(at)earthlink.net> |
Gordon,
The plans and article in the 1932 "Flying & Glider Manual" show a steel tube
fuselage, as do the plans from Orrin Hoopman.
Would suggest you get both the 1932 and 1933 manual from the EAA. The second
one has the Sky Scout plans and article by Bernard in which he points out some
improvements, that he believes should be incorporated in the Air Camper.
Bernard himself also makes the following comment."But as I said before, if
you
know your stuff, you may be able to make improvements in this ship and I would
like
to hear from those doing it, as it is one of my greatest desires to see the
lightplane developed into one of the safest and best sports there is......But those
of you who wish only to build so that you will have something to fly had better
build it exactly as the plans, and you will be sure of having a ship that is very
easy to handle"
Warren
________________________________________________________________________________
I've thought about this for a while, and here is what I have come up with so
far.
Disconnect the front and rear spars, and struts. Pull the wing out 2 inches
and and drop the wing nose down 90 degrees, then fold the wing bottom side
down, up against the fuse. The struts are either removed or folded flat
with bottom of the wing. The pivot and slider would be mounted on the rear
spar and consist of a tube inside a tube with a U-joint on the end. Lots of
details would have to be worked out, like linkages, but could be done. What
would I call it?
A "pietenpol with folding wings".
Steve E.
-----Original Message-----
John McNarry
Sent: Saturday, November 21, 1998 5:29 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: wings
Phil:
I in no mean to be disrespectful of your desires and if youve been reading
this list for a while you would know that I too have made the comment that
if Bernie was still with us I'm sure he would still be experimenting with
his design. As for changes made well I can't say I've stuck to the plans
either. But safety comes first, and then , Does it alter the general design
to the point that it no longer looks like a Pietenpol? We have all seen some
pretty strange looking aircraft called by the Pietenpol name. If you do
figure out a simple safe and covenient way to swing the wing let us all know
please.
John Mc
________________________________________________________________________________
Thanks for the info Warren
I plan to buy those two books from EAA, In fact they have a deal if you buy all
5 for
24.95 I think, I was just on the web site the other day.
Gordon
Warren Shoun wrote:
> Gordon,
> The plans and article in the 1932 "Flying & Glider Manual" show a steel tube
> fuselage, as do the plans from Orrin Hoopman.
> Would suggest you get both the 1932 and 1933 manual from the EAA. The second
> one has the Sky Scout plans and article by Bernard in which he points out some
> improvements, that he believes should be incorporated in the Air Camper.
> Bernard himself also makes the following comment."But as I said before, if
you
> know your stuff, you may be able to make improvements in this ship and I would
like
> to hear from those doing it, as it is one of my greatest desires to see the
> lightplane developed into one of the safest and best sports there is......But
those
> of you who wish only to build so that you will have something to fly had better
> build it exactly as the plans, and you will be sure of having a ship that is
very
> easy to handle"
> Warren
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: wing cut out |
>Tom Fahy and Mike Cuy have cut out the back end in the middle section of
>the wing for better pilot entry. Does this have any effect on lift ?
In the 8th issue of the BPAN, Vi Kapler wrote that BHP estimated a wing cut-out
to reduce lift by an amount equal to reducing wing span by 2 feet. Instead, he
recommended installing a hinged cut-out that could be replaced during flight or
raising the cabanes by 2 inches to ease entry for the flexibility-challenged.
On the other hand, I've not yet heard a negative comment about wing cut-outs
from a builder who has installed one.
--Peter
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | how loud is a corvair engine? |
I am going to approach the town of Scarborough tomorrow with the
proposition of making a grass strip for my Pietenpol in my back yard
(with the purchase of a nieghboring piece of land). I would like some
testimony from anyone who has heard a Corvair engine on
takeoff/landing. How does it compare in noise to a plane like a
Cessna? Have any of you done this? What has the reaction been from
neighbors?
I need to gather as much info as possible about doing this before I
actually try to buy the land.
Many thanks.
Richard D.
==
http://www.wrld.com/w3builder
"All knowledge is of itself of some value. There
is nothing so minute or inconsiderable, that I would
not rather know it than not." --Samuel, Dr. Johnson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phil Peck <crusader(at)thegrid.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Swing wing piet |
Steve E. Thats the same thing I came up with. I even have the linkages
figuared out so as to get that extra length when need to fold the
wings. When I first started thinking about this I was going to use a
trailer that had swing out arms to support the weight of the wings.
Does any body know what one wing panel weights ? I am going to make a
working model of the center section and wing. After looking at the
three piece wing plans am I wrong in assuming that the only thing
holding one wing on is four straps and the wing strut ?
steve(at)byu.edu wrote:
> I've thought about this for a while, and here is what I have come up
> with so
> far.
>
> Disconnect the front and rear spars, and struts. Pull the wing out 2
> inches
> and and drop the wing nose down 90 degrees, then fold the wing bottom
> side
> down, up against the fuse. The struts are either removed or folded
> flat
> with bottom of the wing. The pivot and slider would be mounted on the
> rear
> spar and consist of a tube inside a tube with a U-joint on the end.
> Lots of
> details would have to be worked out, like linkages, but could be
> done. What
> would I call it?
>
> A "pietenpol with folding wings".
>
> Steve E.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> John McNarry
> Sent: Saturday, November 21, 1998 5:29 PM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Re: wings
>
> Phil:
> I in no mean to be disrespectful of your desires and if youve been
> reading
> this list for a while you would know that I too have made the comment
> that
> if Bernie was still with us I'm sure he would still be experimenting
> with
> his design. As for changes made well I can't say I've stuck to the
> plans
> either. But safety comes first, and then , Does it alter the general
> design
> to the point that it no longer looks like a Pietenpol? We have all
> seen some
> pretty strange looking aircraft called by the Pietenpol name. If you
> do
> figure out a simple safe and covenient way to swing the wing let us
> all know
> please.
>
> John Mc
--
Check out Crusader Toys @
http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: Swing wing piet |
Right. As I put my wings on and off I found it much easier to do it with
two people. Each panel weighs about 80 lbs or so I'd guess, but after it is
covered, moving it is a two body job. One thing that would make handling
easier is making a tip handle so you could grasp the tips, although ugly one
at the LE and TE would be best for positive handling. Making it a one man
job would be a trick. You would need a tip brace to disconnect the struts
and spar bolts, and probably a guide on the front spar in addition to the
rear spar swivel. Then you could disconnnect/connect with the wing in place
and then move out the the tip, slide the wing out 4-6 inches and tip the
nose and walk it back. You would also need bracing for the wing to fit on
the trailer. Significant wear items would be fittings and bolts. Getting
everything lined up each time I mounted the wings was a strugle too.
Alignment is not easy without the leverage available from the wing tip. I
live about 10 miles from the airport and thought seriously about trailering,
but instead choose to tie down in the weather for a winter instead. I have
a cheap hanger now,(not inexpensive) but at least it keeps the sun and rain
and snow off.
Steve E.
-----Original Message-----
Phil Peck
Sent: Monday, November 23, 1998 2:34 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Swing wing piet
Steve E. Thats the same thing I came up with. I even have the linkages
figuared out so as to get that extra length when need to fold the
wings. When I first started thinking about this I was going to use a
trailer that had swing out arms to support the weight of the wings.
Does any body know what one wing panel weights ? I am going to make a
working model of the center section and wing. After looking at the
three piece wing plans am I wrong in assuming that the only thing
holding one wing on is four straps and the wing strut ?
steve(at)byu.edu wrote:
> I've thought about this for a while, and here is what I have come up
> with so
> far.
>
> Disconnect the front and rear spars, and struts. Pull the wing out 2
> inches
> and and drop the wing nose down 90 degrees, then fold the wing bottom
> side
> down, up against the fuse. The struts are either removed or folded
> flat
> with bottom of the wing. The pivot and slider would be mounted on the
> rear
> spar and consist of a tube inside a tube with a U-joint on the end.
> Lots of
> details would have to be worked out, like linkages, but could be
> done. What
> would I call it?
>
> A "pietenpol with folding wings".
>
> Steve E.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> John McNarry
> Sent: Saturday, November 21, 1998 5:29 PM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Re: wings
>
> Phil:
> I in no mean to be disrespectful of your desires and if youve been
> reading
> this list for a while you would know that I too have made the comment
> that
> if Bernie was still with us I'm sure he would still be experimenting
> with
> his design. As for changes made well I can't say I've stuck to the
> plans
> either. But safety comes first, and then , Does it alter the general
> design
> to the point that it no longer looks like a Pietenpol? We have all
> seen some
> pretty strange looking aircraft called by the Pietenpol name. If you
> do
> figure out a simple safe and covenient way to swing the wing let us
> all know
> please.
>
> John Mc
--
Check out Crusader Toys @
http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: how loud is a corvair engine? |
Don't know for sure but the Suberu puts out some noise, I guess all do as
they are not muffled. How large of a strip are you working with? I
thought about one on my property for a plane that does it in 100' but
when I said I only had 407' to work with everybody said no way. Property
next to me may be up for sale soon so it would give me another 300'
Gordon
Richard DeCosta wrote:
> I am going to approach the town of Scarborough tomorrow with the
> proposition of making a grass strip for my Pietenpol in my back yard
> (with the purchase of a nieghboring piece of land). I would like some
> testimony from anyone who has heard a Corvair engine on
> takeoff/landing. How does it compare in noise to a plane like a
> Cessna? Have any of you done this? What has the reaction been from
> neighbors?
>
> I need to gather as much info as possible about doing this before I
> actually try to buy the land.
>
> Many thanks.
>
> Richard D.
>
> ==
> http://www.wrld.com/w3builder
> "All knowledge is of itself of some value. There
> is nothing so minute or inconsiderable, that I would
> not rather know it than not." --Samuel, Dr. Johnson
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: how loud is a corvair engine? |
Well, if I got the property I am looking at, Id end up with about
1000'-1200' Thats in the ideal world. :)
---Gordon Brimhall wrote:
>
> Don't know for sure but the Suberu puts out some noise, I guess all
do as
> they are not muffled. How large of a strip are you working with? I
> thought about one on my property for a plane that does it in 100' but
> when I said I only had 407' to work with everybody said no way.
Property
> next to me may be up for sale soon so it would give me another 300'
>
> Gordon
>
>
> Richard DeCosta wrote:
>
> > I am going to approach the town of Scarborough tomorrow with the
> > proposition of making a grass strip for my Pietenpol in my back yard
> > (with the purchase of a nieghboring piece of land). I would like
some
> > testimony from anyone who has heard a Corvair engine on
> > takeoff/landing. How does it compare in noise to a plane like a
> > Cessna? Have any of you done this? What has the reaction been from
> > neighbors?
> >
> > I need to gather as much info as possible about doing this before I
> > actually try to buy the land.
> >
> > Many thanks.
> >
> > Richard D.
> >
> > ==
> > http://www.wrld.com/w3builder
> > "All knowledge is of itself of some value. There
> > is nothing so minute or inconsiderable, that I would
> > not rather know it than not." --Samuel, Dr. Johnson
> >
> >
>
>
==
http://www.wrld.com/w3builder
"All knowledge is of itself of some value. There
is nothing so minute or inconsiderable, that I would
not rather know it than not." --Samuel, Dr. Johnson
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: EAA Flying & Gliding reprints |
Gordon,
Buy them all...they are a delight to read, reread, dream about, reread, etc.
Don Cooley
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
| Subject: | Re: To Ian Holland |
Larry:
If you are ever in Manitoba please stop by and check out the Commonwealth
Air training Plan Museum. I'm sure you will enjoy it and may even find some
history about your friend. We have a web page at the museum
http://www.mts.net/~krallen/catpm.html I hope you find it interesting. I
sure do, volunteering there is one of the reasons my Pietenpol project moves
slowly.
John McNarry
-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Pasley <lpasley(at)aristotle.net>
Date: Sunday, November 22, 1998 8:23 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: To Ian Holland
>Ian,
>An old World War 2 bomber pilot from here married a girl from Thunder Bay
>way back when. He went to Canada in 1939 and joined up to fight. (The U.S.
>wasn't moving fast enough for him.) He flew for Canada, was moved into the
>British Air Corp, and later was with the US Forces. He was shot down twice,
>excaping capture both times. One of those times he lived with desert nomads
>for a month untill they could return him. Later in the war he returned home
>and trained other pilots. He sure had some stories. He passed away this
>summer. The "girl" from Thunder Bay still lives here.
>Larry Pasley
>Carlisle, Arkansas
>
>
>----------
>> Wish I could say yes, but I can't. I am located in Thunder bay, Ontario,
>> a long way from Rogers. Do I have a long lost relative out there? If so,
>> i would like to claim halfers on the 172.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | fishin <fishin(at)wwa.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Brodhead Video? |
the videos where available from; Kim Stricker, PO Box 104, Olmstead,
Illinois, 62970,,,573-651-0610. the cost was $15 bucks. well worth seeing
and hearing the flight qualities of all the Piets in their different
configurations.
JoeC
Zion, Ill
>I am going to buy myself the Brodhead video for Christmas :) Can
>someone fill me in on who to send the check to and for how much? Thanks!
>
>Richard
>
>
>==
>http://www.wrld.com/w3builder
>"All knowledge is of itself of some value. There
>is nothing so minute or inconsiderable, that I would
>not rather know it than not." --Samuel, Dr. Johnson
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phil Peck <crusader(at)thegrid.net> |
Steve E.
Thanks for the weight wing info and all of the problems that you
encountered taking your wings on and off. Will stick with my swing arm
trailer idea as I want this to be a lazy,no brainer,one man operation !
Plus we don't want ugly handles on the wing tips. It would probably be
easier to build a one wing piet and a hanger, but I love a challange.
Keep firing any problems I will encounter and I will keep you updated on
my working model. It seems do able so far.
phil
--
Check out Crusader Toys @
http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dean Dayton <deandayton(at)hotmail.com> |
I bought the St. Croix plans. They are the same plans you get from Don
Pietenpol with a few exceptions:
- the St Croix plans are a true blueprint (white on blue instead of
blue on white) and are not as clear as the plans I have seen from Don
- the St Croix Plans don't include any supplemental drawings (like the
full size wing rib)
If I were doing it again, I'd probably spring for a set of "official"
plans. But if your really counting pennies, the St Croix plans are
useable.
>Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 13:18:27 -0800
>From: Gordon Brimhall
>Subject: Re: engines
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Reply-to: Pietenpol Discussion
>
>I don't know, I am a Newbie.
>
>What about the St. Croix Air camper, Plans 45.00
>
>How are the plans for your Grega at 25.00 each, what do you get and how
do they
>differ from the wooden piet?
>
>Gordon
>
>Michael King wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Just a point of reference, what makes a Grega
>> design that much different from a Pietenpol as
>> to not add it in the mix?
>>
>> If a Grega, which has the basic design of many of the
>> Piets I have seen in this group, is not considered a
>> variation of a Piet, please let me know. Most of the
>> folks at airports I have flown in have asked me if
>> my plane is a Pietenpol. My Grega has an A-80
>> and Cub gear.....not an auto engine and straight
>> axle. If that is the major difference then so be it.
>>
>> I enjoy the plane and find it a dependable and safe
>> plane to fly low and slow.
>>
>> Thanks guys.......
>>
>> Mike King
>> Grega Air Camper
>> SP-121
>> Dallas
>>
>> >My 2 cents........
>> >
>> >Engine choice is not the dividing line on "real" Piets and other
airplanes.
>> >(even though Model A Piets are just a little more real...... ;-) ).
Mr.
>> >Pietenpol used everything from small Continentals to Model A's to a
Velie
>> >radial on his ships.
>> >
>> >A "real" Piet is built to BHP's plans without major design changes.
A
>> >Grega, while an enjoyable airplane, is something other than a
Pietenpol. A
>> >Piet with a 65 Cont is still a Piet in my book.
>> >
>> >Build it with whatever powerplant makes sense to you. The closer
you follow
>> >the plans the less trouble you'll have and the more fun.
>> >
>> >John
>> >
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: Gordon Brimhall
>> >To: Pietenpol Discussion
>> >Date: Monday, November 16, 1998 12:45 PM
>> >Subject: Re: engines
>> >
>> >
>> >>How about building a Pietenpol to the design that was in the 1932
Glider
>> >and
>> >>Flying Manual and it will be real close to the original Pietenpol.
>> >>
>> >>I guess what you are saying if it looks something like a Pietenpol
and was
>> >>built with other plans (Their are many) it is still true to design
even if
>> >it
>> >>is powered with some other engine and not a Model "A" or Corvair
like
>> >Barnard
>> >>did. How about a RagWing UL Pietenpol? It looks something like the
orig but
>> >>only has one seat and is only 254 lbs.
>> >>
>> >>I may very well build both but for the REAL one I will use Barnard
>> >Pietenpol
>> >>plans and it will be powered by a Model "A" Engine or a Corvair
engine.
>> >>
>> >>I have a Original 1930 How To Build It Published By Modern
Mechanics and it
>> >>has plans for the Lawrence water Glider. For Trade for a set of
Barnards
>> >>Pietenpol Plans.
>> >>
>> >>Gordon
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>Michael Brusilow wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Gordon wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> <> With the two choices of either Model "A" or Corvair to be a
true
>> >>> Pietenpol......>
>> >>>
>> >>> Nonsense! What is a "true Pietenpol"? An aircraft built from the
>> >original
>> >>> plans or from modified plans ( see Vi Kapler ), large wheels or
small
>> >>> wheels, tail skid or tail wheel, one piece wing or three piece
wing, "A"
>> >>> engine, corvair, round engine, continental, Ford escort, "T"
engine,
>> >>> etc.etc. They are all true Pientenpols.
>> >>>
>> >>> To see one is to know one. It is a classic that can not be
mistaken.
>> >>>
>> >>> Mike B ( Piet N 687MB )
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: EAA Flying & Gliding reprints |
ADonJr(at)aol.com wrote:
> Gordon,
> Buy them all...they are a delight to read, reread, dream about, reread, etc.
> Don Cooley
Yes I think you are right, I like those old books and magazines anyway. Sure
wish I had saved my old "Air Trails" Magazines as when I went to EAA last year
I
saw some just like I had when I was in Jr. High. And I have a 1930 Popular
Mechanics How To Build It that has plans for the Lawrence Water Glider. 147
pages and only 50 cents. which was about 3 hours pay back then.
Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
The St. Croix calls out for Wood, Tubing and fabric and the Original plans
are Wood and fabric. ones 45.00 other 75.00 No real differance.
Guess you would have to look at both together to see if the details are the
same.
Gordon
Dean Dayton wrote:
> I bought the St. Croix plans. They are the same plans you get from Don
> Pietenpol with a few exceptions:
> - the St Croix plans are a true blueprint (white on blue instead of
> blue on white) and are not as clear as the plans I have seen from Don
> - the St Croix Plans don't include any supplemental drawings (like the
> full size wing rib)
>
> If I were doing it again, I'd probably spring for a set of "official"
> plans. But if your really counting pennies, the St Croix plans are
> useable.
>
> >Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 13:18:27 -0800
> >From: Gordon Brimhall
> >Subject: Re: engines
> >To: Pietenpol Discussion
> >Reply-to: Pietenpol Discussion
> >
> >I don't know, I am a Newbie.
> >
> >What about the St. Croix Air camper, Plans 45.00
> >
> >How are the plans for your Grega at 25.00 each, what do you get and how
> do they
> >differ from the wooden piet?
> >
> >Gordon
> >
> >Michael King wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Just a point of reference, what makes a Grega
> >> design that much different from a Pietenpol as
> >> to not add it in the mix?
> >>
> >> If a Grega, which has the basic design of many of the
> >> Piets I have seen in this group, is not considered a
> >> variation of a Piet, please let me know. Most of the
> >> folks at airports I have flown in have asked me if
> >> my plane is a Pietenpol. My Grega has an A-80
> >> and Cub gear.....not an auto engine and straight
> >> axle. If that is the major difference then so be it.
> >>
> >> I enjoy the plane and find it a dependable and safe
> >> plane to fly low and slow.
> >>
> >> Thanks guys.......
> >>
> >> Mike King
> >> Grega Air Camper
> >> SP-121
> >> Dallas
> >>
> >> >My 2 cents........
> >> >
> >> >Engine choice is not the dividing line on "real" Piets and other
> airplanes.
> >> >(even though Model A Piets are just a little more real...... ;-) ).
> Mr.
> >> >Pietenpol used everything from small Continentals to Model A's to a
> Velie
> >> >radial on his ships.
> >> >
> >> >A "real" Piet is built to BHP's plans without major design changes.
> A
> >> >Grega, while an enjoyable airplane, is something other than a
> Pietenpol. A
> >> >Piet with a 65 Cont is still a Piet in my book.
> >> >
> >> >Build it with whatever powerplant makes sense to you. The closer
> you follow
> >> >the plans the less trouble you'll have and the more fun.
> >> >
> >> >John
> >> >
> >> >-----Original Message-----
> >> >From: Gordon Brimhall
> >> >To: Pietenpol Discussion
> >> >Date: Monday, November 16, 1998 12:45 PM
> >> >Subject: Re: engines
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>How about building a Pietenpol to the design that was in the 1932
> Glider
> >> >and
> >> >>Flying Manual and it will be real close to the original Pietenpol.
> >> >>
> >> >>I guess what you are saying if it looks something like a Pietenpol
> and was
> >> >>built with other plans (Their are many) it is still true to design
> even if
> >> >it
> >> >>is powered with some other engine and not a Model "A" or Corvair
> like
> >> >Barnard
> >> >>did. How about a RagWing UL Pietenpol? It looks something like the
> orig but
> >> >>only has one seat and is only 254 lbs.
> >> >>
> >> >>I may very well build both but for the REAL one I will use Barnard
> >> >Pietenpol
> >> >>plans and it will be powered by a Model "A" Engine or a Corvair
> engine.
> >> >>
> >> >>I have a Original 1930 How To Build It Published By Modern
> Mechanics and it
> >> >>has plans for the Lawrence water Glider. For Trade for a set of
> Barnards
> >> >>Pietenpol Plans.
> >> >>
> >> >>Gordon
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>Michael Brusilow wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> Gordon wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> <> With the two choices of either Model "A" or Corvair to be a
> true
> >> >>> Pietenpol......>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Nonsense! What is a "true Pietenpol"? An aircraft built from the
> >> >original
> >> >>> plans or from modified plans ( see Vi Kapler ), large wheels or
> small
> >> >>> wheels, tail skid or tail wheel, one piece wing or three piece
> wing, "A"
> >> >>> engine, corvair, round engine, continental, Ford escort, "T"
> engine,
> >> >>> etc.etc. They are all true Pientenpols.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> To see one is to know one. It is a classic that can not be
> mistaken.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Mike B ( Piet N 687MB )
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eli or Robert or Teresa Bozeman |
| Subject: | Pressurized cowl Or eyebrows |
Can anyone give me some reasons why I'd half to go to a pressurized
cowl on a 0-290 lyc. or can I leave those jugs out in the wind?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: wing cut out |
>>Tom Fahy and Mike Cuy have cut out the back end in the middle section of
>>the wing for better pilot entry. Does this have any effect on lift ?
>>In the 8th issue of the BPAN, Vi Kapler wrote that BHP estimated a wing
cut-out
>to reduce lift by an amount equal to reducing wing span by 2 feet.
>--Peter
Peter- I've got tons of faith in BHP's design and his comments recorded
over time, but
the wing cutout issue is one that is far overstated. Stearmans, Jennies,
etc. all had them
and not only does it make it easier to get it and out, you can see above
you and it helps
you clear turns. In my case I turned the center section into a baggage
area with a hinged
alum. cover with latches at the back. Frank P. did the same thing but he
cannot reach inside
his due to no cutout or flop. I can stand up right in the pilots seat and
lean forward to
rummage around in the center section. (also makes for great periodic
inspection of your
aileron cables and pulleys.) I'm not trying to be funny here but see the
list below for
improving lift:
1) Whatever engine you choose make sure it's up to snuff. Don't hang a junk
65 horse engine out there and complain when your rate of climb is poor.
2) Keep the plane light. Stay away from heavy finishing processes. Light
fabric grade
will be easier to attatch and the weave fills with less coats. Dope
works wonderful- it's light,
and easy to repair.
3) WAX the wing. Really. I swear I gained 100 fpm after waxing my wing,
top and bottom.
Yes, you will have a stiff neck and sore arms.
4) Loose 20 pounds after the holidays. (something I need to do as well !)
5) Take off into the wind !
Worth every cent you paid for it,
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mr. Carmen A. Natalie" <carmen(at)cana.com> |
| Subject: | Re: how loud is a corvair engine? |
Richard DeCosta wrote:
>
> I am going to approach the town of Scarborough tomorrow with the
> proposition of making a grass strip for my Pietenpol in my back yard
You also want to check on the zoning (if any), and with the FAA
regarding private strips. Here, the process can be lengthy - local town
board, zoning board, neighborhood forum/comments, and of course, FAA
approval. Unless, of course, you have a farm with lots of acreage, in
which case, you simply make a stip and fly from it, and hope nobody
complains (which is sure to stop activity at even an FAA approved
airport, if the complaints are loud enough...)
The engine sound at takeoff is only for 30-45 seconds at full power, and
in landing, an aircraft at idle can't really be heard. Sound is much
less of a problem than the perceptions of your neigbors...
Carmen
--
----------------------
Mr. Carmen A. Natalie
President
CA Natalie Associates, Inc
CANA WebSystems
100 State Street Suite 1040
Albany, New York 12207
http://www.cana.com
phone 518.436.4932
fax 518.436.4933
----------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Custom planes |
I read the articles also, and am planning to subscribe. Lots of
practical stuff for the grass roots builder that hasn't got $100K+ for a
300 knot speedster. They need tpo be encouraged!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Raffaele Bellissimo <rbelliss(at)yesic.com> |
| Subject: | Re: wing cut out |
I've heard the is buffeting at the back of the neck with the cutout.
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter P Frantz
Date: Monday, November 23, 1998 1:36 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: wing cut out
>>Tom Fahy and Mike Cuy have cut out the back end in the middle section of
>>the wing for better pilot entry. Does this have any effect on lift ?
>
>In the 8th issue of the BPAN, Vi Kapler wrote that BHP estimated a wing
cut-out
>to reduce lift by an amount equal to reducing wing span by 2 feet.
Instead, he
>recommended installing a hinged cut-out that could be replaced during
flight or
>raising the cabanes by 2 inches to ease entry for the
flexibility-challenged.
>On the other hand, I've not yet heard a negative comment about wing
cut-outs
>from a builder who has installed one.
>
>--Peter
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Warren Shoun <wbnb(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: wing cut out |
Hi Mike,'
Thanks again for sage advice learned and earned by actually doing this. And
thanks also for your specific and clear information.
Warren
Michael D Cuy wrote:
> >>Tom Fahy and Mike Cuy have cut out the back end in the middle section of
> >>the wing for better pilot entry. Does this have any effect on lift ?
> >>In the 8th issue of the BPAN, Vi Kapler wrote that BHP estimated a wing
> cut-out
> >to reduce lift by an amount equal to reducing wing span by 2 feet.
> >--Peter
>
> Peter- I've got tons of faith in BHP's design and his comments recorded
> over time, but
> the wing cutout issue is one that is far overstated. Stearmans, Jennies,
> etc. all had them
> and not only does it make it easier to get it and out, you can see above
> you and it helps
> you clear turns. In my case I turned the center section into a baggage
> area with a hinged
> alum. cover with latches at the back. Frank P. did the same thing but he
> cannot reach inside
> his due to no cutout or flop. I can stand up right in the pilots seat and
> lean forward to
> rummage around in the center section. (also makes for great periodic
> inspection of your
> aileron cables and pulleys.) I'm not trying to be funny here but see the
> list below for
> improving lift:
>
> 1) Whatever engine you choose make sure it's up to snuff. Don't hang a junk
> 65 horse engine out there and complain when your rate of climb is poor.
>
> 2) Keep the plane light. Stay away from heavy finishing processes. Light
> fabric grade
> will be easier to attatch and the weave fills with less coats. Dope
> works wonderful- it's light,
> and easy to repair.
>
> 3) WAX the wing. Really. I swear I gained 100 fpm after waxing my wing,
> top and bottom.
> Yes, you will have a stiff neck and sore arms.
>
> 4) Loose 20 pounds after the holidays. (something I need to do as well !)
>
> 5) Take off into the wind !
>
> Worth every cent you paid for it,
> Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: To Ian Holland |
John, I was in the Museum several years back while transitioning from
one job to another. It was impressive then. I spent a lot of time
looking at the Lysander which was in pretty sick condition (1986?). It
looks like a lot of work has been done to it. I will have to drop in
again. Another favourite spot is the Western Aviation Museum in
Winnipeg. I get a chance between layovers to check it out.
Unfortunately, I don't get to Brandon very often. You folks have done a
first class job of maintaining history!
-=Ian=-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William Conway <conwayw(at)ricks.edu> |
| Subject: | Wing cutout and engine noise |
I have two things I'd like to discuss. As I wrote previously, I have the
cutout in my wing and feel that it is absolutely necessary for access to
the cockpit and for visability. I have my radiator tucked under the Ford
Escort; just think what the turbulence must be off the Model-A radiator
facing the wind squarely in front of the center section of the wing. Just
how efficient can that center section be in the Model A versions? Cutting
some 3 or 3 =BD square feet out of the wing equals a lose of just that
amount, particularly on the trailing edge. Last evening as I was flying I
also found out that my crash helmet sticks some 1 or 2 inches up into the
cut out area. For someone my height, 6'2", the cabane struts would have
to be lengthened to gain clearance. I can't image lowering the seat any
because my legs are reasonably tight now. Of course, if I didn't use a
cushion at all, I'd be 1/2 " lower. When turning base on approach, I love
being able to look under the wing and over it at the same time. I feel
the safety factor, alone is worth the lose of a few square feet of wing.
I do have a problem I could use some suggestions on. The Ford Escort with
straight pipes is pretty loud--probably an understatement! With tight
earphones in my crash helmet, it doesn't bother me at all. I need a
simple, compact way to cut the noise down some without losing its
distinctive sound. I have all four exhaust pipes going into a single tube
which is around 2 =BD or 3 inches in diameter--can't remember exactly. I
don't want to add anything with much leverage because of the vibration and
cracking. I've heard that a motorcycle spark arrestor might cut the noise
a little. I don't want to got to a full exhaust system with a bulky
muffler hanging in the airstream such as some of the 2-stroke people have.
Suggestions???
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larsen, Ed" <ELarsen(at)flowserve.com> |
| Subject: | unsubscribe - Pietenpol Discussion |
Unsubscribe - Thanks for all the great information!
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Corvair powered take off distance? |
Does anyone have any figures on getting a Corvair powered Piet to
clear a 50' obstacle? I need to figure how much runway space I should
try to buy from my neighbor.
Many thanks!
Richard
==
http://www.wrld.com/w3builder
"All knowledge is of itself of some value. There
is nothing so minute or inconsiderable, that I would
not rather know it than not." --Samuel, Dr. Johnson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Lee L. Schiek" <concrete(at)qtm.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing cutout and engine noise |
William Conway wrote:
> I have two things I'd like to discuss. As I wrote previously, I have t=
he cutout in my wing and feel that it is absolutely necessary for access
to the cockpit and for visability. I have my radiator tucked under the F=
ord Escort; just think what the turbulence must be off the Model-A radiat=
or facing the wind squarely in front of the center section of the wing. J=
ust how efficient can that center section be in the Model A versions? Cut=
ting some 3 or 3 =BD square feet out of the wing equals a lose of just t=
hat amount, particularly on the trailing edge. Last evening as I was fly=
ing I also found out that my crash helmet sticks some 1 or 2 inches up in=
to the cut out area. For someone my height, 6'2", the cabane struts woul=
d have to be lengthened to gain clearance. I can't image lowering the se=
at any because my legs are reasonably tight now. Of course, if I didn't
use a cushion at all, I'd be 1/2 " lower. When turning base on approach,=
I love being able to look under the wing and over it at the same time.
I feel the safety factor, alone is worth the lose of a few square feet of=
wing.
>
> I do have a problem I could use some suggestions on. The Ford Escort w=
ith straight pipes is pretty loud--probably an understatement! With tight=
earphones in my crash helmet, it doesn't bother me at all. I need a si=
mple, compact way to cut the noise down some without losing its distincti=
ve sound. I have all four exhaust pipes going into a single tube which i=
s around 2 =BD or 3 inches in diameter--can't remember exactly. I don't
want to add anything with much leverage because of the vibration and crac=
king. I've heard that a motorcycle spark arrestor might cut the noise a
little. I don't want to got to a full exhaust system with a bulky muffle=
r hanging in the airstream such as some of the 2-stroke people have. Sug=
gestions???
Bill,
On the off-chance you're not aware, the Tony Bingelis book FIREWALL FORWA=
RD has about 25 pages devoted to exhausts & mufflers. Part of it is theo=
ry and the rest is applications. It's available thru EAA, Spruce & Speci=
alty, probably Sportys, etc. About
20 bucks if I recall. If you haven't seen it and just want the exhaust/m=
uffler section, let me know you're snail-mail and I'll copy it at the off=
ice after Thanksgiving & get it to you.
Lee in MI
P.S. To Mike Cuy: I've been lurking here for over a year; I coveted you=
r ship at Brodhed '98 (my 3rd gettin'-ready-to-get-ready trip) and I valu=
e the insights & thoughts you send out- Keep it up!.......
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Brusilow <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
William Conroy wrote:
must be off the Model-A radiator facing the wind squarely in front of the
center section of the wing.>>
Don't know about that. I flew with a Model A for two years & I flew Ed
Snyder's model A quite a bit. The radiator didn't seem to bother. I didn't
notice any turbulence. If fact after I changed to an 0-200, the flight
characteristics didn't change except for increased climb & airspeed.
The Model A radiator sits below the center section & not in front of it.
Mike B ( Piet N687MB )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | UUNet <jgw(at)village.uunet.be> |
| Subject: | Re: swing wing piet |
Phil & Steve,
I really like your "one man lazy" concept of the swing wing trailer! I've
been thinking about the same idea as I plan on trailering to the airport
too. The nearest airfield usually has a crowd of glider pilots who do the
same routine. I have this re-occuring dream of pulling up with "twin" Model
A engines (One my '31 Deluxe Tudor and One in the Piet) and showing them
what "low and slow" is really about!
Do you have a sketch of what either of you are thinking about? I have
thought of a system as Steve describes with u-joints. The struts could
secure to the wing for travel. A compromise could be to have anchor points
in each wing to which handles could be attached for setup, and removed for
flight. I'd love to see a picture of your model Phil once you get it
finished, and would be glad to work on the design with either of you.
Another thought I had was to mimick the glider trailers I've seen which are
covered. A custom Piet trailer could have a series of overlapping
cover-sections - decreasing in size toward the tail. This would also
protect the wings / fuselage from the chance rock or road debris. Once
installed, such a covered Piet trailer would act as a hangar as well.
Regards,
Jim Wright
American Pietenpoler in Belgium
jgw(at)village.uunet.be
-----Original Message-----
From: Phil Peck <crusader(at)thegrid.net>
Date: Tuesday, November 24, 1998 3:32 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: swing wing piet
>Steve E.
>Thanks for the weight wing info and all of the problems that you
>encountered taking your wings on and off. Will stick with my swing arm
>trailer idea as I want this to be a lazy,no brainer,one man operation !
>Plus we don't want ugly handles on the wing tips. It would probably be
>easier to build a one wing piet and a hanger, but I love a challange.
>Keep firing any problems I will encounter and I will keep you updated on
>my working model. It seems do able so far.
>phil
>
>--
>Check out Crusader Toys @
>http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
| Subject: | Re: To Ian Holland |
Ian
Thanks for the encouragement. I too drool over the Lysander. It is on a semi
permanent loan to the Museum. I would really like the museum to aquire it
and then perhaps a major restoration could be started. It sure needs it! I
know of one in Saskatchewan and have heard rumours of two in Ontario. I
would love to see one fly ... low and slow redifined! If you ever do get
out this way please look us up.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Ian Holland
Date: Tuesday, November 24, 1998 10:57 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: To Ian Holland
>John, I was in the Museum several years back while transitioning from
>one job to another. It was impressive then. I spent a lot of time
>looking at the Lysander which was in pretty sick condition (1986?). It
>looks like a lot of work has been done to it. I will have to drop in
>again. Another favourite spot is the Western Aviation Museum in
>Winnipeg. I get a chance between layovers to check it out.
>Unfortunately, I don't get to Brandon very often. You folks have done a
>first class job of maintaining history!
>-=Ian=-
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
| Subject: | Re: swing wing piet |
Hi Guys
I have also considering a trailer for the Piet. I had tought about hanging
the wings leading edge down on the inside of the trailer and then winching
the fuselage in tail first. I think brackets could be built into the trailer
wall to hold the wings at their attach points. Rigging will still be a
problem. Have you considered studying some of the folding wing naval
designs? I remember looking at one that used a pair of first class levers
butted together at the wing root to take care of aileron linkage. I wonder
if my AA Ford truck would pull it? :-)
J Mc
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ed Nolan <nv_nolan(at)apollo.commnet.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: swing wing piet |
>Jim Wright
>American Pietenpoler in Belgium
>jgw(at)village.uunet.be
You're a long way from home, Jim. What took you to the other side of the
pond? Quite a few Piets in England from what I gather. Anyone else in
Belgium building a Piet?
Did you buy a turkey yet--(well, at least a large capon)? 8
)
Ed
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phil Peck <crusader(at)thegrid.net> |
Its nice to see the positive response about the swing wing. I have been
kind of quiet about it not wanting to upset any die hard Piet by the
plans builders. Personally I think if the wings would fold the Piet
would become as popular as the Kitfox(but I could be wrong). But let me
share my dream with you.
You have just finished a great flight and you need to go home for
dinner. You land and stop in front of your trailer. You shut off the
engine and just before you get out you flip up the back trailing edge
center section to reveal the ends of two long rods that you pull out to
unlock the spars from the center section . ( stole that idea from my
model Ultimate Bipe) Then you unlock the top aileron cable to give you
the extra foot you will need to pull out the wings and swing them back.(
The method for this would be the same method i use to chain my tractor
down with when I trailer it. But for the life of me I can't remember
what the quick locks are called!) The important thing is that it would
be quick,fail safe, and keep the same pre set cable adjustments. I
would then get out of the piet swing the trailer wing arms out parrellel
to the wing and then winch the plane nose first into the trailer till
the wings tips rest in the padded trailer arm cradles. (only bracing the
tips will allow me to raise up the struts to the wing plus the design of
the trailer arms are such that this allows me to pull out the wing three
inches or so,piviot the wing and then swing it back) This takes care of
the wing weight,allows support for the wings while trailering and makes
for a quick one man operation. Plus I haven't changed any of the outward
apperance of the Piet! I haven't given the full cover hanger idea any
thought but it would be nice to have a piet in a hangered trailer. I
will gladly intertain any thoughts on why this will not work as I am
sure there is something I haven't thought of... But its a start.
phil
--
Check out Crusader Toys @
http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Joe & Marian Beck <flyretina(at)feist.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Corvair powered take off distance? |
Richard -
The notes from Don P. describe 200' agl at end of a 1/4 mile strip from
a dead stop (Corvair version). That's what I'm counting on to fly from
our 80 acre place.
Joe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Hannan <khannan(at)gte.net> |
Pietenpol Discussion , Mom & Dad ,
Martin Twite , "Lococo, Jack" ,
"Kerslake, Murray" ,
Joe Myers , JOE ,
Dwight Virtue , cory_jackson(at)csi.com,
Christian Herman , Alfred Makonnen ,
DrVirtue(at)aol.com
Please change my E-mail
khannan(at)gte.net
Please change my E-mail
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: swing wing piet |
I said the same thing a couple weeks ago about pulling into a Fly-In with my
Model "A" pulling a Pietenpol powered by a Model "A", and dressed in the period
clothes also, get out the wicker chairs, and old Red & White Coke A Cola Ice
Chest and old Royal Typewriter just incase I want to type some letters too.
I bet we are not the first with the idea. Just wish I still had my 31 4dr Briggs
Body.
I'm building an Ultra Piet also. My projects start in 1999
Gordon
UUNet wrote:
> Phil & Steve,
>
> I really like your "one man lazy" concept of the swing wing trailer! I've
> been thinking about the same idea as I plan on trailering to the airport
> too. The nearest airfield usually has a crowd of glider pilots who do the
> same routine. I have this re-occuring dream of pulling up with "twin" Model
> A engines (One my '31 Deluxe Tudor and One in the Piet) and showing them
> what "low and slow" is really about!
>
> Do you have a sketch of what either of you are thinking about? I have
> thought of a system as Steve describes with u-joints. The struts could
> secure to the wing for travel. A compromise could be to have anchor points
> in each wing to which handles could be attached for setup, and removed for
> flight. I'd love to see a picture of your model Phil once you get it
> finished, and would be glad to work on the design with either of you.
>
> Another thought I had was to mimick the glider trailers I've seen which are
> covered. A custom Piet trailer could have a series of overlapping
> cover-sections - decreasing in size toward the tail. This would also
> protect the wings / fuselage from the chance rock or road debris. Once
> installed, such a covered Piet trailer would act as a hangar as well.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jim Wright
> American Pietenpoler in Belgium
> jgw(at)village.uunet.be
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Phil Peck <crusader(at)thegrid.net>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Date: Tuesday, November 24, 1998 3:32 AM
> Subject: swing wing piet
>
> >Steve E.
> >Thanks for the weight wing info and all of the problems that you
> >encountered taking your wings on and off. Will stick with my swing arm
> >trailer idea as I want this to be a lazy,no brainer,one man operation !
> >Plus we don't want ugly handles on the wing tips. It would probably be
> >easier to build a one wing piet and a hanger, but I love a challange.
> >Keep firing any problems I will encounter and I will keep you updated on
> >my working model. It seems do able so far.
> >phil
> >
> >--
> >Check out Crusader Toys @
> >http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/
> >
> >
> >
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | E-Mail address change |
Please change my e-mail from stockberger(at)proaxis.com to
stokbrgr(at)teleport.com
Thanks
Randy Stockberger
Independence Oregon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | oil can <oilcanbob(at)hotmail.com> |
My brother in law used pro seal on his rv-6a, and it worked out well,
but he said the smell was gastly to overpowering! A must do outside.
Also I've heard that proseal will not tolerate any gasoline that
contains alcohol. Alcohol will melt the proseal out of the tank walls.
Fiberglass tanks are ,(from what I hear) the same way...no alcohol can
be mixted in with the gas.
As for me, I will weld mine from 040 alum using flux core rod. But I do
have some alum welding exp.
ocb
>From steve(at)byu.edu Mon Nov 23 03:50:51 1998
>Received: from adena.byu.edu ("port 2966"@adena.byu.edu)
> by EMAIL1.BYU.EDU (PMDF V5.1-10 #U3118)
> with ESMTP id <01J4I19M5P0I90U636(at)EMAIL1.BYU.EDU> for
oilcanbob(at)hotmail.com;
>Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1998 06:54:18 +0000
>From: Seibert
>Subject: Re: sight gauge
>Sender: Maiser(at)adena.byu.edu
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Errors-to: Steve(at)byu.edu
>Reply-to: Pietenpol Discussion
>Message-id: <24EF90C3F6F(at)adena.byu.edu>
>Organization: Southwestern Bell Internet Services
>MIME-version: 1.0
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04C-SBIS-NC404 (Macintosh; I; 68K) (via Mercury MTS
v1.43
> (NDS)) (via Mercury MTS v1.43 (NDS))
>Comments: Originally To: "Pietenpol Discussion"
>X-Listname:
>
>If you are considering an aluminum fuel tank, I would recommend
riveting one
>together and using Pro-seal. I had zero experience with it when I built
my
>RV-6 and it has worked out well. The only leaks I had in 7 years are
the cork
>gaskets used on the gage sending units. (easy fix)
>
>The pro-seal is a two part adhesive which is applied between the
flanges to be
>riveted together. I has a pot life of many hours and it will fill
fairly large
>voids. But it is messy and smelly!
>It also has an affinity for any white or good piece of clothing. I
swear that
>it can jump out of the container and get on anyone who walks into the
work area.
>
>I will certainly build my tank using it.
>Bob Seibert
>Piet on the gear
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | oil can <oilcanbob(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Swing wing piet |
I to have given thought to folding wings. Picture this...a hinge folded
flat, one side attached to the center section rear spar.the other hinge
flat has a tube attached, through which a sliding bar rides. Pull the
wing out a couple inches, drop the nose down and fold the wing on the
hinge.
ocb
>From Steve(at)byu.edu Mon Nov 23 08:11:54 1998
>Received: from [128.187.22.133] by hotmail.com (1.0) with SMTP id
MHotMail3089290313493506532493215974464548011; Mon Nov 23 08:11:54 1998
>Received: from adena.byu.edu ("port 3046"@adena.byu.edu)
> by EMAIL1.BYU.EDU (PMDF V5.1-10 #U3118)
> with ESMTP id <01J4IAEQTJY490PJX6(at)EMAIL1.BYU.EDU> for
oilcanbob(at)hotmail.com;
>Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1998 09:09:12 -0700
>From: steve(at)byu.edu
>Subject: Swing wing piet
>Sender: Maiser(at)adena.byu.edu
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Errors-to: Steve(at)byu.edu
>Reply-to: Pietenpol Discussion
>Message-id: <25355564DBF(at)adena.byu.edu>
>MIME-version: 1.0
>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 (via Mercury MTS
v1.43
> (NDS)) (via Mercury MTS v1.43 (NDS))
>Comments: Originally To: "Pietenpol Discussion"
>X-Listname:
>
>I've thought about this for a while, and here is what I have come up
with so
>far.
>
>Disconnect the front and rear spars, and struts. Pull the wing out 2
inches
>and and drop the wing nose down 90 degrees, then fold the wing bottom
side
>down, up against the fuse. The struts are either removed or folded
flat
>with bottom of the wing. The pivot and slider would be mounted on the
rear
>spar and consist of a tube inside a tube with a U-joint on the end.
Lots of
>details would have to be worked out, like linkages, but could be done.
What
>would I call it?
>
>A "pietenpol with folding wings".
>
>Steve E.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>John McNarry
>Sent: Saturday, November 21, 1998 5:29 PM
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Subject: Re: wings
>
>
>Phil:
> I in no mean to be disrespectful of your desires and if youve been
reading
>this list for a while you would know that I too have made the comment
that
>if Bernie was still with us I'm sure he would still be experimenting
with
>his design. As for changes made well I can't say I've stuck to the
plans
>either. But safety comes first, and then , Does it alter the general
design
>to the point that it no longer looks like a Pietenpol? We have all seen
some
>pretty strange looking aircraft called by the Pietenpol name. If you
do
>figure out a simple safe and covenient way to swing the wing let us all
know
>please.
>
>John Mc
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Neal <llneal(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Corvair powered take off distance? |
I'm thinking of clearing a 1200' strip myself. Grass of course, with
barbed wire fences on both ends but adjoining cleared fields that have good
emergency potential.
Anyone have any comments on flying a Piet from this length runway?
Larry
Joe & Marian Beck wrote:
> Richard -
> The notes from Don P. describe 200' agl at end of a 1/4 mile strip from
> a dead stop (Corvair version). That's what I'm counting on to fly from
> our 80 acre place.
> Joe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Raffaele Bellissimo <rbelliss(at)yesic.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing cutout and engine noise |
William,
A friend of mine has suggested installing an internal type spark/nois=
e
arrestor as was used in VW's. Take a thin sheet of stainless about th=
e
length of your straight section. Take a 3/16 inch dia. nail and punch=
holes
into the entire sheet. role the sheet so the sharp side if the holes
are
against the exhaust flow. Set the roled sheet on stand-offs inside yo=
ue
exhaust, and keep it in place with a few stainless machine screws. Th=
is
should work. I'll be doing just this for my corvair.
regards,
Dom. Bellissimo
-----Original Message-----
=46rom: William Conway
Date: Tuesday, November 24, 1998 11:58 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Wing cutout and engine noise
>I have two things I'd like to discuss. As I wrote previously, I hav=
e the
cutout in my wing and feel that it is absolutely necessary for access=
to the
cockpit and for visability. I have my radiator tucked under the Ford
Escort; just think what the turbulence must be off the Model-A radiat=
or
facing the wind squarely in front of the center section of the wing.
Just
how efficient can that center section be in the Model A versions? Cut=
ting
some 3 or 3 =BD square feet out of the wing equals a lose of just th=
at
amount, particularly on the trailing edge. Last evening as I was fly=
ing I
also found out that my crash helmet sticks some 1 or 2 inches up into=
the
cut out area. For someone my height, 6'2", the cabane struts would h=
ave to
be lengthened to gain clearance. I can't image lowering the seat any
because my legs are reasonably tight now. Of course, if I didn't use=
a
cushion at all, I'd be 1/2 " lower. When turning base on approach, I=
love
being able to look under the wing and over it at the same time. I fe=
el the
safety factor, alone is worth the lose of a few square feet of wing.
>
>I do have a problem I could use some suggestions on. The Ford Escor=
t with
straight pipes is pretty loud--probably an understatement! With tight
earphones in my crash helmet, it doesn't bother me at all. I need a
simple, compact way to cut the noise down some without losing its
distinctive sound. I have all four exhaust pipes going into a single=
tube
which is around 2 =BD or 3 inches in diameter--can't remember exactly=
. I
don't want to add anything with much leverage because of the vibratio=
n and
cracking. I've heard that a motorcycle spark arrestor might cut the
noise a
little. I don't want to got to a full exhaust system with a bulky mu=
ffler
hanging in the airstream such as some of the 2-stroke people have.
Suggestions???
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Warren Shoun <wbnb(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Corvair powered take off distance? |
Hi Larry,
Still building my Piet. Have flown 2 others. 1200' will give you more
than enough peace of mind. The 65 hp version I flew got off in less than 400'
and the 85 hp version was off by the time I had gently put in full throttle.
Best Regards,
Warren
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Corvair powered take off distance? |
Back in the late '60's I operated a 150 out of 1100 feet with absolutely no
problems. Was in western Kansas, I forget the MSL, but over 1000'. If
Wichita iron can hack it, no reason a high-powered Peit couldn't (provided the
engine runs as advertized, you aren't over gross and there isn't too much tail
wind component of course)
Right now we're operating a T41, a J3 and a PA-30 [that's a Twin Commanche]
off a 2100 foot "zee" shaped grass strip surrounded by trees...break ground,
turn right, turn left, look up at the trees on all sides.
Bottom line: Learn YOUR airplane, practice, don't get cocky, practice, enjoy.
Ed
________________________________________________________________________________
oil can wrote:
> My brother in law used pro seal on his rv-6a, and it worked out well,
> but he said the smell was gastly to overpowering! A must do outside.
> Also I've heard that proseal will not tolerate any gasoline that
> contains alcohol. Alcohol will melt the proseal out of the tank walls.
>
> Fiberglass tanks are ,(from what I hear) the same way...no alcohol can
> be mixted in with the gas.
>
> As for me, I will weld mine from 040 alum using flux core rod. But I do
> have some alum welding exp.
>
What type of set-up are you using for your alum welding?
Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Wing cutout and engine noise |
Hi! I have been following the discussion with interest, particularly
regarding the use of the Ford Escort engine. Is there anything that you
can share with how to convert/use as an aircraft engine? Year, type,
power, type of reduction etc? Corvairs are getting darn hard to find!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Beanlands <kbeanlan(at)spots.ab.ca> |
This is not necessarily true. Depending on the type and brand of glass
resign you use, you may or may not have problems. Most of the glass boats
I've seen use a molded fiberglass tank of some sort. There are also
sloshing compounds to use inside the tank that will make it impervious to
any fuels. The big problem with fiberglass tanks is to make sure that they
are well bonded (electrically) to the frame. Static sparcs are a definite
killer.
GM even sent out a letter to thier customers that have trucks warning
about filling those plastic fuel containers. If the truck is equipped with
a plastic boxliner, there is no way to dissapate the static charge that
will build as you fill the gas can in the back of the truck. Thier
suggestion was to place the cans on the ground while refueling and lifting
them back into the truck when done. Simple fix, but it's amazing how many
people are nort aware that there is any danger at all, like me. I've
filled hundreds of gallons into those plastic cans (we use autogas in our
Cessna 180 floatplane) in the back of such a truck. I was lucky and didn't
have any problems, but we certainly don't do it any more.
Ken
On Tue, 24 Nov 1998, oil can wrote:
> Fiberglass tanks are ,(from what I hear) the same way...no alcohol can
> be mixted in with the gas.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William Conway <conwayw(at)ricks.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing cutout and engine noise |
Ian, I have a 1986 1.9L Ford Escort in my plane. It is converted using
the conversion kit once marketed by Ed. Libtz, a Canadian Airline Pilot.
I probably didn't spell his name correctly. As far as I know the kit
isn't available any longer. Basically, the engine is turned around, the
distributor is moved and operated by a 1 to 1 cogbelt from the overhead
cam pully on the serpentine belt end of the engine. A cast iron 2.5 to 1
reduction psru is created on the other end. Basically a small cog pully
is bolted to the center of the flywheel and a larger one to the front of
the engine using just two bolts and a spindle with tapered bearings. The
prop is bolted directly to the larger cog pully. My unit has about 66
hours flying time with no major problems. The carb is modified slightly
but other wise the engine is stock with both starter and alternator.
Total weight is around 300 lbs with around 80 hp. My plane solo takes off
in 2-300 feet and climbs like crazy; this is from a strip located at 4860
feet altitude.
>>> Ian Holland 11/25 11:24 AM >>>
Hi! I have been following the discussion with interest, particularly
regarding the use of the Ford Escort engine. Is there anything that you
can share with how to convert/use as an aircraft engine? Year, type,
power, type of reduction etc? Corvairs are getting darn hard to find!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
Guys- Just surfed over to Grant's BPA site and he says that the
EAA and Tom Poberezny enthusiastically support a mass fly-in
to celebrate the first flight of an Air Camper 70 years ago !!
(Grant has some connections at EAA and is well respected.....so
this could really be a shot in the arm for Piet and would-be Piet
builders, eh ?)
I hope that all of you guys who are 'close' will burn the midnight
oil this Jan-June to wrap it up and get the time flown off so you
can join us. Don't let flying into OSH scare you. It's easy with
a no radio waiver. More on that later. I did it this year and it
was my first time flying into EAA and was a piece of cake. Really.
All it cost me was 32 cents for the norad postcard clearance.
You don't pay a nickel for parking there either. (unless you are
camping) You just buy admission like all the other people.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
Whats the date for 1999 Fly-In? This year we flew in on our Harley, next
year we may fly in on our Nissan W/Camper and in 2000 we may just fly in
our airplane.
For those who don't ride motorcycles, EAA had a special open house for
all the Harley riders who were back for Harley's 95th Birthday Party and
was selling T Shirts with a picture of an Airplane and a Harley with the
inscription, "The Best of Both Worlds" I agree, Our trip back was over
5000 miles round trip.
Gordon
Michael D Cuy wrote:
> Guys- Just surfed over to Grant's BPA site and he says that the
> EAA and Tom Poberezny enthusiastically support a mass fly-in
> to celebrate the first flight of an Air Camper 70 years ago !!
> (Grant has some connections at EAA and is well respected.....so
> this could really be a shot in the arm for Piet and would-be Piet
> builders, eh ?)
>
> I hope that all of you guys who are 'close' will burn the midnight
> oil this Jan-June to wrap it up and get the time flown off so you
> can join us. Don't let flying into OSH scare you. It's easy with
> a no radio waiver. More on that later. I did it this year and it
> was my first time flying into EAA and was a piece of cake. Really.
> All it cost me was 32 cents for the norad postcard clearance.
> You don't pay a nickel for parking there either. (unless you are
> camping) You just buy admission like all the other people.
> Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | AirNav.com --> Cool Site |
I had a friend show me a site he came accross while surfing along:
http://www.airnav.com
It is not 'official' information, but it did have a really neat
fuel pricing finder for every airport within 45 miles of a
user input choice airport.
It might really surprise you where the least costly may
be for a given airport!
David Scott
Washington, IL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Warren Shoun <wbnb(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AirNav.com --> Cool Site |
Hey David,
Cool Web Page! Thanks!
Warren
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave and Connie <dmatt(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | plywood and doug fir |
Is there any reason not to order rib gusset plywood from
Balsa USA? They are a model airplane supplier that sells
1/16" birch ply in 12"x48" pieces. The price works out to
about $55 for a 4'x8'sheet. This is a whole lot cheaper
than AAS gets. Plus the little sheets are a lot easier to
handle.
Also, how much weigh would building from Douglas Fir add?
I am considering using local materials. The little sticks
are easily gotten out of fir. I would probably still go
with sitka for the spars and longerons.
Dave
Haven't ordered the plans yet but figuring out the options.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: plywood and doug fir |
Dave,
As far as I can figure, the model plywood is adequate for gussets. Fir will
add about ten per-cent weight to your wood structure, but is about 25%
stronger, so you could, carefully, reduce dimensions some. Be aware that this
may have major consequences later when you try to fit things together, but if
you are careful, and think things through thoroughly first, you should be able
to avoid major problems. I'm using some fir, and find it less pleasant to
work with than spruce...it is more brittle, which makes it prone to splitting
and it has nastier slivers. It is considerably cheaper, though, so you pays
your money and you takes your chances. Keep building!
Don Cooley
________________________________________________________________________________
unsubscribe
unsubscribe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Neal <llneal(at)earthlink.net> |
Steve,
Just wanted to let you know that while it's often not expressed, we all
appreciate the work you do to keep this discussion group going!
This has got to be difficult, especially as you are now well along in
building hours and way past "sawdust days". But we appreciate the heck
out of this list.
Great job Stevee! - Piet's forever!!!
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: plywood and doug fir |
The 1/16" birch plywood from Balsa USA is suitable for the gussets. I used it
for some of mine, and have used it extensively in building model r.c. planes,
and find it a high quality plywood.
Douglas Fir, acording to AC 43.13 - 1A / 2a, exceeds the strength of spruce
but is more difficult to work with, having a tendency to split and splinter.
It is 10% heavier, but 10% stronger. I used it for my 3/4" spars, and
longerons. Port Orford Cedar is also a replacement for spruce, and is readily
available at local lumber stores. When choosing wood from the lumber store,
you should take your time in selecting lumber with few knots (cut the knots
out) and straight grain.
Chuck
"A superior pilot uses superior judgment to avoid those situations
which require the use of superior skill"
________________________________________________________________________________
Bravo !! Bravo !! Stevee !!!
Many thanks !!
Chuck
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
Hear hear!
John Mc
-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Neal <llneal(at)earthlink.net>
Date: Saturday, November 28, 1998 7:58 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Hey Stevee!
>Steve,
>
>Just wanted to let you know that while it's often not expressed, we all
>appreciate the work you do to keep this discussion group going!
>This has got to be difficult, especially as you are now well along in
>building hours and way past "sawdust days". But we appreciate the heck
>out of this list.
>
>Great job Stevee! - Piet's forever!!!
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Amen to that!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | michael list <mclist(at)ptw.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Custom planes |
Ken,
I picked up the Custom Planes as well after seeing the article on the
Pietenpol. Loved the pictures, but some of the info is bad, such as a
VW engine being too heavy for an Air Camper. Just the opposite, it is
too light, and not enough torque, either. Saw some errors in the other
articles as well. Seems typical for a new publication, give them time
to get their reporting straight, but be careful of everything they say
for now.
Mike
Ken Beanlands wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I picked up a copy of Dec/98 Custom Planes, the new Private Pilot
> bi-monthly magazine. There's an article (I have to admit, I haven't read
> it yet) on the Piet right at the end of the mag. There's also a good
> article on fabric covering. It's only the forth edition but I have to say
> that it's quite a good technical magazine.
>
> Ken.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | oil can <oilcanbob(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: plywood and doug fir |
I used plywood from the local hobby store for some of my rib gussets
when I ran out of the aircraft stuff. My worry was that the glue might
not be sound in wet weather, so I soaked some of both types, and found
the hobby store stuff to handle the several day water soak test just as
well as the airplane grade wood.
ocb
>From steve(at)byu.edu Sat Nov 28 16:16:52 1998
>Received: from adena.byu.edu ("port 4802"@adena.byu.edu)
> by EMAIL1.BYU.EDU (PMDF V5.1-10 #U3118)
> with ESMTP id <01J4PQS6NOVO90UCSW(at)EMAIL1.BYU.EDU> for
oilcanbob(at)hotmail.com;
>Date: Sat, 28 Nov 1998 19:12:48 -0600
>From: Dave and Connie <dmatt(at)frontiernet.net>
>Subject: plywood and doug fir
>Sender: Maiser(at)adena.byu.edu
>To: Pietenpol Discussion
>Errors-to: Steve(at)byu.edu
>Reply-to: Pietenpol Discussion
>Message-id: <2D36B6A3251(at)adena.byu.edu>
>MIME-version: 1.0
>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32) (via Mercury
MTS
> v1.43 (NDS)) (via Mercury MTS v1.43 (NDS))
>Comments: Originally To: "Pietenpol Discussion"
>X-Listname:
>
>Is there any reason not to order rib gusset plywood from
>Balsa USA? They are a model airplane supplier that sells
>1/16" birch ply in 12"x48" pieces. The price works out to
>about $55 for a 4'x8'sheet. This is a whole lot cheaper
>than AAS gets. Plus the little sheets are a lot easier to
>handle.
>
>Also, how much weigh would building from Douglas Fir add?
>I am considering using local materials. The little sticks
>are easily gotten out of fir. I would probably still go
>with sitka for the spars and longerons.
>
>Dave
>Haven't ordered the plans yet but figuring out the options.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: plywood and doug fir |
Probably the Hobby Wholesalers buy from the same source as the Aircraft
Supply companys. I have found that anything associated with aircraft or
Marine stuff is costed out higher. Maybe they think Airplane Builders and
Boaters are from the rich crowd.
A friend of mine in Nome Alaska gave me an email address of a person who
deals in Sitka Spruce so I emailed him. Never got a reply as I was asking
for pricing information.
Gordon
Arkie's Air Acres
oil can wrote:
> I used plywood from the local hobby store for some of my rib gussets
> when I ran out of the aircraft stuff. My worry was that the glue might
> not be sound in wet weather, so I soaked some of both types, and found
> the hobby store stuff to handle the several day water soak test just as
> well as the airplane grade wood.
>
> ocb
>
> >From steve(at)byu.edu Sat Nov 28 16:16:52 1998
> >Received: from adena.byu.edu ("port 4802"@adena.byu.edu)
> > by EMAIL1.BYU.EDU (PMDF V5.1-10 #U3118)
> > with ESMTP id <01J4PQS6NOVO90UCSW(at)EMAIL1.BYU.EDU> for
> oilcanbob(at)hotmail.com;
> >Date: Sat, 28 Nov 1998 19:12:48 -0600
> >From: Dave and Connie <dmatt(at)frontiernet.net>
> >Subject: plywood and doug fir
> >Sender: Maiser(at)adena.byu.edu
> >To: Pietenpol Discussion
> >Errors-to: Steve(at)byu.edu
> >Reply-to: Pietenpol Discussion
> >Message-id: <2D36B6A3251(at)adena.byu.edu>
> >MIME-version: 1.0
> >X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32) (via Mercury
> MTS
> > v1.43 (NDS)) (via Mercury MTS v1.43 (NDS))
> >Comments: Originally To: "Pietenpol Discussion"
> >X-Listname:
> >
> >Is there any reason not to order rib gusset plywood from
> >Balsa USA? They are a model airplane supplier that sells
> >1/16" birch ply in 12"x48" pieces. The price works out to
> >about $55 for a 4'x8'sheet. This is a whole lot cheaper
> >than AAS gets. Plus the little sheets are a lot easier to
> >handle.
> >
> >Also, how much weigh would building from Douglas Fir add?
> >I am considering using local materials. The little sticks
> >are easily gotten out of fir. I would probably still go
> >with sitka for the spars and longerons.
> >
> >Dave
> >Haven't ordered the plans yet but figuring out the options.
> >
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Something nice to come across this Monday morning.... We have nearly 120
subscribers.
Thanks all!
Steve E.
-----Original Message-----
Larry Neal
Sent: Saturday, November 28, 1998 7:57 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Hey Stevee!
Steve,
Just wanted to let you know that while it's often not expressed, we all
appreciate the work you do to keep this discussion group going!
This has got to be difficult, especially as you are now well along in
building hours and way past "sawdust days". But we appreciate the heck
out of this list.
Great job Stevee! - Piet's forever!!!
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Piet parts for sale |
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Thursday, November 26, 1998 8:46 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List:
Hey Guys,
I have a pietenpol project for sale in East Texas, less wing, wingstruts,
prop, engine, insruments, and covering. $1,500. I made a web page for it
with all the information on it and a picture.
http://www2.1starnet.com/ferguson/peitenpol/index.htm
Williams Ferguson
fergus(at)1starnet.com
"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | fishin <fishin(at)wwa.com> |
I've been visiting this group for several months now and totally enjoy and
am being educated by the discussions.sometimes we take a service such as
yours for granted and should'nt. Add my name to those who say
THANKS!!!.don't ever let the juices stop flowing.
JoeC
>
>Amen to that!
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Beanlands <kbeanlan(at)spots.ab.ca> |
| Subject: | A-75 parts for sale |
Hi,
After finding out that the crankshaft for my C-85 was out of limits, I
sourced a complete A-75-8 engine in BC for $1500 CDN with a good, tagged
crank ( the engine was disassembled ) and a prop. Yesterday we got home
from the 14 hr round trip to BC with the engine tucked away in the back of
the truck.
The engine was better than I could have hoped. I was expecting a tapered
A-65/A-75 crankshaft. Instead, it had been overhauled sometime in the past
and a FLANGED C-85 had been installed. This was a common practice back
when the C-85 was still in production and the A-75 was discontinued. The
part numbers are identical between the 2 cranks. I should have guessed
that it was a flanged crank when I heard that it came with an aluminum
prop. The aluminum props not commonly used used with the tapered shaft
from what I've been told.
I also got a box full of NEW parts. He had purchased a lot of the gaskets,
hoses, clamps, rubber bits, etc to do his overhaul and never used them.
So, now I have a bunch of A-75 (also simular to A-65) parts that I can't
use available for sale:
1 crankcase with rear cover (requires line bore I believe)
4 Cylinders at + 0.015" (one is marginal), includes new ring set and
they've already been honed.
2 Bendix Schintilla Mags and shielded harness (electric equipped C-85's
turn the mags in the opposite direction.
1 camshaft and lifters
Gears for crank and camshaft
4 Intake manifolds (cylinder ends)
1 A-75 intake spider
Soon to have 4 connecting rods (they were accidentally left behind).
I'm open to offers if there's anything here you need.
Thanks,
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: A-75 parts for sale |
>>Hi,
>>After finding out that the crankshaft for my C-85 was out of limits, I
>sourced a complete A-75-8 engine in BC for $1500 CDN with a good, tagged
>crank ( the engine was disassembled ) and a prop.
Ken- I don't need any parts, but CONGRAT's on a really good $$ find.
Mike C. Wow, a prop too !!!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Duprey <j-m-duprey(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Re: plywood and doug fir |
ADonJr(at)aol.com wrote:
>
Can someone give me the contact info for this source of plywood?
Thanks
John
> Dave,
> As far as I can figure, the model plywood is adequate for gussets. Fir will
> add about ten per-cent weight to your wood structure, but is about 25%
> stronger, so you could, carefully, reduce dimensions some. Be aware that this
> may have major consequences later when you try to fit things together, but if
> you are careful, and think things through thoroughly first, you should be able
> to avoid major problems. I'm using some fir, and find it less pleasant to
> work with than spruce...it is more brittle, which makes it prone to splitting
> and it has nastier slivers. It is considerably cheaper, though, so you pays
> your money and you takes your chances. Keep building!
> Don Cooley
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Warren Shoun <wbnb(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: plywood and doug fir |
John,
Also, take a look at
http://www.aitwood.com
particularly their ultra-thin plywood section.
Warren
John Duprey wrote:
> ADonJr(at)aol.com wrote:
> >
>
> Can someone give me the contact info for this source of plywood?
>
> Thanks
> John
> > Dave,
> > As far as I can figure, the model plywood is adequate for gussets. Fir will
> > add about ten per-cent weight to your wood structure, but is about 25%
> > stronger, so you could, carefully, reduce dimensions some. Be aware that this
> > may have major consequences later when you try to fit things together, but
if
> > you are careful, and think things through thoroughly first, you should be able
> > to avoid major problems. I'm using some fir, and find it less pleasant to
> > work with than spruce...it is more brittle, which makes it prone to splitting
> > and it has nastier slivers. It is considerably cheaper, though, so you pays
> > your money and you takes your chances. Keep building!
> > Don Cooley
________________________________________________________________________________
unsubscribe
unsubscribe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave and Connie <dmatt(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: plywood and doug fir |
>ADonJr(at)aol.com wrote:
>>
>
>Can someone give me the contact info for this source of plywood?
>
>Thanks
>John
Balsa USA advertises in RC Modeler (or at leat they did last time
I bought a copy). They are also at http://www.balsausa.com. I
flew one of their kits for years.
Dave
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Owen Davies <owen(at)davies.mv.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Off-topic observation on cost of parts (Was Re: plywood |
and doug
Gordon Brimhall observed:
>I have found that anything associated with aircraft or
>Marine stuff is costed out higher. Maybe they think Airplane Builders and
>Boaters are from the rich crowd.
Fifteen years or so ago, a friend told me of someone he had known at least
ten years earlier. The guy took a radio out of his Bonanza and stopped by
the dealer at---rats! What's that GA airport in New Jersey just south of
the
Hudson?--to order a plate to cover the opening. Didn't think to ask about
the price. How much could a little piece of enameled sheet metal cost?
A week later he stopped by to pick it up and learned the answer: $196! And
this must have been no later than 1975.
Owen Davies
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Warren Shoun <wbnb(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Off-topic observation on cost of parts (Was Re: plywood |
and d
Regarding the cost of the gusset plate plywood, I found that what Anderson
International Trading (http://www.aitwood.com) imports from Finland as
ultra-thin, multi-layered plywood, is in fact the exact same product that is
sold as "aircraft quality". The difference is that they do not stamp it as
"certified" due to the cost of the insurance requirements that they would have
to meet, and the repercussions of the Trial Lawyers Association if your project
should have a traumatic failure and your survior(s) file suit.
________________________________________________________________________________
test
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: plywood and doug fir |
John,
I get mine at the local hobby shop, but I bet you could get a better price
ordering from one of the Model Airplane magazines...they always used to have
lots of ads for mail-order houses.
Good hunting!
Don Cooley
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Beanlands <kbeanlan(at)spots.ab.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: A-75 parts for sale |
Hi,
Thanks to everyone who responded. Everything has been sold! You have to
love the internet!
Ken
On Mon, 30 Nov 1998, Ken Beanlands wrote:
> So, now I have a bunch of A-75 (also simular to A-65) parts that I can't
> use available for sale:
>
> 1 crankcase with rear cover (requires line bore I believe)
>
> 4 Cylinders at + 0.015" (one is marginal), includes new ring set and
> they've already been honed.
>
> 2 Bendix Schintilla Mags and shielded harness (electric equipped C-85's
> turn the mags in the opposite direction.
>
> 1 camshaft and lifters
>
> Gears for crank and camshaft
>
> 4 Intake manifolds (cylinder ends)
>
> 1 A-75 intake spider
>
> Soon to have 4 connecting rods (they were accidentally left behind).
>
> I'm open to offers if there's anything here you need.
> Thanks,
> Ken
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mboynton(at)excite.com |
Does anyone know...
Are there any differences between the plans sets offered by Orin Hoopman and
Donald Pietenpol? If no substantial differences, is either one a clearer
reproduction than the other?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Warren Shoun <wbnb(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Plans question |
I have a copy of each. Both are drawn by Orin Hoopman. My most recent
purchase was from Orin, and is a black & white copy that is very easy to read.
Personally, would very strongly suggest that you also purchase the 1932 &
1933 Flying & Glider Manual reproduction from the EAA. Each has an excellent
article by Mr Pietenpol about the Air Camper and the Sky Scout, which I found to
be very informative and helpful and corrects a couple of minor errors on the
plans.
Regards,
Warren
mboynton(at)excite.com wrote:
> Does anyone know...
>
> Are there any differences between the plans sets offered by Orin Hoopman and
> Donald Pietenpol? If no substantial differences, is either one a clearer
> reproduction than the other?
>
> _______________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Plans question |
I don't really know the answer. I heard that you can build the Pietenpol from
the 1933 book from EAA for 4.95. I will be buying that before I spend 75.00 to
the Pietenpol Family.
Grega sells plans for 25.00 but I don't know how original, they are.
If you find good information, let me know. I already own plans for three
airplanes. I have become a plans collector without even trying.
Gordon
mboynton(at)excite.com wrote:
> Does anyone know...
>
> Are there any differences between the plans sets offered by Orin Hoopman and
> Donald Pietenpol? If no substantial differences, is either one a clearer
> reproduction than the other?
>
> _______________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
| Subject: | Re: Plans question |
Gordon
Grega's plans are for a different airplane. It is very similar to a
Pietenpol, but few components would interchange. I suspect that when he drew
his plans he had access to a lot of Piper Cub parts. I have Grega's plans
and a set of 1934 Pietenpol plans drawn by Orin. I concur with the
suggestion to buy the EAA reprints of the Flying and Gliding magazines.
Interesting tips and pictures. I started building from Grega's plans before
I knew the difference. Now I am taking what I think is the best of both.
Richard DeCosta's Image site has a picture (JM-Assemb1)of what I have so far
except that I have all the ribs. If you study the fuselage sides you can
compare the differences with Pietenpols. Either one should be fun to fly!
John Mc
-----Original Message-----
From: Gordon Brimhall
Date: Tuesday, December 01, 1998 5:08 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans question
>I don't really know the answer. I heard that you can build the Pietenpol
from
>the 1933 book from EAA for 4.95. I will be buying that before I spend 75.00
to
>the Pietenpol Family.
>
>Grega sells plans for 25.00 but I don't know how original, they are.
>
>If you find good information, let me know. I already own plans for three
>airplanes. I have become a plans collector without even trying.
>
>Gordon
>
>
>mboynton(at)excite.com wrote:
>
>> Does anyone know...
>>
>> Are there any differences between the plans sets offered by Orin Hoopman
and
>> Donald Pietenpol? If no substantial differences, is either one a clearer
>> reproduction than the other?
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Warren Shoun <wbnb(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Plans question |
I also have the Grega plans. They have a number of major differences from
the
Orin Hoopman plans. In my opinion, the biggest item about them, is that they are
designed to use many of the Piper J-3 series of available parts, including
Lyc/Cont. engine, prop, cowl, etc., for ease and speed of construction. Has
different placement of fuselage braces, modified airfoil and placement of spars,
different hardware and motor mount, J-3 landing gear and fuel tank and has entire
fuselage from firewall to tailpost plywood covered.
Must note that I developed many good and useful ideas for my Piet, that is
under construction, from these plans, and have nothing negative to say about them.
Warren
Gordon Brimhall wrote:
> I don't really know the answer. I heard that you can build the Pietenpol from
> the 1933 book from EAA for 4.95. I will be buying that before I spend 75.00 to
> the Pietenpol Family.
>
> Grega sells plans for 25.00 but I don't know how original, they are.
>
> If you find good information, let me know. I already own plans for three
> airplanes. I have become a plans collector without even trying.
>
> Gordon
>
> mboynton(at)excite.com wrote:
>
> > Does anyone know...
> >
> > Are there any differences between the plans sets offered by Orin Hoopman and
> > Donald Pietenpol? If no substantial differences, is either one a clearer
> > reproduction than the other?
> >
> > _______________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Plans question |
Thanks John
The information is interesting, I thought all of them drew plans of the same
plane. But it is good that they all are fun to fly.
Gordon
John McNarry wrote:
> Gordon
>
> Grega's plans are for a different airplane. It is very similar to a
> Pietenpol, but few components would interchange. I suspect that when he drew
> his plans he had access to a lot of Piper Cub parts. I have Grega's plans
> and a set of 1934 Pietenpol plans drawn by Orin. I concur with the
> suggestion to buy the EAA reprints of the Flying and Gliding magazines.
> Interesting tips and pictures. I started building from Grega's plans before
> I knew the difference. Now I am taking what I think is the best of both.
> Richard DeCosta's Image site has a picture (JM-Assemb1)of what I have so far
> except that I have all the ribs. If you study the fuselage sides you can
> compare the differences with Pietenpols. Either one should be fun to fly!
>
> John Mc
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gordon Brimhall
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Date: Tuesday, December 01, 1998 5:08 PM
> Subject: Re: Plans question
>
> >I don't really know the answer. I heard that you can build the Pietenpol
> from
> >the 1933 book from EAA for 4.95. I will be buying that before I spend 75.00
> to
> >the Pietenpol Family.
> >
> >Grega sells plans for 25.00 but I don't know how original, they are.
> >
> >If you find good information, let me know. I already own plans for three
> >airplanes. I have become a plans collector without even trying.
> >
> >Gordon
> >
> >
> >mboynton(at)excite.com wrote:
> >
> >> Does anyone know...
> >>
> >> Are there any differences between the plans sets offered by Orin Hoopman
> and
> >> Donald Pietenpol? If no substantial differences, is either one a clearer
> >> reproduction than the other?
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________________
> >
> >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave and Connie <dmatt(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Plans question |
>Thanks John
>
>The information is interesting, I thought all of them drew plans of the same
>plane. But it is good that they all are fun to fly.
>
>Gordon
>
I am going to order the full set from Don Pietenpol. I want the
3 piece wing and the fuselage mods for the Corvair. I have already
received the builder's manual from Don. It is the articles for
both the Air Camper and the Sky Scout along with the engine
conversion info for both the Ford and Corvair. What is probably
more useful are the notes in the back that are additions and
changes to the original articles. What amazes me are how thin
the instructions are for building the plane. The builder's manual
is 74 pages long. I think that the wing instructions for a Zenair
601 are longer than that. I am not sure that the builders manual is
worth the $27 that Don gets but I am glad that I bought it.
Dave - looking for a good source of Doug Fir in western NY
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phil Peck <crusader(at)thegrid.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Plans question |
Gordon, Could you clarify something for me about your note below? Did
you type that letter with a computer that you paid over $1500. for and
are probably paying $20.00 a month internet access.And you will be
building your $10,000. airplane with a $4.95 book because you think the
Pietenpol family (who if had not been ,this discussion group would not
be)is getting rich selling plans for $75.00 Or did I read more into it
than you meant.
phil
Gordon Brimhall wrote:
> I don't really know the answer. I heard that you can build the
> Pietenpol from
> the 1933 book from EAA for 4.95. I will be buying that before I spend
> 75.00 to
> the Pietenpol Family.
>
> Grega sells plans for 25.00 but I don't know how original, they are.
>
> If you find good information, let me know. I already own plans for
> three
> airplanes. I have become a plans collector without even trying.
>
> Gordon
>
> mboynton(at)excite.com wrote:
>
> > Does anyone know...
> >
> > Are there any differences between the plans sets offered by Orin
> Hoopman and
> > Donald Pietenpol? If no substantial differences, is either one a
> clearer
> > reproduction than the other?
> >
> > _______________________________________________________
--
Check out Crusader Toys @
http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Konan <Konan(at)mail.vsu.edu> |
help
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eli or Robert or Teresa Bozeman |
| Subject: | Re: Piet parts for sale |
Hi guys anyone ou there need a Scotts 2000 tail wheel Assembly, its
got new bushings and excelant rubber
Robert B.
---steve(at)byu.edu wrote:
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Thursday, November 26, 1998 8:46 PM
> To: Steve_Eldredge(at)byu.edu
> Subject:
>
>
> Hey Guys,
>
> I have a pietenpol project for sale in East Texas, less wing,
wingstruts,
> prop, engine, insruments, and covering. $1,500. I made a web page
for it
> with all the information on it and a picture.
> http://www2.1starnet.com/ferguson/peitenpol/index.htm
>
> Williams Ferguson
> fergus(at)1starnet.com
> "
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Neal <llneal(at)earthlink.net> |
Konan,
Please be more specific. First drop the sword....
Next wipe the dried blood from your hands....
Finally, try to form complete sentences and explain the following:
Origin of the plans that you are working with
What engine you plan to use.
Type of landing gear
Fabrication process needing clarification
This newsgroup will be happy to help unless it involves the sacking
and/or pillaging of any Griega, Ford, Corvair or Subaru Websites ;-)
LLN
Konan wrote:
> help
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Plans question |
Actually I think you are reading way too much into my note I typed with my
old 486 computer of which I only have one now as I just shipped out my other
old 486 computer to a person in trade for a set of 54.00 plans and I paid
56.00 for shipping. And also I plan to buy all of the little books the EAA
sells and as someone said you could built a Piet with the 4.95 book alone. I
think that was said on this list if not mistaken. Actually I think you are
just trying to make a mound out of a MoleHill. And I would love to be able
to buy a 1500 computer but being retired due to Base Closure and living on
1/3 of what I was used to sometimes I find 75.00 expensive. I already have
three sets of plans for three other airplanes and have not decided on which
one to build yet.
Gordon
Phil Peck wrote:
> Gordon, Could you clarify something for me about your note below? Did
> you type that letter with a computer that you paid over $1500. for and
> are probably paying $20.00 a month internet access.And you will be
> building your $10,000. airplane with a $4.95 book because you think the
> Pietenpol family (who if had not been ,this discussion group would not
> be)is getting rich selling plans for $75.00 Or did I read more into it
> than you meant.
> phil
>
> Gordon Brimhall wrote:
>
> > I don't really know the answer. I heard that you can build the
> > Pietenpol from
> > the 1933 book from EAA for 4.95. I will be buying that before I spend
> > 75.00 to
> > the Pietenpol Family.
> >
> > Grega sells plans for 25.00 but I don't know how original, they are.
> >
> > If you find good information, let me know. I already own plans for
> > three
> > airplanes. I have become a plans collector without even trying.
> >
> > Gordon
> >
> > mboynton(at)excite.com wrote:
> >
> > > Does anyone know...
> > >
> > > Are there any differences between the plans sets offered by Orin
> > Hoopman and
> > > Donald Pietenpol? If no substantial differences, is either one a
> > clearer
> > > reproduction than the other?
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________________
>
> --
> Check out Crusader Toys @
> http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Plans question |
Oh and I forgot to say that I pay only 14.95 per month for unlimited access to
Surfree for my Internet service although I was a Charter Member of Compuserve
many years back as I am a retired Computer Spec. And also I sent a nice letter
to Don Pietenpol commending him on keeping the Pietenpol alive and would be
buying a set of plans from him before building. I also said that I would be
putting a Model "A" engine in mine to be true to scale.
Now can you read anything else into my note?
Gordon
PS. YOU WERE JUST MAKING FUNNIES RIGHT?
Gordon Brimhall wrote:
> Actually I think you are reading way too much into my note I typed with my
> old 486 computer of which I only have one now as I just shipped out my other
> old 486 computer to a person in trade for a set of 54.00 plans and I paid
> 56.00 for shipping. And also I plan to buy all of the little books the EAA
> sells and as someone said you could built a Piet with the 4.95 book alone. I
> think that was said on this list if not mistaken. Actually I think you are
> just trying to make a mound out of a MoleHill. And I would love to be able
> to buy a 1500 computer but being retired due to Base Closure and living on
> 1/3 of what I was used to sometimes I find 75.00 expensive. I already have
> three sets of plans for three other airplanes and have not decided on which
> one to build yet.
>
> Gordon
>
> Phil Peck wrote:
>
> > Gordon, Could you clarify something for me about your note below? Did
> > you type that letter with a computer that you paid over $1500. for and
> > are probably paying $20.00 a month internet access.And you will be
> > building your $10,000. airplane with a $4.95 book because you think the
> > Pietenpol family (who if had not been ,this discussion group would not
> > be)is getting rich selling plans for $75.00 Or did I read more into it
> > than you meant.
> > phil
> >
> > Gordon Brimhall wrote:
> >
> > > I don't really know the answer. I heard that you can build the
> > > Pietenpol from
> > > the 1933 book from EAA for 4.95. I will be buying that before I spend
> > > 75.00 to
> > > the Pietenpol Family.
> > >
> > > Grega sells plans for 25.00 but I don't know how original, they are.
> > >
> > > If you find good information, let me know. I already own plans for
> > > three
> > > airplanes. I have become a plans collector without even trying.
> > >
> > > Gordon
> > >
> > > mboynton(at)excite.com wrote:
> > >
> > > > Does anyone know...
> > > >
> > > > Are there any differences between the plans sets offered by Orin
> > > Hoopman and
> > > > Donald Pietenpol? If no substantial differences, is either one a
> > > clearer
> > > > reproduction than the other?
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________________
> >
> > --
> > Check out Crusader Toys @
> > http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ed Nolan <nv_nolan(at)apollo.commnet.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Plans question |
Out of curiosity, Gordon, what other plan sets do you have?
Ed
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::
>I already own plans for three
>airplanes. I have become a plans collector without even trying.
>
>Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mboynton(at)excite.com |
| Subject: | Re: Plans question |
Thanks, Warren
Mark Boynton
Phoenix, AZ
P.S. Still looking for builders/owners in the Phoenix area.
> I have a copy of each. Both are drawn by Orin Hoopman. My most
recent
> purchase was from Orin, and is a black & white copy that is very easy to
read.
> Personally, would very strongly suggest that you also purchase the
1932 &
> 1933 Flying & Glider Manual reproduction from the EAA. Each has an
excellent
> article by Mr Pietenpol about the Air Camper and the Sky Scout, which I
found to
> be very informative and helpful and corrects a couple of minor errors on
the
> plans.
> Regards,
> Warren
>
> mboynton(at)excite.com wrote:
>
> > Does anyone know...
> >
> > Are there any differences between the plans sets offered by Orin Hoopman
and
> > Donald Pietenpol? If no substantial differences, is either one a
clearer
> > reproduction than the other?
> >
> > _______________________________________________________
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Plans question |
Whatever the plans that you use, I would strongly suggest that you lay
down a large flat surface somewhere (I used two 3/4 inch sheets of oak
plywood nailed to my basement floor) and loft the various compnents.
That way you can work out most of the difficulties before cutting wood
and can transfer exact angles via protractor to your saw. You will find
that the plans are pretty close in most areas, but there are a few
errors that show up in the lofting.The plans that I am using are from
Don Pietenpol (drafted by ren Hoopman) along with the 3 piece wing plans
and Corvair mods) So far, the only difficulties encountered have been
minor and have been resolved either by Don, or this group. Mr Pietenpol
was well advanced for so early a time in avaition history. I also
obtained the Glider and flying manual via the EAA and found it very
helpful.
I bought a set of the Grega plans, but have not used them. If any one
wants a set for reference or to build from, they are for sale cheap ($15
US).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: Plans question |
Gordon/Guys
After you see the Flying/Glider articles and prints you'll want to
order
the full size plans from the Pietenpol family. The dimensions and
drawings in the book are so small that many are illegible without the
aid of an electron scanning microscope.
The 'builder's manual' is a very general guide which will not take you
thru every step required to build. The Pietenpol design leaves a
large
portion of the decision making your responsibility. Sometimes there
is no 'right' or 'wrong' way to do something. It's your choice with a
Piet. You'll run across a million of these nagging questions during
the
building sequence and that's when you sit down and think. ....and
then
post your question here.....or call another Piet builder...etc.
The Grega design is a fun airplane to fly just like the Piet
however
it incorporates some limitations compared to the Piet. You can
adjust your center of gravity on a Piet. You cannot
on a GN-1.
Well you can, you just have to move things like the engine, pilot,
etc. The Piet wing is adjustable fore and aft to accommodate all the
various engines available to be used. Even after you are flying if
you
find the CG is a bit tail heavy you can adjust the wing to fix it.
GN-1's empty weights are generally higher than Pietenpols thus the
reason you see so many GN-1's with more than 65 horse engines.
John Grega took advantage of a 'Pietenpol advertising lull' in the 60's
by placing ads everywhere calling his design an aircamper too.
Naturally people thought an aircamper was an aircamper. Grega has
sold thousands of plans this way because after a while Bernard
Pietenpol just didn't advertise as much. Price of the GN-1 plans
got alot of copies sold too.
I purchased every plan/combo available from Donald Pietenpol
and I think it still was under $200. Clean, new prints. I know a
guy here in Ohio that has probably $20,000 worth of radios in one
of his planes but he was SO cheap that he copied a set of Piet plans
that had been copied before and he couldn't even read them. He
wanted to 'borrow' my new set to make himself and I a 'spare' set of
plans. No way. I have a nice thank you letter signed by Donald
Pietenpol, dated, etc. in my records which I'll enjoy for years to
come.
He's got a set of junky plans he can't read. Anywho, enjoy building
and whichever design you choose they are just a LOAD OF FUN to
fly !!!! Right STeev EEE ???
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: Plans question |
=A0
=2E
=A0Anywho, enjoy building
and whichever design you choose they are just a LOAD OF FUN to
fly !!!! Right STeev EEE ???
Mike C.
[Steve Eldredge]=A0
Right!=A0 Just thinking about skipping out of work this morning to do=
just
that.=A0 During the Thanksgiving break I had great fun in the 60 degr=
ee
weather flying patterns till my rear got sore.=A0 Then I did some mor=
e.=A0 About
sunset the wind picked up.=A0 It had been dead calm all day, but on d=
ownwind
as the sun went down the wind kicked up to about 15kts right down the
runway.=A0 That is when the fun started.=A0 I had been practicing spo=
t landing
for some future, yet unknown spot landing contest, and with the added=
wind,
I decided to do short field full stop spot landings.=A0 I touched dow=
n on the
numbers and hit the brakes and was dead stopped in less than 150'.=
=A0 With
5800' of runway left I did a short field take-off and was off before
the
windsock.=A0 Feeling smug and happy I climbed right up to 200' before=
deciding
that since I had the whole airfield to myself, I could try that again=
.=A0=A0
Well, I didn't bother turning or doing a pattern, I just chopped the
power
and forward slipped back to the runway.=A0 It was a steep decent and
a wierd
angle with all the wind, but I plopped down again still with thousand=
s of
feet of pavement left.=A0 I could have done it all agian, but it was
getting
late, and I wanted to end happy.=A0 Which I did.
"Oh what fun, it is to fly, in a 65 horse open cockpit pla--ine!"=
=A0
=A0Still the season!
=A0
Steve E.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Plans question |
That seems like the normal precedure to lay down 2 sheets of plywood on a
strong frame making sure it is nice and level. The plans for the Mohawk
point that out and then go on the mark out the pieces and cut the pieces and
block them with these nice 1/2" x 2" x 1" pieces of oak you have sawed out
with a radius on one side.
For information sake, what do you actually get from Don Pietenpol for the
75.00 plans cost?
I have heard that the plans and builders manual were a little skimpy, I have
one set of plans, 54.00 that comes with 22 sheets of drawings and a 40 pages
builders manual. and the Mohawk comes with a much more.
It's nice that this design "Pietenpol" has survived so long and enables the
family to continue making a living from it and also gives us a chance to
have a piece of history.
Gordon
Ian Holland wrote:
> Whatever the plans that you use, I would strongly suggest that you lay
> down a large flat surface somewhere (I used two 3/4 inch sheets of oak
> plywood nailed to my basement floor) and loft the various compnents.
> That way you can work out most of the difficulties before cutting wood
> and can transfer exact angles via protractor to your saw. You will find
> that the plans are pretty close in most areas, but there are a few
> errors that show up in the lofting.The plans that I am using are from
> Don Pietenpol (drafted by ren Hoopman) along with the 3 piece wing plans
> and Corvair mods) So far, the only difficulties encountered have been
> minor and have been resolved either by Don, or this group. Mr Pietenpol
> was well advanced for so early a time in avaition history. I also
> obtained the Glider and flying manual via the EAA and found it very
> helpful.
>
> I bought a set of the Grega plans, but have not used them. If any one
> wants a set for reference or to build from, they are for sale cheap ($15
> US).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phil Peck <crusader(at)thegrid.net> |
Thanks for your reply Gordon, I have a modeler friend who constantly
spends hours building beautiful model RC airplanes. When finished he
will take them out to the field and they usually will crash because he
builds his own battery packs out of the (good batteries from old packs)
to save a couple bucks . I give him a bad time about it. But he still
to this day is stuborn about it. But we still are best friends.
I think we all want to build our piets for as little as possable if
nothing else but to brag about our scavaging abilities! So build your
plane like I am with as few dollars as possable, but if I think yours or
anybody elses thriftyness (starting with the plans) is going to effect
the safety Zone I'm going to raze you about it ! I don't mean to make a
mountain out of a mole hill, just reminding all that with this
overpriced airplane stuff that we don't want to see anyone become a
molehill on the side of a mountain!
Self appointed Safety guru
--
Check out Crusader Toys @
http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Plans question |
Well I just spend 30 minutes writing a disertation on plans and such when my old
486 computer locked up. Man wish I had that 1500 computer I am accused of
having.
I have a few pages of the Mohawk Builders manual to read just to see how nice
they are presented but not to build from as I would buy the complete set of 250
pages.
I have the following coming from my computer trade.
Ragwing
RW1 Ultra "Piet"
RW2 BiPlane Spec.
RW8 Piper Colt/vagabond/J-3 Stand Off Scale
Gordon
Ed Nolan wrote:
> Out of curiosity, Gordon, what other plan sets do you have?
>
> Ed
> ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
> :::::::::::::
>
> >I already own plans for three
> >airplanes. I have become a plans collector without even trying.
> >
> >Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Beanlands <kbeanlan(at)spots.ab.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Plans question |
Here's is a tip that worked well for me and the Christavia plans. I found
the 24"x40" sheets a little cumbersome around the shop. I found that a lot
of the time I only checking the plans for reference purposes rather than
getting dimension details. ie, was that 0.063" or 0.071" plate? Also, I
was worried about getting junk on the plans like glue, paint, grease, etc.
At the time, I had access to a 36" wide by unlimited length, monochrome
scanner so I scanned in the entire plan set and re-printed them at 50%. It
also gave me a set of plans to mark up as I made some changes. I'm not
sure what it would cost to scan and reprint, but it worked well for me.
Ken
On Wed, 2 Dec 1998, Michael D Cuy wrote:
>
> I purchased every plan/combo available from Donald Pietenpol
> and I think it still was under $200. Clean, new prints. I know a
> guy here in Ohio that has probably $20,000 worth of radios in one
> of his planes but he was SO cheap that he copied a set of Piet plans
> that had been copied before and he couldn't even read them. He
> wanted to 'borrow' my new set to make himself and I a 'spare' set of
> plans. No way. I have a nice thank you letter signed by Donald
> Pietenpol, dated, etc. in my records which I'll enjoy for years to
> come.
>
> He's got a set of junky plans he can't read. Anywho, enjoy building
> and whichever design you choose they are just a LOAD OF FUN to
> fly !!!! Right STeev EEE ???
>
> Mike C.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Plans question |
Mike
Thanks for your information.
I spent too many years fighting computer software piracy while with the govt
and I don't copy plans. Interesting how many people preach the plans
copyright stuff and you will find thousands of dollars worth of illeagle
software on their computer.
Gordon
PS. But I am still cheap and will look for a good deal.
Michael D Cuy wrote:
> Gordon/Guys
>
> After you see the Flying/Glider articles and prints you'll want to order
> the full size plans from the Pietenpol family. The dimensions and
> drawings in the book are so small that many are illegible without the
> aid of an electron scanning microscope.
> The 'builder's manual' is a very general guide which will not take you
> thru every step required to build. The Pietenpol design leaves a large
> portion of the decision making your responsibility. Sometimes there
> is no 'right' or 'wrong' way to do something. It's your choice with a
> Piet. You'll run across a million of these nagging questions during the
> building sequence and that's when you sit down and think. ....and then
> post your question here.....or call another Piet builder...etc.
> The Grega design is a fun airplane to fly just like the Piet however
> it incorporates some limitations compared to the Piet. You can
> adjust your center of gravity on a Piet. You cannot on a GN-1.
> Well you can, you just have to move things like the engine, pilot,
> etc. The Piet wing is adjustable fore and aft to accommodate all the
> various engines available to be used. Even after you are flying if you
> find the CG is a bit tail heavy you can adjust the wing to fix it.
> GN-1's empty weights are generally higher than Pietenpols thus the
> reason you see so many GN-1's with more than 65 horse engines.
> John Grega took advantage of a 'Pietenpol advertising lull' in the 60's
> by placing ads everywhere calling his design an aircamper too.
> Naturally people thought an aircamper was an aircamper. Grega has
> sold thousands of plans this way because after a while Bernard
> Pietenpol just didn't advertise as much. Price of the GN-1 plans
> got alot of copies sold too.
> I purchased every plan/combo available from Donald Pietenpol
> and I think it still was under $200. Clean, new prints. I know a
> guy here in Ohio that has probably $20,000 worth of radios in one
> of his planes but he was SO cheap that he copied a set of Piet plans
> that had been copied before and he couldn't even read them. He
> wanted to 'borrow' my new set to make himself and I a 'spare' set of
> plans. No way. I have a nice thank you letter signed by Donald
> Pietenpol, dated, etc. in my records which I'll enjoy for years to come.
> He's got a set of junky plans he can't read. Anywho, enjoy building
> and whichever design you choose they are just a LOAD OF FUN to
> fly !!!! Right STeev EEE ???
>
> Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Plans question |
Thanks Steve for that nice message.
That is what it is all about and it does not matter who's open cockpit
design you are having all that fun in.
Gordon
steve(at)byu.edu wrote:
>
>
> .
> Anywho, enjoy building
> and whichever design you choose they are just a LOAD OF FUN
> to
> fly !!!! Right STeev EEE ???
>
> Mike C.
> [Steve Eldredge]
>
> Right! Just thinking about skipping out of work this
> morning to do just that. During the Thanksgiving break I
> had great fun in the 60 degree weather flying patterns till
> my rear got sore. Then I did some more. About sunset the
> wind picked up. It had been dead calm all day, but on
> downwind as the sun went down the wind kicked up to about
> 15kts right down the runway. That is when the fun started.
> I had been practicing spot landing for some future, yet
> unknown spot landing contest, and with the added wind, I
> decided to do short field full stop spot landings. I
> touched down on the numbers and hit the brakes and was dead
> stopped in less than 150'. With 5800' of runway left I did
> a short field take-off and was off before the windsock.
> Feeling smug and happy I climbed right up to 200' before
> deciding that since I had the whole airfield to myself, I
> could try that again. Well, I didn't bother turning or
> doing a pattern, I just chopped the power and forward
> slipped back to the runway. It was a steep decent and a
> wierd angle with all the wind, but I plopped down again
> still with thousands of feet of pavement left. I could have
> done it all agian, but it was getting late, and I wanted to
> end happy. Which I did.
>
> "Oh what fun, it is to fly, in a 65 horse open cockpit
> pla--ine!"
>
> Still the season!
>
> Steve E.
>
Thanks Steve for that nice message.
That is what it is all about and it does not matter who's open cockpit
design you are having all that fun in.
Gordon
steve(at)byu.edu wrote:
.
Anywho, enjoy building
and whichever design you choose they are just a LOAD OF FUN to
fly !!!! Right STeev EEE ???
Mike C.
[Steve
Eldredge]
Right!
Just thinking about skipping out of work this morning to do just that.
During the Thanksgiving break I had great fun in the 60 degree weather
flying patterns till my rear got sore. Then I did some more.
About sunset the wind picked up. It had been dead calm all day, but
on downwind as the sun went down the wind kicked up to about 15kts right
down the runway. That is when the fun started. I had been practicing
spot landing for some future, yet unknown spot landing contest, and with
the added wind, I decided to do short field full stop spot landings.
I touched down on the numbers and hit the brakes and was dead stopped in
less than 150'. With 5800' of runway left I did a short field take-off
and was off before the windsock. Feeling smug and happy I climbed
right up to 200' before deciding that since I had the whole airfield to
myself, I could try that again. Well, I didn't bother turning
or doing a pattern, I just chopped the power and forward slipped back to
the runway. It was a steep decent and a wierd angle with all the
wind, but I plopped down again still with thousands of feet of pavement
left. I could have done it all agian, but it was getting late, and
I wanted to end happy. Which I did.
"Oh
what fun, it is to fly, in a 65 horse open cockpit pla--ine!"
Still the season!
Steve
E.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: Plans question |
>Mike
>
>Thanks for your information.
Gordon- Grant MacLaren has the Pietenpol plans web site listed as:
info and prices. If you haven't had a ride in an Air Camper and ever
in the Clev. OH area, stop by and we'll get you a little front seat stick
time.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Plans Question |
Phil
No problem as I knew you had the best intentions in mind when you were
razing me about it. Thanks for not calling me an old cheap a-- but I guess I
am in a way. But safety is my concern and if you had read any of my earlier
posts you would remember that my dream is to drive into a local Fly In with
my Model "A" Ford pulling my Real Peitenpol which will be powered with a
Model "A" Engine. I want the real plane built as close to the one Barnard
built with some safety features built in also.
I buy cases of batteries and my RC batteries are rechargable.
Thanks
Gordon
Phil Peck wrote:
> Thanks for your reply Gordon, I have a modeler friend who constantly
> spends hours building beautiful model RC airplanes. When finished he
> will take them out to the field and they usually will crash because he
> builds his own battery packs out of the (good batteries from old packs)
> to save a couple bucks . I give him a bad time about it. But he still
> to this day is stuborn about it. But we still are best friends.
> I think we all want to build our piets for as little as possable if
> nothing else but to brag about our scavaging abilities! So build your
> plane like I am with as few dollars as possable, but if I think yours or
> anybody elses thriftyness (starting with the plans) is going to effect
> the safety Zone I'm going to raze you about it ! I don't mean to make a
> mountain out of a mole hill, just reminding all that with this
> overpriced airplane stuff that we don't want to see anyone become a
> molehill on the side of a mountain!
> Self appointed Safety guru
>
> --
> Check out Crusader Toys @
> http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | UUNet <jgw(at)village.uunet.be> |
Even if I didn't think the world of Steve for running our discussion
list...you gotta like anybody that goes by STeevEE!! One day I'm going to
get to go to Brodhead to meet all of you guys! Can't wait!
Jim Wright
jgw(at)village.uunet.be
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov>
Date: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 3:36 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans question
>Gordon/Guys
>
>After you see the Flying/Glider articles and prints you'll want to order
>the full size plans from the Pietenpol family. The dimensions and
>drawings in the book are so small that many are illegible without the
>aid of an electron scanning microscope.
>The 'builder's manual' is a very general guide which will not take you
>thru every step required to build. The Pietenpol design leaves a large
>portion of the decision making your responsibility. Sometimes there
>is no 'right' or 'wrong' way to do something. It's your choice with a
>Piet. You'll run across a million of these nagging questions during the
>building sequence and that's when you sit down and think. ....and then
>post your question here.....or call another Piet builder...etc.
>The Grega design is a fun airplane to fly just like the Piet however
>it incorporates some limitations compared to the Piet. You can
>adjust your center of gravity on a Piet. You cannot on a GN-1.
>Well you can, you just have to move things like the engine, pilot,
>etc. The Piet wing is adjustable fore and aft to accommodate all the
>various engines available to be used. Even after you are flying if you
>find the CG is a bit tail heavy you can adjust the wing to fix it.
>GN-1's empty weights are generally higher than Pietenpols thus the
>reason you see so many GN-1's with more than 65 horse engines.
>John Grega took advantage of a 'Pietenpol advertising lull' in the 60's
>by placing ads everywhere calling his design an aircamper too.
>Naturally people thought an aircamper was an aircamper. Grega has
>sold thousands of plans this way because after a while Bernard
>Pietenpol just didn't advertise as much. Price of the GN-1 plans
>got alot of copies sold too.
>I purchased every plan/combo available from Donald Pietenpol
>and I think it still was under $200. Clean, new prints. I know a
>guy here in Ohio that has probably $20,000 worth of radios in one
>of his planes but he was SO cheap that he copied a set of Piet plans
>that had been copied before and he couldn't even read them. He
>wanted to 'borrow' my new set to make himself and I a 'spare' set of
>plans. No way. I have a nice thank you letter signed by Donald
>Pietenpol, dated, etc. in my records which I'll enjoy for years to come.
>He's got a set of junky plans he can't read. Anywho, enjoy building
>and whichever design you choose they are just a LOAD OF FUN to
>fly !!!! Right STeev EEE ???
>
>Mike C.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Duane and I have decided to make plans for Brodhead 99' We will be flying
from Utah at 70mph. I have decided that I cant miss the 70 year
anniversary.
Steve E.
-----Original Message-----
UUNet
Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 2:46 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: STeevEE
Even if I didn't think the world of Steve for running our discussion
list...you gotta like anybody that goes by STeevEE!! One day I'm going to
get to go to Brodhead to meet all of you guys! Can't wait!
Jim Wright
jgw(at)village.uunet.be
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov>
Date: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 3:36 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans question
>Gordon/Guys
>
>After you see the Flying/Glider articles and prints you'll want to order
>the full size plans from the Pietenpol family. The dimensions and
>drawings in the book are so small that many are illegible without the
>aid of an electron scanning microscope.
>The 'builder's manual' is a very general guide which will not take you
>thru every step required to build. The Pietenpol design leaves a large
>portion of the decision making your responsibility. Sometimes there
>is no 'right' or 'wrong' way to do something. It's your choice with a
>Piet. You'll run across a million of these nagging questions during the
>building sequence and that's when you sit down and think. ....and then
>post your question here.....or call another Piet builder...etc.
>The Grega design is a fun airplane to fly just like the Piet however
>it incorporates some limitations compared to the Piet. You can
>adjust your center of gravity on a Piet. You cannot on a GN-1.
>Well you can, you just have to move things like the engine, pilot,
>etc. The Piet wing is adjustable fore and aft to accommodate all the
>various engines available to be used. Even after you are flying if you
>find the CG is a bit tail heavy you can adjust the wing to fix it.
>GN-1's empty weights are generally higher than Pietenpols thus the
>reason you see so many GN-1's with more than 65 horse engines.
>John Grega took advantage of a 'Pietenpol advertising lull' in the 60's
>by placing ads everywhere calling his design an aircamper too.
>Naturally people thought an aircamper was an aircamper. Grega has
>sold thousands of plans this way because after a while Bernard
>Pietenpol just didn't advertise as much. Price of the GN-1 plans
>got alot of copies sold too.
>I purchased every plan/combo available from Donald Pietenpol
>and I think it still was under $200. Clean, new prints. I know a
>guy here in Ohio that has probably $20,000 worth of radios in one
>of his planes but he was SO cheap that he copied a set of Piet plans
>that had been copied before and he couldn't even read them. He
>wanted to 'borrow' my new set to make himself and I a 'spare' set of
>plans. No way. I have a nice thank you letter signed by Donald
>Pietenpol, dated, etc. in my records which I'll enjoy for years to come.
>He's got a set of junky plans he can't read. Anywho, enjoy building
>and whichever design you choose they are just a LOAD OF FUN to
>fly !!!! Right STeev EEE ???
>
>Mike C.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Plans question |
Thanks for offer. I'm in California and do plan to be at the Piet Fly-In at
Corona Airport in April of 1999.
I have been at the below web site a few times and that is where I got Don
Pietenpol's Email address and sent him a nice post.
Gordon
Michael D Cuy wrote:
> >Mike
> >
> >Thanks for your information.
>
> Gordon- Grant MacLaren has the Pietenpol plans web site listed as:
>
>
> info and prices. If you haven't had a ride in an Air Camper and ever
> in the Clev. OH area, stop by and we'll get you a little front seat stick
> time.
>
> Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave and Connie <dmatt(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Plans question |
>Gordon/Guys
>
-- clip
>The 'builder's manual' is a very general guide which will not take you
>thru every step required to build. The Pietenpol design leaves a large
>portion of the decision making your responsibility. Sometimes there
>is no 'right' or 'wrong' way to do something. It's your choice with a
>Piet. You'll run across a million of these nagging questions during the
>building sequence and that's when you sit down and think. ....and then
>post your question here.....or call another Piet builder...etc.
-- clip some more
Mike,
Does this mean that I should order the original articles in
addition to the Builder's Manual that I got from Don? I think
that the Builder's Manual has the orginal articles in it but
I may have misuderstood.
Dave
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phil Peck <crusader(at)thegrid.net> |
I have Mike Cuy's Piet as my Desktop. Was curious to know about getting
a screen saver with different built Piets. any ideas or directions on
how to make this possable ?
phil
--
Check out Crusader Toys @
http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jmcnarry(at)techplus.com (John McNarry) |
| Subject: | Re: screen saver |
Phil
I have wondered about that before. I have a small program I downloaded that
allows me to run an image collection as a slideshow. It is called Lview. I
don't remeber where on the Net I found it. I sometimes load it and the
images and just leave them running wihile I am in the same room as the
computer and doing other reading, like boring school work! It is really nice
to look up from my work and see a great image of a wonderful airplane. I
don't know how to make it an automatic event though.
Great idea
John Mc
-----Original Message-----
From: Phil Peck <crusader(at)thegrid.net>
Date: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 7:08 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: screen saver
>I have Mike Cuy's Piet as my Desktop. Was curious to know about getting
>a screen saver with different built Piets. any ideas or directions on
>how to make this possable ?
>phil
>
>--
>Check out Crusader Toys @
>http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eli or Robert or Teresa Bozeman |
| Subject: | Scotts 2000 tailwheel |
does anyone need a tailwheel? I've got a spare one
Robert B.
---steve(at)byu.edu wrote:
>
>
> .
>Anywho, enjoy building
> and whichever design you choose they are just a LOAD OF FUN to
> fly !!!! Right STeev EEE ???
>
> Mike C.
> [Steve Eldredge]=A0
>
> Right!=A0 Just thinking about skipping out of work this morning to
do
just
> that.=A0 During the Thanksgiving break I had great fun in the 60 de=
gree
> weather flying patterns till my rear got sore.=A0 Then I did some
more.=A0 About
> sunset the wind picked up.=A0 It had been dead calm all day, but on
downwind
> as the sun went down the wind kicked up to about 15kts right down t=
he
> runway.=A0 That is when the fun started.=A0 I had been practicing s=
pot
landing
> for some future, yet unknown spot landing contest, and with the
added wind,
> I decided to do short field full stop spot landings.=A0 I touched d=
own
on the
> numbers and hit the brakes and was dead stopped in less than 150'.=
=A0
With
> 5800' of runway left I did a short field take-off and was off befor=
e
the
> windsock.=A0 Feeling smug and happy I climbed right up to 200' befo=
re
deciding
> that since I had the whole airfield to myself, I could try that
again.=A0=A0
> Well, I didn't bother turning or doing a pattern, I just chopped th=
e
power
> and forward slipped back to the runway.=A0 It was a steep decent an=
d a
wierd
> angle with all the wind, but I plopped down again still with
thousands of
> feet of pavement left.=A0 I could have done it all agian, but it wa=
s
getting
> late, and I wanted to end happy.=A0 Which I did.
>
> "Oh what fun, it is to fly, in a 65 horse open cockpit pla--ine!"=
=A0
>
>Still the season!
>
>
> Steve E.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Brodhead 99' |
Steve, et al,
I'm still trying to find out what the dates for Brodhead '99 are. I'm
planning to return to Brodhead, (was there in '96 flying my "Rice-Rocket"
[made by Honda]), this time in my '46 'Coupe. I hope it won't be too out of
place among the Piets...it's a fun plane, too. If someone would post the
dates, I would be most appreciative. See ya there!
Don Cooley
P.S. I too have Mike C's Piet as "wallpaper" on my PC. Sometimes I just sit
and look at it, and daydream. Thanx, Mike!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | scherer2(at)airmail.net (Glenn Scherer) |
| Subject: | Re: Plans question |
>It's nice that this design "Pietenpol" has survived so long and enables
the
>family to continue making a living from it and also gives us a chance to
>have a piece of history.
>
>Gordon
I *seriously* doubt that the Pietenpol family makes a living from
selling these plans at $75. I charge $75 *an hour* and drive a Metro.
I would be very surprised if Don sells more than one or two plan sets
a month. Not much of a living. I personally am grateful that he puts
up with the *hassle* of selling plans in order to keep his father's
dream alive. I haven't bought mine yet because I'm still a long way
from building, but when I do I'll get the full set and count it cheap.
PS, I'm using an old 486 computer, too. In the immortal words of Bill
Clinton, "I feel your pain". :)
| | Glenn Scherer
__|
~~~: Farmersville, TX USA
\
) scherer2(at)airmail.net
\/\ /
\_(
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Plans question |
Glenn Scherer wrote:
>
> >It's nice that this design "Pietenpol" has survived so long and enables the
> >family to continue making a living from it and also gives us a chance to
> >have a piece of history.
> >
> >Gordon
>
> I *seriously* doubt that the Pietenpol family makes a living from
> selling these plans at $75. I charge $75 *an hour* and drive a Metro.
> I would be very surprised if Don sells more than one or two plan sets
> a month. Not much of a living. I personally am grateful that he puts
> up with the *hassle* of selling plans in order to keep his father's
> dream alive. I haven't bought mine yet because I'm still a long way
> from building, but when I do I'll get the full set and count it cheap.
>
> PS, I'm using an old 486 computer, too. In the immortal words of Bill
> Clinton, "I feel your pain". :)
>
Who was he saying that too? as he hasn't told the truth in years.
>
> _
> | | Glenn Scherer
> __|
~~~: Farmersville, TX USA
>
Well this old 486 was given to me by my friend who just bought a new 400mhz
system. The one 486 I traded for plans I bought in 94 for 1200.00 and added the
cd and sound system, but still not worth more than 200.00 the first computer I
owned was a Tandy Model one with 4K of ram and a tape drive. I've bought 6 sinse
then. I keep waiting for them to get bigger and faster so maybe next year or
2000 I will finally jump for a new one, should be about 1450mhz by then with
flat 29" screen and only 500.00
Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Duprey <j-m-duprey(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | A newbies plans n question ??? |
Hi Guys:
I have both the EAA's reprint of the flying and glider plans & a set
from Don Pietenpol. On the Large plans and the Flying & Glider drawings
it shows wing rib stock to be 1/2" X 1/4" but in the F&G text it says
1/2" x 1/2" which is correct? Thanks! And thanks to Steve for running
this forum to help guys like me build my airplane.
John Duprey
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: Brodhead 99' |
>Duane and I have decided to make plans for Brodhead 99' We will be
flying
>from Utah at 70mph. I have decided that I cant miss the 70 year
>anniversary.
>YES !!!
>Steve E.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: Plans question |
>Mike,
>
>Does this mean that I should order the original articles in
>addition to the Builder's Manual that I got from Don? I think
>that the Builder's Manual has the orginal articles in it but
>I may have misuderstood.
>
>Dave
Dave- Good question. I think some of the info overlaps between
the two sources in places but with the Piet the more info the better.
Some applies to the Model A builders, some info applies to all,
etc. And even though everyone has heard this a million times from
me, the most valuable help I had in building my plane were all the
books written by Tony Bingelis thru EAA. I think it's $75 or so for
the entire set of 3 or four books but they would make an awesome
Christmas gift. (oh, sorry....I guess if I was politically correct I'd
say 'holiday gift'....but I'm not !)
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Warren Shoun <wbnb(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: A newbies plans n question ??? |
John,
It is 1/2" X 1/4". Also note in the F&G article the rib dimension
correction from 6" to 6 1/8" I believe it is, and the notation of the
direction of the last rib brace piece, as both are structurally
significant. And do take Mike's advice and get all of Tony Bingelis's
books. The plans and the articles give you a lot of tasks to do and Tony
shows you several different ways to do each one, most of the time.
Have Fun
Warren
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ed Nolan <nv_nolan(at)apollo.commnet.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Plans question |
Just bought Tony's two engine books. His others have been an immense help.
While he wrote for Sport Aviation, he would also answer questions via
mail. I wrote to him on several occasions and always received a friendly
and thorough answer.
>the most valuable help I had in building my plane were all the
>books written by Tony Bingelis thru EAA. I think it's $75 or so for
>the entire set of 3 or four books but they would make an awesome
>Christmas gift. (oh, sorry....I guess if I was politically correct I'd
>say 'holiday gift'....but I'm not !)
>
>Mike C.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David B. Schober" <dbs(at)fscvax.wvnet.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: A newbies plans n question ??? |
The 1/2" X 1/4" is the correct size per the plans. This is overkill though.
Many airplanes with higher gross weight use only 1/4" X 1/4", I know of
several airplanes that use 3/16" X 3/16". If you want a good performing
airplane keep it light. If you look at airplanes made by B.H. Pietenpol,
the dimensions of ALL wood parts are actually about 1/16" less than the
plans. He measured to the center of the blade kerf, not the edge of the
blade.
I've been watching all the questions about the plans. I bought mine from
Mr. Pietenpol back in the mid '70's. In the set I have, the dimensions for
the 3 piece wing vary from the one piece. It would be a good idea to verify
all dimensions prior to cutting any wood. A simple method to keep your
weight down if you plan aon a 3 piece wing is to make it 2 piece rather
than 3. The additional fittings and ribs weigh about 6 lbs per side. If you
build one wing with the center section and the other wing with only the
outer panel, you save about 6 lbs. Another important modification is to
build your outboard strut attach fittings in line with the strut. The
original plans call out for the fitting to straddle the spar and attach to
the strut at an acute angle. This puts a bending moment on the fitting and
spar. If you make the fitting and bolt holes in the spar in line with the
strut, it reduces this bending load. Another area to watch is the fuselage
fittings. Some of the fittings will have interference with bolt heads and
nuts if built as drawn. Made cardboard mockups to verify the position of
all hardware before you make the fittings.
John Duprey wrote:
> Hi Guys:
>
> I have both the EAA's reprint of the flying and glider plans & a set
> from Don Pietenpol. On the Large plans and the Flying & Glider drawings
> it shows wing rib stock to be 1/2" X 1/4" but in the F&G text it says
> 1/2" x 1/2" which is correct? Thanks! And thanks to Steve for running
> this forum to help guys like me build my airplane.
>
> John Duprey
--
David B.Schober, CPE
Instructor, Aviation Maintenance
Fairmont State College
National Aerospace Education Center
Rt. 3 Box 13
Bridgeport, WV 26330-9503
(304) 842-8300
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mboynton(at)excite.com |
| Subject: | Re: Brodhead 99' |
Steve:
Good for you! Be sure and take lots of pictures to be scanned and accessed
through this discussion group. By the way, how many hours do you estimate
you'll be in the air, to and from, on your trip?
Mark Boynton
Phoenix, AZ
> Duane and I have decided to make plans for Brodhead 99' We will be
flying
> from Utah at 70mph. I have decided that I cant miss the 70 year
> anniversary.
>
> Steve E.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> UUNet
> Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 2:46 PM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: STeevEE
>
>
> Even if I didn't think the world of Steve for running our discussion
> list...you gotta like anybody that goes by STeevEE!! One day I'm going
to
> get to go to Brodhead to meet all of you guys! Can't wait!
>
> Jim Wright
> jgw(at)village.uunet.be
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov>
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Date: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 3:36 PM
> Subject: Re: Plans question
>
>
> >Gordon/Guys
> >
> >After you see the Flying/Glider articles and prints you'll want to order
> >the full size plans from the Pietenpol family. The dimensions and
> >drawings in the book are so small that many are illegible without the
> >aid of an electron scanning microscope.
> >The 'builder's manual' is a very general guide which will not take you
> >thru every step required to build. The Pietenpol design leaves a large
> >portion of the decision making your responsibility. Sometimes there
> >is no 'right' or 'wrong' way to do something. It's your choice with a
> >Piet. You'll run across a million of these nagging questions during the
> >building sequence and that's when you sit down and think. ....and then
> >post your question here.....or call another Piet builder...etc.
> >The Grega design is a fun airplane to fly just like the Piet however
> >it incorporates some limitations compared to the Piet. You can
> >adjust your center of gravity on a Piet. You cannot on a GN-1.
> >Well you can, you just have to move things like the engine, pilot,
> >etc. The Piet wing is adjustable fore and aft to accommodate all the
> >various engines available to be used. Even after you are flying if you
> >find the CG is a bit tail heavy you can adjust the wing to fix it.
> >GN-1's empty weights are generally higher than Pietenpols thus the
> >reason you see so many GN-1's with more than 65 horse engines.
> >John Grega took advantage of a 'Pietenpol advertising lull' in the 60's
> >by placing ads everywhere calling his design an aircamper too.
> >Naturally people thought an aircamper was an aircamper. Grega has
> >sold thousands of plans this way because after a while Bernard
> >Pietenpol just didn't advertise as much. Price of the GN-1 plans
> >got alot of copies sold too.
> >I purchased every plan/combo available from Donald Pietenpol
> >and I think it still was under $200. Clean, new prints. I know a
> >guy here in Ohio that has probably $20,000 worth of radios in one
> >of his planes but he was SO cheap that he copied a set of Piet plans
> >that had been copied before and he couldn't even read them. He
> >wanted to 'borrow' my new set to make himself and I a 'spare' set of
> >plans. No way. I have a nice thank you letter signed by Donald
> >Pietenpol, dated, etc. in my records which I'll enjoy for years to come.
> >He's got a set of junky plans he can't read. Anywho, enjoy building
> >and whichever design you choose they are just a LOAD OF FUN to
> >fly !!!! Right STeev EEE ???
> >
> >Mike C.
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mr. Carmen A. Natalie" <carmen(at)cana.com> |
Hi all.
I came across something that isn't really detailed on the plans, and
which every Piet builder seems to do differently. Where are the cables
for tachometers, water temp guage, etc. routed? The plans seem to
indicate that the throttle linkage should go through the left fuselage
side (plywood) and under the fabric to the engine, but no mention of
these other cables. (No throttle in the front 'pit on the original
plans..). It looks like Bernie routed stuff along the former which is
attached to the ply fuselage side.
I've seen where many builders route all of these cables through the
front 'pit, then hide them with some wood panels. I guess this might
make replacement easier, but still seems to clutter the sides of the
front cockpit. I'd like to avoid having too much 'stuff' hanging out in
the passenger area...
Any thoughts?
--
----------------------
Mr. Carmen A. Natalie
President
CA Natalie Associates, Inc
CANA WebSystems
100 State Street Suite 1040
Albany, New York 12207
http://www.cana.com
phone 518.436.4932
fax 518.436.4933
----------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <<Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: Brodhead 99' |
>GRANT WROTE:
>In conversations with Tom Poberezny, it is clear to me
>that he wants the Piets to be a significant part of Osh '99.
>He has given me the names of people I'm to work with
>at EAA. For starters, read the letter below. I had originally
>asked for permission to fly in in a group AFTER B'head.>>>>
>(maybe Sunday afternoon.) He want us to fly-in together
>for Convention opening -- day 1 or 2.
0000,8080,8080Grant- That opening day worked great
for my trip this year, then
onto Brodhead for the weekend. The parking up there is easier
the first day, after that it bites. Also we could gettoutta there
before
the huge crowds move in on Sat. (we'd be at B-Head !)
After the big weekend people vacate EAA in droves. Who knows,
they might even showcase us in a fly by if we have enough of em.
>I'll keep you posted -- AFTER I finish moving about
>Dec 10 or so. Would you be willing to help organize
>the "fly-in" to Osh? Maybe gather the group in
>Hartford, WI? Maybe be "the contact" with the tower?
0000,8080,8080I could be of help with this thing
I'm sure. My plane doesn't have
a shielded ignition system so I can't use a handheld radio but I
already 'see a way' to make this work if all the guys cooperate.
I went into EAA 98' NORDO this year or 'no radio'. It's really, really
easy at avoids ALL the radio traffic. They land you on a whole
different runway and the only stipulation is that you must be on the
ground by 11 am. If they have an accident or the weather is below
minimums to land NORDO the flashing strobes are going on the
control tower which tells us we can't go in. I'll have to see where
Hartford, WI is, but boy did my trip work out this year by staying
overnight at Watertown. (about 1 hour flight south of EAA)
It was perfect. They have a Holiday Inn Express and Motel 8
right at the airport with food and town an easy walk. I layed over
there the night before EAA started and then took off early and had
no problems at all landing at Oshkosh. (course the weather helped
too) They rolled out the red carpet at Watertown. Anywho, more
later I'm sure. The no radio clearance is done by mailing a
postcard to EAA in May or June, then they mail you back the postcard
with a clearance on it and all the info req'd to land and depart at
EAA.
0000,8080,8080There is even a
FREE video tape the FAA puts out that explains all
the various ways in and out of Osh. Yes, FREE.
Even when I got there the parking was full. I was lucky to have found
a spot close to show center. We might have to have some pull here
to rope off an area where Tom would want us to park
estimating the no. of planes we expect-otherwise we will be parked in
row 155 !
>PS -- the following letter will be published in the
>Jan BPAN --- and on the web when I get a minute.
>
>
>=
=
>BUCKEYE PIETENPOL ASSOCIATION
>7 Crosswinds
>St. Louis MO 63132-4303
>E-Mail: GMacLaren(at)aol.com
>Dec 1, 1998
>
>Mr. Tom Poberezny
>President, EAA
>PO Box 3086
>
>
>
>Dear Tom,
>
>Our members will be very happy to know you enthusiastically endorse
the
>celebration of the 70th anniversary of Bernard Pietenpol's first flight
of the
>Model =93A=94 Ford-Powered Pietenpol Air Camper.
>
>As discussed today, we will be working out the details for having a
fleet of
>twenty or more =93Piets=94 (some =93A=94 powered) arrive and be parked toge=
ther
at
>Wittman Field during the convention.
>
>We will have a multi-media presentation (similar to the one we presented
in
>1989) in the Theater in the Woods at an appropriate time.
>
>We will work with various EAA staff to make AirVenture '99 a great
experience
>for all concerned. Thank you very much and =85
>
>
>Pietenpols forever,
>
>
>
>Grant MacLaren
>Editor, BPA Newsletter
>
>
>CC: All BPA members
> Jack Cox
> Joe Schumacher and Ken White
> Sue Smick, Ray Scholler --
>
>http://users.aol.com/BPANews
>
>
>
>
>
><<<<<<<<
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Silly but Awesome |
>Date: Thu, 03 Dec 1998 10:18:39 -0500
>To: GMacLaren(at)aol.com
>From: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov>
>Subject: Silly but Awesome
>
>Grant- I don't think EAA would go for this silly idea but let me run
>it past you once: Whaddaya think of letting us Pietenpols land behind
>the museum (grass runway at Pioneer Airfield)
>at EAA and all park nearby Bernard's old hangar which
>stands there for a few days ? I've never seen this done before but
>it's just a thought.
>
>Michael
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: Silly but Awesome |
LETS DO IT!!!!
Steve E
-----Original Message-----
Michael D Cuy
Sent: Thursday, December 03, 1998 8:19 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Silly but Awesome
>Date: Thu, 03 Dec 1998 10:18:39 -0500
>To: GMacLaren(at)aol.com
>From: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov>
>Subject: Silly but Awesome
>
>Grant- I don't think EAA would go for this silly idea but let me run
>it past you once: Whaddaya think of letting us Pietenpols land behind
>the museum (grass runway at Pioneer Airfield)
>at EAA and all park nearby Bernard's old hangar which
>stands there for a few days ? I've never seen this done before but
>it's just a thought.
>
>Michael
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Warren Shoun <wbnb(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: cable routing |
Hi Carmen:
Looking at the same issue while I'm under construction. Presently
looking at several PVC type computer cable items that are available in
various colors and dimensions. Most are black and oblong in cross-section
and of a considerable length and strong enough to be walked on in an office
environment. Found these in a woodworkers mail order catalogue for making
computer furniture. I am also looking at computer cable type plugs at the
firewall for the electrical connectors and expect to end up with a wire loom
plan before I begin the electrical. Still reviewing various options
however.
Warren
"Mr. Carmen A. Natalie" wrote:
> Hi all.
> I came across something that isn't really detailed on the plans, and
> which every Piet builder seems to do differently. Where are the cables
> for tachometers, water temp guage, etc. routed? The plans seem to
> indicate that the throttle linkage should go through the left fuselage
> side (plywood) and under the fabric to the engine, but no mention of
> these other cables. (No throttle in the front 'pit on the original
> plans..). It looks like Bernie routed stuff along the former which is
> attached to the ply fuselage side.
>
> I've seen where many builders route all of these cables through the
> front 'pit, then hide them with some wood panels. I guess this might
> make replacement easier, but still seems to clutter the sides of the
> front cockpit. I'd like to avoid having too much 'stuff' hanging out in
> the passenger area...
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> --
> ----------------------
> Mr. Carmen A. Natalie
> President
> CA Natalie Associates, Inc
> CANA WebSystems
> 100 State Street Suite 1040
> Albany, New York 12207
> http://www.cana.com
> phone 518.436.4932
> fax 518.436.4933
> ----------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Brodhead 99' |
What kind of camping arrangements at Broodhead?
We will be pulling our bike with our Camper which we will be staying in. My wife
says the trip on the bike every 5 years is enough as we did it in June 1993 and
1995 and we aren't getting any younger.
This will be a great chance for us to see more Piets and take pictures so we build
ours to the highest safety standard. We plan to be at Corona in April also.
My friend Paul flew into EAA last year from Ca with his Air Force Col. friend and
gave me a second by second account of the landing which was AWSOME I was sitting
here on my computer reading it as I gripped the chair.
Gordon
Looking for Model "A" Engine
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Eli or Robert or Teresa Bozeman |
| Subject: | RE: cable routing |
I made a chase from 6061 al for front hole on the left side and put
frt trottle in same then covered it with same leather that cockpit
trim was made of. Its under left longeron and you realy can't tell
its there. Also used electronic tack from westack, saves problems
with stiff tack cable ( easer to run 2 wire than that big mechanical
tack )
Robert B.
---steve(at)byu.edu wrote:
>
> I just tucked mine up under the upper longeron. Spiral wrapped with
some
> nylon cable shield.
>
> Stevee
>
> -----Original Message-----
Mr.
> Carmen A. Natalie
> Sent: Thursday, December 03, 1998 8:01 AM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: cable routing
>
>
> Hi all.
> I came across something that isn't really detailed on the plans, and
> which every Piet builder seems to do differently. Where are the
cables
> for tachometers, water temp guage, etc. routed? The plans seem to
> indicate that the throttle linkage should go through the left fuselage
> side (plywood) and under the fabric to the engine, but no mention of
> these other cables. (No throttle in the front 'pit on the original
> plans..). It looks like Bernie routed stuff along the former which is
> attached to the ply fuselage side.
>
> I've seen where many builders route all of these cables through the
> front 'pit, then hide them with some wood panels. I guess this might
> make replacement easier, but still seems to clutter the sides of the
> front cockpit. I'd like to avoid having too much 'stuff' hanging
out in
> the passenger area...
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> --
> ----------------------
> Mr. Carmen A. Natalie
> President
> CA Natalie Associates, Inc
> CANA WebSystems
> 100 State Street Suite 1040
> Albany, New York 12207
> http://www.cana.com
> phone 518.436.4932
> fax 518.436.4933
> ----------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Buckeye Pietenpol Association |
How many of you are members of the Buckeye Pietenpol Association?
Is it a good association to belong too?
Isn't this List associated with it?
I'm thinking about joining come January.
I belong to EAA already but not a local chapter yet as none are close to
us.
Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: Buckeye Pietenpol Association |
-----Original Message-----
Gordon Brimhall
Sent: Thursday, December 03, 1998 9:47 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Buckeye Pietenpol Association
How many of you are members of the Buckeye Pietenpol Association?
Most list recipients are I would guess. I held off getting a membership for
about a year after I started my project, I should have just started right
off. Grant does great things for the piet movement and his newsletters are
very good. Unfortunatly he will discontinue being the editor at the year
2000. Anyone know if another good man/woman has stepped up to carry on?
Is it a good association to belong too?
Yes. A very good source of info. He has everything from t-shirts to past
newsletters.
Isn't this List associated with it?
No official tie, but Grant does kindly advertise this list on his web site.
Steve E.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Warren Shoun <wbnb(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Buckeye Pietenpol Association |
Gordon:
Am a member and for the small cost it is worth it. However, (personal
opinion here) this on line forum has provided me with a whole lot more
useful construction tips than the BPA newsletter or webpage.
The newsletter is much more a show & tell forum of who is doing what or
who is planning on doing something someday, than a source of information for
the serious builder.
Having said that, I must come back around and commend Grant for
maintaining a web page and a newsletter that keeps the Pietenpol Ideal alive
and well. That I think is its' real function. Besides that, he is a really
decent human being.
Warren
Gordon Brimhall wrote:
> How many of you are members of the Buckeye Pietenpol Association?
>
> Is it a good association to belong too?
>
> Isn't this List associated with it?
>
> I'm thinking about joining come January.
>
> I belong to EAA already but not a local chapter yet as none are close to
> us.
>
> Gordon
Gordon:
Am a member and for the small cost it is worth it.
However, (personal opinion here) this
on line forum has provided me with a whole lot more useful construction
tips than the BPA newsletter or webpage.
The newsletter is much more a show tell
forum of who is doing what or who is planning on doing something someday,
than a source of information for the serious builder.
Having said that, I must come back around and commend
Grant for maintaining a web page and a newsletter that keeps the Pietenpol
Ideal alive and well. That I think is its' real function. Besides
that, he is a really decent human being.
Warren
Gordon Brimhall wrote:
How many of you are members of the Buckeye Pietenpol
Association?
Is it a good association to belong too?
Isn't this List associated with it?
I'm thinking about joining come January.
I belong to EAA already but not a local chapter yet as none are close
to
us.
Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Buckeye Pietenpol Association |
steve(at)byu.edu wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> Gordon Brimhall
> Sent: Thursday, December 03, 1998 9:47 AM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Buckeye Pietenpol Association
>
> How many of you are members of the Buckeye Pietenpol Association?
>
> Most list recipients are I would guess. I held off getting a membership for
> about a year after I started my project, I should have just started right
> off. Grant does great things for the piet movement and his newsletters are
> very good. Unfortunatly he will discontinue being the editor at the year
> 2000. Anyone know if another good man/woman has stepped up to carry on?
>
> Is it a good association to belong too?
>
> Yes. A very good source of info. He has everything from t-shirts to past
> newsletters.
>
> Isn't this List associated with it?
>
> No official tie, but Grant does kindly advertise this list on his web site.
>
> Steve E.
Thanks for info. Yes that is a must do come January, I remember getting
information about this list their but thought it was their list. I guess untell
you actually get your Piet completed you are just a Wannabie, so that is fine as
I have plans coming for my Ultralite Piet and I am saving for my other plans
from Don Pietenpol.
I was NewsLetter Editor for the Home Brewing Club I started back in 1991, Had
the duties for three yrs off and on. Not a gravy job as one member found out
after begging to take over the position. After 6 months she quit and I ended up
with it again.
Three Cheers to Grant for doing a Thankless Job.
How many members in the Association now?
My problem with Hobbies is I never go just half way, always get so involved like
the Sailboating and Home Brewing, Motorcycles. Maybe it is just anything with a
motor.
Anybody need a dozen Home Brewing Books and a couple thousand in equipment?
Trade for airplane stuff. We had a Retail Brew Shop for 4 yrs.
Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Buckeye Pietenpol Association |
Thanks Warren
I understand what you mean. I am on many lists while trying to decide on
what will be my first plane to build.I figure my past history of a Model
Designer, Aircraft Machinist will finally come in handy. I found a web
page, now can't remember his name but on here that has the most
Beautiful Web Page I have ever found, You know who you are, Has a Paint
area that you can download a blank Piet and then paint it. Love That
site.
Now to just get some information on Brodhead as the EAA thing is July
28th thru Aug 3rd
1999 I am interested in the Camping Arrangements, Cost if any and so
fourth. We have friends that live in the Milwaukee area that we stayed
with last June but I would want to stay where the action is in our
Camper.
Gordon
Warren Shoun wrote:
> Gordon:
> Am a member and for the small cost it is worth it. However,
> (personal opinion here) this on line forum has provided me with a
> whole lot more useful construction tips than the BPA newsletter or
> webpage.
> The newsletter is much more a show & tell forum of who is doing
> what or who is planning on doing something someday, than a source of
> information for the serious builder.
> Having said that, I must come back around and commend Grant for
> maintaining a web page and a newsletter that keeps the Pietenpol Ideal
> alive and well. That I think is its' real function. Besides that, he
> is a really decent human being.
> Warren
>
>
> Gordon Brimhall wrote:
>
>> How many of you are members of the Buckeye Pietenpol Association?
>>
>> Is it a good association to belong too?
>>
>> Isn't this List associated with it?
>>
>> I'm thinking about joining come January.
>>
>> I belong to EAA already but not a local chapter yet as none are
>> close to
>> us.
>>
>> Gordon
>
Thanks Warren
I understand what you mean. I am on many lists while trying to decide
on what will be my first plane to build.I figure my past history of a Model
Designer, Aircraft Machinist will finally come in handy. I found a web
page, now can't remember his name but on here that has the most Beautiful
Web Page I have ever found, You know who you are, Has a Paint area that
you can download a blank Piet and then paint it. Love That site.
Now to just get some information on Brodhead as the EAA thing is July
28th thru Aug 3rd
1999 I am interested in the Camping Arrangements, Cost if any and so
fourth. We have friends that live in the Milwaukee area that we stayed
with last June but I would want to stay where the action is in our Camper.
Gordon
Warren Shoun wrote:
Gordon:
Am a member and for the small cost it is worth it.
However, (personal opinion here) this
on line forum has provided me with a whole lot more useful construction
tips than the BPA newsletter or webpage.
The newsletter is much more a show tell
forum of who is doing what or who is planning on doing something someday,
than a source of information for the serious builder.
Having said that, I must come back around and commend
Grant for maintaining a web page and a newsletter that keeps the Pietenpol
Ideal alive and well. That I think is its' real function. Besides
that, he is a really decent human being.
Warren
Gordon Brimhall wrote:
How many of you are members of the Buckeye Pietenpol
Association?
Is it a good association to belong too?
Isn't this List associated with it?
I'm thinking about joining come January.
I belong to EAA already but not a local chapter yet as none are close
to
us.
Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mboynton(at)excite.com |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Brodhead 99' |
Steve:
Hey! That's right. Flight of Passage should be required reading for all of
you who will make th pilgrimage. NEWS FLASH - All of you planning to make
the trip should get a copy of Flight of Passage, by Rinker Buck, and read it
prior to the trip.
> Many, many hours. Our preliminary guess for vacation time planing is a
week
> each way. I suspect we can do it in 2 8 hour days and one 10 hour day,
> however. Thanks to you Mark, after reading Flight of Passage by Rinker
> Buck, This trip has taken on new life. I really want to do it!
>
> Steve E.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> mboynton(at)excite.com
> Sent: Thursday, December 03, 1998 7:35 AM
> To: Pietenpol Discussion
> Subject: Re: Brodhead 99'
>
>
> Steve:
>
> Good for you! Be sure and take lots of pictures to be scanned and
accessed
> through this discussion group. By the way, how many hours do you
estimate
> you'll be in the air, to and from, on your trip?
>
> Mark Boynton
> Phoenix, AZ
>
>
>
> > Duane and I have decided to make plans for Brodhead 99' We will be
> flying
> > from Utah at 70mph. I have decided that I cant miss the 70 year
> > anniversary.
> >
> > Steve E.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > UUNet
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 2:46 PM
> > To: Pietenpol Discussion
> > Subject: STeevEE
> >
> >
> > Even if I didn't think the world of Steve for running our discussion
> > list...you gotta like anybody that goes by STeevEE!! One day I'm going
> to
> > get to go to Brodhead to meet all of you guys! Can't wait!
> >
> > Jim Wright
> > jgw(at)village.uunet.be
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)lerc.nasa.gov>
> > To: Pietenpol Discussion
> > Date: Wednesday, December 02, 1998 3:36 PM
> > Subject: Re: Plans question
> >
> >
> > >Gordon/Guys
> > >
> > >After you see the Flying/Glider articles and prints you'll want to
order
> > >the full size plans from the Pietenpol family. The dimensions and
> > >drawings in the book are so small that many are illegible without the
> > >aid of an electron scanning microscope.
> > >The 'builder's manual' is a very general guide which will not take you
> > >thru every step required to build. The Pietenpol design leaves a large
> > >portion of the decision making your responsibility. Sometimes there
> > >is no 'right' or 'wrong' way to do something. It's your choice with a
> > >Piet. You'll run across a million of these nagging questions during
the
> > >building sequence and that's when you sit down and think. ....and then
> > >post your question here.....or call another Piet builder...etc.
> > >The Grega design is a fun airplane to fly just like the Piet however
> > >it incorporates some limitations compared to the Piet. You can
> > >adjust your center of gravity on a Piet. You cannot on a GN-1.
> > >Well you can, you just have to move things like the engine, pilot,
> > >etc. The Piet wing is adjustable fore and aft to accommodate all the
> > >various engines available to be used. Even after you are flying if you
> > >find the CG is a bit tail heavy you can adjust the wing to fix it.
> > >GN-1's empty weights are generally higher than Pietenpols thus the
> > >reason you see so many GN-1's with more than 65 horse engines.
> > >John Grega took advantage of a 'Pietenpol advertising lull' in the
60's
> > >by placing ads everywhere calling his design an aircamper too.
> > >Naturally people thought an aircamper was an aircamper. Grega has
> > >sold thousands of plans this way because after a while Bernard
> > >Pietenpol just didn't advertise as much. Price of the GN-1 plans
> > >got alot of copies sold too.
> > >I purchased every plan/combo available from Donald Pietenpol
> > >and I think it still was under $200. Clean, new prints. I know a
> > >guy here in Ohio that has probably $20,000 worth of radios in one
> > >of his planes but he was SO cheap that he copied a set of Piet plans
> > >that had been copied before and he couldn't even read them. He
> > >wanted to 'borrow' my new set to make himself and I a 'spare' set of
> > >plans. No way. I have a nice thank you letter signed by Donald
> > >Pietenpol, dated, etc. in my records which I'll enjoy for years to
come.
> > >He's got a set of junky plans he can't read. Anywho, enjoy building
> > >and whichever design you choose they are just a LOAD OF FUN to
> > >fly !!!! Right STeev EEE ???
> > >
> > >Mike C.
> > >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Brodhead 99' |
What is Flight of Passage about?
Where does everybody plan to stay while back their?
Guess I wonder if you all have watched too many Marlon Brando Movies because I
seem not to be able to get an answer to my camping questions.:-)
Gordon
mboynton(at)excite.com wrote:
> Steve:
>
> Hey! That's right. Flight of Passage should be required reading for all of
> you who will make th pilgrimage. NEWS FLASH - All of you planning to make
> the trip should get a copy of Flight of Passage, by Rinker Buck, and read it
> prior to the trip.
>
>
> > Many, many hours. Our preliminary guess for vacation time planing is a
> week
> > each way. I suspect we can do it in 2 8 hour days and one 10 hour day,
> > however. Thanks to you Mark, after reading Flight of Passage by Rinker
> > Buck, This trip has taken on new life. I really want to do it!
> >
> > Steve E.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > mboynton(at)excite.com
> > Sent: Thursday, December 03, 1998 7:35 AM
> > To: Pietenpol Discussion
> > Subject: Re: Brodhead 99'
> >
> >
November 16, 1998 - December 03, 1998
Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-ak