Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-ch
January 23, 2002 - January 30, 2002
>
>Hi Kip. Just read Skips message where he thinks the PP had spruce spars in
>it. Anyway I have a couple of books here,
>one, Aircraft Materials and Processes from 1937.lists spruce compression at
>4000 lb and yel poplar at3750. As a
>comparison, the forestry table lists spruce comp at 4500. In any case the
>poplar is going to be weaker so be
>carefull.Also Aircraft Woodwork from 1946( I love used bookstores!) says yp
>should not be used as a direct
>substitute for spruce. Poplar is a soft hardwood,fir is a hard softwood. I
>wonder what ancient genius came up
>with these designations? The AW book also has 19 eye opener pages on wood
>defects. There are a lot of things
>that can happen to a tree before and after felling. Some are not easily
>eyeballed. Hope this helps some.
>Have fun with the project. Clif
Clif,
Thanks for the additional information. I think I can shed some light on one
point. 'Hardwood' and 'softwood' are a forester's working definitions (i.e.
some wiggle room as to how you apply the terms) for deciduous, 'broadleaf'
(leaf-shedding) or coniferous, 'narrow-leaf' ('evergreen') trees, broadly
speaking. Thus, you can in fact have 'hard' softwood and 'soft' hardwood,
depending on the species in question. There are some species that confound
this definition, such as the Bald Cypress, that has narrow needles like a
conifer, but sheds them like a broadleaf tree every Fall (nature refuses to
be simple!).
This 'Aircraft Woodwork' book sounds like one of those 'golden oldies' that
went out of print when 'modern' materials began to dominate the aircraft
industry. Can you give us the rest of the publisher's info (authors, etc.)
so I can have my local bookstore track down a copy? (would you be willing
to copy the relevant pages if I can't find one?)
BTW, do you know the std. lumberyard designation for the yellow cedar you
got? We have a really good country lumberyard nearby that I'm told has, or
can get, the kind of stuff Home Depot doesn't want to fool with. Since I
may wind up making all-new ribs & redoing the one wing panel anyway, I
might consider 'dumping' my two 3/4' spruce wing spars & going with routed
1" spars of some other material, like your yellow cedar, or douglas fir, if
I can find good material at a price that makes the change worthwhile.
Thanks!
Kip Gardner (thinking about spar alternatives - yeah we've been there before!)
426 Schneider St. SE
North Canton, OH 44720
(330) 494-1775
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
> since there are controls in
> both cockpits, why not set up the front cockpit as
> the pilot's office and
> placard it for solo from FRONT SEAT only?
> why are Piets soloed from the rear when so many of
> them have
> tail heavy issues?
My first thought is that You could never haul a
passenger in the back without throwing the cg way off,
whereas when the passenger sits on the cg, it doesn't
matter if they are there or not.
Del
http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Dick and Marge Gillespie" <dickmarg(at)peganet.com> |
Subject: | Re: Steel supplies |
Greg,
Vogelsong takes credit cards.
DickG.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Cardinal" <gcardinal(at)startribune.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Steel supplies
>
> For steel sheet and tubing I strongly recommend Dillsburg Aeroplane Works.
Contact:
>
> Charles Vogelsong
> 114 Sawmill Rd.
> Dillsburg, PA 17019
> 717 432-4589
>
> No website, no credit cards. Send him a few stamps and he'll send a
catalog.
> After you are in his computer database an order is placed simply by
calling him and telling him what you want.
> He ships the next day and the invoice is sent with the materials.
> A very nice way to do business.
>
> Greg Cardinal
>
>
> >>> lshutks(at)webtv.net 01/23 8:29 AM >>>
>
> George: If you strike out with replicraft, ACS has 4130 in
> strips--verious with"s and thickness. Order the proper steel strips and
> cut to length with your hacksaw. A little labor involved, but cheaper
> than Replicraft. Leon S.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
Subject: | Re: wood in Pietenpol Air Camper |
I'm the taller old fart! We started November 26th. Took three weeks off Xmas
and New Years and more or less, put in 3 hours a day, about four days a week,
on average so far. We kibbitz a lot and have more or less flown this plane
in imagination down through Central America, crossed some high Andes mountain
passes and tried to figure how to get to Quito from Guayaquil.
The recent query today about 40 lbs of lead in the engine compartment had me
puzzled? Don't you stick the engine on, then balance the plane on a saw horse?
Isn't the CG supposed to hit right where the person in front would have his
knees? Do this with someone in the back seat and see where the CG is? I understand
more forward is better for the balance. I haven't got an engine yet,
but figure with wood stringers, will slide it back and forth, until I get the
CG balance of the fuselage where it is supposed to be? Not big on calculations.
Like the more practical stuff.
Already cut my fuselage doors to get feet in and knee holes in the two instrument
panels with the trusty jig saw. The flight with Ted was an eye opener.
Was looking at Home Depot this morning for piano hinges. None there! For the
doors.
On Wed, 23 January 2002, mark boynton wrote:
>
>
> Fisherman Caye,
>
> Cool pic's. Which one of those gents are you? Whose
> Piet is that with the wheel pants?
>
> Mark Boynton
> Gilbert, AZ
> --- Fisherman Caye wrote:
> >
> >
> > Here is my website and photos of fuselage under
> > construction. Story on the wood too! Did not go to
> > regular suppliers. They were too expensive.
> >
> >
> http://members.tripod.com/~speculation/pietenpolplaneconstruction.html
> >
> >
> > FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
> > http://www.FindLaw.com
> > Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
> > http://mail.Justice.com
> >
> >
> >
> > Forum -
> > Contributions of
> > any other form
> >
> > latest messages.
> > other List members.
> >
> > http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> > http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> > http://www.matronics.com/search
> > http://www.matronics.com/archives
> > http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/
>
>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Hubbard, Eugene" <ehubbard(at)titan.com> |
Subject: | Replicraft/tail hardware |
Get a cheap metal cutting bandsaw from Grizzly or Harbor Freight. Use the
finest pitch bi-metal blade they sell. Set it up with the blade vertical
and use the little table supplied. They're less than $200 and go through
4130 steel sheet like butter. BTW, my experiences with Replicraft were
totally unsatisfactory. The only good part was that it convinced me to work
on my welding technique.
Gene Hubbard
San Diego
-----Original Message-----
From: lshutks(at)webtv.net [mailto:lshutks(at)webtv.net]
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Replicraft/tail hardware
George: If you strike out with replicraft, ACS has 4130 in
strips--verious with"s and thickness. Order the proper steel strips and
cut to length with your hacksaw. A little labor involved, but cheaper
than Replicraft. Leon S.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Kent Hallsten <KHallsten(at)governair.com> |
Subject: | Replicraft Aviation |
I saw on Ron Wattanja's Flybaby site that Replicraft Aviation changed their
name to EAPS Aviation. Maybe they have a web site under the new name.
Kent Hallsten
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Kent Hallsten <KHallsten(at)governair.com> |
Subject: | Replicraft Aviation |
Found address and phone for EAPS in Florida. Don't know if it was the same
as Replicraft before the name change.
4551 West Cardinal Street
Unit #1
Homosassa, FL., 34446
Phone 352-476-3307
This was on a Google search for Replicraft under the 'cached' pages. It
looks like Google saves pages from previous visits, (in case someone shuts
down?). Here's the link it gave. Good luck getting your stuff.
http://www.replicraftaviation.com/contactus.htm
Kent
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Re: wood in Pietenpol Air Camper |
I'm wondering the same thing. Within limits, of course, I don't see why
you couldn't make the engine mounts longer. Lot's of planes carry
ballast, but with 250lbs or so at the front of the arm you'd think a
little jiggling would make this nonsense unnecessary.
So what if the prop is extended 6" or so, if it handles funny, just go
back and put a tad more area on the tail. Actually, I think it would
look pretty classy myself...
Larry
Fisherman Caye wrote:
>
>To: Marc Boynton
>
> I'm the taller old fart! We started November 26th. Took three weeks off Xmas
and New Years and more or less, put in 3 hours a day, about four days a week,
on average so far. We kibbitz a lot and have more or less flown this plane
in imagination down through Central America, crossed some high Andes mountain
passes and tried to figure how to get to Quito from Guayaquil.
>
> The recent query today about 40 lbs of lead in the engine compartment had me
puzzled? Don't you stick the engine on, then balance the plane on a saw horse?
Isn't the CG supposed to hit right where the person in front would have his
knees? Do this with someone in the back seat and see where the CG is? I understand
more forward is better for the balance. I haven't got an engine yet,
but figure with wood stringers, will slide it back and forth, until I get the
CG balance of the fuselage where it is supposed to be? Not big on calculations.
Like the more practical stuff.
>
> Already cut my fuselage doors to get feet in and knee holes in the two instrument
panels with the trusty jig saw. The flight with Ted was an eye opener.
Was looking at Home Depot this morning for piano hinges. None there! For the
doors.
>
>
>On Wed, 23 January 2002, mark boynton wrote:
>
>>
>>Fisherman Caye,
>>
>>Cool pic's. Which one of those gents are you? Whose
>>Piet is that with the wheel pants?
>>
>>Mark Boynton
>>Gilbert, AZ
>>--- Fisherman Caye wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Here is my website and photos of fuselage under
>>>construction. Story on the wood too! Did not go to
>>>regular suppliers. They were too expensive.
>>>
>>>
>>http://members.tripod.com/~speculation/pietenpolplaneconstruction.html
>>
>>>
>>>FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
>>>http://www.FindLaw.com
>>>Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
>>>http://mail.Justice.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Forum -
>>>Contributions of
>>>any other form
>>>
>>>latest messages.
>>>other List members.
>>>
>>>http://www.matronics.com/subscription
>>>http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
>>>http://www.matronics.com/search
>>>http://www.matronics.com/archives
>>>http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/
>>
>>
>
>
>FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
>http://www.FindLaw.com
>Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
>http://mail.Justice.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gdascomb(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Replicraft Aircraft aka EAPS |
Guys: Thank you all for your help in the matter of who & where these people
are.
The internet site is shut dowm, the phone has been changed. I can assume that
they are not doing business any more. They are however, quick to accept money
from Pay Pal. I have filed a dispute with Chase Bank for the charges.
Thanks again for the help....
Looks like its back to the Harbor Freight catalog for a band saw!
George
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Jim Kinsella" <windmill602a(at)hotmail.com> |
Subject: | W&B VS Aerodynamics |
Observation:
Since completion in July of '99, NX799JK (Barebones), required a small
amount of up elevator with full fuel in fusalage tank and a similar amount
of down elevator when fuel was getting low.
I removed the front windscreen winter of '99 to see if wind was reduced on
the pilot as reported by others. Yes it was, to some extent. More
significant, however, was the INCREASE in down elevator needed at all times
to fly straight and level.
The windscreen was re-installed.
In 2001 I made a larger windscreen for the rear hole. (That winter wind is
cooool!) I now need down elevator at all times!
Notice the Weight & Ballance didn't change but the "ballance" did SEEM to
change!
Anybody else??
Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Subject: | Re: Steel supplies |
Dick,
As of a few months ago when I got my last order, they Did NOT take credit
cards. Unless it's changed since.
walt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dick and Marge Gillespie" <dickmarg(at)peganet.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Steel supplies
>
> Greg,
> Vogelsong takes credit cards.
> DickG.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Greg Cardinal" <gcardinal(at)startribune.com>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Steel supplies
>
>
>
> >
> > For steel sheet and tubing I strongly recommend Dillsburg Aeroplane
Works.
> Contact:
> >
> > Charles Vogelsong
> > 114 Sawmill Rd.
> > Dillsburg, PA 17019
> > 717 432-4589
> >
> > No website, no credit cards. Send him a few stamps and he'll send a
> catalog.
> > After you are in his computer database an order is placed simply by
> calling him and telling him what you want.
> > He ships the next day and the invoice is sent with the materials.
> > A very nice way to do business.
> >
> > Greg Cardinal
> >
> >
> > >>> lshutks(at)webtv.net 01/23 8:29 AM >>>
> >
> > George: If you strike out with replicraft, ACS has 4130 in
> > strips--verious with"s and thickness. Order the proper steel strips and
> > cut to length with your hacksaw. A little labor involved, but cheaper
> > than Replicraft. Leon S.
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Dick and Marge Gillespie" <dickmarg(at)peganet.com> |
Subject: | Re: Steel supplies |
Walt,
Just got an order of steel last week and they took the credit card.
DickG.
----- Original Message -----
From: "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Steel supplies
>
> Dick,
> As of a few months ago when I got my last order, they Did NOT take credit
> cards. Unless it's changed since.
> walt
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dick and Marge Gillespie" <dickmarg(at)peganet.com>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Steel supplies
>
>
>
> >
> > Greg,
> > Vogelsong takes credit cards.
> > DickG.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Greg Cardinal" <gcardinal(at)startribune.com>
> > To:
> > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Steel supplies
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > For steel sheet and tubing I strongly recommend Dillsburg Aeroplane
> Works.
> > Contact:
> > >
> > > Charles Vogelsong
> > > 114 Sawmill Rd.
> > > Dillsburg, PA 17019
> > > 717 432-4589
> > >
> > > No website, no credit cards. Send him a few stamps and he'll send a
> > catalog.
> > > After you are in his computer database an order is placed simply by
> > calling him and telling him what you want.
> > > He ships the next day and the invoice is sent with the materials.
> > > A very nice way to do business.
> > >
> > > Greg Cardinal
> > >
> > >
> > > >>> lshutks(at)webtv.net 01/23 8:29 AM >>>
> > >
> > > George: If you strike out with replicraft, ACS has 4130 in
> > > strips--verious with"s and thickness. Order the proper steel strips
and
> > > cut to length with your hacksaw. A little labor involved, but cheaper
> > > than Replicraft. Leon S.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | lshutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan) |
Eugene Hubbard: I have one of those Harbor band saws. I have bought
blades like you describe from Harbor and everyone else and can't keep
teeth on the blade while cutting 4130. Who is your source for good
blades? because of the blade problem, I've found the saw to be
practically useless. Leon S.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Hubbard, Eugene" <ehubbard(at)titan.com> |
Leon,
I actually got mine from Grizzly, but I suspect they all come from the same
sweatshop in China. I had the same experience with the "tool steel" blades.
Use the bi-metal blades--Grizzly part #G5115 for 20-24 pitch--they cost
about $20 each and they're slightly brittle. I've never worn the teeth off
of one before breaking it by doing something stupid, usually by not properly
supporting the material and putting a kink in the blade. The other thing I
had to do to mine was to cut away some case material around the tensioning
slot in order to properly tighten the blade. I also want to replace the
flimsy table that is supplied with a more stable one, but just clamping a
bar across the bottom of the blade slot helps a lot.
I can't claim that it's a high-quality machine. It was fairly cheap and
(for the most part) does the job. I've chewed through a lot of 4130 with
it, having cut out most of the fittings now for the Piet.
Gene
-----Original Message-----
From: lshutks(at)webtv.net [mailto:lshutks(at)webtv.net]
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Band saw
Eugene Hubbard: I have one of those Harbor band saws. I have bought
blades like you describe from Harbor and everyone else and can't keep
teeth on the blade while cutting 4130. Who is your source for good
blades? because of the blade problem, I've found the saw to be
practically useless. Leon S.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Gary L Bell" <glbell(at)midohio.net> |
Piet Fliers and Builders
I bought 4130 X .090, .060 and .024 sheets in 12" X 24" sheets and tried to
band saw it up into 1" X 24", 7/8"X 24" and 3/4"x24" for the fittings and
had a heck of a time cutting a straight line (looked like a dogs hind leg).
Went to the yellow pages and found a machine shop with a drop sheer that
would handle 4130. They had all three sheets sheered up in about 00:10
minuets with the sizes I needed for $20.00 (the cost of a band saw blade).
It has to be done with a drop sheer because if you use a knife sheer it will
roll your 4130 into a barrel hoop.
Hope this helps
Gary Bell
Delaware, Ohio
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hubbard, Eugene" <ehubbard(at)titan.com>
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Band saw
>
> Leon,
>
> I actually got mine from Grizzly, but I suspect they all come from the
same
> sweatshop in China. I had the same experience with the "tool steel"
blades.
> Use the bi-metal blades--Grizzly part #G5115 for 20-24 pitch--they cost
> about $20 each and they're slightly brittle. I've never worn the teeth
off
> of one before breaking it by doing something stupid, usually by not
properly
> supporting the material and putting a kink in the blade. The other thing
I
> had to do to mine was to cut away some case material around the tensioning
> slot in order to properly tighten the blade. I also want to replace the
> flimsy table that is supplied with a more stable one, but just clamping a
> bar across the bottom of the blade slot helps a lot.
>
> I can't claim that it's a high-quality machine. It was fairly cheap and
> (for the most part) does the job. I've chewed through a lot of 4130 with
> it, having cut out most of the fittings now for the Piet.
>
> Gene
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lshutks(at)webtv.net [mailto:lshutks(at)webtv.net]
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Band saw
>
>
> Eugene Hubbard: I have one of those Harbor band saws. I have bought
> blades like you describe from Harbor and everyone else and can't keep
> teeth on the blade while cutting 4130. Who is your source for good
> blades? because of the blade problem, I've found the saw to be
> practically useless. Leon S.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | JamesJboyer(at)aol.com |
Leon,
Go to a good tool store and buy a good bi-metal bandsaw blade. They cost
about $23 here in Santa Rosa and last much longer and cut better than the
standard high carbon blades. Harbor freight is not a good place, my opinion,
to buy good blandes to cut steel.
I have cut 81 pieces of steel so far with my bi-metal blade and its still
cuts very fast.
Be sure to set your saw blade speed to its slowest speed. My saw will work at
80, 120, and 160 ft/min. Always use the slowest speed and use a water-soluble
oil to lube the blade and it will last. Without lube and at highest speed it
will not last and will spit teeth like you are seeing.
Cheers, Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "D.Dale Johnson" <dd5john(at)juno.com> |
Eugene Hubbard
I have a China band saw with a 64 1/2 " blade. I buy my blades from
menards
lumber. They are cheap blades at about 6.00 per blade and they last a
long time.
The secret is to use constant feed pressure. To much it will take the
teeth of and
to little will dull the blade. This will take some experience just like
welding.
Dale Mpls,
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Jeffery Lorimor <jlorimor(at)willinet.net> |
Subject: | Piets in NW Florida |
Gang-
Any piets within an hour or two (by car) of Panama City, Fla.? My wife & I
are going to be there the week of Feb 11-15 just sitting around (hopefully
in the sun) & I would love to fill some time looking over a piet project.
Thanks.
Jeff Lorimor
Boone, IA
Jeff & Peg Lorimor
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Jim Malley <jgmalley(at)home.com> |
Subject: | Re: aft CG problems |
Tail-heaviness is a common problem. For those with a Ford-A or a
similarly weighted engine, it is probably brought about by the fact that
most of us are heavier than Bernard Pietenpol. For those with a lighter
engine, it just wasn't put far enough forward to achieve the proper
balance. (See Tom Nolan's aircraft for for how far forward the engine
must be if you don't want to add ballast or shift the wings too much; it
appears long in the nose, but it's got great balance.) That said, we're
only talking about a few pounds that shifts the CG rearward. To remove
the pilot entirely would throw the CG so far forward that flight would
be impossible. When balanced - heavy engine in the front and heavy pilot
and tail in the rear - hands free flight can be obtained for the few
minutes between some fuel having been used and having some fuel left.
Keeping the tail light is important, but placement of the engine and
other heavy items according to how much you weigh is even more
effective.
Jim Malley
Oscar Zuniga wrote:
>
>
> Folks;
>
> I was sitting thinking about Ernie Moreno's Piet, the one that's still for
> sale (Franklin powered), long nose, tail heavy. Ernie has 40 lb. of lead
> strapped to the engine mount up front, and flies the plane with the header
> tank full (flying off the wing tank) to help with balance. So here's the
> question (and it may be a repeat from the past): since there are controls in
> both cockpits, why not set up the front cockpit as the pilot's office and
> placard it for solo from FRONT SEAT only? That puts the pilot much closer
> to the CG. Besides the issue of it being easier to get in and out of the
> rear cockpit, why are Piets soloed from the rear when so many of them have
> tail heavy issues?
>
> Oscar Zuniga
> Medford, Oregon
> mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
> website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
>
> Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Richard Navratril" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net> |
It helps to slow your blade speed as slow as possible and run a bead of oil
on the cut. I have cut .100 4130 with good blade life.
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Leon Stefan" <lshutks(at)webtv.net>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Band saw
>
> Eugene Hubbard: I have one of those Harbor band saws. I have bought
> blades like you describe from Harbor and everyone else and can't keep
> teeth on the blade while cutting 4130. Who is your source for good
> blades? because of the blade problem, I've found the saw to be
> practically useless. Leon S.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | javier cruz <javcr(at)yahoo.com> |
Hi friends
Like Larry, Was easy to find one Corvair engine here
in Mexico, but the engine was a coctel of parts from
diferents models, case from 65, heads froms 95 and
102, crank 5609 from early models, no harmonic
balancer etc. it was no cheap, about 200 dlls. On the
other case, the other one that i can get from a yard
on El Paso,TX. for 100.00 dlls., was a 1964 engine,
complete , all in good shape, the cylinders STD size
with just .003 off, the cylinder heads and valves all
ok ,the complete work shop for the heads , cylinders
and crank was 80.00 dlls. and now the crank have the
security shaft on it, just waiting any chance to fly
to USA for the parts for finish (forged pistons, rings
gaskets etc.), i don't want to pay the expensive
shipping. I am agree with Larry, if you coment to the
shop people that the engine will be for an airplane,
they rize the prices, just ask for a good work..
If someone need a good engine, take your time, be
carefully, look 3 or 4 engines before you take the
decision..
Saludos desde Mexico
Javier Cruz
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net> |
The rule of saws is to always have two teeth in the material. This is worst
case. If you have a 22 teeth per inch blade, that means the minimum
thickness to cut is .045 inches and that is pushing it. Otherwise the
material will get into the gullet and shear off the next tooth to come
along.
Chris bobka
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Navratril" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Band saw
>
> It helps to slow your blade speed as slow as possible and run a bead of
oil
> on the cut. I have cut .100 4130 with good blade life.
> Dick
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Leon Stefan" <lshutks(at)webtv.net>
> To:
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Band saw
>
>
> >
> > Eugene Hubbard: I have one of those Harbor band saws. I have bought
> > blades like you describe from Harbor and everyone else and can't keep
> > teeth on the blade while cutting 4130. Who is your source for good
> > blades? because of the blade problem, I've found the saw to be
> > practically useless. Leon S.
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | clif <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca> |
Hi Kip, the book is called Aircraft Woodwork by Colonel Rollen H. Drake, B.S.,
M.A..
from The Macmillan Company, New York, copyright 1946 Also of interest,
Aircraft Materials and Processes,George F. Titterton,B.S. in M.E., A.E. from
Pitman Publishing Corp. N.Y. and Chicago, 1937, Aircraft Maintenance by
Daniel J. Brimm and H. Edward Boggess from Sir Isaac Pitman and Sons
(Canada) ltd. This is the same co. as above.
If you want I can copy material and send it. It might have to be snail. The last
time I tried to send an attachment of scanned material it almost blew up my
best friends computer.
If your talking about names, Western yellow cedar is not cedar at all but
cypress. For that matter doug fir is not fir. I.m not sure but I think it's the
only
one of our wood choices with those nasty pitch pockets.The fir that is.
If sizes, unless you find a local woodbutcher like I did they're nominally 2x4
say.
This comes out to 1.5x3.5 planed. 1x6 would be 3/4x5.5.
Since Bernie specified 1" for spruce spars isn't using 3/4" taking a chance?
What do you others think. Afterall it's not just you but your passenger as well
that is trusting your judgement.
Maybe someone could do a stress analysis(hint hint).
Sport Av Assoc. has an article by someone who visited Mr P just before he
passed on. Bernie was buying 2x4 hemlock ripping it down then laminating
spars ala Stearman.
Oh,metal cutting. I had trouble with bandsaw blades then I bought a 5"metal
side cutter for work. It now resides in a little table I welded up and works great,
only straight lines though. But you can use it to grind out the fillets. Buy the
stainless blades, they last longer. These things are cheap but VERY noisy.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | clif <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca> |
Subject: | Re: wood in Pietenpol Air Camper |
What about the guy whose engine was so far forward that the plane was so
uncontrollable on takeoff ( P factor and cent. force) that he put a nose
wheel on it.
SAA has a picture of a twin engined piet.
----- Original Message -----
From: Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: wood in Pietenpol Air Camper
>
> To: Marc Boynton
>
> I'm the taller old fart! We started November 26th. Took three weeks
off Xmas and New Years and more or less, put in 3 hours a day, about four
days a week, on average so far. We kibbitz a lot and have more or less
flown this plane in imagination down through Central America, crossed some
high Andes mountain passes and tried to figure how to get to Quito from
Guayaquil.
>
> The recent query today about 40 lbs of lead in the engine compartment
had me puzzled? Don't you stick the engine on, then balance the plane on a
saw horse? Isn't the CG supposed to hit right where the person in front
would have his knees? Do this with someone in the back seat and see where
the CG is? I understand more forward is better for the balance. I haven't
got an engine yet, but figure with wood stringers, will slide it back and
forth, until I get the CG balance of the fuselage where it is supposed to
be? Not big on calculations. Like the more practical stuff.
>
> Already cut my fuselage doors to get feet in and knee holes in the two
instrument panels with the trusty jig saw. The flight with Ted was an eye
opener. Was looking at Home Depot this morning for piano hinges. None
there! For the doors.
>
>
> On Wed, 23 January 2002, mark boynton wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Fisherman Caye,
> >
> > Cool pic's. Which one of those gents are you? Whose
> > Piet is that with the wheel pants?
> >
> > Mark Boynton
> > Gilbert, AZ
> > --- Fisherman Caye wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Here is my website and photos of fuselage under
> > > construction. Story on the wood too! Did not go to
> > > regular suppliers. They were too expensive.
> > >
> > >
> > http://members.tripod.com/~speculation/pietenpolplaneconstruction.html
> > >
> > >
> > > FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
> > > http://www.FindLaw.com
> > > Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
> > > http://mail.Justice.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Forum -
> > > Contributions of
> > > any other form
> > >
> > > latest messages.
> > > other List members.
> > >
> > > http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> > > http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> > > http://www.matronics.com/search
> > > http://www.matronics.com/archives
> > > http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/
> >
> >
>
>
> FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
> http://www.FindLaw.com
> Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
> http://mail.Justice.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | clif <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca> |
Subject: | Re: aft CG problems |
If the balance point is too far back on the wing the plane will become more
and more
dangerously uncontrollable. At some point you would be able to control a
takeoff
and foreward flight then kill yourself when you tried to turn. Everything is
in
delecate balance. Go and buy one of those cheapie little gliders at the
hobbyshop
and experement with wing positions and you'll see what happens. Clif
----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Kinsella <windmill602a(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: aft CG problems
>
> Are these CG problems based on weight and ballance measurements or flight
> charicteristics?
>
>
> >From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags(at)hotmail.com>
> >Reply-To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> >Subject: Pietenpol-List: aft CG problems
> >Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 14:07:21
> >
> >
> >
> >Folks;
> >
> >I was sitting thinking about Ernie Moreno's Piet, the one that's still
for
> >sale (Franklin powered), long nose, tail heavy. Ernie has 40 lb. of lead
> >strapped to the engine mount up front, and flies the plane with the
header
> >tank full (flying off the wing tank) to help with balance. So here's the
> >question (and it may be a repeat from the past): since there are controls
> >in
> >both cockpits, why not set up the front cockpit as the pilot's office and
> >placard it for solo from FRONT SEAT only? That puts the pilot much
closer
> >to the CG. Besides the issue of it being easier to get in and out of the
> >rear cockpit, why are Piets soloed from the rear when so many of them
have
> >tail heavy issues?
> >
> >Oscar Zuniga
> >Medford, Oregon
> >mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
> >website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
> >
> >
> >Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Michael Brusilow" <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Subject: | Re: aft CG problems |
----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Malley
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 10:07 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: aft CG problems
Tail-heaviness is a common problem. For those with a Ford-A or a
similarly weighted engine, it is probably brought about by the fact
that
most of us are heavier than Bernard Pietenpol. For those with a
lighter
engine, it just wasn't put far enough forward to achieve the proper
balance. (See Tom Nolan's aircraft for for how far forward the engine
must be if you don't want to add ballast or shift the wings too much;
it
appears long in the nose, but it's got great balance.) That said,
we're
only talking about a few pounds that shifts the CG rearward. To remove
the pilot entirely would throw the CG so far forward that flight would
be impossible. When balanced - heavy engine in the front and heavy
pilot
and tail in the rear - hands free flight can be obtained for the few
minutes between some fuel having been used and having some fuel left.
Keeping the tail light is important, but placement of the engine and
other heavy items according to how much you weigh is even more
effective.
Jim Malley
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The amount of fuel does not effect the CG. The tank is at the CG. If
the builder places a variable weight- eg. fwd tank, fwd of the CG, then
the amount of fuel consumed will be a factor.
In my opinion, moving the wing back is the most effective method to
adjust the CG.
Hint ( I have posted this before ), raise the tail to straight &
level, let go, if the airplane teeters for a moment, the CG is good.
Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Jim Kinsella" <windmill602a(at)hotmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: aft CG problems |
*( Hint ( I have posted this before ), raise the tail to straight &
level, let go, if the airplane teeters for a moment, the CG is good.)*
Sorry, This theory is entirely dependent on the placement of the gear and
probably should not be used to evaluate the C/G from one Piet to another!!
>From: "Michael Brusilow" <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net>
>Reply-To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: aft CG problems
>Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 08:52:20 -0500
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jim Malley
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 10:07 PM
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: aft CG problems
>
>
> Tail-heaviness is a common problem. For those with a Ford-A or a
> similarly weighted engine, it is probably brought about by the fact
>that
> most of us are heavier than Bernard Pietenpol. For those with a
>lighter
> engine, it just wasn't put far enough forward to achieve the proper
> balance. (See Tom Nolan's aircraft for for how far forward the engine
> must be if you don't want to add ballast or shift the wings too much;
>it
> appears long in the nose, but it's got great balance.) That said,
>we're
> only talking about a few pounds that shifts the CG rearward. To remove
> the pilot entirely would throw the CG so far forward that flight would
> be impossible. When balanced - heavy engine in the front and heavy
>pilot
> and tail in the rear - hands free flight can be obtained for the few
> minutes between some fuel having been used and having some fuel left.
> Keeping the tail light is important, but placement of the engine and
> other heavy items according to how much you weigh is even more
> effective.
>
> Jim Malley
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> The amount of fuel does not effect the CG. The tank is at the CG. If
>the builder places a variable weight- eg. fwd tank, fwd of the CG, then
>the amount of fuel consumed will be a factor.
> In my opinion, moving the wing back is the most effective method to
>adjust the CG.
> Hint ( I have posted this before ), raise the tail to straight &
>level, let go, if the airplane teeters for a moment, the CG is good.
>
> Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Jim Kinsella" <windmill602a(at)hotmail.com> |
If you arn't using bi-matalic blades, they will last longer.
When cutting any high carbon steel you must keep the cut moving along at a
good clip. If you slow down too much, the friction will cause the metal to
heat up and harden almost instantly. You might as well start the cut from
the other side at this point or loose teeth or sharpness.
Jim
That's my 2 cents worth!
>From: "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net>
>Reply-To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Band saw
>Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 22:25:03 -0600
>
>
>The rule of saws is to always have two teeth in the material. This is
>worst
>case. If you have a 22 teeth per inch blade, that means the minimum
>thickness to cut is .045 inches and that is pushing it. Otherwise the
>material will get into the gullet and shear off the next tooth to come
>along.
>
>Chris bobka
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Richard Navratril" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net>
>To:
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Band saw
>
>
>
> >
> > It helps to slow your blade speed as slow as possible and run a bead of
>oil
> > on the cut. I have cut .100 4130 with good blade life.
> > Dick
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Leon Stefan" <lshutks(at)webtv.net>
> > To:
> > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Band saw
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Eugene Hubbard: I have one of those Harbor band saws. I have bought
> > > blades like you describe from Harbor and everyone else and can't keep
> > > teeth on the blade while cutting 4130. Who is your source for good
> > > blades? because of the blade problem, I've found the saw to be
> > > practically useless. Leon S.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Gary McNeel, Jr." <gmcneel(at)mykitplane.com> |
When you people say "moving the wing back", how is this achieved? I have not
gotten the plans yet, but will be building the longer, Corvair powered
version. Is it difficult to move the wing back? Is this something you have
to "plan" to do prior to building by the plans? What is the procedure? I
plan on using a center wing tank as well, though have thought about also
using a fuselage tank.
Thoughts on this would be appreciated. TIA.
-Gary McNeel, Jr.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Michael
> Brusilow
> Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 7:52 AM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: aft CG problems
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jim Malley
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 10:07 PM
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: aft CG problems
>
>
> Tail-heaviness is a common problem. For those with a Ford-A or a
> similarly weighted engine, it is probably brought about by the fact
> that
> most of us are heavier than Bernard Pietenpol. For those with a
> lighter
> engine, it just wasn't put far enough forward to achieve the proper
> balance. (See Tom Nolan's aircraft for for how far forward the engine
> must be if you don't want to add ballast or shift the wings too much;
> it
> appears long in the nose, but it's got great balance.) That said,
> we're
> only talking about a few pounds that shifts the CG rearward. To remove
> the pilot entirely would throw the CG so far forward that flight would
> be impossible. When balanced - heavy engine in the front and heavy
> pilot
> and tail in the rear - hands free flight can be obtained for the few
> minutes between some fuel having been used and having some fuel left.
> Keeping the tail light is important, but placement of the engine and
> other heavy items according to how much you weigh is even more
> effective.
>
> Jim Malley
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> The amount of fuel does not effect the CG. The tank is at the CG. If
> the builder places a variable weight- eg. fwd tank, fwd of the CG, then
> the amount of fuel consumed will be a factor.
> In my opinion, moving the wing back is the most effective method to
> adjust the CG.
> Hint ( I have posted this before ), raise the tail to straight &
> level, let go, if the airplane teeters for a moment, the CG is good.
>
> Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | mark boynton <marktboynton(at)yahoo.com> |
Subject: | sitka spruce in San Diego |
All,
Do any of you know of a source for sitka spruce in San
Diego. I'll be there in a couple of weeks and if its
available, I'd like to look at some for my tail
feathers. I'll have douglas fir everywhere else, but
I'd like to keep the tail as light as possible.
Thanks,
Mark Boynton
Gilbert, AZ
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
Subject: | Re: sitka spruce in San Diego |
Sitka Spruce is both expensive and scarce. But Englemann Spruce works fine
and is available from your local lumber yard, hardware store. ACE Hardware carries
it. Construction lumber.
Lot of knots, but you look at the rings on the end and the grain, and get aircraft
quality, (without regarding the knots ) Very cheap. Buy plenty, try to
get the lengths you want between the knots. It is light and white. Still you
could buy a ton of the stuff, for the price of aviation graded Sitka Spruce,
that would make no difference whatsover in performance of your tail feathers.
On Thu, 24 January 2002, mark boynton wrote:
>
>
> All,
>
> Do any of you know of a source for sitka spruce in San
> Diego. I'll be there in a couple of weeks and if its
> available, I'd like to look at some for my tail
> feathers. I'll have douglas fir everywhere else, but
> I'd like to keep the tail as light as possible.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mark Boynton
> Gilbert, AZ
>
>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | DonanClara(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Piets in NW Florida |
Jeff...I'm 1:20 hrs due north of Panama City. Happy to have you visit for a
look at my 95% Piet. Lets coordinate off-list...DonanClara(at)aol.com. Don
Hicks
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Jim Kinsella" <windmill602a(at)hotmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: sitka spruce in San Diego |
Mark:
Another alternative is to buy a "Bargain bag of spruce" from AC Spruce &
Specialties. You will still need the long pieces for your horr stab, but
there will be plenty of good short stuff.
I built most of fusalage, empenage, center section spars, etc. from these.
Jim
NX799JK
> > All,
> >
> > Do any of you know of a source for sitka spruce in San
> > Diego. I'll be there in a couple of weeks and if its
> > available, I'd like to look at some for my tail
> > feathers. I'll have douglas fir everywhere else, but
> > I'd like to keep the tail as light as possible.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Mark Boynton
> > Gilbert, AZ
> >
> >
>
>
>FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
>http://www.FindLaw.com
>Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
>http://mail.Justice.com
>
>
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | DonanClara(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: aft CG problems |
In a message dated 01/24/2002 7:53:57 AM Central Standard Time,
mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net writes:
<< raise the tail to straight &
level, let go, if the airplane teeters for a moment, the CG is good.
Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )
>>
Mike and (other flying listers) what weight is on your tailwheel ? Of course
it would depend on your total empty weight and whether it is a long or short
fuselage, but I'm curious about a ballpark figure for the Piet. My Buhl Bull
Pup at an empty weight of about 570# had ten pounds on the tail. Don Hicks
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Michael Brusilow" <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Subject: | Re: aft CG problems |
----- Original Message -----
From: DonanClara(at)aol.com
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 5:40 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: aft CG problems
In a message dated 01/24/2002 7:53:57 AM Central Standard Time,
mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net writes:
<< raise the tail to straight &
level, let go, if the airplane teeters for a moment, the CG is good.
Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )
>>
Mike and (other flying listers) what weight is on your tailwheel ? Of
course
it would depend on your total empty weight and whether it is a long or
short
fuselage, but I'm curious about a ballpark figure for the Piet. My
Buhl Bull
Pup at an empty weight of about 570# had ten pounds on the tail. Don
Hicks
_____________________________________________________________
I don't remember exactly. I don't have the firgures with me, but I
don't think that it is any more the 2 lbs.
I have the long fuselage with the wing back 31/2 in. 0-200 with
electrical system & metal prop.
Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com> |
Subject: | Re: aft CG problems |
What we did with a plane when we installed a 503 Rotax
where a 447 was suposed to be, was to make a
"temporal" engine mount from mild steel tube, JUST FOR
THE STATIC WEIGHT AND BALANCE... In fact we "cut and
pasted" the EMount two times before getting the
correct position. Then the "good one" from 4130 was
built, and problem solved. The diference were about 4"
in the engine position and no lead added.
Saludos
Gary Gower
--- Jim Malley wrote:
>
>
> Tail-heaviness is a common problem. For those with a
> Ford-A or a
> similarly weighted engine, it is probably brought
> about by the fact that
> most of us are heavier than Bernard Pietenpol. For
> those with a lighter
> engine, it just wasn't put far enough forward to
> achieve the proper
> balance. (See Tom Nolan's aircraft for for how far
> forward the engine
> must be if you don't want to add ballast or shift
> the wings too much; it
> appears long in the nose, but it's got great
> balance.) That said, we're
> only talking about a few pounds that shifts the CG
> rearward. To remove
> the pilot entirely would throw the CG so far forward
> that flight would
> be impossible. When balanced - heavy engine in the
> front and heavy pilot
> and tail in the rear - hands free flight can be
> obtained for the few
> minutes between some fuel having been used and
> having some fuel left.
> Keeping the tail light is important, but placement
> of the engine and
> other heavy items according to how much you weigh is
> even more
> effective.
>
> Jim Malley
>
> Oscar Zuniga wrote:
> >
> Zuniga"
> >
> > Folks;
> >
> > I was sitting thinking about Ernie Moreno's Piet,
> the one that's still for
> > sale (Franklin powered), long nose, tail heavy.
> Ernie has 40 lb. of lead
> > strapped to the engine mount up front, and flies
> the plane with the header
> > tank full (flying off the wing tank) to help with
> balance. So here's the
> > question (and it may be a repeat from the past):
> since there are controls in
> > both cockpits, why not set up the front cockpit as
> the pilot's office and
> > placard it for solo from FRONT SEAT only? That
> puts the pilot much closer
> > to the CG. Besides the issue of it being easier
> to get in and out of the
> > rear cockpit, why are Piets soloed from the rear
> when so many of them have
> > tail heavy issues?
> >
> > Oscar Zuniga
> > Medford, Oregon
> > mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
> > website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
> >
> > Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device:
> http://mobile.msn.com
> >
>
>
>
> Forum -
> Contributions of
> any other form
>
> latest messages.
> other List members.
>
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> http://www.matronics.com/search
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Kip & Beth Gardner <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Re: Kp, book etc. |
Clif,
>
>Hi Kip, the book is called Aircraft Woodwork by Colonel Rollen H. Drake,
>B.S., M.A..
>from The Macmillan Company, New York, copyright 1946 Also of interest,
>Aircraft Materials and Processes,George F. Titterton,B.S. in M.E., A.E. from
>Pitman Publishing Corp. N.Y. and Chicago, 1937, Aircraft Maintenance by
>Daniel J. Brimm and H. Edward Boggess from Sir Isaac Pitman and Sons
>(Canada) ltd. This is the same co. as above.
Thanks very much for these references. I'll get in touch off list about
some copying. BTW, for anyone who is interested - while going over some of
the stuff I got with my project, I took a second look at the paperwork &
included was a list of books available from a guy named John Roby in CA.
Don't know if it's current, but it had over 200 titles, everything from old
NACA reports to a 1964 title by Paul Poberezny - all on the subject of
WOODEN aircraft construction (but, suprisingly, not these titles). Anyway,
I was wondering if anyone else had heard of this guy & if he's still in
business? Sounds like a great resource.
>If your talking about names, Western yellow cedar is not cedar at all but
>cypress.
Can you tell me a little more about this yellow spruce/cypress? Is it a
West Coast species? The only cypress I'm familiar with is the Bald Cypress
from those good ol' southern swamps back home in coastal Virginia - very
useful for boat building because it almost never rots, but I've never heard
of it being used in a plane.
>For that matter doug fir is not fir. I.m not sure but I think it's the only
>one of our wood choices with those nasty pitch pockets.The fir that is.
I'm finding a fair amount of info on fir in the books I got from EAA & I
know several people on this list have used it for spars, etc.
>Sport Av Assoc. has an article by someone who visited Mr P just before he
>passed on. Bernie was buying 2x4 hemlock ripping it down then laminating
>spars ala Stearman.
Actually, last night I was rereading the construction manual that the
Pietenpols sell with their plans & in those Don P. (Bernie's son) wrote a
rather long section describing how Bernie made up these laminated spars in
his later planes. Worth a look for historical reference if nothing else!
Thanks Again!
Kip Gardner
426 Schneider St. SE
North Canton, OH 44720
(330) 494-1775
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Kip & Beth Gardner <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Re: sitka spruce in San Diego |
>
>
>Mark:
>Another alternative is to buy a "Bargain bag of spruce" from AC Spruce &
>Specialties. You will still need the long pieces for your horr stab, but
>there will be plenty of good short stuff.
>I built most of fusalage, empenage, center section spars, etc. from these.
>Jim
>NX799JK
Mark,
Pat, the guy I bought my Piet project from had some very good advice in
this regard. He said to buy one of these 'bargain bags' EVERY time you
order wood from AS&S, because if you are ordering wood, you are paying a
bundle for all the packaging & shipping costs anyway, so why not go for a
little more 'bang for the buck?'
Cheers!
Kip Gardner
426 Schneider St. SE
North Canton, OH 44720
(330) 494-1775
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net> |
I once had a quote from john roby for 75 dollars for a photocopy of a book
that I later bought an original for about 15 dollars.
Try www.bookfinder.com for any of these titles.
Chris Bobka
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kip & Beth Gardner" <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Kp, book etc.
>
> Clif,
>
> >
> >Hi Kip, the book is called Aircraft Woodwork by Colonel Rollen H. Drake,
> >B.S., M.A..
> >from The Macmillan Company, New York, copyright 1946 Also of interest,
> >Aircraft Materials and Processes,George F. Titterton,B.S. in M.E., A.E.
from
> >Pitman Publishing Corp. N.Y. and Chicago, 1937, Aircraft Maintenance by
> >Daniel J. Brimm and H. Edward Boggess from Sir Isaac Pitman and Sons
> >(Canada) ltd. This is the same co. as above.
>
> Thanks very much for these references. I'll get in touch off list about
> some copying. BTW, for anyone who is interested - while going over some of
> the stuff I got with my project, I took a second look at the paperwork &
> included was a list of books available from a guy named John Roby in CA.
> Don't know if it's current, but it had over 200 titles, everything from
old
> NACA reports to a 1964 title by Paul Poberezny - all on the subject of
> WOODEN aircraft construction (but, suprisingly, not these titles). Anyway,
> I was wondering if anyone else had heard of this guy & if he's still in
> business? Sounds like a great resource.
>
> >If your talking about names, Western yellow cedar is not cedar at all but
> >cypress.
>
> Can you tell me a little more about this yellow spruce/cypress? Is it a
> West Coast species? The only cypress I'm familiar with is the Bald Cypress
> from those good ol' southern swamps back home in coastal Virginia - very
> useful for boat building because it almost never rots, but I've never
heard
> of it being used in a plane.
>
> >For that matter doug fir is not fir. I.m not sure but I think it's the
only
> >one of our wood choices with those nasty pitch pockets.The fir that is.
>
> I'm finding a fair amount of info on fir in the books I got from EAA & I
> know several people on this list have used it for spars, etc.
>
> >Sport Av Assoc. has an article by someone who visited Mr P just before he
> >passed on. Bernie was buying 2x4 hemlock ripping it down then laminating
> >spars ala Stearman.
>
> Actually, last night I was rereading the construction manual that the
> Pietenpols sell with their plans & in those Don P. (Bernie's son) wrote a
> rather long section describing how Bernie made up these laminated spars in
> his later planes. Worth a look for historical reference if nothing else!
>
> Thanks Again!
>
> Kip Gardner
>
>
> 426 Schneider St. SE
> North Canton, OH 44720
> (330) 494-1775
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Jim Malley <jgmalley(at)home.com> |
Subject: | Re: aft CG problems |
815 total weight with 4 pounds on the raised tail. Main gear placement
has a great effect on this.
Mike's right about the fuel in the wing tank being on the CG. It's
burning the fuel from a fuselage tank that has a gradual effect on
balance. I've got 8 gallons in the wing and 12 in the fuselage, burn
less than 3 an hour for a 7 hour range. Ever even think of sitting on a
slab of plywood for 7 hours?
Jim Malley
DonanClara(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> In a message dated 01/24/2002 7:53:57 AM Central Standard Time,
> mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net writes:
>
> << raise the tail to straight &
> level, let go, if the airplane teeters for a moment, the CG is good.
>
> Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )
> >>
> Mike and (other flying listers) what weight is on your tailwheel ? Of course
> it would depend on your total empty weight and whether it is a long or short
> fuselage, but I'm curious about a ballpark figure for the Piet. My Buhl Bull
> Pup at an empty weight of about 570# had ten pounds on the tail. Don Hicks
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "John Dilatush" <dilatush(at)amigo.net> |
Pieters,
To simply raise the tail and find out how much weight is on it, (as if
doing a weight and balance) seems to me to be dependent on where the
landing gear is placed.
Think of it this way. If the gear is way foward, then the weight on the
tailwheel would be greater, however, if the gear is way back toward the
tail, then the weight on the tail is less. In fact it might even be
negative! None of this has to do with where the CG of the plane is,
only where the placement of the gear might be.
John Dilatush, NX114D
Salida, Colorado
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Tom & Michelle Brant" <tmbrant(at)uswest.net> |
Ok, I'm in panic... You know how guys typically don't read the
instructions until after the project is messed up... I got my T-88
tonight and was so excited to use it, I went down and started in, having
only read about half of the instructions it turns out... After
stopping, I reread the instructions which say to apply the glue
"liberally" (which I feel I did) and then let stand in the open for
30-40 minutes... Touch up any dull spots and assemble... What it,
figuratively speaking, someone didn't let stand for 30-40 minutes before
assembly? Would that person (I won't give out names as not to offend
"that persons dignity") be in trouble with the glue joints?
Tom Brant
MLPS
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | JamesJboyer(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: T-88 Bafoonery |
Tom,
Where does it say to "let stand open for 30 to 40 minutes." My T-88 says to
not mix more than will be used in 30 minutes.
I built my Piet by gluing and making sure that the joints were completed and
assembled within 30 minutes WITH NO OPEN TIME BEFORE ASSEMBLY.
Cheers, Jim
NX499JB
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Alan Swanson" <swans071(at)tc.umn.edu> |
Tom- Not to worry. Those instructions are specifically for working with oak
or other very porous wood where the wood will absorb the epoxy and possibly
starve the joint. The woods we are using don't have this problem. Just
spread on the glue, clamp lightly to hold in place, and come back the next
day when it is cured. You'll be one glue joint closer to flight!
Al Swanson
Minnetonka
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tom &
Michelle Brant
Subject: Pietenpol-List: T-88 Bafoonery
Ok, I'm in panic... You know how guys typically don't read the
instructions until after the project is messed up... I got my T-88
tonight and was so excited to use it, I went down and started in, having
only read about half of the instructions it turns out... After
stopping, I reread the instructions which say to apply the glue
"liberally" (which I feel I did) and then let stand in the open for
30-40 minutes... Touch up any dull spots and assemble... What it,
figuratively speaking, someone didn't let stand for 30-40 minutes before
assembly? Would that person (I won't give out names as not to offend
"that persons dignity") be in trouble with the glue joints?
Tom Brant
MLPS
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Re: T-88 Bafoonery |
Tom,
I'd be extremely surprised. This is the first mention I've heard of
waiting 40 minutes. The worse problem in my mind is to wait until it
starts to set up and won't penetrate well anymore. My instructions say
to mix "only enough to use within 30 minutes".
Mix it well and use enough, but don't let the viscosity make up for poor
fitting.
I mix for a couple of minutes but never let the stuff set for more than
a few minutes after that before gluing.
If it was me, I wouldn't sweat it. Lets hear what the rest say...
Larry
Tom & Michelle Brant wrote:
>
>Ok, I'm in panic... You know how guys typically don't read the
>instructions until after the project is messed up... I got my T-88
>tonight and was so excited to use it, I went down and started in, having
>only read about half of the instructions it turns out... After
>stopping, I reread the instructions which say to apply the glue
>"liberally" (which I feel I did) and then let stand in the open for
>30-40 minutes... Touch up any dull spots and assemble... What it,
>figuratively speaking, someone didn't let stand for 30-40 minutes before
>assembly? Would that person (I won't give out names as not to offend
>"that persons dignity") be in trouble with the glue joints?
>
>Tom Brant
>
>MLPS
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net> |
Subject: | Re: aft CG problems |
815 total weight with 4 lbs on the tail. Main gear placement is the ONLY
thing that will have an effect on this.
Chris bobka
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Malley" <jgmalley(at)home.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: aft CG problems
>
> 815 total weight with 4 pounds on the raised tail. Main gear placement
> has a great effect on this.
>
> Mike's right about the fuel in the wing tank being on the CG. It's
> burning the fuel from a fuselage tank that has a gradual effect on
> balance. I've got 8 gallons in the wing and 12 in the fuselage, burn
> less than 3 an hour for a 7 hour range. Ever even think of sitting on a
> slab of plywood for 7 hours?
>
> Jim Malley
>
>
> DonanClara(at)aol.com wrote:
> >
> >
> > In a message dated 01/24/2002 7:53:57 AM Central Standard Time,
> > mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net writes:
> >
> > << raise the tail to straight &
> > level, let go, if the airplane teeters for a moment, the CG is good.
> >
> > Mike B Piet N687MB ( Mr Sam )
> > >>
> > Mike and (other flying listers) what weight is on your tailwheel ? Of
course
> > it would depend on your total empty weight and whether it is a long or
short
> > fuselage, but I'm curious about a ballpark figure for the Piet. My Buhl
Bull
> > Pup at an empty weight of about 570# had ten pounds on the tail. Don
Hicks
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Tom & Michelle Brant" <tmbrant(at)uswest.net> |
Subject: | Re: T-88 Bafoonery |
I saw those instructions on the box, after it is said not to mix up too much
(which I read in advance)... after I wrote that email, I ran down to the
basement and slid the joints apart and let them stand for a 15-20 minutes
since I had just finished when I wrote the email, I figured the time was
pretty close. When I pulled them apart, they came apart easily, but when I
put them back together (after they sat for a while) the glue seemed much
stickier. I guess I'll find out tomorrow night after work if it all sets up
right. Man will that suck if it didn't work right! After seeing how the
stuff went back together I'm pretty confident though.
You guys say it doesn't matter if you just glue and stick together right
away though right?? If yours has worked out ok, I trust that it will work
the same for me. I guess we'll see tomorrow night.
Another T-88 question... I was under the assumption that this stuff was of
a lighter consistency. I'm wondering how people apply it to the joints. I
have just taken a small scrap of spruce that was about 1/8" thk by 3/4"
wide, used it to mix the glue on a tin, and then spread it on the glue
joints like "butta". For some reason I thought that this stuff was
something that could be brushed on, but the thickness of it would make
brushing difficult. Any opinions???
Thanks all!
Tom Brant
MLPS
----- Original Message -----
From: Alan Swanson <swans071(at)tc.umn.edu>
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: T-88 Bafoonery
>
> Tom- Not to worry. Those instructions are specifically for working with
oak
> or other very porous wood where the wood will absorb the epoxy and
possibly
> starve the joint. The woods we are using don't have this problem. Just
> spread on the glue, clamp lightly to hold in place, and come back the next
> day when it is cured. You'll be one glue joint closer to flight!
>
> Al Swanson
> Minnetonka
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tom &
> Michelle Brant
> To: Pietenpol-List(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: T-88 Bafoonery
>
>
>
>
> Ok, I'm in panic... You know how guys typically don't read the
> instructions until after the project is messed up... I got my T-88
> tonight and was so excited to use it, I went down and started in, having
> only read about half of the instructions it turns out... After
> stopping, I reread the instructions which say to apply the glue
> "liberally" (which I feel I did) and then let stand in the open for
> 30-40 minutes... Touch up any dull spots and assemble... What it,
> figuratively speaking, someone didn't let stand for 30-40 minutes before
> assembly? Would that person (I won't give out names as not to offend
> "that persons dignity") be in trouble with the glue joints?
>
> Tom Brant
>
> MLPS
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | JamesJboyer(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: T-88 Bafoonery |
Hi again Tom,
Put the glue; both resin and hardner in a pan of hot water for a few minutes.
Practice will let you get it right for how you like to work. The heat makes
it flow better and I use a 1/2" brush with short bristles to spread it on. If
you use alcohol afterwards (like right away) and soak the brush in it you can
actually reuse the brush several times before its too stiff.
Cheers, Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Re: T-88 Bafoonery |
Tom,
Worried or not, you're definitely getting a kick out of starting your
project. Good for you!
Take a couple of aspirin and tomorrow go to Home Depot (The Piet Store)
or a hobby center and get a couple of boxes of tongue depressors, paper
towels and a bunch of small paper cups. Walmart or the local
Save-A-Whatever is good for this stuff as well.
Use the tongue depressors to mix the glue and also apply it. For big
glue-ups put equal amounts of T-88 in two cups and pour the light stuff
into the dark (it flows faster) then mix. For smaller jobs, fill a
corner of the cup with the dark stuff and then turn it and put an equal
amount (watch for equal sizing in the corners) of the light stuff and
mix away. Mix it good, but don't make a career out of it.
It smells like peanut butter, spreads like honey and soaks into wood
like water.
Keep a bunch of paper towels around to wipe the stuff off you. Grocery
store white vinegar will dissolve skin stickies pretty well (you will
soon discover what I mean by this), but I just get messy and scrub down
with a decent work soap afterwards.
You can also buy epoxy dispensers or weight the stuff etc., but I've
found it a very reliable just by carefully eyeballing the amounts. I've
done lots of "coupons" which are test glue-ups of scrap material to bust
and check the strength. This is a good idea and will improve your
skills and help your confidence.
I don't own stock in the company and have never called them either, just
got good results. Use wisely, but it's a pretty damn good glue.
Larry
Tom & Michelle Brant wrote:
>
>I saw those instructions on the box, after it is said not to mix up too much
>(which I read in advance)... after I wrote that email, I ran down to the
>basement and slid the joints apart and let them stand for a 15-20 minutes
>since I had just finished when I wrote the email, I figured the time was
>pretty close. When I pulled them apart, they came apart easily, but when I
>put them back together (after they sat for a while) the glue seemed much
>stickier. I guess I'll find out tomorrow night after work if it all sets up
>right. Man will that suck if it didn't work right! After seeing how the
>stuff went back together I'm pretty confident though.
>
>You guys say it doesn't matter if you just glue and stick together right
>away though right?? If yours has worked out ok, I trust that it will work
>the same for me. I guess we'll see tomorrow night.
>
>Another T-88 question... I was under the assumption that this stuff was of
>a lighter consistency. I'm wondering how people apply it to the joints. I
>have just taken a small scrap of spruce that was about 1/8" thk by 3/4"
>wide, used it to mix the glue on a tin, and then spread it on the glue
>joints like "butta". For some reason I thought that this stuff was
>something that could be brushed on, but the thickness of it would make
>brushing difficult. Any opinions???
>
>Thanks all!
>
>Tom Brant
>
>MLPS
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Alan Swanson <swans071(at)tc.umn.edu>
>To:
>Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: T-88 Bafoonery
>
>
>>
>>Tom- Not to worry. Those instructions are specifically for working with
>>
>oak
>
>>or other very porous wood where the wood will absorb the epoxy and
>>
>possibly
>
>>starve the joint. The woods we are using don't have this problem. Just
>>spread on the glue, clamp lightly to hold in place, and come back the next
>>day when it is cured. You'll be one glue joint closer to flight!
>>
>>Al Swanson
>>Minnetonka
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
>>[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tom &
>>Michelle Brant
>>To: Pietenpol-List(at)matronics.com
>>Subject: Pietenpol-List: T-88 Bafoonery
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Ok, I'm in panic... You know how guys typically don't read the
>>instructions until after the project is messed up... I got my T-88
>>tonight and was so excited to use it, I went down and started in, having
>>only read about half of the instructions it turns out... After
>>stopping, I reread the instructions which say to apply the glue
>>"liberally" (which I feel I did) and then let stand in the open for
>>30-40 minutes... Touch up any dull spots and assemble... What it,
>>figuratively speaking, someone didn't let stand for 30-40 minutes before
>>assembly? Would that person (I won't give out names as not to offend
>>"that persons dignity") be in trouble with the glue joints?
>>
>>Tom Brant
>>
>>MLPS
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Greg Cardinal" <gcardinal(at)startribune.com> |
Subject: | Re: T-88 Bafoonery |
Tom,
Your glue joint will be fine.
T-88 is difficult to brush on unless your working in a warm area. I prefer to use
a stick to spread it on.
Greg Cardinal
>>> tmbrant(at)uswest.net 01/25 12:22 AM >>>
I saw those instructions on the box, after it is said not to mix up too much
(which I read in advance)... after I wrote that email, I ran down to the
basement and slid the joints apart and let them stand for a 15-20 minutes
since I had just finished when I wrote the email, I figured the time was
pretty close. When I pulled them apart, they came apart easily, but when I
put them back together (after they sat for a while) the glue seemed much
stickier. I guess I'll find out tomorrow night after work if it all sets up
right. Man will that suck if it didn't work right! After seeing how the
stuff went back together I'm pretty confident though.
You guys say it doesn't matter if you just glue and stick together right
away though right?? If yours has worked out ok, I trust that it will work
the same for me. I guess we'll see tomorrow night.
Another T-88 question... I was under the assumption that this stuff was of
a lighter consistency. I'm wondering how people apply it to the joints. I
have just taken a small scrap of spruce that was about 1/8" thk by 3/4"
wide, used it to mix the glue on a tin, and then spread it on the glue
joints like "butta". For some reason I thought that this stuff was
something that could be brushed on, but the thickness of it would make
brushing difficult. Any opinions???
Thanks all!
Tom Brant
MLPS
----- Original Message -----
From: Alan Swanson <swans071(at)tc.umn.edu>
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: T-88 Bafoonery
>
> Tom- Not to worry. Those instructions are specifically for working with
oak
> or other very porous wood where the wood will absorb the epoxy and
possibly
> starve the joint. The woods we are using don't have this problem. Just
> spread on the glue, clamp lightly to hold in place, and come back the next
> day when it is cured. You'll be one glue joint closer to flight!
>
> Al Swanson
> Minnetonka
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tom &
> Michelle Brant
> To: Pietenpol-List(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: T-88 Bafoonery
>
>
>
>
> Ok, I'm in panic... You know how guys typically don't read the
> instructions until after the project is messed up... I got my T-88
> tonight and was so excited to use it, I went down and started in, having
> only read about half of the instructions it turns out... After
> stopping, I reread the instructions which say to apply the glue
> "liberally" (which I feel I did) and then let stand in the open for
> 30-40 minutes... Touch up any dull spots and assemble... What it,
> figuratively speaking, someone didn't let stand for 30-40 minutes before
> assembly? Would that person (I won't give out names as not to offend
> "that persons dignity") be in trouble with the glue joints?
>
> Tom Brant
>
> MLPS
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Greg Cardinal" <gcardinal(at)startribune.com> |
Subject: | Re: T-88 Bafoonery |
One added note to all the good stuff Larry wrote- the paper cups need to be "waxless".
Waxed cups will contaminate the glue.
Greg Cardinal
>>> llneal2(at)earthlink.net 01/24 11:05 PM >>>
Tom,
Worried or not, you're definitely getting a kick out of starting your
project. Good for you!
Take a couple of aspirin and tomorrow go to Home Depot (The Piet Store)
or a hobby center and get a couple of boxes of tongue depressors, paper
towels and a bunch of small paper cups. Walmart or the local
Save-A-Whatever is good for this stuff as well.
Use the tongue depressors to mix the glue and also apply it. For big
glue-ups put equal amounts of T-88 in two cups and pour the light stuff
into the dark (it flows faster) then mix. For smaller jobs, fill a
corner of the cup with the dark stuff and then turn it and put an equal
amount (watch for equal sizing in the corners) of the light stuff and
mix away. Mix it good, but don't make a career out of it.
It smells like peanut butter, spreads like honey and soaks into wood
like water.
Keep a bunch of paper towels around to wipe the stuff off you. Grocery
store white vinegar will dissolve skin stickies pretty well (you will
soon discover what I mean by this), but I just get messy and scrub down
with a decent work soap afterwards.
You can also buy epoxy dispensers or weight the stuff etc., but I've
found it a very reliable just by carefully eyeballing the amounts. I've
done lots of "coupons" which are test glue-ups of scrap material to bust
and check the strength. This is a good idea and will improve your
skills and help your confidence.
I don't own stock in the company and have never called them either, just
got good results. Use wisely, but it's a pretty damn good glue.
Larry
Tom & Michelle Brant wrote:
>
>I saw those instructions on the box, after it is said not to mix up too much
>(which I read in advance)... after I wrote that email, I ran down to the
>basement and slid the joints apart and let them stand for a 15-20 minutes
>since I had just finished when I wrote the email, I figured the time was
>pretty close. When I pulled them apart, they came apart easily, but when I
>put them back together (after they sat for a while) the glue seemed much
>stickier. I guess I'll find out tomorrow night after work if it all sets up
>right. Man will that suck if it didn't work right! After seeing how the
>stuff went back together I'm pretty confident though.
>
>You guys say it doesn't matter if you just glue and stick together right
>away though right?? If yours has worked out ok, I trust that it will work
>the same for me. I guess we'll see tomorrow night.
>
>Another T-88 question... I was under the assumption that this stuff was of
>a lighter consistency. I'm wondering how people apply it to the joints. I
>have just taken a small scrap of spruce that was about 1/8" thk by 3/4"
>wide, used it to mix the glue on a tin, and then spread it on the glue
>joints like "butta". For some reason I thought that this stuff was
>something that could be brushed on, but the thickness of it would make
>brushing difficult. Any opinions???
>
>Thanks all!
>
>Tom Brant
>
>MLPS
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Alan Swanson <swans071(at)tc.umn.edu>
>To:
>Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: T-88 Bafoonery
>
>
>>
>>Tom- Not to worry. Those instructions are specifically for working with
>>
>oak
>
>>or other very porous wood where the wood will absorb the epoxy and
>>
>possibly
>
>>starve the joint. The woods we are using don't have this problem. Just
>>spread on the glue, clamp lightly to hold in place, and come back the next
>>day when it is cured. You'll be one glue joint closer to flight!
>>
>>Al Swanson
>>Minnetonka
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
>>[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tom &
>>Michelle Brant
>>To: Pietenpol-List(at)matronics.com
>>Subject: Pietenpol-List: T-88 Bafoonery
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Ok, I'm in panic... You know how guys typically don't read the
>>instructions until after the project is messed up... I got my T-88
>>tonight and was so excited to use it, I went down and started in, having
>>only read about half of the instructions it turns out... After
>>stopping, I reread the instructions which say to apply the glue
>>"liberally" (which I feel I did) and then let stand in the open for
>>30-40 minutes... Touch up any dull spots and assemble... What it,
>>figuratively speaking, someone didn't let stand for 30-40 minutes before
>>assembly? Would that person (I won't give out names as not to offend
>>"that persons dignity") be in trouble with the glue joints?
>>
>>Tom Brant
>>
>>MLPS
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | clif <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca> |
H Kip, yellow cedar and port orford cedar are west coast species named chaemaecyparis.
Bald cypress is completely different, taxodium.Apparently it is very strong, hard
wood.
Can't find anything on it in my wood books,found it in my dictionary
Here's another one for you, Understanding Wood, Bruce Hoadley, Taunton Press.
This should be available from Garret-Wade, Lee Valley or other tool suppliers.Check
adds in woodwork magazines. Maybe get your library to get it.
Nothing wrong with fir really,just hard to work with. Once it's in the plane it
will be
done with. The result will be a plane you can trust.
I never bought Dons book, just the plans. Don't forget, the plane is historical
too! Clif
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Richard Navratril" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net> |
I was just about to start building a set of eyebrows for my A-65.
Tonight I was talking to a A&I who owns a J-3 on the field. He doesnt
think that they should be necessary and said I would be lucky most days
to get to normal operating temp. Does anyone have any opinions? I have
seen Piets without them.
Dick Navratil
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Re: T-88 Bafoonery |
Drat, I forgot this point, and it's important folks. Dixie makes
non-waxed cups, I'll get you all the part number. - Thanks Greg!
Greg Cardinal wrote:
>
>One added note to all the good stuff Larry wrote- the paper cups need to be "waxless".
Waxed cups will contaminate the glue.
>
>Greg Cardinal
>
>>>>llneal2(at)earthlink.net 01/24 11:05 PM >>>
>>>>
>
>Tom,
>
>Worried or not, you're definitely getting a kick out of starting your
>project. Good for you!
>
>Take a couple of aspirin and tomorrow go to Home Depot (The Piet Store)
>or a hobby center and get a couple of boxes of tongue depressors, paper
>towels and a bunch of small paper cups. Walmart or the local
>Save-A-Whatever is good for this stuff as well.
>
>Use the tongue depressors to mix the glue and also apply it. For big
>glue-ups put equal amounts of T-88 in two cups and pour the light stuff
>into the dark (it flows faster) then mix. For smaller jobs, fill a
>corner of the cup with the dark stuff and then turn it and put an equal
>amount (watch for equal sizing in the corners) of the light stuff and
>mix away. Mix it good, but don't make a career out of it.
>
>It smells like peanut butter, spreads like honey and soaks into wood
>like water.
>
>Keep a bunch of paper towels around to wipe the stuff off you. Grocery
>store white vinegar will dissolve skin stickies pretty well (you will
>soon discover what I mean by this), but I just get messy and scrub down
>with a decent work soap afterwards.
>
>You can also buy epoxy dispensers or weight the stuff etc., but I've
>found it a very reliable just by carefully eyeballing the amounts. I've
>done lots of "coupons" which are test glue-ups of scrap material to bust
>and check the strength. This is a good idea and will improve your
>skills and help your confidence.
>
>I don't own stock in the company and have never called them either, just
>got good results. Use wisely, but it's a pretty damn good glue.
>
>Larry
>
>
>Tom & Michelle Brant wrote:
>
>>
>>I saw those instructions on the box, after it is said not to mix up too much
>>(which I read in advance)... after I wrote that email, I ran down to the
>>basement and slid the joints apart and let them stand for a 15-20 minutes
>>since I had just finished when I wrote the email, I figured the time was
>>pretty close. When I pulled them apart, they came apart easily, but when I
>>put them back together (after they sat for a while) the glue seemed much
>>stickier. I guess I'll find out tomorrow night after work if it all sets up
>>right. Man will that suck if it didn't work right! After seeing how the
>>stuff went back together I'm pretty confident though.
>>
>>You guys say it doesn't matter if you just glue and stick together right
>>away though right?? If yours has worked out ok, I trust that it will work
>>the same for me. I guess we'll see tomorrow night.
>>
>>Another T-88 question... I was under the assumption that this stuff was of
>>a lighter consistency. I'm wondering how people apply it to the joints. I
>>have just taken a small scrap of spruce that was about 1/8" thk by 3/4"
>>wide, used it to mix the glue on a tin, and then spread it on the glue
>>joints like "butta". For some reason I thought that this stuff was
>>something that could be brushed on, but the thickness of it would make
>>brushing difficult. Any opinions???
>>
>>Thanks all!
>>
>>Tom Brant
>>
>>MLPS
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: Alan Swanson <swans071(at)tc.umn.edu>
>>To:
>>Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: T-88 Bafoonery
>>
>>
>>>
>>>Tom- Not to worry. Those instructions are specifically for working with
>>>
>>oak
>>
>>>or other very porous wood where the wood will absorb the epoxy and
>>>
>>possibly
>>
>>>starve the joint. The woods we are using don't have this problem. Just
>>>spread on the glue, clamp lightly to hold in place, and come back the next
>>>day when it is cured. You'll be one glue joint closer to flight!
>>>
>>>Al Swanson
>>>Minnetonka
>>>
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
>>>[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tom &
>>>Michelle Brant
>>>To: Pietenpol-List(at)matronics.com
>>>Subject: Pietenpol-List: T-88 Bafoonery
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Ok, I'm in panic... You know how guys typically don't read the
>>>instructions until after the project is messed up... I got my T-88
>>>tonight and was so excited to use it, I went down and started in, having
>>>only read about half of the instructions it turns out... After
>>>stopping, I reread the instructions which say to apply the glue
>>>"liberally" (which I feel I did) and then let stand in the open for
>>>30-40 minutes... Touch up any dull spots and assemble... What it,
>>>figuratively speaking, someone didn't let stand for 30-40 minutes before
>>>assembly? Would that person (I won't give out names as not to offend
>>>"that persons dignity") be in trouble with the glue joints?
>>>
>>>Tom Brant
>>>
>>>MLPS
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | clif <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca> |
The one admonishment I got from an old hand was to mix thoroughly.
He made me mix feverishly for 5 minutes, rest my poor hand for 1
then mix another couple of minutes. The closer it gets to every
molecule being next to every other molecule the better. Just don,t
mix and mix till it sets!
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | clif <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca> |
Try this, http://techreports.larc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/NYRS
NACA experiments from 1917 til 1958, hundreds of them!
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net> |
I tried the link with no results. Anyone else?
Chris Bobka
----- Original Message -----
From: "clif" <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: info-naca
>
> Try this, http://techreports.larc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/NYRS
> NACA experiments from 1917 til 1958, hundreds of them!
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net> |
Subject: | Re: engine eyebrows |
For the A series Continental or an O-200, it is imperitive that the cooling
air go from top to bottom not front to back. It might work for a year or
two but you will pay the price in new cylinders sooner or later. Use the
eyebrows exactly like those from a cub (they can be copied - ask dale
johnson) and a tray that goes along the bottom of the case to take air along
where the oil gathers. This air eventually will spill out at the oil sump.
Look at a tcraft or any cessna 120/140/150 for a good example of the tray.
The front of this tray ports to an oval hole just below the prop hub which
is easily blocked off for winter ops.
Chris bobka
EAA Tech counselor
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Navratril" <horzpool(at)goldengate.net>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: engine eyebrows
>
> I was just about to start building a set of eyebrows for my A-65.
> Tonight I was talking to a A&I who owns a J-3 on the field. He doesnt
> think that they should be necessary and said I would be lucky most days
> to get to normal operating temp. Does anyone have any opinions? I have
> seen Piets without them.
> Dick Navratil
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | clif <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca> |
Yeah, I know, just tried it myself when my message popped up.
Google has it. I just tried it and it worked. Clif
----- Original Message -----
From: Christian Bobka <bobka(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: info-naca
>
> I tried the link with no results. Anyone else?
>
> Chris Bobka
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "clif" <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca>
> To:
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: info-naca
>
>
> >
> > Try this, http://techreports.larc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/NYRS
> > NACA experiments from 1917 til 1958, hundreds of them!
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
worked for me here. http://techreports.larc.nasa.gov
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Michael Brusilow" <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Ever even think of sitting on a
> slab of plywood for 7 hours?
>
> Jim Malley
>
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
To solve that problem, I lowered the seat until it was just above the
torque tube.I now sit on two soft cushions. Big difference.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert Haines" <robertsjunk(at)hotmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: T-88 Bafoonery |
I was just about to write the exact same thing. The only thing I can add it
to get the little plastic cups, the kind you make jello shots in. The
popsicle sticks are in the hobby aisle, oddly enough close to the cups.
(It's like WalMart had it planned) Also get latex gloves. Repeated skin
exposure will make you alergic to the stuff. I haven't heard of anyone on
this list being alergic to it but I hear it happens.
Robert Haines
Murphysboro, Illinois
P.S. - enjoy the expression on the kids face at the checkout as he trys to
figure out what the heck you are going to do with jello shots, popsicle
sticks, and rubber gloves. :)
> Take a couple of aspirin and tomorrow go to Home Depot (The Piet Store)
> or a hobby center and get a couple of boxes of tongue depressors, paper
> towels and a bunch of small paper cups. Walmart or the local
> Save-A-Whatever is good for this stuff as well.
>
> Use the tongue depressors to mix the glue and also apply it. For big
> glue-ups put equal amounts of T-88 in two cups and pour the light stuff
> into the dark (it flows faster) then mix. For smaller jobs, fill a
> corner of the cup with the dark stuff and then turn it and put an equal
> amount (watch for equal sizing in the corners) of the light stuff and
> mix away. Mix it good, but don't make a career out of it.
>
> It smells like peanut butter, spreads like honey and soaks into wood
> like water.
>
> Keep a bunch of paper towels around to wipe the stuff off you. Grocery
> store white vinegar will dissolve skin stickies pretty well (you will
> soon discover what I mean by this), but I just get messy and scrub down
> with a decent work soap afterwards.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Gary McNeel, Jr." <gmcneel(at)mykitplane.com> |
This too http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/
-Gary McNeel
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
> VAHOWDY(at)aol.com
> Sent: Friday, January 25, 2002 1:53 AM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: info-naca
>
>
> worked for me here. http://techreports.larc.nasa.gov
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Gary McNeel, Jr." <gmcneel(at)mykitplane.com> |
FYI guys, I added this to my web site too. I created the site to house this
type of information because I just could not keep all organized easily in
the browser. I lost all of my Favorites during a rebuild - forgot to back it
up - ugh. This way I have it all stored on the net for anyone else too. The
site is free and will remain so for as long as I am alive (or some other
catastrophic event does not intercede).
Also, I am adding an area to the site so that people can upload information
relevant to just a particular type of aircraft (the venerable Piet) or
generic information that anyone would want, like this. The new area should
come soon, just been busy in the new job with a very, very tight deadline.
PS - I am ordering the plans at the end of January. I am finally totally
convinced this is the plane for me. I have not seen one yet, but hope to in
the future.
Now, I just need to knock out a pilots certificate, build the plane, keep
the new job, spend time with my 4 1/2 year old son (and future flying
buddy), oh, and, spend some time with my wonderful wife. Did I miss
anything? Oh, yeah, keep up with you guys. The above is in no particular
order. i.e. read it backwards.
-Gary McNeel
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of clif
> Sent: Friday, January 25, 2002 12:13 AM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: info-naca
>
>
> Try this, http://techreports.larc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/NYRS
> NACA experiments from 1917 til 1958, hundreds of them!
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | DonanClara(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: T-88 Bafoonery |
In a message dated 01/24/2002 11:40:18 PM Central Standard Time,
llneal2(at)earthlink.net writes:
<< Drat, I forgot this point, and it's important folks. Dixie makes
non-waxed cups, I'll get you all the part number. - Thanks Greg! >>
I used 3-oz white plastic cups from Wal-Mart. Found them to be a bit sturdier
than non-waxed paper cups. Don[
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
Subject: | 12 hours door to door |
> Jim Malley makes a good point. He's done the x-country to Wisconsin !
In 1998 it took me 12 hours from Cleveland, Ohio to Watertown, Wisconsin
with four stops. (about 475 miles) Nice day, but a huge headwind and tons
of turbulence. Had a school bus pass me on the Indiana Turnpike like I was
parked. If you angle the seat just right and are a bit on the fat side,
the plywood
seat is no big deal. Others who have flown my Piet ask how I can do
it......well,
they are thinner and could use a cushion need be. I've gotten a few
complaints
about the front seat as it's square inch area is really pretty
small.....but then
again those folks just never get a second ride :)))
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 34 Msgs - 01/24/02 |
From: | Richard A Hartwig <rhartwig11(at)juno.com> |
Ref: http://techreports.larc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/NYRS
Change the "NYRS" to NTRS. That looks like the site.
Dick Hartwig
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | mark boynton <marktboynton(at)yahoo.com> |
Subject: | Re: sitka spruce in San Diego |
Jim and Kip,
Thanks for the tip.
Mark Boynton
Gilbert, AZ
--- Kip & Beth Gardner
wrote:
> Gardner
>
> Kinsella"
> >
> >
> >Mark:
> >Another alternative is to buy a "Bargain bag of
> spruce" from AC Spruce &
> >Specialties. You will still need the long pieces
> for your horr stab, but
> >there will be plenty of good short stuff.
> >I built most of fusalage, empenage, center section
> spars, etc. from these.
> >Jim
> >NX799JK
>
> Mark,
>
> Pat, the guy I bought my Piet project from had some
> very good advice in
> this regard. He said to buy one of these 'bargain
> bags' EVERY time you
> order wood from AS&S, because if you are ordering
> wood, you are paying a
> bundle for all the packaging & shipping costs
> anyway, so why not go for a
> little more 'bang for the buck?'
>
> Cheers!
>
> Kip Gardner
>
>
> 426 Schneider St. SE
> North Canton, OH 44720
> (330) 494-1775
>
>
>
> Forum -
> Contributions of
> any other form
>
> latest messages.
> other List members.
>
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> http://www.matronics.com/search
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Gene Vickery" <h2opilot(at)cwo.com> |
Subject: | Books and Thoughts |
I have found that many older out-of-print books can be obtained by ABE
Books at the following web site: http://www.abebooks.com/ I have not
looked for the technical subjects you fellows are talking about, but you
might give it a try.
As a pilot with 50 years experience, and a long time Pietenpol fan I
find some remarks on this site a little disturbing. A Franklin powered
Piet with 40 pounds of lead strapped to the engine mount? And it's for
sale?
Your Pietenpol project should not be rushed. Quality of materials and
workmanship should be your only goal. Some of the discussions about
cheaper ways to build are scary to me. Don't cut corners. Is it worth
your life to save a thousand dollars on your Peit project? Remember it's
going to be your butt in that seat.
Just a thought on CG: Stay in the envelope. To venture outside the
envelope is likely to kill you sooner or later, especially if your CG is
too far aft. The best stability will be achieved in the forward part of
the envelope.
Gene Vickery
Tehachapi, CA
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Gary Meadows" <gwmeadows(at)hotmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: aft CG problems |
When you weigh an airplane for CG determinations, you HAVE to take the
weight of the plane at each maingear, then the weight at the tailwheel in
the flying position. These are where you weigh planes. But this isn't where
the calculation stops.
At this point, you have to know the distance (arm) of the maingear from the
datum, and do the old weitght and balance calculations using WxA=M Weight x
Arm = Moment. This, by the way is after you subtract any extra devices which
got weighed which aren't normally part of the airplane(called Tare). Using
the datum is what ties the weight at the gear to the actual CG on the
airplane. If I remember correctly, the datum on the Piet is the LE of the
wing.
This is the only way to get the accurate weight and cg location of the
plane.
If this was already answered - my apologies, I'm catching up on email and am
way behind.
Gary Meadows
Spring, TX
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "walter evans" <wbeevans(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Subject: | Re: T-88 Bafoonery |
My 2 centavos on glueing,
With all the talk of mixing containers, still the BEST way to mix it without
wasting, is to mix on a saucer. The little circle in the middle where the
cup goes is a perfect "dish" No lie, it's good for two reasons. First,
is not to waste because after a few glueing sessions it's easy to
"guesstimate" what you need.
And second, there is no problem with getting equal quantities. Just put
two equal length beads side by side without touching beads till you mix.
Kind of hard to get quantities right when you are squirting into the bottom
of a cup.
Cleanup is also a breeze, just a wipe with a paper towel. By tomorrow the
plate is hard and dry and ready to use again.
Did all my mixing with the tongue depressors , just bite them on the end,
and pull them in half.
Did all the glueing on this Piet with about 1 1/2 Qt. kits Thats with
having nice full, glue joints. Virtually no waste.
walt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom & Michelle Brant" <tmbrant(at)uswest.net>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: T-88 Bafoonery
>
> Ok, I'm in panic... You know how guys typically don't read the
> instructions until after the project is messed up... I got my T-88
> tonight and was so excited to use it, I went down and started in, having
> only read about half of the instructions it turns out... After
> stopping, I reread the instructions which say to apply the glue
> "liberally" (which I feel I did) and then let stand in the open for
> 30-40 minutes... Touch up any dull spots and assemble... What it,
> figuratively speaking, someone didn't let stand for 30-40 minutes before
> assembly? Would that person (I won't give out names as not to offend
> "that persons dignity") be in trouble with the glue joints?
>
> Tom Brant
>
> MLPS
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Gary McNeel, Jr." <gmcneel(at)mykitplane.com> |
This is how I will do it too. A friend of mine built a Boredom Fighter some
years ago. He gave me a TON of good stuff and tips. Among the stuff were
Popsicle sticks (bags of them), non-wax paper cups, the little rectangular
8x6 inch plastic trays for adds and ends, and a terrific workbench. I hope
to do some plans on that in the near future.
-Gary
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Robert
> Haines
> Sent: Friday, January 25, 2002 8:14 AM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: T-88 Bafoonery
>
>
>
>
> I was just about to write the exact same thing. The only thing I
> can add it
> to get the little plastic cups, the kind you make jello shots in. The
> popsicle sticks are in the hobby aisle, oddly enough close to the cups.
> (It's like WalMart had it planned) Also get latex gloves. Repeated skin
> exposure will make you alergic to the stuff. I haven't heard of anyone on
> this list being alergic to it but I hear it happens.
>
> Robert Haines
> Murphysboro, Illinois
>
> P.S. - enjoy the expression on the kids face at the checkout as he trys to
> figure out what the heck you are going to do with jello shots, popsicle
> sticks, and rubber gloves. :)
>
>
> > Take a couple of aspirin and tomorrow go to Home Depot (The Piet Store)
> > or a hobby center and get a couple of boxes of tongue depressors, paper
> > towels and a bunch of small paper cups. Walmart or the local
> > Save-A-Whatever is good for this stuff as well.
> >
> > Use the tongue depressors to mix the glue and also apply it. For big
> > glue-ups put equal amounts of T-88 in two cups and pour the light stuff
> > into the dark (it flows faster) then mix. For smaller jobs, fill a
> > corner of the cup with the dark stuff and then turn it and put an equal
> > amount (watch for equal sizing in the corners) of the light stuff and
> > mix away. Mix it good, but don't make a career out of it.
> >
> > It smells like peanut butter, spreads like honey and soaks into wood
> > like water.
> >
> > Keep a bunch of paper towels around to wipe the stuff off you. Grocery
> > store white vinegar will dissolve skin stickies pretty well (you will
> > soon discover what I mean by this), but I just get messy and scrub down
> > with a decent work soap afterwards.
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Ian Holland" <iholland(at)telusplanet.net> |
Subject: | Re: T-88 Bafoonery |
Anybody know of a source for T-88 in Canada? I have tried Revy, Home
Depot, Home Hardware etc and they all look at me kind of funny. Who
makes it?
Thanks,
-=Ian=-
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Ted Tuckerman" <ws133b341(at)home.com> |
Subject: | Re: T-88 Bafoonery |
Ian:
Try the manufacturer's web site at www.systemthree.com
Ted Tuckerman
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ian Holland" <iholland(at)telusplanet.net>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: T-88 Bafoonery
>
> Anybody know of a source for T-88 in Canada? I have tried Revy, Home
> Depot, Home Hardware etc and they all look at me kind of funny. Who
> makes it?
> Thanks,
> -=Ian=-
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | JamesJboyer(at)aol.com |
Hello there ,
I have built most of the Piet so far and just mixed it well, a couple of
minutes, and made test pieces with each batch. The ones that I have broken
apart to check the glue joints have all torn the wood apart NONE OF THE GLUE
JOINTS HAVE SEPARATED.
You don't need to mix it until your arms/fingers/whatever is sore! Use common
sense and think about what you are doing.
Cheers, Jim
PS the rocket science is all in the formulation of the glue; not the gluing!
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | JamesJboyer(at)aol.com |
Hi Gary,
Sounds like you have all the right things listed, but I would like to make a
suggestion about order!
1. Wife
2. Wife
3. Wife
If you can do these three the rest will fall in line no sweat and probably
with her willing help.
Cheers, Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Tom & Michelle Brant" <tmbrant(at)uswest.net> |
Subject: | all is well with glu joints |
I am happy to report that after further review of the glue joints, all
looks good. I pulled the fuse side out of the jig tonight to check and
everything was solid as a rock. Thanks for putting up with a
worry-wart. After reading the box in more detail, the mention of
letting it stand for 30-40 minutes isn't really in the application
instructions, it's more in the description of the product. I appreciate
all the feedback from everyone. This is almost as fun as flying... "2
hours of complete boredome that ends with 30 seconds of stark terror"
you know the phrase...
Tom B.
MLPS
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "twinboom" <twinboom(at)email.msn.com> |
Try this one, it gets you to the NACA page, pick where you want to go from
there.
http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/
Doug Blackburn, Arrowbear Lake, So. Cal.
Inland Slope Rebels, Riverside Ca.
<http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/ISR>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | clif <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca> |
Subject: | Re: 12 hours door to door |
Has anyone tried that temperfoam stuff?
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: 12 hours door to door
>
>
> > Jim Malley makes a good point. He's done the x-country to Wisconsin !
> In 1998 it took me 12 hours from Cleveland, Ohio to Watertown, Wisconsin
> with four stops. (about 475 miles) Nice day, but a huge headwind and
tons
> of turbulence. Had a school bus pass me on the Indiana Turnpike like I
was
> parked. If you angle the seat just right and are a bit on the fat side,
> the plywood
> seat is no big deal. Others who have flown my Piet ask how I can do
> it......well,
> they are thinner and could use a cushion need be. I've gotten a few
> complaints
> about the front seat as it's square inch area is really pretty
> small.....but then
> again those folks just never get a second ride :)))
>
> Mike C.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
bz-culture(at)psg.com
Subject: | Re: T-88 Bafoonery |
I find all this talk of glue sort of wierd?
With wood, it is usually the fibers, the outer layer, where the wood is glued
that gives way. The wood is more important than the glue. There are glues that
get hard and crack, letting in moisture. Can't remember the name, but a marine
wood powder glue was like that. You do of course want a waterproof glue,
not like in house doors that delaminate. Expoxy two part glues are great of
course, but for the Pientenpol, unless they are easy and handy, hardly necessary.
This is a barnyard plane, meant to be built with what is handy, from the bucket
of bolts in the machine shed, where the hayrack and other machinery gets repaired,
including bailing wire. "Maybe I'm just too old now?"
The salesmen of course are pushing higher quality more expensive aircraft certified
this and that. But you don't have to go that route, if you don't want.
Pietenpol designed this thing to hang together no matter what a stupid farmer
might do, or a cow, scratching his rump against the wing tip.
I am using polyester resin glue from Home Depot. Did a test piece at the beginning.
The glue foamed and filled voids. Has to stay overnight, but works fine.
You have to peel the first layer of wood fibers off, to get it loose.
No two part. Just a squeeze bottle, about $6 or so, in quart size. Working fine
as far as I can see. The darn stuff foams though and it bulges out of the
seams and you have to cut the excess off if you are building a show airplane
for trophies. Me, I am leaving it hang out. Going to cover with fabric anyway.
This thing just has to fly when I'm done. Not into esthetics, I need it to
do work. But glue has come a hell of a long way, since I was a kid. Home Depot
stuff is great. Squeeze and done.
Got to go down to South Miami this morning. Ran out of strips for wing ribs.
Need to go to ACE hardware and see what they have in Construction Englemen Spruce.
See if I can find some aircraft grade in end rings in the pile and with
knots far enough apart, to let me get some good strips with straight grain out
of them. By the way, for bending the wing rib upper piece. I bought an 18
inch piece of 2 inch galvanized pipe from Home Depot and a screw on galvanized
cap. Used some Forma Gasket, the black soft No.2 on the threads and have me
a container leaning against the mango tree. Tried boiling the water at first,
but found it not necessary. Just leave four or five pieces stuck in water overnight.
They bend with a little force the next morning to slip into the curve
part of the table top jig. Takes about one day to make two wing ribs, but
then only work about 3 to 4 hours and I'm an old man and very slow. For gussets,
I'm using those 5/8 inch machine steel nails that come in clips like ammo.
The automatic punch machine was $160 or so; instead I just bought the plastic
container with the joined string of nails in belts. About $1.50. They are
about the thickness of a needle and I use a chisel to pry them off, one by one.
Then hammer them in the wing rib gussets. I found slightly bigger brass and
copper nails, one inch longer would split the spruce. Bad thing that. Only
want something to keep the pressure on the gusset while the glue sets overnight.
Varnish over the nail head, which is sort of square, should tackle any future
problem with rust. I use needle nose pliers to hold the small thin nail,
while hammering. Get a blue thumbnail otherwise. Also using the No. 4 screws,
of about half inch long that come from Home Depot. They look like Aluminum,
but probably steel. Only need them to reinforce and hold pressure while the
glue sets anyway. Some I unscrew after, if they are in the way.
I had a bit of trouble with the seats during construction. The measurements
on the long fuselage and the short fuselage, off put the instrument panel base.
If I had known what he was trying to do, would have made the instrument panel
as one unit, on the work bench and put it on afterwards. I also threw away
one seat made wrong, cause I couldn't figure it out at first. But later, I realized
if you stick in all the bulkheads, back supports, firewall, and seat panels
first, then add braces, it is very easy to cut and fit, the pieces without
resorting to silly measurements, that end up being off, when you mix up long
and short fuselages.
There is not much in a weight penalty on the fuselage, if you should diddle around
and stick in a few more wood pieces anywhere for reinforcing. Far as I
can see, the impact of landing a 1200 lb. airplane, is absorbed by the soft tires,
the bungee cords and the quarter inch construction grade, good one side Douglas
Fir plywood from Home Depot on the bottom. About $15 a sheet.
Looks to be enough, unless you drop it in from 20 feet up. Ted scared the shit
out of me, when he landed on the grass strip at Naples. Seemed like he was going
to fly the propeller into the ground. But the last minute flare worked out
alright and we still seemed to hit the wheel rim on the right tire. ( memo-
get bigger tires and less bungee cord turns! ) Should have worn my glasses
I guess. The perspective is off without them, for judging distance. But flaring
out at 3 feet eye level, is something I will have to learn by practice I guess.
Anyway, Home Depot polyester glue is fine! Less work but stains the fingers
for four days afterward until it wears off.
http://members.tripod.com/~speculation/pietenpolplaneconstruction.html
( will add another photo, this weekend )
-----------------------------------------------------
On Fri, 25 January 2002, "walter evans" wrote:
>
>
> My 2 centavos on glueing,
> With all the talk of mixing containers, still the BEST way to mix it without
> wasting, is to mix on a saucer. The little circle in the middle where the
> cup goes is a perfect "dish" No lie, it's good for two reasons. First,
> is not to waste because after a few glueing sessions it's easy to
> "guesstimate" what you need.
> And second, there is no problem with getting equal quantities. Just put
> two equal length beads side by side without touching beads till you mix.
> Kind of hard to get quantities right when you are squirting into the bottom
> of a cup.
> Cleanup is also a breeze, just a wipe with a paper towel. By tomorrow the
> plate is hard and dry and ready to use again.
> Did all my mixing with the tongue depressors , just bite them on the end,
> and pull them in half.
> Did all the glueing on this Piet with about 1 1/2 Qt. kits Thats with
> having nice full, glue joints. Virtually no waste.
> walt
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tom & Michelle Brant" <tmbrant(at)uswest.net>
> To:
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: T-88 Bafoonery
>
>
>
> >
> > Ok, I'm in panic... You know how guys typically don't read the
> > instructions until after the project is messed up... I got my T-88
> > tonight and was so excited to use it, I went down and started in, having
> > only read about half of the instructions it turns out... After
> > stopping, I reread the instructions which say to apply the glue
> > "liberally" (which I feel I did) and then let stand in the open for
> > 30-40 minutes... Touch up any dull spots and assemble... What it,
> > figuratively speaking, someone didn't let stand for 30-40 minutes before
> > assembly? Would that person (I won't give out names as not to offend
> > "that persons dignity") be in trouble with the glue joints?
> >
> > Tom Brant
> >
> > MLPS
> >
> >
>
> >
> >
>
>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
Subject: | Re: aft CG problems |
Gary
My eyes cross over, when I read this and try to figure the math out. I am going
to stick it on a saw horse and slide the engine on wood engine bed stringers
back and forth until it balances right, with one person in the rear seat.
If I already have put the wing on, then I know in advance where it has to balance.
At 20 % chord from the leading edge. Once the engine is set, then drill
holes and bolt it down. Far as I can tell from numerous photos of many planes.
A tail dragger needs the landing gear at the wing leading edge point, or
slightly more forward?
On Fri, 25 January 2002, "Gary Meadows" wrote:
>
>
> When you weigh an airplane for CG determinations, you HAVE to take the
> weight of the plane at each maingear, then the weight at the tailwheel in
> the flying position. These are where you weigh planes. But this isn't where
> the calculation stops.
>
> At this point, you have to know the distance (arm) of the maingear from the
> datum, and do the old weitght and balance calculations using WxA=M Weight x
> Arm = Moment. This, by the way is after you subtract any extra devices which
> got weighed which aren't normally part of the airplane(called Tare). Using
> the datum is what ties the weight at the gear to the actual CG on the
> airplane. If I remember correctly, the datum on the Piet is the LE of the
> wing.
>
> This is the only way to get the accurate weight and cg location of the
> plane.
>
> If this was already answered - my apologies, I'm catching up on email and am
> way behind.
>
> Gary Meadows
> Spring, TX
>
> Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
>
>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Wood and wooden planes |
In a message dated 1/26/02 9:23:56 AM Eastern Standard Time,
cayecaulker(at)justice.com writes:
<<
Anyway, Home Depot polyester glue is fine! Less work but stains the
fingers for four days afterward until it wears off. >>
Would you mind posting the name of this glue ? I'm going to go see what I can
find at ACE also, so far haven't found an ACE that had wood, so will be
looking. I got a kick out of the "HOME DEPOT" comments. It really does seem
that its the "PIET DEPOT"
Do you have your plane finished ? Is your friend Ted building one too?
I agree that this is a barnyard plane. Its made for those farmers that want
to build something between haying and feeding the cows. And made to land in
the hayfields. Good comments. I wish your comments would be written up with
pictures. It would make a GREAT addition to an already massive amount of
information on the PIET.
-dennis the menace, in Tenn.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | DonanClara(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: aft CG problems |
Hey Fisherman...you sound like a no-nonsense kind of guy..a man after my own
heart...BUT, you had better find the mathematician who will help you do a
full bore, FAA type weight and balance when it comes time for you formal
inspection...they won't buy sawhorse balancing. Your plan should get you in
the ballpark for engine positioning though. My 2c Don
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com> |
Subject: | anatomic seat design. |
Hi friends,
A little hand on (been there done that) experience:
Something that has worked for me is the foam and
fiberglass method of the Binguilis book.
Over the plywood seat you "carve" in foam a seat, I
even added back support like sport car seats, then put
a thin layer of fiberglass. It should finish as a
very confortable seat, then just a thin layer of
padding will do the rest, is one of lightest, cheap
and more confortable method I have tried.
If carefully made (carved), practicaly no height will
be added to the pilot position, because only anatomic
support, were needed, will be added over the plywood.
I can not remember in wich of the B. books is this
article but is in page 176 (I keep a copy of the page
in my construction binder, same with each idea I aply
to my projects, I should add the book reference to the
each copy...).
Got the idea of the anatomic carving from a local
medical clinic wait room, that has very confortable
fiberglass seats, with no padding, but perfectly
conforms to the body...
My 2 centavos, hope it helps you enjoy your flying
like I do, here we fly every week end, year round, WWP
(Weather and Wife Permited, well honestly weather is
far more "supporting" here ;o).
Saludos
Gary Gower
--- clif wrote:
>
>
> Has anyone tried that temperfoam stuff?
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov>
> To:
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: 12 hours door to door
>
>
> Cuy
>
> >
> >
> > > Jim Malley makes a good point. He's done the
> x-country to Wisconsin !
> > In 1998 it took me 12 hours from Cleveland, Ohio
> to Watertown, Wisconsin
> > with four stops. (about 475 miles) Nice day,
> but a huge headwind and
> tons
> > of turbulence. Had a school bus pass me on the
> Indiana Turnpike like I
> was
> > parked. If you angle the seat just right and are
> a bit on the fat side,
> > the plywood
> > seat is no big deal. Others who have flown my
> Piet ask how I can do
> > it......well,
> > they are thinner and could use a cushion need be.
> I've gotten a few
> > complaints
> > about the front seat as it's square inch area is
> really pretty
> > small.....but then
> > again those folks just never get a second ride
> :)))
> >
> > Mike C.
> >
> >
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com> |
>
>
http://members.tripod.com/~speculation/pietenpolplaneconstruction.html
>
> ( will add another photo, this weekend )
>
-----------------------------------------------------
You have a great page and you are having a real great
time...
I know my english is not bad, but some times I find
words that I have to look in the dictionary, Fewer as
years go by...
Two of them that I could not find in my pocket
dictionary here, were "old farts" what do they mean?
Gracias
Saludos
Gary Gower
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
Subject: | Re: Wood and wooden planes |
The glue is a polyurethane. Brand name Polybrand. My Home Depot pretty much
does not have any other glue. An expert just answered and said it is an excellent
glue. Which I found out anyway in practice.
On the comment about an FAA Inspector and mathematical computation for weight
and balance? Why would I need an FAA inspector? Never had one before and been
flying off and on for 40 years, here and there in the world. ( Just joking
of course! Ha! Ha! )
Depends a lot where I get to test it! If it is out in the boondocks of the Everglades
on some grass patch??? If at an airport with lots of rules, then I
guess one has to comply?
------------------------------------------
On Sat, 26 January 2002, Dmott9(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> In a message dated 1/26/02 9:23:56 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> cayecaulker(at)justice.com writes:
>
> <<
> Anyway, Home Depot polyester glue is fine! Less work but stains the
> fingers for four days afterward until it wears off. >>
>
> Would you mind posting the name of this glue ? I'm going to go see what I can
> find at ACE also, so far haven't found an ACE that had wood, so will be
> looking. I got a kick out of the "HOME DEPOT" comments. It really does seem
> that its the "PIET DEPOT"
>
> Do you have your plane finished ? Is your friend Ted building one too?
> I agree that this is a barnyard plane. Its made for those farmers that want
> to build something between haying and feeding the cows. And made to land in
> the hayfields. Good comments. I wish your comments would be written up with
> pictures. It would make a GREAT addition to an already massive amount of
> information on the PIET.
> -dennis the menace, in Tenn.
>
>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Tim <tbertw(at)tenbuckplans.com> |
Subject: | Re: Wood and wooden planes |
List,
" On the comment about an FAA Inspector and mathematical computation for
weight and balance? Why would I need an FAA inspector? Never had one
before and been flying off and on for 40 years, here and there in the
world. ( Just joking of course! Ha! Ha! )"
It is a well known scientific fact that air molecules interact differently
with propellors and wings AND the effects of gravity are altered after a
"bureaucrat" looks at an aircraft. It is presumptively incomprehensible
that someone would EVER fly something that was "ungraced" by our government!
Tim - Lurker in Texas
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Isablcorky(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Wood and wooden planes |
Pieters,
On this poly glue, I found some TITEBOND URETHANE glue that states it is
completely waterproof. TITEBOND is the trade name for some products of the
Franklin Company. Having been in the piano business, wood, glue and wire, for
over 60 years I will stand on the box and give the highest rating to Franklin
Products. Problem is I can't remember where I bought it. Anyone else out
there with a memory problem?
Corky in La heading for Florida in a few days. Hope I remember the way home
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Wayne McIntosh" <mcintosh3017(at)home.com> |
Subject: | Re: aft CG problems T-88 |
Hello,
I have been lurking on this list for the last 4 months. I have built and
am currently flying a Ragwing Rag-A-Muffin. The Rag-A-Muffin is a single
seat wood and fabric parasol wing plane that is similar in size to the Heath
Parasol. I have been flying my plane for the last 2 years and now. I want to
build another plane and the Aircamper is one of the planes I am thinking
about building. I am also on the Ragwing list and I find that there is also
on line discussions about glue and materials on the Ragwing list. I built my
plane using mostly T-88, a friend of mine built a 2 seat Keritoo using T-88
and the plane is now 14 years old and has over 1400 hours on it with no
complaints as far as glue joints. I initially used the foaming polyurethane
glue but after comparing it with T-88 I threw away most of the parts made
with the polyurethane glue. The foaming action of the poly glue can force
parts out of contact making a weak joint, the foam has very little strength.
I bought all of my lumber at the local lumber yard and used Douglas Fir. It
wasn't hard to grade the wood and I also made a bend tester to test the
strength of the wood before using it. I also painted the plane using the
latex paint process known as the Fisher process which uses black latex house
paint for the UV barrier. For plywood,aluminum,cables,bolts etc I used all
aircraft grade stuff. What I am getting at is that I did not use all
expensive aircraft stuff in my plane. I would be real careful about using
hardware store items without first verifying for sure that it will work.
Sure the Pietenpol is overbuilt and is simple to build. But back then all
types of planes crashed more often than we are used to seeing today. We have
found over the 100 years that we have been flying that there is a minimum
quality that we must not cross oe we will die. I have seen a few people
start building with abandon and later realize that maybe they should have
used a little better grade of stuff and give up on the project or worse sell
it to someone else.
When you place your plane on a sawhorse with someone in the seat and
slide the engine on the mounts you will have a plane that weighs over a half
ton. I hope you have a good sawhorse, and I hope the floor and longerons can
take the weight. As far as the math to do the W&B goes, I am no whiz either
but if you can multiply ,divide and use a tape measure and a level, you will
have no problem. Here is a NTSB report on what can happen in the extreme
case of cutting too many corners.
Wayne McIntosh, Lafayette IN
NTSB Identification: CHI84FU007 . The docket is stored on NTSB microfiche
number 26765.
Accident occurred Saturday, July 28, 1984 at LUDINGTON, MI
Aircraft:COLLINS FISHER FP-202, registration: NONE
Injuries: 1 Fatal.
THE ULTRA-LIGHT WAS CONSTRUCTED BY THE PILOT AND TWO OTHER PERSONS. THIS
GROUP HAD NO PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE IN AIRCRAFT CONSTRUCTION. THIS WAS THE
THIRD KNOWN FLIGHT FOR THIS AIRCRAFT. IT HAD BEEN FLOWN TWO DAYS PRIOR TO
THE ACCIDENT AND AN ADJUSTMENT TO THE AILERONS HAD BEEN MADE. THE PILOT WAS
IN A TURN FROM BASE TO FINAL WHEN HE STARTED TO LOOSE ALTITUDE. WHEN HE
ADDED POWER THE NOSE STARTED UP THEN THE RIGHT WING SEPARATED. EXAMINATION
OF THE WRECKAGE REVEALED THAT SCRAP HOUSE PANELING WAS USED IN THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THIS VEHICLE. ALSO SEVERAL GLUE JOINTS PULLED APART WITHOUT
SPLINTERING THE CONTACTING SURFACES.
The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of
this accident as follows.
MAINTENANCE,MAJOR ALTERATION..INADEQUATE..MANUFACTURER
MATERIAL INADEQUATE..OTHER PERSON
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fisherman Caye" <cayecaulker(at)justice.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: aft CG problems
>
>
> Gary
>
>
> My eyes cross over, when I read this and try to figure the math out. I
am going to stick it on a saw horse and slide the engine on wood engine bed
stringers back and forth until it balances right, with one person in the
rear seat. If I already have put the wing on, then I know in advance where
it has to balance. At 20 % chord from the leading edge. Once the engine is
set, then drill holes and bolt it down. Far as I can tell from numerous
photos of many planes. A tail dragger needs the landing gear at the wing
leading edge point, or slightly more forward?
>
>
> On Fri, 25 January 2002, "Gary Meadows" wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > When you weigh an airplane for CG determinations, you HAVE to take the
> > weight of the plane at each maingear, then the weight at the tailwheel
in
> > the flying position. These are where you weigh planes. But this isn't
where
> > the calculation stops.
> >
> > At this point, you have to know the distance (arm) of the maingear from
the
> > datum, and do the old weitght and balance calculations using WxA=M
Weight x
> > Arm = Moment. This, by the way is after you subtract any extra devices
which
> > got weighed which aren't normally part of the airplane(called Tare).
Using
> > the datum is what ties the weight at the gear to the actual CG on the
> > airplane. If I remember correctly, the datum on the Piet is the LE of
the
> > wing.
> >
> > This is the only way to get the accurate weight and cg location of the
> > plane.
> >
> > If this was already answered - my apologies, I'm catching up on email
and am
> > way behind.
> >
> > Gary Meadows
> > Spring, TX
> >
> > Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
> >
> >
>
>
> FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
> http://www.FindLaw.com
> Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
> http://mail.Justice.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "John McNarry" <jmcnarry(at)escape.ca> |
Subject: | anatomic seat design. |
Hi friends,
A little more on (been there done that) experience:
I was at a rumage sale and purchased two of those metal framed community
hall stacking chairs. The kind with the molded plywood seat bottom and back.
I drilled out the rivets and now have two seat bottoms curved to fit a butt
for under $2.00. Takes care of that sharp front edge too. Tempra foam as
Bengalis suggests on top of that makes a good seat.
John Mc
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net> |
Subject: | New BPA newsletter is out |
I just received the first quarter BPA newsletter with a nice photo of
Matt Berger's aircamper.
chris bobka
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Gary McNeel, Jr." <gmcneel(at)mykitplane.com> |
Subject: | New BPA newsletter is out |
Where can I sign up for this newsletter.
-Gary
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Christian
> Bobka
> Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2002 1:09 AM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: New BPA newsletter is out
>
>
>
>
> I just received the first quarter BPA newsletter with a nice photo of
> Matt Berger's aircamper.
>
> chris bobka
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
Old Farts!
This is slang colloguial English. Old people, have stomach problems and they
usually exude smelly gas out the rectum, more frequently as they get older,
more often than younger people. Such people going around uncontrollably letting
out noisy steady gas, that smells, are called jokingly "old farts". A fart,
being the slang term for an explosion of smelly gas out of the rectum.
On Sat, 26 January 2002, Gary Gower wrote:
>
>
> >
> >
> http://members.tripod.com/~speculation/pietenpolplaneconstruction.html
> >
> > ( will add another photo, this weekend )
> >
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> You have a great page and you are having a real great
> time...
>
> I know my english is not bad, but some times I find
> words that I have to look in the dictionary, Fewer as
> years go by...
>
> Two of them that I could not find in my pocket
> dictionary here, were "old farts" what do they mean?
> Gracias
>
> Saludos
> Gary Gower
>
>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 12 Msgs - 01/26/02 |
Uh Corky, flying the Piet, and you ARE home. Don't worry.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
Subject: | Re: Wood and wooden planes |
Guess I offended some people's sensibilities? Glue of any kind between joints,
if not kept under compression during the setting process, indeed can make
a faulty joint. Just as valid for T 88 as any other kind from Home Depot. That
is why you use a clamp, or a nail, or screw in the joint while it sets.
I'll think about the mathematics of weight and balance. Probably do it, as a
backup check on the more eyeball engineering method. Guess you will catch on
to my sarcastic sense of humor after a while, as I'm a newbie on the list. As
to the saw horse? Yup! It will work. Used to put 1000 pounds of engines in
overhead trees, with trip wires, to drop on lumber thieves and roving killer
bandidos in Central America. It works out fine.
Sorry about the irreverance I show to due process and bureaucrats. Spent my
life without any handy to ever help me in strange parts of the world. Hard to
get used to the bureaucrat rules and controls your life syndrome, back home.
Might never get over my sense of self-reliance? The only ones I ever met, caused
me untold grief and expense and their assistance wasn't worth a damn.
On Sat, 26 January 2002, Fisherman Caye wrote:
>
>
>
> The glue is a polyurethane. Brand name Polybrand. My Home Depot pretty much
does not have any other glue. An expert just answered and said it is an excellent
glue. Which I found out anyway in practice.
> On the comment about an FAA Inspector and mathematical computation for weight
and balance? Why would I need an FAA inspector? Never had one before and
been flying off and on for 40 years, here and there in the world. ( Just joking
of course! Ha! Ha! )
> Depends a lot where I get to test it! If it is out in the boondocks of the
Everglades on some grass patch??? If at an airport with lots of rules, then
I guess one has to comply?
> ------------------------------------------
>
>
> On Sat, 26 January 2002, Dmott9(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > In a message dated 1/26/02 9:23:56 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> > cayecaulker(at)justice.com writes:
> >
> > <<
> > Anyway, Home Depot polyester glue is fine! Less work but stains the
> > fingers for four days afterward until it wears off. >>
> >
> > Would you mind posting the name of this glue ? I'm going to go see what I can
> > find at ACE also, so far haven't found an ACE that had wood, so will be
> > looking. I got a kick out of the "HOME DEPOT" comments. It really does seem
> > that its the "PIET DEPOT"
> >
> > Do you have your plane finished ? Is your friend Ted building one too?
> > I agree that this is a barnyard plane. Its made for those farmers that want
> > to build something between haying and feeding the cows. And made to land in
> > the hayfields. Good comments. I wish your comments would be written up with
> > pictures. It would make a GREAT addition to an already massive amount of
> > information on the PIET.
> > -dennis the menace, in Tenn.
> >
> >
>
>
> FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
> http://www.FindLaw.com
> Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
> http://mail.Justice.com
>
>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
Subject: | Re: Wood and wooden planes |
Got the latest photo mounted now. Progress is slightly further along. Two days
of varnishing and one instrument panel mounted. Included a cost analysis
for those interested in what my project is costing.
Anybody got any experience or know any, with the 3.3 Plymouth Voyager engine
conversion? Think it is a 6 cylinder and aluminum block.
------- Start of forwarded message -------
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and wooden planes
From: Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com>
Date: 27 Jan 2002 05:30:56 -0800
Guess I offended some people's sensibilities? Glue of any kind between joints,
if not kept under compression during the setting process, indeed can make
a faulty joint. Just as valid for T 88 as any other kind from Home Depot. That
is why you use a clamp, or a nail, or screw in the joint while it sets.
I'll think about the mathematics of weight and balance. Probably do it, as a
backup check on the more eyeball engineering method. Guess you will catch on
to my sarcastic sense of humor after a while, as I'm a newbie on the list. As
to the saw horse? Yup! It will work. Used to put 1000 pounds of engines in
overhead trees, with trip wires, to drop on lumber thieves and roving killer
bandidos in Central America. It works out fine.
Sorry about the irreverance I show to due process and bureaucrats. Spent my
life without any handy to ever help me in strange parts of the world. Hard to
get used to the bureaucrat rules and controls your life syndrome, back home.
Might never get over my sense of self-reliance? The only ones I ever met, caused
me untold grief and expense and their assistance wasn't worth a damn.
On Sat, 26 January 2002, Fisherman Caye wrote:
>
>
>
> The glue is a polyurethane. Brand name Polybrand. My Home Depot pretty much
does not have any other glue. An expert just answered and said it is an excellent
glue. Which I found out anyway in practice.
> On the comment about an FAA Inspector and mathematical computation for weight
and balance? Why would I need an FAA inspector? Never had one before and
been flying off and on for 40 years, here and there in the world. ( Just joking
of course! Ha! Ha! )
> Depends a lot where I get to test it! If it is out in the boondocks of the
Everglades on some grass patch??? If at an airport with lots of rules, then
I guess one has to comply?
> ------------------------------------------
>
>
> On Sat, 26 January 2002, Dmott9(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > In a message dated 1/26/02 9:23:56 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> > cayecaulker(at)justice.com writes:
> >
> > <<
> > Anyway, Home Depot polyester glue is fine! Less work but stains the
> > fingers for four days afterward until it wears off. >>
> >
> > Would you mind posting the name of this glue ? I'm going to go see what I can
> > find at ACE also, so far haven't found an ACE that had wood, so will be
> > looking. I got a kick out of the "HOME DEPOT" comments. It really does seem
> > that its the "PIET DEPOT"
> >
> > Do you have your plane finished ? Is your friend Ted building one too?
> > I agree that this is a barnyard plane. Its made for those farmers that want
> > to build something between haying and feeding the cows. And made to land in
> > the hayfields. Good comments. I wish your comments would be written up with
> > pictures. It would make a GREAT addition to an already massive amount of
> > information on the PIET.
> > -dennis the menace, in Tenn.
> >
> >
>
>
> FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
> http://www.FindLaw.com
> Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
> http://mail.Justice.com
>
>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
------- End of forwarded message -------
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
Subject: | Sam Riggs Aviation School, Consejo Shores |
Got a message from Sam Riggs. Said things are starting to sort themselves out
in the USA. He is at his airport in Oklahoma.
Said, his surveying is done at Consejo Shores. That bookings and registration
enquiries are coming in, to advertisements in world wide magazines for Agricultural
Pilot Training for the new school to be at Consejo Shores.
He lost several millions of dollars with the loss of four agriculture airplanes,
stored in Honcho, Texas last year, while waiting on action by the Government
of Belize on his airport land application.
The four planes were not insured. They got flipped and destroyed by tornado squall
lines. His Cessna 120, got pranged in Belize and is still over at Dr. Trummers
backyard in Corozal, last I heard.
For a lot of months, Sam was not to optimistic, but I see a new sense of optimism
after his many financial losses in the USA. Says he will be down to open
up in Belize, soon as the tricky legal stuff is tucked away. Which he hopes
will be shortly.
I just posted another photo of construction on my Pietenpol Air Camper. Still
trying to figure out what engine to use and how to get it and stay in budget?
http://members.tripod.com/~speculation/pietenpolplaneconstruction.html
For lack of appropriate land, my Roaring Creek and Mountain Ridge use of the
Pietenpol Air Camper intention is in doubt. Just looking at Merida, Venezuela.
Beautiful place and they have a cable car that goes up 12,000 feet. Which
solves a lot of transportation problems over the Hidden Valley Falls area of
Roaring Creek Gorge in the country of Belize, Central America. Anyway, be the
end of the year before I finish the plane, so plenty of time yet, to sort things
out. Got to get the Pietenpol flying first and then start on the Carbon Dragon
sailplane. ( maybe!)
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net> |
Subject: | BPA newsletter new and old |
Brodhead Pietenpol Association information
USA subscription is ten dollars per year for bulk rate mail, canada and
mexico are 12 dollars per year. Other countries or USA first class mail are
15 dollars per year with USA 1st class postage.
Brodhead Pietenpol Association
c/o The Independent-Register
P.O. Box 255
Brodhead, WI 53520-0255
email is bpa(at)indreg.com
A classified ad showed copies of all 63 of the old Buckeye Pietenpol
Association newsletter are available for 25 dollars plus shipping from:
Carl Pitcher
16276 Taft Street
Spring Lake, MI 49456
616-847-0597
Individual copies of newsletters can be had as well if you are missing only
part of the collection.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Wood and wooden planes |
In a message dated 1/27/02 9:09:02 AM Eastern Standard Time,
cayecaulker(at)justice.com writes:
<<
Got the latest photo mounted now. Progress is slightly further along.
Two days of varnishing and one instrument panel mounted. Included a cost
analysis for those interested in what my project is costing.
>>
Ray, it would be helpful if you would only "quote" the portion of the
messsage your replying to. Also, do you have the web site address again? I
can't seem to get it to load now.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | clif <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca> |
Rectum! Damn near killed em!
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Kip & Beth Gardner <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Re: Wood and wooden planes |
> Sorry about the irreverance I show to due process and bureaucrats.
>Spent my life without any handy to ever help me in strange parts of the
>world. Hard to get used to the bureaucrat rules and controls your life
>syndrome, back home. Might never get over my sense of self-reliance? The
>only ones I ever met, caused me untold grief and expense and their
>assistance wasn't worth a damn.
Caye,
With all due respect, the bureaucrats in this case are not trying to help
you, they are trying to help keep you from killing someone else. As someone
else on this list pointed out a day or so ago, yes, people made planes from
hardware store parts & lumberyard lumber in years gone by, but a lot more
planes fell out of the sky because of structural failures than happens now,
too.
There is nothing wrong with being 'experimental', learning saomething new
is part of what this whole ride is about, but what's the point in doing
something that was PROVEN dangerous a long time ago? Clearly, you've had
lots of experience building boats and working with tropical hardwoods. That
is useful & valuable knowledge - done a little bit of it myself, but I'm
learning that aircraft construction is like boatbuilding the way welding is
like soldering - similar, but with some real differences that will get you
in big trouble if you assume that there is a 1-to-1 comparison.
Yes, the bureaucrats can be a pain, but they are not there just to annoy
us. And the truth is, if you really don't want to have to worry about being
regulated to death (if that's the way you feel about it), then there are
always ultralights, where the whole deal is set up so no one has to worry
about you killing anyone but yourself if you screw up.
Just my 2 cents' worth, hope no one takes offense, but I 've been concerned
that safety might be taking a back seat to expediency & holding to a budget
in some of the recent posts.
Tally Ho!
Kip Gardner
426 Schneider St. SE
North Canton, OH 44720
(330) 494-1775
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Larry Ragan" <lragan(at)hotmail.com> |
Subject: | Couple of questions.... |
After the responses to my inquiry re:woods used and their characteristics, I was
reminded of what a resource this list is. Thanks for all of the info and advice.
Now a couple of more questions: 1. With all of the discussion regarding the
shifting of weight due to fuel consumption or front passengers, has anyone
ever adapted an elevator trim other than the metal tab as seen on some homebuilts?
2. Someone used to have a web page that had a 3 demensional drawing of the
Piet. Is it still out there? O.K., 3 questions....3) Is there a good picture
of the Piet with a cowling covering a Corvair engine? Thanks.
Just another old fart.
Larry Ragan
Jacksonville, Fl.
lragan(at)hotmail.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Re: Couple of questions.... |
If memory serves, the 3-D Piet was another Richard DeCosta project, six
or eight years ago.
This was back in the "good old days" when Richard, Grant and Stevee were
all getting into technology and were making tremendous contributions on
the web for all of us slackers..
It's not around anymore, what's left of Richard's site is at
www.aircamper.org, but last I heard he doesn't have time to work with it
much.
Larry
Larry Ragan wrote:
>
>
>
After the responses to my inquiry re:woods used and their characteristics, I was
reminded of what a resource this list is. Thanks for all of the info and advice.
Now a couple of more questions: 1. With all of the discussion regarding the
shifting of weight due to fuel consumption or front passengers, has anyone
ever adapted an elevator trim other than the metal tab as seen on some homebuilts?
2. Someone used to have a web page that had a 3 demensional drawing of the
Piet. Is it still out there? O.K., 3 questions....3) Is there a good picture
of the Piet with a cowling covering a Corvair engine? Thanks.
>
Just another old fart.
>
>
>Larry Ragan
>Jacksonville, Fl.
>lragan(at)hotmail.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com> |
Got it, thanks...
Here in spanish is "Viejo Bombo", Same problem all
over the world...
Saludos
Gary Gower
--- Fisherman Caye wrote:
>
>
>
> Old Farts!
>
> This is slang colloguial English. Old people,
> have stomach problems and they usually exude smelly
> gas out the rectum, more frequently as they get
> older, more often than younger people. Such people
> going around uncontrollably letting out noisy steady
> gas, that smells, are called jokingly "old farts".
> A fart, being the slang term for an explosion of
> smelly gas out of the rectum.
>
>
> On Sat, 26 January 2002, Gary Gower wrote:
>
> >
>
> >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
http://members.tripod.com/~speculation/pietenpolplaneconstruction.html
> > >
> > > ( will add another photo, this weekend )
> > >
> >
>
-----------------------------------------------------
> >
> > You have a great page and you are having a real
> great
> > time...
> >
> > I know my english is not bad, but some times I
> find
> > words that I have to look in the dictionary, Fewer
> as
> > years go by...
> >
> > Two of them that I could not find in my pocket
> > dictionary here, were "old farts" what do they
> mean?
> > Gracias
> >
> > Saludos
> > Gary Gower
> >
> >
>
>
> FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
> http://www.FindLaw.com
> Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
> http://mail.Justice.com
>
>
>
> Forum -
> Contributions of
> any other form
>
> latest messages.
> other List members.
>
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> http://www.matronics.com/search
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com> |
Subject: | Re: Wood and wooden planes |
A few months ago I bougth one for my wife... And got
the same thinking ;0)
Nothing advertised that I know.
Saludos
Gary Gower
--- Fisherman Caye wrote:
>
>
>
> Got the latest photo mounted now. Progress is
> slightly further along. Two days of varnishing and
> one instrument panel mounted. Included a cost
> analysis for those interested in what my project is
> costing.
>
> Anybody got any experience or know any, with the
> 3.3 Plymouth Voyager engine conversion? Think it is
> a 6 cylinder and aluminum block.
>
>
> ------- Start of forwarded message -------
>
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and wooden planes
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> From: Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com>
> Date: 27 Jan 2002 05:30:56 -0800
>
>
>
>
> Guess I offended some people's sensibilities?
> Glue of any kind between joints, if not kept under
> compression during the setting process, indeed can
> make a faulty joint. Just as valid for T 88 as any
> other kind from Home Depot. That is why you use a
> clamp, or a nail, or screw in the joint while it
> sets.
>
> I'll think about the mathematics of weight and
> balance. Probably do it, as a backup check on the
> more eyeball engineering method. Guess you will
> catch on to my sarcastic sense of humor after a
> while, as I'm a newbie on the list. As to the saw
> horse? Yup! It will work. Used to put 1000 pounds
> of engines in overhead trees, with trip wires, to
> drop on lumber thieves and roving killer bandidos in
> Central America. It works out fine.
>
> Sorry about the irreverance I show to due process
> and bureaucrats. Spent my life without any handy to
> ever help me in strange parts of the world. Hard to
> get used to the bureaucrat rules and controls your
> life syndrome, back home. Might never get over my
> sense of self-reliance? The only ones I ever met,
> caused me untold grief and expense and their
> assistance wasn't worth a damn.
>
>
> On Sat, 26 January 2002, Fisherman Caye wrote:
>
> >
> Caye
> >
> >
> > The glue is a polyurethane. Brand name
> Polybrand. My Home Depot pretty much does not have
> any other glue. An expert just answered and said it
> is an excellent glue. Which I found out anyway in
> practice.
> > On the comment about an FAA Inspector and
> mathematical computation for weight and balance?
> Why would I need an FAA inspector? Never had one
> before and been flying off and on for 40 years, here
> and there in the world. ( Just joking of course!
> Ha! Ha! )
> > Depends a lot where I get to test it! If it is
> out in the boondocks of the Everglades on some grass
> patch??? If at an airport with lots of rules, then
> I guess one has to comply?
> > ------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> > On Sat, 26 January 2002, Dmott9(at)aol.com wrote:
> >
> > >
> Dmott9(at)aol.com
> > >
> > > In a message dated 1/26/02 9:23:56 AM Eastern
> Standard Time,
> > > cayecaulker(at)justice.com writes:
> > >
> > > <<
> > > Anyway, Home Depot polyester glue is fine!
> Less work but stains the
> > > fingers for four days afterward until it wears
> off. >>
> > >
> > > Would you mind posting the name of this glue ?
> I'm going to go see what I can
> > > find at ACE also, so far haven't found an ACE
> that had wood, so will be
> > > looking. I got a kick out of the "HOME DEPOT"
> comments. It really does seem
> > > that its the "PIET DEPOT"
> > >
> > > Do you have your plane finished ? Is your friend
> Ted building one too?
> > > I agree that this is a barnyard plane. Its made
> for those farmers that want
> > > to build something between haying and feeding
> the cows. And made to land in
> > > the hayfields. Good comments. I wish your
> comments would be written up with
> > > pictures. It would make a GREAT addition to an
> already massive amount of
> > > information on the PIET.
> > > -dennis the menace, in Tenn.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
> > http://www.FindLaw.com
> > Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
> > http://mail.Justice.com
> >
> >
>
>
> FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
> http://www.FindLaw.com
> Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
> http://mail.Justice.com
>
>
>
> ------- End of forwarded message -------
>
>
> FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
> http://www.FindLaw.com
> Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
> http://mail.Justice.com
>
>
>
> Forum -
> Contributions of
> any other form
>
> latest messages.
> other List members.
>
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> http://www.matronics.com/search
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
Subject: | Re: Wood and wooden planes |
Yep! The Gold Bug caused a lot of heart burn at Rockford when it used gate
hinges and other hardware store parts. It was designed by an aeronautical
engineer BUT it didn't crash, it didn't burn.
If the hardware or other materials are selected with the proper care for the
task at hand, then why not? Don't sell your hardware store stuff short. Many
hardware items have higher quality than
certified materials. We become stuck in a rut sometimes just because that's
the way it was done 30 years ago. The use of 4130 steel is a good example.
There are better, stronger, yet cheaper steels available today but we still
continue using the "tried and true" 4130. Why, because they aren't hardware
store items and the aircraft supply places don't handle them.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
Always looking for articles for the Experimenter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kip & Beth Gardner" <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and wooden planes
> Sorry about the irreverance I show to due process and bureaucrats.
>Spent my life without any handy to ever help me in strange parts of the
>world. Hard to get used to the bureaucrat rules and controls your life
>syndrome, back home. Might never get over my sense of self-reliance? The
>only ones I ever met, caused me untold grief and expense and their
>assistance wasn't worth a damn.
Caye,
With all due respect, the bureaucrats in this case are not trying to help
you, they are trying to help keep you from killing someone else. As someone
else on this list pointed out a day or so ago, yes, people made planes from
hardware store parts & lumberyard lumber in years gone by, but a lot more
planes fell out of the sky because of structural failures than happens now,
too.
There is nothing wrong with being 'experimental', learning saomething new
is part of what this whole ride is about, but what's the point in doing
something that was PROVEN dangerous a long time ago? Clearly, you've had
lots of experience building boats and working with tropical hardwoods. That
is useful & valuable knowledge - done a little bit of it myself, but I'm
learning that aircraft construction is like boatbuilding the way welding is
like soldering - similar, but with some real differences that will get you
in big trouble if you assume that there is a 1-to-1 comparison.
Yes, the bureaucrats can be a pain, but they are not there just to annoy
us. And the truth is, if you really don't want to have to worry about being
regulated to death (if that's the way you feel about it), then there are
always ultralights, where the whole deal is set up so no one has to worry
about you killing anyone but yourself if you screw up.
Just my 2 cents' worth, hope no one takes offense, but I 've been concerned
that safety might be taking a back seat to expediency & holding to a budget
in some of the recent posts.
Tally Ho!
Kip Gardner
426 Schneider St. SE
North Canton, OH 44720
(330) 494-1775
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com> |
Subject: | Re: Wood and wooden planes |
A real flying example with hundreds of derivates
(flying since 1936 until now) is the Flying Flea
(French design of H. Mignet)
Was (and is) designed with the goal of only hardware
materials, that can be built by the "comon citizen
with a little knowledge of hand tools". Most of the
designes are wood... and use Stainless steel insted of
4130, SS is way more cheaper in Europe and other
countries than 4130, Dural (equivalent to 6061-T6) is
also used.
Even the bolts are calculated to use automovile bolts,
(they use the next or more size bigger to compensate
for the "certified"), also this airplanes are designed
with only a hand full of bolts, so the extra weight is
no problem.
Same happens with the wood used... in Europe you can
find real good quality marine plywood that maybe is
better (and cheaper there) that the USA aircraft
ply...
If a designer (and the plans builder) know what they
are doing and have the capacity and common sense, the
plane will be well built.
A joint that is not well done (position, amount of
glue, quality of wood, etc.) is more lack of common
sense than fault of design. Any Law Enforcement
Agency can not think of a law that prevents the lack
of responsability and common sense in a citizen!
Saludos
Gary Gower
--- Cy Galley wrote:
>
>
> Yep! The Gold Bug caused a lot of heart burn at
> Rockford when it used gate
> hinges and other hardware store parts. It was
> designed by an aeronautical
> engineer BUT it didn't crash, it didn't burn.
>
> If the hardware or other materials are selected with
> the proper care for the
> task at hand, then why not? Don't sell your hardware
> store stuff short. Many
> hardware items have higher quality than
> certified materials. We become stuck in a rut
> sometimes just because that's
> the way it was done 30 years ago. The use of 4130
> steel is a good example.
> There are better, stronger, yet cheaper steels
> available today but we still
> continue using the "tried and true" 4130. Why,
> because they aren't hardware
> store items and the aircraft supply places don't
> handle them.
>
> Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair,
> Oshkosh
>
> Editor, EAA Safety Programs
> cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
>
> Always looking for articles for the Experimenter
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kip & Beth Gardner"
>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and
> wooden planes
>
>
> Gardner
>
>
>
> > Sorry about the irreverance I show to due process
> and bureaucrats.
> >Spent my life without any handy to ever help me in
> strange parts of the
> >world. Hard to get used to the bureaucrat rules
> and controls your life
> >syndrome, back home. Might never get over my sense
> of self-reliance? The
> >only ones I ever met, caused me untold grief and
> expense and their
> >assistance wasn't worth a damn.
>
> Caye,
>
> With all due respect, the bureaucrats in this case
> are not trying to help
> you, they are trying to help keep you from killing
> someone else. As someone
> else on this list pointed out a day or so ago, yes,
> people made planes from
> hardware store parts & lumberyard lumber in years
> gone by, but a lot more
> planes fell out of the sky because of structural
> failures than happens now,
> too.
>
> There is nothing wrong with being 'experimental',
> learning saomething new
> is part of what this whole ride is about, but what's
> the point in doing
> something that was PROVEN dangerous a long time ago?
> Clearly, you've had
> lots of experience building boats and working with
> tropical hardwoods. That
> is useful & valuable knowledge - done a little bit
> of it myself, but I'm
> learning that aircraft construction is like
> boatbuilding the way welding is
> like soldering - similar, but with some real
> differences that will get you
> in big trouble if you assume that there is a 1-to-1
> comparison.
>
> Yes, the bureaucrats can be a pain, but they are not
> there just to annoy
> us. And the truth is, if you really don't want to
> have to worry about being
> regulated to death (if that's the way you feel
> about it), then there are
> always ultralights, where the whole deal is set up
> so no one has to worry
> about you killing anyone but yourself if you screw
> up.
>
> Just my 2 cents' worth, hope no one takes offense,
> but I 've been concerned
> that safety might be taking a back seat to
> expediency & holding to a budget
> in some of the recent posts.
>
> Tally Ho!
>
> Kip Gardner
>
> 426 Schneider St. SE
> North Canton, OH 44720
> (330) 494-1775
>
>
>
> Forum -
> Contributions of
> any other form
>
> latest messages.
> other List members.
>
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> http://www.matronics.com/search
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Engine daydreams (I'm bored and the list is slow today..) |
Well, as usual, as soon as I start working on the Corvair motor I
start wondering about alternatives.
It must be some kind of grass-is-always-greener thing with me, but I do
it every time. It only took ten years to decide on which airplane to
build so I'm going to have to get over this quick.
Actually, there is nothing that you could fault the Corvair with. It's
got enough horsepower, but economical on gas. It has good parts
availability and no need for complex redrives and it's CHEAP!
Still I would be nice to put a round motor up front...
What happened to the HCI boys? They had a neat deal going with a kit
that used VW parts to make 5 and 7 cylinder radials. 65 to 120
horsepower range for the two versions, if I remember right. At about
$9k it was up there though, and then they disappeared from the web.
The Australian Rotec folks make a neat looking 100hp radial job they
call the "R2800" (the lads are just a trifle presumptuous). Again it's
in the $12k range and what if the parts dry up?
A Continental or "Shaky Jake" would go a long way toward curing any aft
CG problems ;-) and with 200hp boy would it climb! But $$$!
Maybe a Warner, that would be neat, talk about vintage. I've read that
you need to pack the rocker boxes with grease every 20 hours. It would
be a mess, but classy.
Nope, none of them work. Either weight or the money thing. Well, I
guess at this point either some benevolent captain of industry will be
kind enough to donate a small round engine to my richly deserving, poor
little self (Hint, Hint...) or it's back to the Corvair.
I think while rebuilding the Corvair though, I'll send the rocker covers
in and get them embossed with "Rolls-Royce". Maybe no round sound, but
I'll be proud of my "Replica 1930 Homebuilt Bendix Trophy Winner" anyway
and for damn sure keep the Glassair hacks guessing!
Larry ;-)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | clif <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca> |
Subject: | Re: Wood and wooden planes |
We had one for years.Transmission lousy. Engine great. Guess who makes it?
Mitsubishi. Guess who made the engine for the zero?? You'd have to check
on the weight though, Some of these V6's are a little on the heavy side.
Chev V6 in Finch book is 300+ lbs in iron. He says al. engines can be
heavier
as more metal needed for same strength.
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and wooden planes
>
> A few months ago I bougth one for my wife... And got
> the same thinking ;0)
>
> Nothing advertised that I know.
>
> Saludos
> Gary Gower
>
> --- Fisherman Caye wrote>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "twinboom" <twinboom(at)email.msn.com> |
Subject: | Re: Couple of questions.... |
Larry and Others,
Here is a link to some pages that have an example of Mike Cuy's elevator
trim set-up. Hope it helps!
http://cvl.virtualave.net/mikedraw.htm
Doug Blackburn, Arrowbear Lake, So. Cal.
Inland Slope Rebels, Riverside Ca.
<http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/ISR>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
Subject: | Re: Wood and wooden planes |
C Galley
Thankyou for that comment! Now there is something to back up a bit of experience,
common sense. Actually, I do not ever take any kinds of way out risk.
But have through life taken what one would call calculated risks, based on relatively
thorough research. My research says, that AN bolts and things are about
15 % stronger than hardware comparable bolts and things. To use a generalization.
Nothing to sneeze at and certainly, one should probably go with the
best and certified product in any kind of critical part, or place. But there
are lots of ordinary places were hardware stuff would be overly strong anyway.
A tailwheel for instance. You pop a tailwheel, it is going to be an annoyance,
but not really bothersome. Not with a plane that lands in 75 feet and takes
off in 300 ft.
I don't know what you others are doing, but for example, I bought two sheets
of bending plywood to use on the sides and for the bulkheads. It was not a
casual decision. It just seemed to me, that there should be something suitable
in my local metropolitan area, other than having to buy aircraft certified
$87 one eight sheet of 4 X 8 aircraft plywood from a catalogue, just as good and
cheaper. I searched all around and couldn't find anything. That door stuff
they sell is no good. It delaminates, the glue is not waterproof. Anyway,
after giving up on warehouses and lumber suppliers, started hitting cabinet shop
warehouses. Finally found a guy, who gave me a lot of left over big pieces
of plywood, that worked for gussets. Actually, one piece of plywood was great.
Have no idea what it was, but it was one eight inch and tough as nails.
Could not stick a nail or screw in it, without drilling first. Sort of whitish
color wood. Would have loved to have more, but didn't ask him what it was.
But he gave me a tip. He said "bending plywood" was waterproof glue and tough
as nails for outdoors. Never heard of the stuff before. The bad door making
plywood costs around $8 a sheet, this stuff was around $22 a sheet. Sure enough,
it was tough, does not delaminate when wet, or left out for weeks and bends
in a circle. I tested it. One side is some kind of rough surface, the other
is a hard veneer. Anyway I used some for bulkheads. The cabinet maker told
me the warehouse wholesaler to get it at. I'm satified!
A tip from many years ago in building ocean going boats with good one side,
construction grade plywood instead of marine grade. You need to seal the edges
mostly. Using the same logic on this stuff on the Pietenpol, I am doing lots
of varnish on the edges of plywood gussets, or all plywood in my plane. But
for sure, all the plywood and there isn't really that much of it, plenty of
soaking with varnish all over. I built and ran boats across the Caribbean Sea
all over the place, hard driving stuff in ocean waves for about 14 years is average.
The boats are usually still good, but the engines usually wear out.
So, I kind of did not want to go to certified aviation plywood at $87 a sheet.
Just wanted a waterproof glue and some sort of tough plywood. The construction
surfaces are to small really, to be critical. At least without you not noticing
something?
On Sun, 27 January 2002, "Cy Galley" wrote:
>
>
> Yep! The Gold Bug caused a lot of heart burn at Rockford when it used gate
> hinges and other hardware store parts. It was designed by an aeronautical
> engineer BUT it didn't crash, it didn't burn.
>
> If the hardware or other materials are selected with the proper care for the
> task at hand, then why not? Don't sell your hardware store stuff short. Many
> hardware items have higher quality than
> certified materials. We become stuck in a rut sometimes just because that's
> the way it was done 30 years ago. The use of 4130 steel is a good example.
> There are better, stronger, yet cheaper steels available today but we still
> continue using the "tried and true" 4130. Why, because they aren't hardware
> store items and the aircraft supply places don't handle them.
>
> Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
>
> Editor, EAA Safety Programs
> cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
>
> Always looking for articles for the Experimenter
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kip & Beth Gardner" <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and wooden planes
>
>
>
>
>
> > Sorry about the irreverance I show to due process and bureaucrats.
> >Spent my life without any handy to ever help me in strange parts of the
> >world. Hard to get used to the bureaucrat rules and controls your life
> >syndrome, back home. Might never get over my sense of self-reliance? The
> >only ones I ever met, caused me untold grief and expense and their
> >assistance wasn't worth a damn.
>
> Caye,
>
> With all due respect, the bureaucrats in this case are not trying to help
> you, they are trying to help keep you from killing someone else. As someone
> else on this list pointed out a day or so ago, yes, people made planes from
> hardware store parts & lumberyard lumber in years gone by, but a lot more
> planes fell out of the sky because of structural failures than happens now,
> too.
>
> There is nothing wrong with being 'experimental', learning saomething new
> is part of what this whole ride is about, but what's the point in doing
> something that was PROVEN dangerous a long time ago? Clearly, you've had
> lots of experience building boats and working with tropical hardwoods. That
> is useful & valuable knowledge - done a little bit of it myself, but I'm
> learning that aircraft construction is like boatbuilding the way welding is
> like soldering - similar, but with some real differences that will get you
> in big trouble if you assume that there is a 1-to-1 comparison.
>
> Yes, the bureaucrats can be a pain, but they are not there just to annoy
> us. And the truth is, if you really don't want to have to worry about being
> regulated to death (if that's the way you feel about it), then there are
> always ultralights, where the whole deal is set up so no one has to worry
> about you killing anyone but yourself if you screw up.
>
> Just my 2 cents' worth, hope no one takes offense, but I 've been concerned
> that safety might be taking a back seat to expediency & holding to a budget
> in some of the recent posts.
>
> Tally Ho!
>
> Kip Gardner
>
> 426 Schneider St. SE
> North Canton, OH 44720
> (330) 494-1775
>
>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
Subject: | Re: Engine daydreams (I'm bored and the list is |
slow today..)
That Corvair engine, a mechanic buddy of mine told me; was probably good at
the era they wrote about it, he said. But apparently has been by-passed, by superior
suitable engines in this century. The Subaru and Honda Civic come to
mind. Almost any V 6 with aluminum block is probably better and within weight
guidelines.
I found the cogged belts for a reduction gear, but have not yet found any pulley
sources. The prices for a reduction gear from one of those expensive advertisers,
about $1200, which sort of makes one gulp! Then choke with laughter!
You should be able to build one for $75 -$150, if you can find the part sources.
On Sun, 27 January 2002, Larry Neal wrote:
>
>
> Well, as usual, as soon as I start working on the Corvair motor I
> start wondering about alternatives.
>
> It must be some kind of grass-is-always-greener thing with me, but I do
> it every time. It only took ten years to decide on which airplane to
> build so I'm going to have to get over this quick.
>
> Actually, there is nothing that you could fault the Corvair with. It's
> got enough horsepower, but economical on gas. It has good parts
> availability and no need for complex redrives and it's CHEAP!
>
> Still I would be nice to put a round motor up front...
>
> What happened to the HCI boys? They had a neat deal going with a kit
> that used VW parts to make 5 and 7 cylinder radials. 65 to 120
> horsepower range for the two versions, if I remember right. At about
> $9k it was up there though, and then they disappeared from the web.
>
> The Australian Rotec folks make a neat looking 100hp radial job they
> call the "R2800" (the lads are just a trifle presumptuous). Again it's
> in the $12k range and what if the parts dry up?
>
> A Continental or "Shaky Jake" would go a long way toward curing any aft
> CG problems ;-) and with 200hp boy would it climb! But $$$!
>
> Maybe a Warner, that would be neat, talk about vintage. I've read that
> you need to pack the rocker boxes with grease every 20 hours. It would
> be a mess, but classy.
>
> Nope, none of them work. Either weight or the money thing. Well, I
> guess at this point either some benevolent captain of industry will be
> kind enough to donate a small round engine to my richly deserving, poor
> little self (Hint, Hint...) or it's back to the Corvair.
>
> I think while rebuilding the Corvair though, I'll send the rocker covers
> in and get them embossed with "Rolls-Royce". Maybe no round sound, but
> I'll be proud of my "Replica 1930 Homebuilt Bendix Trophy Winner" anyway
> and for damn sure keep the Glassair hacks guessing!
>
> Larry ;-)
>
>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: Engine daydreams (I'm bored and the list is slow |
today..)
> That Corvair engine, a mechanic buddy of mine told
> me; was probably good at the era they wrote about
> it, he said. But apparently has been by-passed, by
> superior suitable engines in this century. The
> Subaru and Honda Civic come to mind. Almost any V 6
> with aluminum block is probably better and within
> weight guidelines.
This post is a very uninformed opinion, This person
seems to be not at all aware of proven facts, and the
fact that the corvair still remains more bulletproof
and more hp and torque per lb than above engines
mentioned. not to mention certified engines
Del
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Gary McNeel, Jr." <gmcneel(at)mykitplane.com> |
Subject: | Engine daydreams (I'm bored and the list is slow |
today..)
See inline.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Larry
> Neal
>
[snip]
>
> What happened to the HCI boys? They had a neat deal going with a kit
> that used VW parts to make 5 and 7 cylinder radials. 65 to 120
> horsepower range for the two versions, if I remember right. At about
> $9k it was up there though, and then they disappeared from the web.
They are here. New site and all. http://hciaviation.com/
>
> The Australian Rotec folks make a neat looking 100hp radial job they
> call the "R2800" (the lads are just a trifle presumptuous). Again it's
> in the $12k range and what if the parts dry up?
Yes, very nice. Bucks though.
>
> A Continental or "Shaky Jake" would go a long way toward curing any aft
> CG problems ;-) and with 200hp boy would it climb! But $$$!
>
> Maybe a Warner, that would be neat, talk about vintage. I've read that
> you need to pack the rocker boxes with grease every 20 hours. It would
> be a mess, but classy.
Can you even find these anymore?
[snip]
>
> Larry ;-)
>
Gary McNeel
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Gene Rambo" <rambog(at)erols.com> |
Subject: | Re: Wood and wooden planes |
Actually, the "tried and true" was 1025 steel, not 4130 which was the "new
kid on the block" and considered too uppity for serious aircraft builders.
It's funny how the newer ideas are now the "old ways" that must be adhered
to.
----- Original Message -----
From: Cy Galley <cgalley(at)qcbc.org>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and wooden planes
>
> Yep! The Gold Bug caused a lot of heart burn at Rockford when it used gate
> hinges and other hardware store parts. It was designed by an aeronautical
> engineer BUT it didn't crash, it didn't burn.
>
> If the hardware or other materials are selected with the proper care for
the
> task at hand, then why not? Don't sell your hardware store stuff short.
Many
> hardware items have higher quality than
> certified materials. We become stuck in a rut sometimes just because
that's
> the way it was done 30 years ago. The use of 4130 steel is a good
example.
> There are better, stronger, yet cheaper steels available today but we
still
> continue using the "tried and true" 4130. Why, because they aren't
hardware
> store items and the aircraft supply places don't handle them.
>
> Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
>
> Editor, EAA Safety Programs
> cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
>
> Always looking for articles for the Experimenter
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kip & Beth Gardner" <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and wooden planes
>
>
>
>
>
> > Sorry about the irreverance I show to due process and bureaucrats.
> >Spent my life without any handy to ever help me in strange parts of the
> >world. Hard to get used to the bureaucrat rules and controls your life
> >syndrome, back home. Might never get over my sense of self-reliance?
The
> >only ones I ever met, caused me untold grief and expense and their
> >assistance wasn't worth a damn.
>
> Caye,
>
> With all due respect, the bureaucrats in this case are not trying to help
> you, they are trying to help keep you from killing someone else. As
someone
> else on this list pointed out a day or so ago, yes, people made planes
from
> hardware store parts & lumberyard lumber in years gone by, but a lot more
> planes fell out of the sky because of structural failures than happens
now,
> too.
>
> There is nothing wrong with being 'experimental', learning saomething new
> is part of what this whole ride is about, but what's the point in doing
> something that was PROVEN dangerous a long time ago? Clearly, you've had
> lots of experience building boats and working with tropical hardwoods.
That
> is useful & valuable knowledge - done a little bit of it myself, but I'm
> learning that aircraft construction is like boatbuilding the way welding
is
> like soldering - similar, but with some real differences that will get you
> in big trouble if you assume that there is a 1-to-1 comparison.
>
> Yes, the bureaucrats can be a pain, but they are not there just to annoy
> us. And the truth is, if you really don't want to have to worry about
being
> regulated to death (if that's the way you feel about it), then there are
> always ultralights, where the whole deal is set up so no one has to worry
> about you killing anyone but yourself if you screw up.
>
> Just my 2 cents' worth, hope no one takes offense, but I 've been
concerned
> that safety might be taking a back seat to expediency & holding to a
budget
> in some of the recent posts.
>
> Tally Ho!
>
> Kip Gardner
>
> 426 Schneider St. SE
> North Canton, OH 44720
> (330) 494-1775
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Gene Rambo" <rambog(at)erols.com> |
Subject: | Re: Wood and wooden planes |
of course, the Flying Flea never flew worth a damned.
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and wooden planes
>
> A real flying example with hundreds of derivates
> (flying since 1936 until now) is the Flying Flea
> (French design of H. Mignet)
>
> Was (and is) designed with the goal of only hardware
> materials, that can be built by the "comon citizen
> with a little knowledge of hand tools". Most of the
> designes are wood... and use Stainless steel insted of
> 4130, SS is way more cheaper in Europe and other
> countries than 4130, Dural (equivalent to 6061-T6) is
> also used.
>
> Even the bolts are calculated to use automovile bolts,
> (they use the next or more size bigger to compensate
> for the "certified"), also this airplanes are designed
> with only a hand full of bolts, so the extra weight is
> no problem.
> Same happens with the wood used... in Europe you can
> find real good quality marine plywood that maybe is
> better (and cheaper there) that the USA aircraft
> ply...
>
> If a designer (and the plans builder) know what they
> are doing and have the capacity and common sense, the
> plane will be well built.
>
> A joint that is not well done (position, amount of
> glue, quality of wood, etc.) is more lack of common
> sense than fault of design. Any Law Enforcement
> Agency can not think of a law that prevents the lack
> of responsability and common sense in a citizen!
>
> Saludos
> Gary Gower
>
> --- Cy Galley wrote:
> >
> >
> > Yep! The Gold Bug caused a lot of heart burn at
> > Rockford when it used gate
> > hinges and other hardware store parts. It was
> > designed by an aeronautical
> > engineer BUT it didn't crash, it didn't burn.
> >
> > If the hardware or other materials are selected with
> > the proper care for the
> > task at hand, then why not? Don't sell your hardware
> > store stuff short. Many
> > hardware items have higher quality than
> > certified materials. We become stuck in a rut
> > sometimes just because that's
> > the way it was done 30 years ago. The use of 4130
> > steel is a good example.
> > There are better, stronger, yet cheaper steels
> > available today but we still
> > continue using the "tried and true" 4130. Why,
> > because they aren't hardware
> > store items and the aircraft supply places don't
> > handle them.
> >
> > Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair,
> > Oshkosh
> >
> > Editor, EAA Safety Programs
> > cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
> >
> > Always looking for articles for the Experimenter
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Kip & Beth Gardner"
> >
> > To:
> > Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and
> > wooden planes
> >
> >
> > Gardner
> >
> >
> >
> > > Sorry about the irreverance I show to due process
> > and bureaucrats.
> > >Spent my life without any handy to ever help me in
> > strange parts of the
> > >world. Hard to get used to the bureaucrat rules
> > and controls your life
> > >syndrome, back home. Might never get over my sense
> > of self-reliance? The
> > >only ones I ever met, caused me untold grief and
> > expense and their
> > >assistance wasn't worth a damn.
> >
> > Caye,
> >
> > With all due respect, the bureaucrats in this case
> > are not trying to help
> > you, they are trying to help keep you from killing
> > someone else. As someone
> > else on this list pointed out a day or so ago, yes,
> > people made planes from
> > hardware store parts & lumberyard lumber in years
> > gone by, but a lot more
> > planes fell out of the sky because of structural
> > failures than happens now,
> > too.
> >
> > There is nothing wrong with being 'experimental',
> > learning saomething new
> > is part of what this whole ride is about, but what's
> > the point in doing
> > something that was PROVEN dangerous a long time ago?
> > Clearly, you've had
> > lots of experience building boats and working with
> > tropical hardwoods. That
> > is useful & valuable knowledge - done a little bit
> > of it myself, but I'm
> > learning that aircraft construction is like
> > boatbuilding the way welding is
> > like soldering - similar, but with some real
> > differences that will get you
> > in big trouble if you assume that there is a 1-to-1
> > comparison.
> >
> > Yes, the bureaucrats can be a pain, but they are not
> > there just to annoy
> > us. And the truth is, if you really don't want to
> > have to worry about being
> > regulated to death (if that's the way you feel
> > about it), then there are
> > always ultralights, where the whole deal is set up
> > so no one has to worry
> > about you killing anyone but yourself if you screw
> > up.
> >
> > Just my 2 cents' worth, hope no one takes offense,
> > but I 've been concerned
> > that safety might be taking a back seat to
> > expediency & holding to a budget
> > in some of the recent posts.
> >
> > Tally Ho!
> >
> > Kip Gardner
> >
> > 426 Schneider St. SE
> > North Canton, OH 44720
> > (330) 494-1775
> >
> >
> >
> > Forum -
> > Contributions of
> > any other form
> >
> > latest messages.
> > other List members.
> >
> > http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> > http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> > http://www.matronics.com/search
> > http://www.matronics.com/archives
> > http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Re: Engine daydreams (I'm bored and the list is slow today..) |
The Warners are still around, but getting about as scarce as LeRhone's.
Both can be found though, if you've got the patience and the $.
Larry
Gary McNeel, Jr. wrote:
>
>See inline.
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
>>[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Larry
>>Neal
>>
>[snip]
>
>>What happened to the HCI boys? They had a neat deal going with a kit
>>that used VW parts to make 5 and 7 cylinder radials. 65 to 120
>>horsepower range for the two versions, if I remember right. At about
>>$9k it was up there though, and then they disappeared from the web.
>>
>
>They are here. New site and all. http://hciaviation.com/
>
>>The Australian Rotec folks make a neat looking 100hp radial job they
>>call the "R2800" (the lads are just a trifle presumptuous). Again it's
>>in the $12k range and what if the parts dry up?
>>
>
>Yes, very nice. Bucks though.
>
>>A Continental or "Shaky Jake" would go a long way toward curing any aft
>>CG problems ;-) and with 200hp boy would it climb! But $$$!
>>
>>Maybe a Warner, that would be neat, talk about vintage. I've read that
>>you need to pack the rocker boxes with grease every 20 hours. It would
>>be a mess, but classy.
>>
>
>Can you even find these anymore?
>
>[snip]
>
>>Larry ;-)
>>
>Gary McNeel
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Carl Loar" <skycarl(at)megsinet.net> |
Subject: | Engine daydreams (I'm bored and the list is slow |
today..)
For what it's worth dept... When I first started my project and decided on
the corvair over the Ford A, from what I had read and heard I assumed it was
a good engine fitting into my piet building plans. I gotta tell you that
after I started digging into it and really working on did I realize what a
well put together engine it is. And as far as parts, Clarks has just about
everything you'd need.
Just don't mention that it's for an airplane, that's been covered here
before nuff said.
Carl
Please visit my website at
www.megsinet.net/skycarl
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of del magsam
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Engine daydreams (I'm bored and the list is
slow today..)
> That Corvair engine, a mechanic buddy of mine told
> me; was probably good at the era they wrote about
> it, he said. But apparently has been by-passed, by
> superior suitable engines in this century. The
> Subaru and Honda Civic come to mind. Almost any V 6
> with aluminum block is probably better and within
> weight guidelines.
This post is a very uninformed opinion, This person
seems to be not at all aware of proven facts, and the
fact that the corvair still remains more bulletproof
and more hp and torque per lb than above engines
mentioned. not to mention certified engines
Del
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | lshutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan) |
Subject: | Fuel tank on-off valve |
Last week I received my ACS order for all of the plumbing items for my
fuel system. Included was their brass valve @ $23. While at Ace hardware
today I find the exact same (made in Italy) valve for 7 bucks! Last
week B&B aircraft was mentioned for turnbuckles. a while back I was
there buying 90 degree plate nuts to hold my cockpit combing on. ACS
sells them for $4 apiece. B&B sold me 25 for $5. Guess who ACS buy's
them from? Yah, B&B. Leon S. Dollar poor, but valve rich in Ks.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
Subject: | Engine daydreams (I'm bored and the list is |
slow today..)
Stress analysis, the old fashioned EAA way of the Pietenpol Air Camper.
http://members.tripod.com/~speculation/adventuretourismpage6.html
( The Flying Flea example! )
On Sun, 27 January 2002, "Carl Loar" wrote:
>
>
> For what it's worth dept... When I first started my project and decided on
> the corvair over the Ford A, from what I had read and heard I assumed it was
> a good engine fitting into my piet building plans. I gotta tell you that
> after I started digging into it and really working on did I realize what a
> well put together engine it is. And as far as parts, Clarks has just about
> everything you'd need.
> Just don't mention that it's for an airplane, that's been covered here
> before nuff said.
> Carl
>
> Please visit my website at
> www.megsinet.net/skycarl
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of del magsam
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Engine daydreams (I'm bored and the list is
> slow today..)
>
>
>
> > That Corvair engine, a mechanic buddy of mine told
> > me; was probably good at the era they wrote about
> > it, he said. But apparently has been by-passed, by
> > superior suitable engines in this century. The
> > Subaru and Honda Civic come to mind. Almost any V 6
> > with aluminum block is probably better and within
> > weight guidelines.
>
> This post is a very uninformed opinion, This person
> seems to be not at all aware of proven facts, and the
> fact that the corvair still remains more bulletproof
> and more hp and torque per lb than above engines
> mentioned. not to mention certified engines
> Del
>
>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
I got some bits and pieces with an instrument panel donated to me by my local
EAA Chapter 37 on Saturday. There is probably two of the instruments I will
use.
The altimeter has two hose connections on the back, like for pushing on hoses.
What is the rest of that I will need? Anybody know? The other instrument,
forget off hand what it is, but it needs an electrical plug. I think it is the
speed indicator. Or maybe it is vice versa?
I know I want an airspeed indicator, an altimeter, a turn and bank ( cheap kind
), a compass ( auto compass probably ), what else?
There used to be in my youth, ( long ago ) a piece of soldered plate on a coat
hanger, you attached to a spring, which you stuck out a pickup window to get
the speed markings on a piece of wood marked. Then you put it in your plane
as a speedometer. Anybody recollect how to make that?
Back in the 1960's, I had a collection of booklets from EAA, which I would read
in a one room wood shack by kerosene lamp, while feeding the sandflies and
mosquitos and drawing planes on grocery wrapping paper. There was one booklet
in particular, that taught me all about diehedral, aspect ratio, weight and
balance ( saw horse method ), wing span, wing loading and all that good stuff.
Marvelous booklet. But moving around, I ended up donating all my books to a
local library that had not much. Now I wanted to replace it, but the catalogue
from EAA no longer has that booklet. They apparently sell assorted booklets
covering single subjects at astronomical prices. Does anyone remember the title
of that booklet and where I might find one?
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
One of the Tony Bingelis books (I think it is Sportplane Construction
Techniques) has a section on instruments. All four of those books should be
required reading for anyone building a Pietenpol.
Instruments required by the FAA are Airspeed indicator, Altimeter, Compass,
Oil Pressure, Oil Temp (if air-cooled engine), Water Temp (if water-cooled
engine) and fuel gage. You should probably also have a tachometer.
Why buy an auto compass? I bought a perfectly good Airpath aircraft compass
on eBay for $11.
Jack Phillips
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Fisherman
Caye
Subject: Pietenpol-List: instruments
I got some bits and pieces with an instrument panel donated to me by my
local EAA Chapter 37 on Saturday. There is probably two of the instruments
I will use.
The altimeter has two hose connections on the back, like for pushing on
hoses. What is the rest of that I will need? Anybody know? The other
instrument, forget off hand what it is, but it needs an electrical plug. I
think it is the speed indicator. Or maybe it is vice versa?
I know I want an airspeed indicator, an altimeter, a turn and bank ( cheap
kind ), a compass ( auto compass probably ), what else?
There used to be in my youth, ( long ago ) a piece of soldered plate on a
coat hanger, you attached to a spring, which you stuck out a pickup window
to get the speed markings on a piece of wood marked. Then you put it in
your plane as a speedometer. Anybody recollect how to make that?
Back in the 1960's, I had a collection of booklets from EAA, which I would
read in a one room wood shack by kerosene lamp, while feeding the sandflies
and mosquitos and drawing planes on grocery wrapping paper. There was one
booklet in particular, that taught me all about diehedral, aspect ratio,
weight and balance ( saw horse method ), wing span, wing loading and all
that good stuff. Marvelous booklet. But moving around, I ended up donating
all my books to a local library that had not much. Now I wanted to replace
it, but the catalogue from EAA no longer has that booklet. They apparently
sell assorted booklets covering single subjects at astronomical prices.
Does anyone remember the title of that booklet and where I might find one?
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: Fuel tank on-off valve |
Last
> week B&B aircraft was mentioned for turnbuckles. a
> while back I was
> there buying 90 degree plate nuts to hold my cockpit
> combing on. ACS
> sells them for $4 apiece. B&B sold me 25 for $5.
> Guess who ACS buy's
> them from? Yah, B&B.
Does B&B have a web site, a catalog, or an address if
I happen to be going thru kansas city?
Del
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Sam Marinucci" <srmjem(at)ezol.com> |
Subject: | Re: Fuel tank on-off valve |
Where is B&B located? Do they have a website? Sounds as though they are the
place for bargains,
-----Original Message-----
From: Leon Stefan <lshutks(at)webtv.net>
Date: Monday, January 28, 2002 12:49 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fuel tank on-off valve
>
>Last week I received my ACS order for all of the plumbing items for my
>fuel system. Included was their brass valve @ $23. While at Ace hardware
>today I find the exact same (made in Italy) valve for 7 bucks! Last
>week B&B aircraft was mentioned for turnbuckles. a while back I was
>there buying 90 degree plate nuts to hold my cockpit combing on. ACS
>sells them for $4 apiece. B&B sold me 25 for $5. Guess who ACS buy's
>them from? Yah, B&B. Leon S. Dollar poor, but valve rich in Ks.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
Hi Jack
I'll try and get those books through my library. The instruments sounded interesting.
The E-Bay thing I'm going to have to look into. Never used it before.
Guess I'll learn about the instruments and how to hook them up over the year.
This is a learning process as I go along. The auto compass? Well! It's
a long long story, but the short end is that one saved my life in an Ercoupe
once. Got vertigo over the Gulf of Mexico in an Ercoupe. Could not see any
horizon and water was every where it seemed to me. The auto compass was not much
good, because it spins. But I managed to get it to spin a few revolutions
one way and back again, along with the altimeter, and in half an hour picked
up a shoreline on the horizon, then I was good again. It did sort of keep me
roughly straight and level.
On Mon, 28 January 2002, "Jack Phillips" wrote:
>
>
> One of the Tony Bingelis books (I think it is Sportplane Construction
> Techniques) has a section on instruments. All four of those books should be
> required reading for anyone building a Pietenpol.
>
> Instruments required by the FAA are Airspeed indicator, Altimeter, Compass,
> Oil Pressure, Oil Temp (if air-cooled engine), Water Temp (if water-cooled
> engine) and fuel gage. You should probably also have a tachometer.
>
> Why buy an auto compass? I bought a perfectly good Airpath aircraft compass
> on eBay for $11.
>
> Jack Phillips
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Fisherman
> Caye
> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 7:06 AM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: instruments
>
>
>
> I got some bits and pieces with an instrument panel donated to me by my
> local EAA Chapter 37 on Saturday. There is probably two of the instruments
> I will use.
>
> The altimeter has two hose connections on the back, like for pushing on
> hoses. What is the rest of that I will need? Anybody know? The other
> instrument, forget off hand what it is, but it needs an electrical plug. I
> think it is the speed indicator. Or maybe it is vice versa?
>
> I know I want an airspeed indicator, an altimeter, a turn and bank ( cheap
> kind ), a compass ( auto compass probably ), what else?
>
> There used to be in my youth, ( long ago ) a piece of soldered plate on a
> coat hanger, you attached to a spring, which you stuck out a pickup window
> to get the speed markings on a piece of wood marked. Then you put it in
> your plane as a speedometer. Anybody recollect how to make that?
>
> Back in the 1960's, I had a collection of booklets from EAA, which I would
> read in a one room wood shack by kerosene lamp, while feeding the sandflies
> and mosquitos and drawing planes on grocery wrapping paper. There was one
> booklet in particular, that taught me all about diehedral, aspect ratio,
> weight and balance ( saw horse method ), wing span, wing loading and all
> that good stuff. Marvelous booklet. But moving around, I ended up donating
> all my books to a local library that had not much. Now I wanted to replace
> it, but the catalogue from EAA no longer has that booklet. They apparently
> sell assorted booklets covering single subjects at astronomical prices.
> Does anyone remember the title of that booklet and where I might find one?
>
>
> FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
> http://www.FindLaw.com
> Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
> http://mail.Justice.com
>
>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Kip & Beth Gardner <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Re: Wood and wooden planes |
>
>Yep! The Gold Bug caused a lot of heart burn at Rockford when it used gate
>hinges and other hardware store parts. It was designed by an aeronautical
>engineer BUT it didn't crash, it didn't burn.
>
>If the hardware or other materials are selected with the proper care for the
>task at hand, then why not? Don't sell your hardware store stuff short. Many
>hardware items have higher quality than
>certified materials. We become stuck in a rut sometimes just because that's
>the way it was done 30 years ago. The use of 4130 steel is a good example.
>
>Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
>
>Editor, EAA Safety Programs
>cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
Well put Cy! I suppose someone could put together a safe (full-size)
airplane with Balsa, for that matter (& someone probably has), as long as
they KNEW what their design parameters were. It's making changes without
due diligence that worries me.
I am reminded of the article Ron Wanttaja put on his website that was later
picked up by Experimenter or SA a few months ago about a FlyBaby that
crashed in North Carolina a coupla years ago. In that case, the builder
changed ONE component - he substituted streamlined flying wires for the
aircraft cable that the designer specified. Ironically, he thought this
would give him a stronger setup, since the streamlined wires were rated far
higher than the cable. What he didn't know was that this set up a
vibrational stress on a critical part & it failed. The wing folded up on
the guy he had just sold the plane to fortunately, he had
a chute and bailed.
All that said, BHP 'eyeball engineered' the Piet (anybody know how many
times he pranged testing his designs?), so there is room for modification &
experimentation (not to mention a lot of places where BHP just leaves
things to our own imaginations!). On the other hand Pete Bowers, was an
aeronautical engineer for Boeing & designed the FlyBaby to defined
specifications; builders make changes to major components at their peril if
they don't do a thorough analysis first.
>There are better, stronger, yet cheaper steels available today but we still
>continue using the "tried and true" 4130. Why, because they aren't hardware
>store items and the aircraft supply places don't handle them.
Cy, can you give some examples? I asked the list about this a while back,
especially in reference to good STAINLESS steel substitutes for 4130, but
no one had any good ideas.
"If it can't be backed up with numbers, it's Opinion, not Engineering!"
Cheers!
Kip Gardner
426 Schneider St. SE
North Canton, OH 44720
(330) 494-1775
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "KenGailGriff" <kengg(at)texas.net> |
Subject: | Re: Wood and wooden planes |
Has anyone identified a reliable alternative to aircraft plywood? Sounds
like Caye came out all right, but I don't think I can repeat his success.
And I'm a little too underemployed to shell out hundreds for my fuselage
plywood.
Ken Chambers
In the early stages
Austin, Texas
----- Original Message -----
From: Gene Rambo <rambog(at)erols.com>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and wooden planes
>
> of course, the Flying Flea never flew worth a damned.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and wooden planes
>
>
> >
> > A real flying example with hundreds of derivates
> > (flying since 1936 until now) is the Flying Flea
> > (French design of H. Mignet)
> >
> > Was (and is) designed with the goal of only hardware
> > materials, that can be built by the "comon citizen
> > with a little knowledge of hand tools". Most of the
> > designes are wood... and use Stainless steel insted of
> > 4130, SS is way more cheaper in Europe and other
> > countries than 4130, Dural (equivalent to 6061-T6) is
> > also used.
> >
> > Even the bolts are calculated to use automovile bolts,
> > (they use the next or more size bigger to compensate
> > for the "certified"), also this airplanes are designed
> > with only a hand full of bolts, so the extra weight is
> > no problem.
> > Same happens with the wood used... in Europe you can
> > find real good quality marine plywood that maybe is
> > better (and cheaper there) that the USA aircraft
> > ply...
> >
> > If a designer (and the plans builder) know what they
> > are doing and have the capacity and common sense, the
> > plane will be well built.
> >
> > A joint that is not well done (position, amount of
> > glue, quality of wood, etc.) is more lack of common
> > sense than fault of design. Any Law Enforcement
> > Agency can not think of a law that prevents the lack
> > of responsability and common sense in a citizen!
> >
> > Saludos
> > Gary Gower
> >
> > --- Cy Galley wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Yep! The Gold Bug caused a lot of heart burn at
> > > Rockford when it used gate
> > > hinges and other hardware store parts. It was
> > > designed by an aeronautical
> > > engineer BUT it didn't crash, it didn't burn.
> > >
> > > If the hardware or other materials are selected with
> > > the proper care for the
> > > task at hand, then why not? Don't sell your hardware
> > > store stuff short. Many
> > > hardware items have higher quality than
> > > certified materials. We become stuck in a rut
> > > sometimes just because that's
> > > the way it was done 30 years ago. The use of 4130
> > > steel is a good example.
> > > There are better, stronger, yet cheaper steels
> > > available today but we still
> > > continue using the "tried and true" 4130. Why,
> > > because they aren't hardware
> > > store items and the aircraft supply places don't
> > > handle them.
> > >
> > > Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair,
> > > Oshkosh
> > >
> > > Editor, EAA Safety Programs
> > > cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
> > >
> > > Always looking for articles for the Experimenter
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Kip & Beth Gardner"
> > >
> > > To:
> > > Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and
> > > wooden planes
> > >
> > >
> > > Gardner
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Sorry about the irreverance I show to due process
> > > and bureaucrats.
> > > >Spent my life without any handy to ever help me in
> > > strange parts of the
> > > >world. Hard to get used to the bureaucrat rules
> > > and controls your life
> > > >syndrome, back home. Might never get over my sense
> > > of self-reliance? The
> > > >only ones I ever met, caused me untold grief and
> > > expense and their
> > > >assistance wasn't worth a damn.
> > >
> > > Caye,
> > >
> > > With all due respect, the bureaucrats in this case
> > > are not trying to help
> > > you, they are trying to help keep you from killing
> > > someone else. As someone
> > > else on this list pointed out a day or so ago, yes,
> > > people made planes from
> > > hardware store parts & lumberyard lumber in years
> > > gone by, but a lot more
> > > planes fell out of the sky because of structural
> > > failures than happens now,
> > > too.
> > >
> > > There is nothing wrong with being 'experimental',
> > > learning saomething new
> > > is part of what this whole ride is about, but what's
> > > the point in doing
> > > something that was PROVEN dangerous a long time ago?
> > > Clearly, you've had
> > > lots of experience building boats and working with
> > > tropical hardwoods. That
> > > is useful & valuable knowledge - done a little bit
> > > of it myself, but I'm
> > > learning that aircraft construction is like
> > > boatbuilding the way welding is
> > > like soldering - similar, but with some real
> > > differences that will get you
> > > in big trouble if you assume that there is a 1-to-1
> > > comparison.
> > >
> > > Yes, the bureaucrats can be a pain, but they are not
> > > there just to annoy
> > > us. And the truth is, if you really don't want to
> > > have to worry about being
> > > regulated to death (if that's the way you feel
> > > about it), then there are
> > > always ultralights, where the whole deal is set up
> > > so no one has to worry
> > > about you killing anyone but yourself if you screw
> > > up.
> > >
> > > Just my 2 cents' worth, hope no one takes offense,
> > > but I 've been concerned
> > > that safety might be taking a back seat to
> > > expediency & holding to a budget
> > > in some of the recent posts.
> > >
> > > Tally Ho!
> > >
> > > Kip Gardner
> > >
> > > 426 Schneider St. SE
> > > North Canton, OH 44720
> > > (330) 494-1775
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Forum -
> > > Contributions of
> > > any other form
> > >
> > > latest messages.
> > > other List members.
> > >
> > > http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> > > http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> > > http://www.matronics.com/search
> > > http://www.matronics.com/archives
> > > http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Michael Brusilow" <mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net> |
----- Original Message -----
From: Fisherman Caye
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 9:25 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: instruments
Got vertigo over the Gulf of Mexico in an Ercoupe. Could not see
any horizon and water was every where it seemed to me. The auto compass
was not much good, because it spins. But I managed to get it to spin a
few revolutions one way and back again, along with the altimeter, and in
half an hour picked up a shoreline on the horizon, then I was good
again. It did sort of keep me roughly straight and level.
_______________________________________________________________
Similar thing happened to me in a Jodel. Needle/ball/airspeed got me
out.
I have those instruments in my Piet plus a climb/dive.
So much for an auto comapss.
Mike B Piet N687MB (Mr Sam )
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Christian Bobka" <bobka(at)charter.net> |
Subject: | Wrong analysis kip |
Kip,
The flybaby was built to the plans and did have the correct wires. The
flybaby uses two wires that run about an inch apart and parallel to each
other. What happened is that the tensions were not even meaning that the
tighter wire was taking all the load. It eventually failed. shifting the
load to the remaining wire which then failed too.
Streamline wire sections were not involved.
Pete Bowers stipulates a process to evenly tension the wires and recommends
they be checked periodically and on any (re)assembly.
Chris Bobka
EAA tech counselor
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kip & Beth Gardner" <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and wooden planes
>
> >
> >Yep! The Gold Bug caused a lot of heart burn at Rockford when it used
gate
> >hinges and other hardware store parts. It was designed by an aeronautical
> >engineer BUT it didn't crash, it didn't burn.
> >
> >If the hardware or other materials are selected with the proper care for
the
> >task at hand, then why not? Don't sell your hardware store stuff short.
Many
> >hardware items have higher quality than
> >certified materials. We become stuck in a rut sometimes just because
that's
> >the way it was done 30 years ago. The use of 4130 steel is a good
example.
>
> >
> >Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
> >
> >Editor, EAA Safety Programs
> >cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
>
> Well put Cy! I suppose someone could put together a safe (full-size)
> airplane with Balsa, for that matter (& someone probably has), as long as
> they KNEW what their design parameters were. It's making changes without
> due diligence that worries me.
>
> I am reminded of the article Ron Wanttaja put on his website that was
later
> picked up by Experimenter or SA a few months ago about a FlyBaby that
> crashed in North Carolina a coupla years ago. In that case, the builder
> changed ONE component - he substituted streamlined flying wires for the
> aircraft cable that the designer specified. Ironically, he thought this
> would give him a stronger setup, since the streamlined wires were rated
far
> higher than the cable. What he didn't know was that this set up a
> vibrational stress on a critical part & it failed. The wing folded up on
> the guy he had just sold the plane to fortunately, he had
> a chute and bailed.
>
> All that said, BHP 'eyeball engineered' the Piet (anybody know how many
> times he pranged testing his designs?), so there is room for modification
&
> experimentation (not to mention a lot of places where BHP just leaves
> things to our own imaginations!). On the other hand Pete Bowers, was an
> aeronautical engineer for Boeing & designed the FlyBaby to defined
> specifications; builders make changes to major components at their peril
if
> they don't do a thorough analysis first.
>
> >There are better, stronger, yet cheaper steels available today but we
still
> >continue using the "tried and true" 4130. Why, because they aren't
hardware
> >store items and the aircraft supply places don't handle them.
>
> Cy, can you give some examples? I asked the list about this a while back,
> especially in reference to good STAINLESS steel substitutes for 4130, but
> no one had any good ideas.
>
> "If it can't be backed up with numbers, it's Opinion, not Engineering!"
>
> Cheers!
>
> Kip Gardner
>
> 426 Schneider St. SE
> North Canton, OH 44720
> (330) 494-1775
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Re: Wood and wooden planes |
Ken,
I've been using a marine grade mahogany called "Malvo Ply", it's made in
France.
Good and clean on both sides, beautiful grain and well laminated.
Cost is about $50 a sheet (1/5 of A/C grade). Check the local boat
shops and find builders, they'll know where to get it in you area.
Sorry to hear we've got yet another work dropout on the list. Maybe we
should start the UPBA, (Unemployed Pietenpol Builders Association).
Hang in there and keep building!
Larry
(Will lead global eCommerce initiatives for food)
KenGailGriff wrote:
>
>Has anyone identified a reliable alternative to aircraft plywood? Sounds
>like Caye came out all right, but I don't think I can repeat his success.
>And I'm a little too underemployed to shell out hundreds for my fuselage
>plywood.
>
>Ken Chambers
>In the early stages
>Austin, Texas
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Gene Rambo <rambog(at)erols.com>
>To:
>Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and wooden planes
>
>
>>
>>of course, the Flying Flea never flew worth a damned.
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com>
>>To:
>>Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and wooden planes
>>
>>
>>>
>>>A real flying example with hundreds of derivates
>>>(flying since 1936 until now) is the Flying Flea
>>>(French design of H. Mignet)
>>>
>>>Was (and is) designed with the goal of only hardware
>>>materials, that can be built by the "comon citizen
>>>with a little knowledge of hand tools". Most of the
>>>designes are wood... and use Stainless steel insted of
>>>4130, SS is way more cheaper in Europe and other
>>>countries than 4130, Dural (equivalent to 6061-T6) is
>>>also used.
>>>
>>>Even the bolts are calculated to use automovile bolts,
>>>(they use the next or more size bigger to compensate
>>>for the "certified"), also this airplanes are designed
>>>with only a hand full of bolts, so the extra weight is
>>>no problem.
>>>Same happens with the wood used... in Europe you can
>>>find real good quality marine plywood that maybe is
>>>better (and cheaper there) that the USA aircraft
>>>ply...
>>>
>>>If a designer (and the plans builder) know what they
>>>are doing and have the capacity and common sense, the
>>>plane will be well built.
>>>
>>>A joint that is not well done (position, amount of
>>>glue, quality of wood, etc.) is more lack of common
>>>sense than fault of design. Any Law Enforcement
>>>Agency can not think of a law that prevents the lack
>>>of responsability and common sense in a citizen!
>>>
>>>Saludos
>>>Gary Gower
>>>
>>>--- Cy Galley wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Yep! The Gold Bug caused a lot of heart burn at
>>>>Rockford when it used gate
>>>>hinges and other hardware store parts. It was
>>>>designed by an aeronautical
>>>>engineer BUT it didn't crash, it didn't burn.
>>>>
>>>>If the hardware or other materials are selected with
>>>>the proper care for the
>>>>task at hand, then why not? Don't sell your hardware
>>>>store stuff short. Many
>>>>hardware items have higher quality than
>>>>certified materials. We become stuck in a rut
>>>>sometimes just because that's
>>>>the way it was done 30 years ago. The use of 4130
>>>>steel is a good example.
>>>>There are better, stronger, yet cheaper steels
>>>>available today but we still
>>>>continue using the "tried and true" 4130. Why,
>>>>because they aren't hardware
>>>>store items and the aircraft supply places don't
>>>>handle them.
>>>>
>>>>Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair,
>>>>Oshkosh
>>>>
>>>>Editor, EAA Safety Programs
>>>>cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
>>>>
>>>>Always looking for articles for the Experimenter
>>>>
>>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>>From: "Kip & Beth Gardner"
>>>>
>>>>To:
>>>>Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and
>>>>wooden planes
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Gardner
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Sorry about the irreverance I show to due process
>>>>>
>>>>and bureaucrats.
>>>>
>>>>>Spent my life without any handy to ever help me in
>>>>>
>>>>strange parts of the
>>>>
>>>>>world. Hard to get used to the bureaucrat rules
>>>>>
>>>>and controls your life
>>>>
>>>>>syndrome, back home. Might never get over my sense
>>>>>
>>>>of self-reliance? The
>>>>
>>>>>only ones I ever met, caused me untold grief and
>>>>>
>>>>expense and their
>>>>
>>>>>assistance wasn't worth a damn.
>>>>>
>>>>Caye,
>>>>
>>>>With all due respect, the bureaucrats in this case
>>>>are not trying to help
>>>>you, they are trying to help keep you from killing
>>>>someone else. As someone
>>>>else on this list pointed out a day or so ago, yes,
>>>>people made planes from
>>>>hardware store parts & lumberyard lumber in years
>>>>gone by, but a lot more
>>>>planes fell out of the sky because of structural
>>>>failures than happens now,
>>>>too.
>>>>
>>>>There is nothing wrong with being 'experimental',
>>>>learning saomething new
>>>>is part of what this whole ride is about, but what's
>>>>the point in doing
>>>>something that was PROVEN dangerous a long time ago?
>>>>Clearly, you've had
>>>>lots of experience building boats and working with
>>>>tropical hardwoods. That
>>>>is useful & valuable knowledge - done a little bit
>>>>of it myself, but I'm
>>>>learning that aircraft construction is like
>>>>boatbuilding the way welding is
>>>>like soldering - similar, but with some real
>>>>differences that will get you
>>>>in big trouble if you assume that there is a 1-to-1
>>>>comparison.
>>>>
>>>>Yes, the bureaucrats can be a pain, but they are not
>>>>there just to annoy
>>>>us. And the truth is, if you really don't want to
>>>>have to worry about being
>>>>regulated to death (if that's the way you feel
>>>>about it), then there are
>>>>always ultralights, where the whole deal is set up
>>>>so no one has to worry
>>>>about you killing anyone but yourself if you screw
>>>>up.
>>>>
>>>>Just my 2 cents' worth, hope no one takes offense,
>>>>but I 've been concerned
>>>>that safety might be taking a back seat to
>>>>expediency & holding to a budget
>>>>in some of the recent posts.
>>>>
>>>>Tally Ho!
>>>>
>>>>Kip Gardner
>>>>
>>>>426 Schneider St. SE
>>>>North Canton, OH 44720
>>>>(330) 494-1775
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Forum -
>>>>Contributions of
>>>>any other form
>>>>
>>>>latest messages.
>>>>other List members.
>>>>
>>>>http://www.matronics.com/subscription
>>>>http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
>>>>http://www.matronics.com/search
>>>>http://www.matronics.com/archives
>>>>http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Kip & Beth Gardner <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Re: Wrong analysis kip |
Chris,
You are right! That was the article in Experimenter&/or SA. However, this
other accident DID happen & is documented extensively on Ron's website.
Check it out, VERY instructive. The guy in the accident reported in the
Experimenter/SA article bought the farm, BTW.
My goof! Again, speaking off the cuff gets me in trouble!
Kip Gardner (headed back downstairs to continue work on my new workbench)
>
>Kip,
>
>The flybaby was built to the plans and did have the correct wires. The
>flybaby uses two wires that run about an inch apart and parallel to each
>other. What happened is that the tensions were not even meaning that the
>tighter wire was taking all the load. It eventually failed. shifting the
>load to the remaining wire which then failed too.
>
>Streamline wire sections were not involved.
>
>Pete Bowers stipulates a process to evenly tension the wires and recommends
>they be checked periodically and on any (re)assembly.
>
>Chris Bobka
>EAA tech counselor
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Kip & Beth Gardner" <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net>
>To:
>Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and wooden planes
>> Well put Cy! I suppose someone could put together a safe (full-size)
>> airplane with Balsa, for that matter (& someone probably has), as long as
>> they KNEW what their design parameters were. It's making changes without
>> due diligence that worries me.
>>
>> I am reminded of the article Ron Wanttaja put on his website that was
>later
>> picked up by Experimenter or SA a few months ago about a FlyBaby that
>> crashed in North Carolina a coupla years ago. In that case, the builder
>> changed ONE component - he substituted streamlined flying wires for the
>> aircraft cable that the designer specified. Ironically, he thought this
>> would give him a stronger setup, since the streamlined wires were rated
>far
>> higher than the cable. What he didn't know was that this set up a
>> vibrational stress on a critical part & it failed. The wing folded up on
>> the guy he had just sold the plane to fortunately, he had
>> a chute and bailed.
>>
>> All that said, BHP 'eyeball engineered' the Piet (anybody know how many
>> times he pranged testing his designs?), so there is room for modification
>&
>> experimentation (not to mention a lot of places where BHP just leaves
>> things to our own imaginations!). On the other hand Pete Bowers, was an
>> aeronautical engineer for Boeing & designed the FlyBaby to defined
>> specifications; builders make changes to major components at their peril
>if
>> they don't do a thorough analysis first.
>>
>> >There are better, stronger, yet cheaper steels available today but we
>still
>> >continue using the "tried and true" 4130. Why, because they aren't
>hardware
>> >store items and the aircraft supply places don't handle them.
>>
>> Cy, can you give some examples? I asked the list about this a while back,
>> especially in reference to good STAINLESS steel substitutes for 4130, but
>> no one had any good ideas.
>>
>> "If it can't be backed up with numbers, it's Opinion, not Engineering!"
>>
>> Cheers!
>>
>> Kip Gardner
426 Schneider St. SE
North Canton, OH 44720
(330) 494-1775
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Gadd, Skip" <Skip.Gadd(at)ssa.gov> |
Subject: | Re: Wood and wooden planes |
Ken,
I am using Hoop Pine for sides, leading edge and a lot of gussets. They
advertise in some on the homebuilding magazines. It is exterior grade. When
I got it, was less $$ than aircraft stuff.
Skip
>Has anyone identified a reliable alternative to aircraft plywood?
>Ken Chambers
>In the early stages
>Austin, Texas
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Kent Hallsten <KHallsten(at)governair.com> |
Subject: | Capstrip ripping |
I spent Sunday afternoon ripping my capstrip material, and I'd like
some opinions about the process and finished dimensions. I'm using
Western Red Cedar 1 x 8" x 8' , and I attached a plywood straight edge on
the boards and ripped both sides to a nice straight edge. Then with my
tablesaw fence set to 1/4" (measured from the blade) I started . My saw
blade was parallel to the fence. As I progressed thru the board, I found
that one end became narrower than the other end. The last cut had the board
just over 1/4" at the front and about 5/8" at the back, when it started out
at 5" both ends. Something was wrong, but I don't know what. Any ideas?
It seemed hard to get a consistent 1/4" width the complete length of
the capstrip. At various places the capstrip would measure + or - about
1/64th to 1/32 from the 1/4" I wanted. Should this be a major concern? I'm
hoping the sturdiness of the design will help me out here.
I checked the archives in rec.woodworking and rec.boatbuilding and
there are differing opinions about having the thin strip against the fence
or on the outside of the cut. One way has the fence set once, the second
way has you moving the fence for each cut. I had the capstrip against the
fence.
Kent Hallsten
.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Hubbard, Eugene" <ehubbard(at)titan.com> |
Subject: | Capstrip ripping |
Kent,
I'd say that you just discovered that errors accumulate. Actually, in the
grand scheme of things it doesn't make very much difference. You've cut
about 15 strips and accumulated an error of 3/8 inch, less than 1/32 over
the five foot length of each strip. If you're comfortable with the
dimension of each strip individually, the only problem with the accumulated
error would be if it got the grain direction too far off. 3/8" in five feet
isn't enough error to affect the 1 in 16 grain slope.
As for what the "problem" is, I would guess at a less-than-sharp blade, or
possibly case-hardened wood that bends as it comes out of the saw. But
fundementally, you get (and got) what you measured, and you'll sand more
than that off of the capstrips during assembly. If you wanted the remaining
strip to stay straight, the only way would have been to move the fence each
time. The strips would probably have come out less uniform, but you would
have gotten that last one out of the 5/8" end (assuming that it didn't
splinter going through the saw.
As they say, it's an airplane, not a swiss watch . . .
Gene Hubbard
San Diego
-----Original Message-----
From: Kent Hallsten [mailto:KHallsten(at)governair.com]
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Capstrip ripping
I spent Sunday afternoon ripping my capstrip material, and I'd like
some opinions about the process and finished dimensions. I'm using
Western Red Cedar 1 x 8" x 8' , and I attached a plywood straight edge on
the boards and ripped both sides to a nice straight edge. Then with my
tablesaw fence set to 1/4" (measured from the blade) I started . My saw
blade was parallel to the fence. As I progressed thru the board, I found
that one end became narrower than the other end. The last cut had the board
just over 1/4" at the front and about 5/8" at the back, when it started out
at 5" both ends. Something was wrong, but I don't know what. Any ideas?
It seemed hard to get a consistent 1/4" width the complete length of
the capstrip. At various places the capstrip would measure + or - about
1/64th to 1/32 from the 1/4" I wanted. Should this be a major concern? I'm
hoping the sturdiness of the design will help me out here.
I checked the archives in rec.woodworking and rec.boatbuilding and
there are differing opinions about having the thin strip against the fence
or on the outside of the cut. One way has the fence set once, the second
way has you moving the fence for each cut. I had the capstrip against the
fence.
Kent Hallsten
.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com> |
Subject: | HCI 7 cil engine |
--- "Gary McNeel, Jr." wrote:
> > What happened to the HCI boys? They had a neat
> deal going with a kit
> > that used VW parts to make 5 and 7 cylinder
> radials. 65 to 120
> > horsepower range for the two versions, if I
> remember right. At about
> > $9k it was up there though, and then they
> disappeared from the web.
>
> They are here. New site and all.
> http://hciaviation.com/
>
I know... I am a "compulsive builder" but once I get
finished with the Stewart Reduction drive (for my VW
engine) we are planning to build from scratch the 7
cilinder HCI engine...
Maybe some day at the end of 2002. Good price for
the plans but a very expensive kit... In June (if
everything comes as pkanned) I will beguin to look for
a flying example (or at least working) of the 7 cil
engine to go and personally see it, to much work
involved for a non practical engine... If you see one
working around, please let us know... Thanks in
advance.
Saludos
Gary Gower
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | del magsam <farmerdel(at)rocketmail.com> |
Subject: | Capstrip ripping |
set the fence so that there is a few thousands more
space on the back side of the blade,so that the blade
is not removing any material on the way out. and cut
equal amounts from each side of the board. cut
everything a little big and then run it thru yours, or
somebodys delta benchtop planer to get absolutely the
same dimension material from beginning to end. if you
do this you can cut all of the capstrips for length
all at the same time including the short pieces. this
will save tons of time not haveing to cut each rib
individually.
Del
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Engine daydreams (I'm bored and the list is |
slow today..)
You can also check out Corvair Undergound for parts - usually cheaper
than Clarks and Lon (the owner of the Underground) is actually on the
corvaircraft list and has no qualms selling parts for aircraft.
Kirk
>
>For what it's worth dept... When I first started my project and decided on
>the corvair over the Ford A, from what I had read and heard I assumed it was
>a good engine fitting into my piet building plans. I gotta tell you that
>after I started digging into it and really working on did I realize what a
>well put together engine it is. And as far as parts, Clarks has just about
>everything you'd need.
>Just don't mention that it's for an airplane, that's been covered here
>before nuff said.
>Carl
>
>Please visit my website at
>www.megsinet.net/skycarl
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
Subject: | Re: Wood and wooden planes |
The only Flying Fleas I have seen, where built by Jack McWhorter in north Florida.
He built two.
But they are a single place ultra light and ultra lights are notoriously underpowered,
so I would not expect them to fly very well under any conditions. Ultra
lights are basically legislated regulated accidents waiting to happen, in my
opinion.
On Mon, 28 January 2002, "KenGailGriff" wrote:
>
>
> Has anyone identified a reliable alternative to aircraft plywood? Sounds
> like Caye came out all right, but I don't think I can repeat his success.
> And I'm a little too underemployed to shell out hundreds for my fuselage
> plywood.
>
> Ken Chambers
> In the early stages
> Austin, Texas
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gene Rambo <rambog(at)erols.com>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and wooden planes
>
>
> >
> > of course, the Flying Flea never flew worth a damned.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com>
> > To:
> > Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and wooden planes
> >
> >
> > >
> > > A real flying example with hundreds of derivates
> > > (flying since 1936 until now) is the Flying Flea
> > > (French design of H. Mignet)
> > >
> > > Was (and is) designed with the goal of only hardware
> > > materials, that can be built by the "comon citizen
> > > with a little knowledge of hand tools". Most of the
> > > designes are wood... and use Stainless steel insted of
> > > 4130, SS is way more cheaper in Europe and other
> > > countries than 4130, Dural (equivalent to 6061-T6) is
> > > also used.
> > >
> > > Even the bolts are calculated to use automovile bolts,
> > > (they use the next or more size bigger to compensate
> > > for the "certified"), also this airplanes are designed
> > > with only a hand full of bolts, so the extra weight is
> > > no problem.
> > > Same happens with the wood used... in Europe you can
> > > find real good quality marine plywood that maybe is
> > > better (and cheaper there) that the USA aircraft
> > > ply...
> > >
> > > If a designer (and the plans builder) know what they
> > > are doing and have the capacity and common sense, the
> > > plane will be well built.
> > >
> > > A joint that is not well done (position, amount of
> > > glue, quality of wood, etc.) is more lack of common
> > > sense than fault of design. Any Law Enforcement
> > > Agency can not think of a law that prevents the lack
> > > of responsability and common sense in a citizen!
> > >
> > > Saludos
> > > Gary Gower
> > >
> > > --- Cy Galley wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Yep! The Gold Bug caused a lot of heart burn at
> > > > Rockford when it used gate
> > > > hinges and other hardware store parts. It was
> > > > designed by an aeronautical
> > > > engineer BUT it didn't crash, it didn't burn.
> > > >
> > > > If the hardware or other materials are selected with
> > > > the proper care for the
> > > > task at hand, then why not? Don't sell your hardware
> > > > store stuff short. Many
> > > > hardware items have higher quality than
> > > > certified materials. We become stuck in a rut
> > > > sometimes just because that's
> > > > the way it was done 30 years ago. The use of 4130
> > > > steel is a good example.
> > > > There are better, stronger, yet cheaper steels
> > > > available today but we still
> > > > continue using the "tried and true" 4130. Why,
> > > > because they aren't hardware
> > > > store items and the aircraft supply places don't
> > > > handle them.
> > > >
> > > > Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair,
> > > > Oshkosh
> > > >
> > > > Editor, EAA Safety Programs
> > > > cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
> > > >
> > > > Always looking for articles for the Experimenter
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Kip & Beth Gardner"
> > > >
> > > > To:
> > > > Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and
> > > > wooden planes
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Gardner
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Sorry about the irreverance I show to due process
> > > > and bureaucrats.
> > > > >Spent my life without any handy to ever help me in
> > > > strange parts of the
> > > > >world. Hard to get used to the bureaucrat rules
> > > > and controls your life
> > > > >syndrome, back home. Might never get over my sense
> > > > of self-reliance? The
> > > > >only ones I ever met, caused me untold grief and
> > > > expense and their
> > > > >assistance wasn't worth a damn.
> > > >
> > > > Caye,
> > > >
> > > > With all due respect, the bureaucrats in this case
> > > > are not trying to help
> > > > you, they are trying to help keep you from killing
> > > > someone else. As someone
> > > > else on this list pointed out a day or so ago, yes,
> > > > people made planes from
> > > > hardware store parts & lumberyard lumber in years
> > > > gone by, but a lot more
> > > > planes fell out of the sky because of structural
> > > > failures than happens now,
> > > > too.
> > > >
> > > > There is nothing wrong with being 'experimental',
> > > > learning saomething new
> > > > is part of what this whole ride is about, but what's
> > > > the point in doing
> > > > something that was PROVEN dangerous a long time ago?
> > > > Clearly, you've had
> > > > lots of experience building boats and working with
> > > > tropical hardwoods. That
> > > > is useful & valuable knowledge - done a little bit
> > > > of it myself, but I'm
> > > > learning that aircraft construction is like
> > > > boatbuilding the way welding is
> > > > like soldering - similar, but with some real
> > > > differences that will get you
> > > > in big trouble if you assume that there is a 1-to-1
> > > > comparison.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, the bureaucrats can be a pain, but they are not
> > > > there just to annoy
> > > > us. And the truth is, if you really don't want to
> > > > have to worry about being
> > > > regulated to death (if that's the way you feel
> > > > about it), then there are
> > > > always ultralights, where the whole deal is set up
> > > > so no one has to worry
> > > > about you killing anyone but yourself if you screw
> > > > up.
> > > >
> > > > Just my 2 cents' worth, hope no one takes offense,
> > > > but I 've been concerned
> > > > that safety might be taking a back seat to
> > > > expediency & holding to a budget
> > > > in some of the recent posts.
> > > >
> > > > Tally Ho!
> > > >
> > > > Kip Gardner
> > > >
> > > > 426 Schneider St. SE
> > > > North Canton, OH 44720
> > > > (330) 494-1775
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Forum -
> > > > Contributions of
> > > > any other form
> > > >
> > > > latest messages.
> > > > other List members.
> > > >
> > > > http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> > > > http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> > > > http://www.matronics.com/search
> > > > http://www.matronics.com/archives
> > > > http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | lshutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan) |
Pieters: Del: B&B does not have a catalog and I've not found anything
on the net for them, but I'm basically commuter illiterate. You guys
with the big search engines may have better luck. I've never bothered to
ask those things because I can can just drop in when in K.C. to visit my
son who lives there. Actually I drive here every night on the job, but
it's after hours. I'll check the yellow pages tonight for there ad. An
address was given a week ago that had them at the Gardner airport. I
think that address is no longer valid as they have since moved to a
larger building in town. They are always at Oshkosh, don't know about
Sun and Fun. Leon S.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Lou Larsen" <pietlars(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Re: Engine daydreams (I'm bored and the list is slow today..) |
FYI:
Lowell Frank had his Warner 145 radial powered "Bull Pietenpol" at
Brodhead last summer. You can read about it in the Summer issue of Sport
Aviation Association's TO FLY magazine which features Pietenpols.
Also being shown and run was an HCI 7 cylinder radial (with VW jugs); it
was built up in Dick Weeden's shop on the field at Brodhead.
Lou Larsen
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Neal" <llneal2(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Engine daydreams (I'm bored and the list is slow
today..)
>
> Well, as usual, as soon as I start working on the Corvair motor I
> start wondering about alternatives.
>
> It must be some kind of grass-is-always-greener thing with me, but I do
> it every time. It only took ten years to decide on which airplane to
> build so I'm going to have to get over this quick.
>
> Actually, there is nothing that you could fault the Corvair with. It's
> got enough horsepower, but economical on gas. It has good parts
> availability and no need for complex redrives and it's CHEAP!
>
> Still I would be nice to put a round motor up front...
>
> What happened to the HCI boys? They had a neat deal going with a kit
> that used VW parts to make 5 and 7 cylinder radials. 65 to 120
> horsepower range for the two versions, if I remember right. At about
> $9k it was up there though, and then they disappeared from the web.
>
> The Australian Rotec folks make a neat looking 100hp radial job they
> call the "R2800" (the lads are just a trifle presumptuous). Again it's
> in the $12k range and what if the parts dry up?
>
> A Continental or "Shaky Jake" would go a long way toward curing any aft
> CG problems ;-) and with 200hp boy would it climb! But $$$!
>
> Maybe a Warner, that would be neat, talk about vintage. I've read that
> you need to pack the rocker boxes with grease every 20 hours. It would
> be a mess, but classy.
>
> Nope, none of them work. Either weight or the money thing. Well, I
> guess at this point either some benevolent captain of industry will be
> kind enough to donate a small round engine to my richly deserving, poor
> little self (Hint, Hint...) or it's back to the Corvair.
>
> I think while rebuilding the Corvair though, I'll send the rocker covers
> in and get them embossed with "Rolls-Royce". Maybe no round sound, but
> I'll be proud of my "Replica 1930 Homebuilt Bendix Trophy Winner" anyway
> and for damn sure keep the Glassair hacks guessing!
>
> Larry ;-)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Re: HCI 7 cil engine |
Good to see them back. The new photos of the 7 cylinder look great.
From their last press release is sounds as though they are getting some
action from the impending Sport licenses as well. I wish them good
luck, maybe I can pick on up used some day (sigh)...
Larry
Gary Gower wrote:
>
>
>--- "Gary McNeel, Jr." wrote:
>
>>>What happened to the HCI boys? They had a neat
>>>
>>deal going with a kit
>>
>>>that used VW parts to make 5 and 7 cylinder
>>>
>>radials. 65 to 120
>>
>>>horsepower range for the two versions, if I
>>>
>>remember right. At about
>>
>>>$9k it was up there though, and then they
>>>
>>disappeared from the web.
>>
>>They are here. New site and all.
>>http://hciaviation.com/
>>
>
>I know... I am a "compulsive builder" but once I get
>finished with the Stewart Reduction drive (for my VW
>engine) we are planning to build from scratch the 7
>cilinder HCI engine...
>Maybe some day at the end of 2002. Good price for
>the plans but a very expensive kit... In June (if
>everything comes as pkanned) I will beguin to look for
>a flying example (or at least working) of the 7 cil
>engine to go and personally see it, to much work
>involved for a non practical engine... If you see one
>working around, please let us know... Thanks in
>advance.
>
>Saludos
>Gary Gower
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "twinboom" <twinboom(at)email.msn.com> |
Sorry for being lame, but what is the difference between an auto compass and
an airplane compass? Is it just a quality issue. I would not buy anything
for instruments I don't think that is not particularly for an airplane, but
just curious.
Doug Blackburn, Arrowbear Lake, So. Cal.
Inland Slope Rebels, Riverside Ca.
<http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/ISR>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Wayne McIntosh" <mcintosh3017(at)home.com> |
Subject: | Re: Wood and wooden planes |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fisherman Caye" <cayecaulker(at)justice.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and wooden planes
Fisherman, Cy, and others,
First there was a question about the Chrysler 3.3 engine in the
Chrysler/Dodge minivan. It has an iron block and some versions have iron
heads others have aluminum heads. There was also mention of a Mitsubichi
engine which Chrysler used in their minivan and that was a 3 liter with iron
block and aluminum heads. The 3.3 engine gives good service and seems to be
generally trouble free, the 3 liter mitsu engine is no longer sold in the US
but parts are still readily available. The 3 litre Mitsu seemed to have
trouble with head gaskets although that may have been a maintainance
problem. Of the 2 the 3.3 is in my opinioin the better engine. Both are port
fuel injected and you would have to devise a way to trick the computer into
thinking the transmission was in high gear and the vehicle was driving at
high speed. This can be done electronically but if weight and balance makes
your eyes gloss over tricking the computer may do that too. Neither of these
engines were ever sold in the US without FI and a computer. I have never
heard of either being used in a plane but I do not see why they would not
work. Both of these engines weigh more than a Corvair engine or a model A
engine with aluminim head as I have seen in a Piet. By the way I have fixed
cars for a living for more than 30 years.
Now back on the subject of hardware store stuff in an airplane. First
and foremost weight in an airplane is bad period. Weight gets in an airplane
a half ounce at a time. If you can find something in a hardware store that
is just as strong that will be just as dependable and is just as light as
aircraft grade stuff then that is what should be used. If hardware store
stuff is more heavy but just as strong you will pay the price when you fly
your plane that has a poor climb rate, longer takeoff and landing roll, less
range( gotta leave the throttle wide open longer to get to altitude), higher
stall speed, less payload and I could go on and on. I have a few friends
that have 2 seat homebuilts that never carry a passenger because thair
planes are so heavy, on a hot day a passenger is not possible. Now I hope
we can agree that we would not use something that we knew was not as strong
as the part specified in the plans. Now we have how long will it last? I
mean why would you go to all of the trouble and time that it takes to build
a plane if you thought it was not going to last you at least 20 years or
more?
Now here is my experience with some hardware store aircraft parts.
Hinges, my Rag-A-Muffin plans specified steel hardware store hinges for the
rudder and elevator, I got mine at Ace but the pins had to be replaced
because they were aliminum pins in steel hinges, they work fine. I could not
find good aluminum piano hinge for my ailerons at thr hardware store so I
got aircraft piano hinge. Aluminum tube, I live in Lafayette Indiana home of
the worlds largest aluminum extrusion plant, Alcoa. They wouldn't sell to
me, the local metal supplier did not stock the sizes I needed and would not
order unless I bought an amount that was way more than I needed, same for
steel tube. I bought my tubing from an aircraft supplier. Pullys, I looked
at boat stuff, garage door stuff, looked in industrial supply catalogs and
finally bit the bullet and bought aircraft pullys thay are light, strong,
smooth and expensive. Cable, I could have used 7x7 hardware cable for my
rudder cables and flying wires but I could not find 7x19 cable in a hardware
store. I needed the more flexable 7x19 for the ailerons to run over the
expensive pulleys. So I bought all 7x19 for 18 cents a foot from Wicks. Nuts
and bolts. Most nut and bolt applications on a wood airplane do not need the
strength of aircraft bolts. But most automotive and hardware bolts have 2
problems. First is corrosion resistance, in the few places that I used
hardware bolts they have already started to rust, none of the AN bolts have
a speck of rust on them. AN bolts will rust as I have seen on old planes but
they seem to hold up better as far as corrosion resistance. Stainless
hardware bolts cost as much as AN bolts. Second automotive and hardware
bolts come with half or more of the bolt threaded and come in 1/2"
increments of length. AN bolts have the last 1/2" or so threaded and come
in 1/8" length increments. Airplanes are made out of small sticks and thin
plywood when you bolt something to the wood you do not want any threads in
the hole so you get a good bearing area. If you have threads in the hole you
do not have good bearing area and vibration tends to wallow out the hole.If
you use automotive bolts then you will have either threads in the hole
(wallow) or a lot of thread sticking out and a lot of washers (weight).
Glue, You can get Weldwood Resorcinol glue at the hardware store and I
understand it is good stuff and is aircraft grade. I tried Excel
Polyurethane glue and it is good also but by my tests T88 was better. You
can't get T-88 in my Ace store. Plywood, none of the lumberyards in my town
stock plywood better than AB, smallest thickness is 1/4". I could special
order Marine plywood at a local lumber yard but I had to get 4x8 sheets and
the thinnest sheet was 3 ply 1/8". I did find a cabnet shop that sold Baltic
Birch plywood thinnest sheet was 1/8" and they said it was interior grade. I
bought aircraft Plywood from Harbor Marine in Baltimore. Yes I used latex
paint to paint my plane I do not know how long it will last and I know it is
heavier than Polytone. I used all Douglas fir lumber from the local yard. My
plane is about 15% heavier than it should have been and and I did save some
money on the paint and lumber but I pay for it when I fly it. If I decide to
build a Piet I will spend the extra money and save a half ounce every place
I can. Wood A Spacewalker 2 seat plane had a wing come off in flight in
Conroe Texas in 1999. It had Basswood Spars and the spar broke. The NTSB
thinks that basswood is unsuitable for spars and caused the fatal crash.
Now Cy, tell me about this alloy that is better and cheaper than 4130
and where I can get it.
Fisherman, I know a young guy that has a Kolb Firefly ultralight with a
53 horsepower engine on it that is definately not underpowered.
Wayne McIntosh Lafayette,IN
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Dave Trainer" <dtrain(at)ptd.net> |
There's not much info on the web site but here it is.
http://www.airnav.com/airport/K34/BB
Dave
Pieters: Del: B&B does not have a catalog and I've not found anything
on the net for them, but I'm basically commuter illiterate.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com> |
Subject: | Learn about the Flying Flea. |
Gene... Sorry to hear you write without thinking (or
knowing) what you say.
But the same thing happened to human history, take for
examples: the Corvair: maybe the worse car but a great
idea and super engine, still one of the great engines
from GM, in concept durability and simplicity, the
BEST conversion for aircraft in the 100 hp range!
Just if peolple would had give Corvair a chance...
Also now airlines give their tickets away because
people thinks that there will be a Taliban in every
flight, people just think what the media wants them to
think and airlines and turist places are going
bankrupt, even if there is 1 in a million chances for
a passenger to blow in a plane... (still even after
sept 11, one of the safest way to travel).
Are you interested in giving the Flea a chance? The
original problem of the 1936, (diving until it was
inverted because of bigger and powerfull engines were
installed, going from 18 HP to 40 HP... happens to
almost all the aircrafts till now), was solved in TWO
WEEKS of tests in a wind tunnel in England, as simple
as just re-rigging the incidence of the rear wing. But
people was more interested in the crashes (8 columns
in all the newspapers in Europe and USA) that in the
solved problem (8 simple lines in 6th page in only one
newspaper in Paris). This way the harm to the design
was done.
But the Flying Flea continues developing as you can
see in this page (and lots more pages if you or anyone
is interested, let me know):
http://www.flyingflea.org/ This is a USA page.
FIRST take look to (in the left) "HM-1100" the
ultimate machine. THEN read the tranlation of Mignet
diary of 1936 in HM-14. I am sure you all will enjoy
it. THIRD go to Dunnes 2001 (the equivalent to the
Piet gadering) once a year event with Flying Fleas in
France.
Then Gene, you can say IF is worth a D****d.
Sorry for being so rude Gene, I sincerely apologize,
but is sad to hear a pilot talk (write) against an
airplane, without knowing what he says, like women
talking about the neighbors in the corner store.
If you keep your interest, Maybe you will fall in love
of the Flying Flea the same way Don Campbel, Phyl
Howell, Jack McWorther (USA), myself (Mexico) and lots
of other pilots and builders around the world.
Saludos
Gary Gower
--- Gene Rambo wrote:
>
>
> of course, the Flying Flea never flew worth a
> damned.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and
> wooden planes
>
>
>
> >
> > A real flying example with hundreds of derivates
> > (flying since 1936 until now) is the Flying Flea
> > (French design of H. Mignet)
> >
> > Was (and is) designed with the goal of only
> hardware
> > materials, that can be built by the "comon citizen
> > with a little knowledge of hand tools". Most of
> the
> > designes are wood... and use Stainless steel
> insted of
> > 4130, SS is way more cheaper in Europe and other
> > countries than 4130, Dural (equivalent to
> 6061-T6) is
> > also used.
> >
> > Even the bolts are calculated to use automovile
> bolts,
> > (they use the next or more size bigger to
> compensate
> > for the "certified"), also this airplanes are
> designed
> > with only a hand full of bolts, so the extra
> weight is
> > no problem.
> > Same happens with the wood used... in Europe you
> can
> > find real good quality marine plywood that maybe
> is
> > better (and cheaper there) that the USA aircraft
> > ply...
> >
> > If a designer (and the plans builder) know what
> they
> > are doing and have the capacity and common sense,
> the
> > plane will be well built.
> >
> > A joint that is not well done (position, amount of
> > glue, quality of wood, etc.) is more lack of
> common
> > sense than fault of design. Any Law Enforcement
> > Agency can not think of a law that prevents the
> lack
> > of responsability and common sense in a citizen!
> >
> > Saludos
> > Gary Gower
> >
> > --- Cy Galley wrote:
> Galley"
> > >
> > >
> > > Yep! The Gold Bug caused a lot of heart burn at
> > > Rockford when it used gate
> > > hinges and other hardware store parts. It was
> > > designed by an aeronautical
> > > engineer BUT it didn't crash, it didn't burn.
> > >
> > > If the hardware or other materials are selected
> with
> > > the proper care for the
> > > task at hand, then why not? Don't sell your
> hardware
> > > store stuff short. Many
> > > hardware items have higher quality than
> > > certified materials. We become stuck in a rut
> > > sometimes just because that's
> > > the way it was done 30 years ago. The use of
> 4130
> > > steel is a good example.
> > > There are better, stronger, yet cheaper steels
> > > available today but we still
> > > continue using the "tried and true" 4130. Why,
> > > because they aren't hardware
> > > store items and the aircraft supply places don't
> > > handle them.
> > >
> > > Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft
> Repair,
> > > Oshkosh
> > >
> > > Editor, EAA Safety Programs
> > > cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
> > >
> > > Always looking for articles for the
> Experimenter
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Kip & Beth Gardner"
> > >
> > > To:
> > > Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and
> > > wooden planes
> > >
> > >
> > > Gardner
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Sorry about the irreverance I show to due
> process
> > > and bureaucrats.
> > > >Spent my life without any handy to ever help me
> in
> > > strange parts of the
> > > >world. Hard to get used to the bureaucrat
> rules
> > > and controls your life
> > > >syndrome, back home. Might never get over my
> sense
> > > of self-reliance? The
> > > >only ones I ever met, caused me untold grief
> and
> > > expense and their
> > > >assistance wasn't worth a damn.
> > >
> > > Caye,
> > >
> > > With all due respect, the bureaucrats in this
> case
> > > are not trying to help
> > > you, they are trying to help keep you from
> killing
> > > someone else. As someone
> > > else on this list pointed out a day or so ago,
> yes,
> > > people made planes from
> > > hardware store parts & lumberyard lumber in
> years
> > > gone by, but a lot more
> > > planes fell out of the sky because of structural
> > > failures than happens now,
> > > too.
> > >
> > > There is nothing wrong with being
> 'experimental',
> > > learning saomething new
> > > is part of what this whole ride is about, but
> what's
> > > the point in doing
> > > something that was PROVEN dangerous a long time
> ago?
> > > Clearly, you've had
> > > lots of experience building boats and working
> with
> > > tropical hardwoods. That
> > > is useful & valuable knowledge - done a little
> bit
> > > of it myself, but I'm
> > > learning that aircraft construction is like
> > > boatbuilding the way welding is
> > > like soldering - similar, but with some real
> > > differences that will get you
> > > in big trouble if you assume that there is a
> 1-to-1
> > > comparison.
> > >
> > > Yes, the bureaucrats can be a pain, but they are
> not
> > > there just to annoy
> > > us. And the truth is, if you really don't want
> to
> > > have to worry about being
> > > regulated to death (if that's the way you feel
> > > about it), then there are
> > > always ultralights, where the whole deal is set
> up
> > > so no one has to worry
> > > about you killing anyone but yourself if you
> screw
> > > up.
> > >
> > > Just my 2 cents' worth, hope no one takes
> offense,
> > > but I 've been concerned
> > > that safety might be taking a back seat to
> > > expediency & holding to a budget
> > > in some of the recent posts.
> > >
> > > Tally Ho!
> > >
>
=== message truncated ===
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Larry Ragan" <lragan(at)hotmail.com> |
Subject: | Mike Cuy's address? |
Either e-mail or home. Need info on ordering his tape.
Thanks
Larry Ragan
Jacksonville, Fl.
lragan(at)hotmail.com
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: Click Here
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Gary Gower <ggower_99(at)yahoo.com> |
Subject: | Re: Fuel tank on-off valve |
Yes Leon, but if you buy it from ACS you will fly
your plane with more confidence, they are "approved
parts", the other way... is dificult to test all the
parts and at the same time be courageous enough to
test fly you plane.
This is the price for a piece of mind... remember the
wood and the glue :o)
The more coward we are the more expensive the
materials we are going to buy... Go figure.
I once read (hope I write the idea correct) that "we
fear to the unknown, once whe know what it is, the
fear goes away".
We need to have lots of (hands on) experience building
until we are confident with "suapping" materials, mean
time, buy it from a approved source, at least you will
nor fear to fly your wonderfull creation.
Remember also that several (being
conservative)experimenters have failed in building
and/or modifying a plane...
Saludos
Gary Gower
--- Leon Stefan wrote:
> lshutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan)
>
> Last week I received my ACS order for all of the
> plumbing items for my
> fuel system. Included was their brass valve @ $23.
> While at Ace hardware
> today I find the exact same (made in Italy) valve
> for 7 bucks! Last
> week B&B aircraft was mentioned for turnbuckles. a
> while back I was
> there buying 90 degree plate nuts to hold my cockpit
> combing on. ACS
> sells them for $4 apiece. B&B sold me 25 for $5.
> Guess who ACS buy's
> them from? Yah, B&B. Leon S. Dollar poor, but
> valve rich in Ks.
>
>
>
> Forum -
> Contributions of
> any other form
>
> latest messages.
> other List members.
>
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> http://www.matronics.com/search
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | clif <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca> |
Subject: | Re: Wood and wooden planes |
You all must go to www.sportaviation.org. This is paul poberezny's pet
project. Lots of Peitenpol stuff. Winter 2000, see material substitutes
article.
Absolutely must read Fall 2000, "Flying with grandpa Bernie"!
Lots of Peit stuff here, Look in "magazine" section for these articles and
more.
This organization is for us grass roots people.
Thanks for reminding me to check website again, Gene.
----- Original Message -----
From: Gene Rambo <rambog(at)erols.com>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and wooden planes
>
> Actually, the "tried and true" was 1025 steel, not 4130 which was the "new
> kid on the block" and considered too uppity for serious aircraft builders.
> It's funny how the newer ideas are now the "old ways" that must be adhered
> to.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Cy Galley <cgalley(at)qcbc.org>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and wooden planes
>
>
> >
> > Yep! The Gold Bug caused a lot of heart burn at Rockford when it used
gate
> > hinges and other hardware store parts. It was designed by an
aeronautical
> > engineer BUT it didn't crash, it didn't burn.
> >
> > If the hardware or other materials are selected with the proper care for
> the
> > task at hand, then why not? Don't sell your hardware store stuff short.
> Many
> > hardware items have higher quality than
> > certified materials. We become stuck in a rut sometimes just because
> that's
> > the way it was done 30 years ago. The use of 4130 steel is a good
> example.
> > There are better, stronger, yet cheaper steels available today but we
> still
> > continue using the "tried and true" 4130. Why, because they aren't
> hardware
> > store items and the aircraft supply places don't handle them.
> >
> > Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
> >
> > Editor, EAA Safety Programs
> > cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
> >
> > Always looking for articles for the Experimenter
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Kip & Beth Gardner" <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net>
> > To:
> > Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and wooden planes
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > Sorry about the irreverance I show to due process and bureaucrats.
> > >Spent my life without any handy to ever help me in strange parts of the
> > >world. Hard to get used to the bureaucrat rules and controls your life
> > >syndrome, back home. Might never get over my sense of self-reliance?
> The
> > >only ones I ever met, caused me untold grief and expense and their
> > >assistance wasn't worth a damn.
> >
> > Caye,
> >
> > With all due respect, the bureaucrats in this case are not trying to
help
> > you, they are trying to help keep you from killing someone else. As
> someone
> > else on this list pointed out a day or so ago, yes, people made planes
> from
> > hardware store parts & lumberyard lumber in years gone by, but a lot
more
> > planes fell out of the sky because of structural failures than happens
> now,
> > too.
> >
> > There is nothing wrong with being 'experimental', learning saomething
new
> > is part of what this whole ride is about, but what's the point in doing
> > something that was PROVEN dangerous a long time ago? Clearly, you've had
> > lots of experience building boats and working with tropical hardwoods.
> That
> > is useful & valuable knowledge - done a little bit of it myself, but I'm
> > learning that aircraft construction is like boatbuilding the way welding
> is
> > like soldering - similar, but with some real differences that will get
you
> > in big trouble if you assume that there is a 1-to-1 comparison.
> >
> > Yes, the bureaucrats can be a pain, but they are not there just to annoy
> > us. And the truth is, if you really don't want to have to worry about
> being
> > regulated to death (if that's the way you feel about it), then there
are
> > always ultralights, where the whole deal is set up so no one has to
worry
> > about you killing anyone but yourself if you screw up.
> >
> > Just my 2 cents' worth, hope no one takes offense, but I 've been
> concerned
> > that safety might be taking a back seat to expediency & holding to a
> budget
> > in some of the recent posts.
> >
> > Tally Ho!
> >
> > Kip Gardner
> >
> > 426 Schneider St. SE
> > North Canton, OH 44720
> > (330) 494-1775
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | clif <cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca> |
Subject: | Re: Capstrip ripping |
Western red cedar is a nice wood for a lot of things but it is almost
exactly
2/3 the strength of spruce. If you increase dimensions by 1 1/2 times in one
direction( preferably depth) you'll have the same strength. As a
compensation
there is a statement somewhere,possibly even in our archives, that Bernie
measured everything to the CENTER of his cuts so the real dimensions
would be some less than what we are building to. ??
At Arlington one year the wood instructer from the local college A&P
facility gave a lecture. He started by showing us a perfect looking 1/2
size rib. Next thing he's wacking it on the edge of the table. Everyone
sat up straight at that. He did that with every student then had them go and
repair it. Build one rib and devise ways of testing it for yourself.
He showed us his steamer. An electric kettle and piece of vac. cleaner tube.
I've used this myself. Two things, buy one(used) with the round nozzle( has
a square bit at the handle side) and bypass the thermostat or it will keep
shutting off. Check water level often. Find tubing in thrift store also.
----- Original Message -----
From: Kent Hallsten <KHallsten(at)governair.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Capstrip ripping
>
> I spent Sunday afternoon ripping my capstrip material, and I'd
like
> some opinions about the process and finished dimensions. I'm using
> Western Red Cedar 1 x 8" x 8' , and I attached a plywood straight edge on
> the boards and ripped both sides to a nice straight edge. Then with my
> tablesaw fence set to 1/4" (measured from the blade) I started . My saw
> blade was parallel to the fence. As I progressed thru the board, I found
> that one end became narrower than the other end. The last cut had the
board
> just over 1/4" at the front and about 5/8" at the back, when it started
out
> at 5" both ends. Something was wrong, but I don't know what. Any ideas?
>
> It seemed hard to get a consistent 1/4" width the complete length
of
> the capstrip. At various places the capstrip would measure + or -
about
> 1/64th to 1/32 from the 1/4" I wanted. Should this be a major concern?
I'm
> hoping the sturdiness of the design will help me out here.
>
> I checked the archives in rec.woodworking and rec.boatbuilding and
> there are differing opinions about having the thin strip against the fence
> or on the outside of the cut. One way has the fence set once, the second
> way has you moving the fence for each cut. I had the capstrip against the
> fence.
>
> Kent Hallsten
>
>
> .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Mike Cuy's address? |
Mike's e-mail is Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov. You'll like his video - well
worth the money.
Jack Phillips
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Larry Ragan
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Mike Cuy's address?
Either e-mail or home. Need info on ordering his tape.
Thanks
Larry Ragan
Jacksonville, Fl.
lragan(at)hotmail.com
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile
device: Click
Here
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
Subject: | Re: Wood and wooden planes |
Wayne
Thankyou for your contribution. I'm keeping it for awhile and going to re-read
it a few times. Love stuff from experience, rather than high brow academic
stuff.
The only reason I mentioned the 3.3 V6, was I have a 1991 Plymouth Voyager in
the yard with a bad transmission. The junk yard wants to give me $50 for it
and they want $2000 for a rebuilt Volkswagon engine. Or about $1200 for a Honda
Civic engine. I had the engine and radiator changed about a year ago. Hate
to lose the $2500 I put in it, to a mechanic.
I cannot figure out from the photographs how to make the reduction gear for the
Honda Civic. It goes on the flywheel side, but I am not sure how? Corvair
used engines at the auto yards are expensive too, more than Volkswagon. More
than V.W. But the V.W. is underpowered for the Pietenpol, though with a reduction
gear, you could get more torque and usable horsepower out of it.
I would really like a $500 used automobile engine and another $500 for any upgrades,
reduction gear, or whatever. The stats on the 3.3, V6 say it weighs 150
pounds. The Ford A motor says to allow 245 pounds. I think one needs at least
70 hp at take off, too be comfortable. Sure you can do it with less, but
why?
----------------------------------
My thanks to the guy who put the forward cowl covered fuel tank drawing up there.
I had thought of it, but the weight and balance would be off and change
as you used fuel. But still, I am thinking of it and may at some point in time
do that, as I need range. However, I intend to stick with the plans for first
flight, as I have no practical experience with plane building, though I have
designed and scribbled them for years and have unproven ideas. Might tinker
afterwards? I had seen a Hatz bi-plane in the hanger at La Belle, Florida and
the fuselage is identical to the Pientenpol. Only the lower wing is the difference,
as far as I could see on a 15 minute inspection. So, if one at some
future date, needed lower wing loading, one could stick 10 ft of lower wing on
the Pietenpol and get it. Right now I figure it is around 8.25 pounds a square
foot and would like it down to 5 pounds a square foot at some point in the
future. This kind of replaces low horsepower for some applications.
---------------------------------
I start the elevator today. Got to go look at hardware stores and Home Depot.
I asked Ted over in Naples what that compartment up front was for? It mystified
me! Once you close up, you cannot get to it. He told me it was for a
radiator in the Model A Ford. So I guess, I can cut a hole in front and use
it to store maps or something? At least until some later future date, when I
might stick a fuel tank in there.
--------------------------------------------------------
Was looking at inclinometers, turn and banks in the catalogues. They run around
$35 or so. Can't I just use a ball bearing and plastic tube with wooden plugs
in the end? Or a six inch carpenters level? For $3.
--------------------------------------------------------
Comments welcome!
On Mon, 28 January 2002, "Wayne McIntosh" wrote:
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Fisherman Caye" <cayecaulker(at)justice.com>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and wooden planes
>
> Fisherman, Cy, and others,
> First there was a question about the Chrysler 3.3 engine in the
> Chrysler/Dodge minivan. It has an iron block and some versions have iron
> heads others have aluminum heads. There was also mention of a Mitsubichi
> engine which Chrysler used in their minivan and that was a 3 liter with iron
> block and aluminum heads. The 3.3 engine gives good service and seems to be
> generally trouble free, the 3 liter mitsu engine is no longer sold in the US
> but parts are still readily available. The 3 litre Mitsu seemed to have
> trouble with head gaskets although that may have been a maintainance
> problem. Of the 2 the 3.3 is in my opinioin the better engine. Both are port
> fuel injected and you would have to devise a way to trick the computer into
> thinking the transmission was in high gear and the vehicle was driving at
> high speed. This can be done electronically but if weight and balance makes
> your eyes gloss over tricking the computer may do that too. Neither of these
> engines were ever sold in the US without FI and a computer. I have never
> heard of either being used in a plane but I do not see why they would not
> work. Both of these engines weigh more than a Corvair engine or a model A
> engine with aluminim head as I have seen in a Piet. By the way I have fixed
> cars for a living for more than 30 years.
> Now back on the subject of hardware store stuff in an airplane. First
> and foremost weight in an airplane is bad period. Weight gets in an airplane
> a half ounce at a time. If you can find something in a hardware store that
> is just as strong that will be just as dependable and is just as light as
> aircraft grade stuff then that is what should be used. If hardware store
> stuff is more heavy but just as strong you will pay the price when you fly
> your plane that has a poor climb rate, longer takeoff and landing roll, less
> range( gotta leave the throttle wide open longer to get to altitude), higher
> stall speed, less payload and I could go on and on. I have a few friends
> that have 2 seat homebuilts that never carry a passenger because thair
> planes are so heavy, on a hot day a passenger is not possible. Now I hope
> we can agree that we would not use something that we knew was not as strong
> as the part specified in the plans. Now we have how long will it last? I
> mean why would you go to all of the trouble and time that it takes to build
> a plane if you thought it was not going to last you at least 20 years or
> more?
> Now here is my experience with some hardware store aircraft parts.
> Hinges, my Rag-A-Muffin plans specified steel hardware store hinges for the
> rudder and elevator, I got mine at Ace but the pins had to be replaced
> because they were aliminum pins in steel hinges, they work fine. I could not
> find good aluminum piano hinge for my ailerons at thr hardware store so I
> got aircraft piano hinge. Aluminum tube, I live in Lafayette Indiana home of
> the worlds largest aluminum extrusion plant, Alcoa. They wouldn't sell to
> me, the local metal supplier did not stock the sizes I needed and would not
> order unless I bought an amount that was way more than I needed, same for
> steel tube. I bought my tubing from an aircraft supplier. Pullys, I looked
> at boat stuff, garage door stuff, looked in industrial supply catalogs and
> finally bit the bullet and bought aircraft pullys thay are light, strong,
> smooth and expensive. Cable, I could have used 7x7 hardware cable for my
> rudder cables and flying wires but I could not find 7x19 cable in a hardware
> store. I needed the more flexable 7x19 for the ailerons to run over the
> expensive pulleys. So I bought all 7x19 for 18 cents a foot from Wicks. Nuts
> and bolts. Most nut and bolt applications on a wood airplane do not need the
> strength of aircraft bolts. But most automotive and hardware bolts have 2
> problems. First is corrosion resistance, in the few places that I used
> hardware bolts they have already started to rust, none of the AN bolts have
> a speck of rust on them. AN bolts will rust as I have seen on old planes but
> they seem to hold up better as far as corrosion resistance. Stainless
> hardware bolts cost as much as AN bolts. Second automotive and hardware
> bolts come with half or more of the bolt threaded and come in 1/2"
> increments of length. AN bolts have the last 1/2" or so threaded and come
> in 1/8" length increments. Airplanes are made out of small sticks and thin
> plywood when you bolt something to the wood you do not want any threads in
> the hole so you get a good bearing area. If you have threads in the hole you
> do not have good bearing area and vibration tends to wallow out the hole.If
> you use automotive bolts then you will have either threads in the hole
> (wallow) or a lot of thread sticking out and a lot of washers (weight).
> Glue, You can get Weldwood Resorcinol glue at the hardware store and I
> understand it is good stuff and is aircraft grade. I tried Excel
> Polyurethane glue and it is good also but by my tests T88 was better. You
> can't get T-88 in my Ace store. Plywood, none of the lumberyards in my town
> stock plywood better than AB, smallest thickness is 1/4". I could special
> order Marine plywood at a local lumber yard but I had to get 4x8 sheets and
> the thinnest sheet was 3 ply 1/8". I did find a cabnet shop that sold Baltic
> Birch plywood thinnest sheet was 1/8" and they said it was interior grade. I
> bought aircraft Plywood from Harbor Marine in Baltimore. Yes I used latex
> paint to paint my plane I do not know how long it will last and I know it is
> heavier than Polytone. I used all Douglas fir lumber from the local yard. My
> plane is about 15% heavier than it should have been and and I did save some
> money on the paint and lumber but I pay for it when I fly it. If I decide to
> build a Piet I will spend the extra money and save a half ounce every place
> I can. Wood A Spacewalker 2 seat plane had a wing come off in flight in
> Conroe Texas in 1999. It had Basswood Spars and the spar broke. The NTSB
> thinks that basswood is unsuitable for spars and caused the fatal crash.
> Now Cy, tell me about this alloy that is better and cheaper than 4130
> and where I can get it.
> Fisherman, I know a young guy that has a Kolb Firefly ultralight with a
> 53 horsepower engine on it that is definately not underpowered.
>
> Wayne McIntosh Lafayette,IN
>
>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Wood and wooden planes |
Wayne,
Good thoughts! Anybody who has ever had to refuse a (heavy) kid a ride in
the summer due to his airplane's lack of load carrying ability will want to
build his next plane as light as possible. Sometimes people get more
carried away with trying to build cheap than with trying to build light.
The poor flying qualities resulting from heavy materials will be with you
forever, long after the pleasure of saving a few dollars is forgotten. Of
course, as you point out, if you use cheap materials it probably won't last
that long anyway.
I have set myself a goal of trying to build mine for an empty weight of no
more than 620 lbs. This should be acheivable, since BHP built one with a
Ford for 610 lbs., and I'm using a Continental. Mike Cuy's weighs 632, and
I haven't heard of one lately that is much lighter than his. I weighed
everything I have built so far the other day and estimated weights for the
items I know I will need to add and came up with 621 lbs. We'll see how
close I come to that (I'm sure it will be more, as I add things I have
forgotten). I've heard of Piets weighing as much as 800 lbs. I'll bet they
are real dogs on a hot day (and who can stand to fly one long on a cold
day?).
Jack Phillips
Now back on the subject of hardware store stuff in an airplane. First
and foremost weight in an airplane is bad period. Weight gets in an airplane
a half ounce at a time. If you can find something in a hardware store that
is just as strong that will be just as dependable and is just as light as
aircraft grade stuff then that is what should be used. If hardware store
stuff is more heavy but just as strong you will pay the price when you fly
your plane that has a poor climb rate, longer takeoff and landing roll, less
range( gotta leave the throttle wide open longer to get to altitude), higher
stall speed, less payload and I could go on and on. I have a few friends
that have 2 seat homebuilts that never carry a passenger because thair
planes are so heavy, on a hot day a passenger is not possible. Now I hope
we can agree that we would not use something that we knew was not as strong
as the part specified in the plans. Now we have how long will it last? I
mean why would you go to all of the trouble and time that it takes to build
a plane if you thought it was not going to last you at least 20 years or
Wayne McIntosh Lafayette,IN
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Wood and wooden planes |
Hi Fisherman,
You indicated that you saw a Hatz Biplane at the LaBelle airport. My
in-laws live just outside of LaBelle (Turkey Creek). Maybe we can get
together next time I visit them. Don't think there is much similar between
a Hatz and a Piet, though. The Hatz has a welded steel tube fuselage and is
very similar in design and construction to a Waco Ten. It's a lot bigger
than a Pietenpol also.
I asked Ted over in Naples what that compartment up front was for? It
mystified me! Once you close up, you cannot get to it.
I'm using that space for a baggage compartment in mine, with an aluminum
hinged door for access. Makes a big enough space for a tent, a pair of
sleeping bags and a duffel bag. I also made the floor of the compartment
removable for access to the forward rudder pedals for maintenance.
--------------------------------------------------------
Was looking at inclinometers, turn and banks in the catalogues. They run
around $35 or so. Can't I just use a ball bearing and plastic tube with
wooden plugs in the end? Or a six inch carpenters level? For $3.
Last year I bought a defunct T&B at Sun'n'Fun for about $10, then just cut
the back off of it and used it for the ball alone. I glued the needle in
centered position so it looked better. Saved over a pound of weight too
(gyros are heavy).
--------------------------------------------------------
Comments welcome!
Jack Phillips
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
Well you can buy an auto compass for $3 or less in an $1 store.
Compasses are graded by their ability to control swinging, upon gyrations and
movement on the vehicle you are in. I have a Hunstedt marine compass for years.
Cost me $50 and with it and a $6 shirt pocket radio, a ruler and chart could
more or less take you anywhere in the world. The hand held Hundstedt compass
does not swing, no matter if you are in a hurricane on a small sailboat.
Lovely thing! But wrong shape for plane cockpit. It is the liquid I guess inside
the compass that counts.
On Mon, 28 January 2002, "twinboom" wrote:
>
>
> Sorry for being lame, but what is the difference between an auto compass and
> an airplane compass? Is it just a quality issue. I would not buy anything
> for instruments I don't think that is not particularly for an airplane, but
> just curious.
>
> Doug Blackburn, Arrowbear Lake, So. Cal.
> Inland Slope Rebels, Riverside Ca.
> <http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/ISR>
>
>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | lshutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan) |
Del & Sam: I called B&B last evening. They gave no catalog or web
sight. They send a flyer out occasionally, but nothing right now. Their
new address is: 202 south Center St. Gardner Ks. 66030 913-884-5930.
If your in the neighbor hood, take I-35 southwest out of KC as if you
are going to Wichita. The last suburb is Olathe. go about 8 miles
further to exit 207 (Gardner road)(which is also Center St.) Go 2 miles
north to Gardner. You will go up and over a viaduct that takes you over
the railroad tracks. At bottom of the overpass look immediately to your
left for a large building. That's B & B. They do go to Sun and Fun as
well as Oshkosh. Good Luck. Gary G. Thanks
for the advise. I expirenced a Corvair many years ago and loved it. It
took an incredible amount of intentional abuse.The worst car GM ever
built in my oinion was the Vega. Leon S.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy(at)grc.nasa.gov> |
Subject: | The weight problem |
Some good input as far as Piet weights and material choices go.
Here are some observations made over the past years where I've seen
empty wts. go up and performance go down.
Wire wheels ? Use aluminum, not steel rims if you can
Fuel tank ? Use aluminum or fiberglass, not galvanized
Instruments ? Skip putting any or many in the front pit. Saves $ too.
Fabric ? The lighter grade is easier to work with and fills with less
coats of paint/dope/etc.
Electrical system ? Ouch. Big penalty, but if you have to you have
to. (controlled airports, etc.,
but then handhelds work good)
Big tailwheels----I have a 6" solid rubber and that's about as big as
anyone should need.
Cowling material ? 0.032" alum. is overkill and harder to work with.
I ended up building pretty much to plans but with some cosmetic
changes. I've got brakes,
solid tailwheel and two leaf springs, an internal elevator trim
system, and it was possible
to still come out at 632 lbs. w/ the Cont. 65. Just gotta make some
decisions up front about
what size passenger, baggage, performance you want. Do you live in a
high/hot part of
the country ? Lots of choices.
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Joe Krzes" <jkrzes(at)hotmail.com> |
>From: Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com>
>--------------------------------------------------------
> Was looking at inclinometers, turn and banks in the catalogues. They
>run around $35 or so. Can't I just use a ball bearing and plastic tube
>with wooden plugs in the end? Or a six inch carpenters level? For $3.
>--------------------------------------------------------
Funny you should ask. I saw this on the minimax builder's list a week or so
ago.
<http://www.inscorp.com/cgiaj/bbs/discuss.cgi?read=10655>
Joe
Spring, TX
Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Learn about the Flying Flea. |
Hey, folks'
I think the Corvair is too much maligned! It was not a "bad" car, it
was a car that American drivers were not used to because of the different
weight distribution of a rear-engined car. In the hands of a competent
driver, it was and remains, an excellent car. If it hadn't have been for
that @#%%#@*% Mr. Nader and his open-mouth-insert-foot-never-mind-the-facts
politicking, the Corvair might have been one of Detroit's success stories,
instead of the butt of a lot of ill-informed misinformation. By his logic,
we should condemn all aircraft whose nose-wheel is mounted on the tail-post,
because they are less stable on the ground than those with the nose-wheel in
front. Think it over! Don Cooley
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
Subject: | Re: Wood and wooden planes |
Wayne
I'm just considering using the 3.3 engine I have and not chasing down some other.
Somebody mentioned that the 150 hp is at high rpm or about 4500 rpm. That
probably is right. In other words, if I only need 70 hp, I could put a stop
on the throttle to prevent going over 2500 rpm and have all the horsepower I
need. That means I could also go straight drive off the crank like a VW without
a need for reduction gear. Sounds good to me. What is wrong with this scenario?
On Mon, 28 January 2002, "Wayne McIntosh" wrote:
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Fisherman Caye" <cayecaulker(at)justice.com>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and wooden planes
>
> Fisherman, Cy, and others,
> First there was a question about the Chrysler 3.3 engine in the
> Chrysler/Dodge minivan. It has an iron block and some versions have iron
> heads others have aluminum heads. There was also mention of a Mitsubichi
> engine which Chrysler used in their minivan and that was a 3 liter with iron
> block and aluminum heads. The 3.3 engine gives good service and seems to be
> generally trouble free, the 3 liter mitsu engine is no longer sold in the US
> but parts are still readily available. The 3 litre Mitsu seemed to have
> trouble with head gaskets although that may have been a maintainance
> problem. Of the 2 the 3.3 is in my opinioin the better engine. Both are port
> fuel injected and you would have to devise a way to trick the computer into
> thinking the transmission was in high gear and the vehicle was driving at
> high speed. This can be done electronically but if weight and balance makes
> your eyes gloss over tricking the computer may do that too. Neither of these
> engines were ever sold in the US without FI and a computer. I have never
> heard of either being used in a plane but I do not see why they would not
> work. Both of these engines weigh more than a Corvair engine or a model A
> engine with aluminim head as I have seen in a Piet. By the way I have fixed
> cars for a living for more than 30 years.
> Now back on the subject of hardware store stuff in an airplane. First
> and foremost weight in an airplane is bad period. Weight gets in an airplane
> a half ounce at a time. If you can find something in a hardware store that
> is just as strong that will be just as dependable and is just as light as
> aircraft grade stuff then that is what should be used. If hardware store
> stuff is more heavy but just as strong you will pay the price when you fly
> your plane that has a poor climb rate, longer takeoff and landing roll, less
> range( gotta leave the throttle wide open longer to get to altitude), higher
> stall speed, less payload and I could go on and on. I have a few friends
> that have 2 seat homebuilts that never carry a passenger because thair
> planes are so heavy, on a hot day a passenger is not possible. Now I hope
> we can agree that we would not use something that we knew was not as strong
> as the part specified in the plans. Now we have how long will it last? I
> mean why would you go to all of the trouble and time that it takes to build
> a plane if you thought it was not going to last you at least 20 years or
> more?
> Now here is my experience with some hardware store aircraft parts.
> Hinges, my Rag-A-Muffin plans specified steel hardware store hinges for the
> rudder and elevator, I got mine at Ace but the pins had to be replaced
> because they were aliminum pins in steel hinges, they work fine. I could not
> find good aluminum piano hinge for my ailerons at thr hardware store so I
> got aircraft piano hinge. Aluminum tube, I live in Lafayette Indiana home of
> the worlds largest aluminum extrusion plant, Alcoa. They wouldn't sell to
> me, the local metal supplier did not stock the sizes I needed and would not
> order unless I bought an amount that was way more than I needed, same for
> steel tube. I bought my tubing from an aircraft supplier. Pullys, I looked
> at boat stuff, garage door stuff, looked in industrial supply catalogs and
> finally bit the bullet and bought aircraft pullys thay are light, strong,
> smooth and expensive. Cable, I could have used 7x7 hardware cable for my
> rudder cables and flying wires but I could not find 7x19 cable in a hardware
> store. I needed the more flexable 7x19 for the ailerons to run over the
> expensive pulleys. So I bought all 7x19 for 18 cents a foot from Wicks. Nuts
> and bolts. Most nut and bolt applications on a wood airplane do not need the
> strength of aircraft bolts. But most automotive and hardware bolts have 2
> problems. First is corrosion resistance, in the few places that I used
> hardware bolts they have already started to rust, none of the AN bolts have
> a speck of rust on them. AN bolts will rust as I have seen on old planes but
> they seem to hold up better as far as corrosion resistance. Stainless
> hardware bolts cost as much as AN bolts. Second automotive and hardware
> bolts come with half or more of the bolt threaded and come in 1/2"
> increments of length. AN bolts have the last 1/2" or so threaded and come
> in 1/8" length increments. Airplanes are made out of small sticks and thin
> plywood when you bolt something to the wood you do not want any threads in
> the hole so you get a good bearing area. If you have threads in the hole you
> do not have good bearing area and vibration tends to wallow out the hole.If
> you use automotive bolts then you will have either threads in the hole
> (wallow) or a lot of thread sticking out and a lot of washers (weight).
> Glue, You can get Weldwood Resorcinol glue at the hardware store and I
> understand it is good stuff and is aircraft grade. I tried Excel
> Polyurethane glue and it is good also but by my tests T88 was better. You
> can't get T-88 in my Ace store. Plywood, none of the lumberyards in my town
> stock plywood better than AB, smallest thickness is 1/4". I could special
> order Marine plywood at a local lumber yard but I had to get 4x8 sheets and
> the thinnest sheet was 3 ply 1/8". I did find a cabnet shop that sold Baltic
> Birch plywood thinnest sheet was 1/8" and they said it was interior grade. I
> bought aircraft Plywood from Harbor Marine in Baltimore. Yes I used latex
> paint to paint my plane I do not know how long it will last and I know it is
> heavier than Polytone. I used all Douglas fir lumber from the local yard. My
> plane is about 15% heavier than it should have been and and I did save some
> money on the paint and lumber but I pay for it when I fly it. If I decide to
> build a Piet I will spend the extra money and save a half ounce every place
> I can. Wood A Spacewalker 2 seat plane had a wing come off in flight in
> Conroe Texas in 1999. It had Basswood Spars and the spar broke. The NTSB
> thinks that basswood is unsuitable for spars and caused the fatal crash.
> Now Cy, tell me about this alloy that is better and cheaper than 4130
> and where I can get it.
> Fisherman, I know a young guy that has a Kolb Firefly ultralight with a
> 53 horsepower engine on it that is definately not underpowered.
>
> Wayne McIntosh Lafayette,IN
>
>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
Subject: | Re: Inclinometers |
Thanks Joe. Will make it instead, it looks like. Alchohol as the liquid. I
think I saw one for sale someplace for $9, would buy one at that price, but cannot
find the place again.
On Tue, 29 January 2002, "Joe Krzes" wrote:
>
>
>
> >From: Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com>
> >--------------------------------------------------------
> > Was looking at inclinometers, turn and banks in the catalogues. They
> >run around $35 or so. Can't I just use a ball bearing and plastic tube
> >with wooden plugs in the end? Or a six inch carpenters level? For $3.
> >--------------------------------------------------------
>
> Funny you should ask. I saw this on the minimax builder's list a week or so
> ago.
>
> <http://www.inscorp.com/cgiaj/bbs/discuss.cgi?read=10655>
>
> Joe
> Spring, TX
>
>
> Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
> http://www.hotmail.com
>
>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Re: Learn about the Flying Flea. |
I'm starting to agree with that sentiment.
After seeing the machine work, design of the engine and talking to some
Corvair (auto) buffs, I'm rather impressed.
I think someone once called it the "American Porsche". That would seem
to to be a good design comparison if you accept that the Corvair was
made for the masses and the Porsche was, well never mind.
Please note that I've driven both, but never pushed a Corvair into tire
screaming twisties, like I did my ex-girlfriend's.
It's funny how the Porsche's oversteer tendency caused by the rear
engine C.G. gives it "aggressive handling" and the Corvairs makes it
"unsafe at any speed". What, did I miss something, did these things
explode in the driveway???
By the way, several Porsche motors have been converted to aircraft.
I've seen one that had a rear drive and belt at the rear and drive
shaft going forward to the prop. Neat stuff.
Well, back to Piets, I'm looking at Cub noses, Champ noses and the
G-BUCO Piet for ideas. Anyone got any thoughts on good looking cowlings
for my long-nose Pietenpol? I'm thinking of pressure cowlings vs
eyebrows vs cylinders-in-the-wind. Any comments would be appreciated.
Larry
(Working on the 'vair whilst waiting for the Le Rhone donor to call for
my shipping address.)
ADonJr(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>Hey, folks'
> I think the Corvair is too much maligned! It was not a "bad" car, it
>was a car that American drivers were not used to because of the different
>weight distribution of a rear-engined car. In the hands of a competent
>driver, it was and remains, an excellent car. If it hadn't have been for
>that @#%%#@*% Mr. Nader and his open-mouth-insert-foot-never-mind-the-facts
>politicking, the Corvair might have been one of Detroit's success stories,
>instead of the butt of a lot of ill-informed misinformation. By his logic,
>we should condemn all aircraft whose nose-wheel is mounted on the tail-post,
>because they are less stable on the ground than those with the nose-wheel in
>front. Think it over! Don Cooley
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Kip & Beth Gardner <kipandbeth(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Re: Wood and wooden planes |
Fisherman,
Your ability to keep costs as low as possible is noteworthy, but you really
need to put some consideration into your engine choice, and not approach it
from the viewpoint of saving big bucks.
First off, don't think you can pick up a working used auto engine of some
type and 'drop' it into your airframe. There is NO automotive engine out
there that can go into a plane without substantial conversion. Also, since
most of the most suitable types of engines are generally old or run-out, it
makes the most sense to pick up a junk engine & overhaul it as you convert
it.
Don't sell the Corvair short. If you look around, you can pick up a run-out
Corvair for $50-100. Because of the eccentricities of the Corvair engine,
you will need to to put on 'new' rebored cylinders - which only the Corvair
suppliers (Clark's, Underground, etc) know how to rebore properly. You'll
also need new pistons to go with 'em, heads overhauled, new seals, safety
shaft installed on the crank, new cam, etc, etc. All that said, you will
end up with a VERY good engine for about $2000 & even if you wanted to go
the Chrome-plated route, you'd still probably not spend more than $4000.
There's a guy over in Port Orange named William Wynne, who is THE authority
on coverting the Corvair (www.flycorvair.com), go talk to him & you'll get
a pretty good idea of what it's all about; he's a great guy, & it will be
worth your time. He sells an excellent conversion manual.
If your junkyard is charging more than $100 for a Corvair engine you are
being ripped. Find your local chapter of CORSA - they always have some
member with a collection of engines who's willing to get rid of one to a
good project. This is the route I'm going.
Other possibilities for engines you might want to consider are the Ford
Fiesta engine and the Toyota R22 truck engine. I think the Fiesta is pretty
much the same as the old Pinto engine, which was the easiest engine I ever
overhauled - only took 3 days, not counting waiting to get the heads and
pistons back from the shop & I'm strictly a shade tree mechanic. The only
problems I ever had with the Pinto engine (as opposed to the damn car) is
that it's kind of tricky to set the valves properly, and the stock
ingintion was kind of squirrley - very prone to moisture under the cap.
There are a couple of Piets out there flying on Fiestas, maybe someone on
the list knows who.
The Toyota is about the most 'bulletproof' engine I've ever worked on. It's
a real Energizer Bunny, 250,000miles+ before overhual is not uncommon. It's
only real problems are that the crank seals start to leak at about
150,000mi & you have to tear the engine down to replace them (in the truck
it's simpler to just add oil & keep going). Also, the timing chain
tensioner needs to be watched on high-mileage, pre-1986 engines, it can pop
out of it's guide if the chain gets too slack. Doug Bryant knows someone
with experience converting this engine for aircraft.
Bernie Pietenpol's grandson, Andrew, told me in no uncertain terms, don't
even THINK about using a VW engine on a Piet, reduction unit or not. It's
been tried, it was almost a disaster. The VW just does not generate enough
thrust at any output to fly a Piet. Forget it's rated hp, it means nothing.
Like I said, pick up a rebuildable JUNK engine for next to nothing & put
your money into overhaul & conversion. Don't trust your average automobile
mechanic with the conversion, get conversion plans specific to the type of
engine you choose & do it yourself. I seriously doubt you'll be able to do
it for $1000 no matter how lucky or good you are at scrounging. With the
Corvair, you might do it for $1500 if you're lucky & do a simple, no-frills
conversion. William Wynne told me that least he ever saw it done for was
about $1200, by a guy who had lots of free time to scrounge. You'll have a
much better engine for the Piet than the VW could ever be on it's best day.
Bernie never flew anything but Corvairs in his Piets after he tried one &
his opinion of them is legendary. The last one he built in 1966, or
thereabouts, is still flying. Andrew has it at his home & it's still a nice
plane.
From everything I've heard, the Civic engine makes a great conversion, but
it's really expensive to do it right.
> The only reason I mentioned the 3.3 V6, was I have a 1991 Plymouth
>Voyager in the yard with a bad transmission. The junk yard wants to give
>me $50 for it and they want $2000 for a rebuilt Volkswagon engine. Or
>about $1200 for a Honda Civic engine. I had the engine and radiator
>changed about a year ago. Hate to lose the $2500 I put in it, to a
>mechanic.
> I cannot figure out from the photographs how to make the reduction gear
>for the Honda Civic. It goes on the flywheel side, but I am not sure how?
>Corvair used engines at the auto yards are expensive too, more than
>Volkswagon. More than V.W. But the V.W. is underpowered for the
>Pietenpol, though with a reduction gear, you could get more torque and
>usable horsepower out of it.
> I would really like a $500 used automobile engine and another $500 for
>any upgrades, reduction gear, or whatever. The stats on the 3.3, V6 say
>it weighs 150 pounds. The Ford A motor says to allow 245 pounds. I think
>one needs at least 70 hp at take off, too be comfortable. Sure you can do
>it with less, but why?
Good luck.
Kip Gardner
426 Schneider St. SE
North Canton, OH 44720
(330) 494-1775
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Re: Wood and wooden planes |
From what little I know (about anything), I'd bet your first two
challenges are:
1. You'll need to machine a custom prop hub. Not to big a deal but
more expensive than buying. Of course I you have, and know how to use a
lathe to build something like this, you're my friend for life ;-)
2. If there is a vibration, bearing or crank strength problem you'll be
the first to know. Usually at low altitude.
Great Plains has a write up about crank problems and they know what they
are doing with the VW. I would be good to understand what steel and
process is used in the 3.3 crank
My two cents worth...
Larry
Fisherman Caye wrote:
>
>Wayne
>
> I'm just considering using the 3.3 engine I have and not chasing down some other.
Somebody mentioned that the 150 hp is at high rpm or about 4500 rpm. That
probably is right. In other words, if I only need 70 hp, I could put a stop
on the throttle to prevent going over 2500 rpm and have all the horsepower
I need. That means I could also go straight drive off the crank like a VW without
a need for reduction gear. Sounds good to me. What is wrong with this scenario?
>
>
>On Mon, 28 January 2002, "Wayne McIntosh" wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Fisherman Caye" <cayecaulker(at)justice.com>
>>To:
>>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and wooden planes
>>
>>Fisherman, Cy, and others,
>> First there was a question about the Chrysler 3.3 engine in the
>>Chrysler/Dodge minivan. It has an iron block and some versions have iron
>>heads others have aluminum heads. There was also mention of a Mitsubichi
>>engine which Chrysler used in their minivan and that was a 3 liter with iron
>>block and aluminum heads. The 3.3 engine gives good service and seems to be
>>generally trouble free, the 3 liter mitsu engine is no longer sold in the US
>>but parts are still readily available. The 3 litre Mitsu seemed to have
>>trouble with head gaskets although that may have been a maintainance
>>problem. Of the 2 the 3.3 is in my opinioin the better engine. Both are port
>>fuel injected and you would have to devise a way to trick the computer into
>>thinking the transmission was in high gear and the vehicle was driving at
>>high speed. This can be done electronically but if weight and balance makes
>>your eyes gloss over tricking the computer may do that too. Neither of these
>>engines were ever sold in the US without FI and a computer. I have never
>>heard of either being used in a plane but I do not see why they would not
>>work. Both of these engines weigh more than a Corvair engine or a model A
>>engine with aluminim head as I have seen in a Piet. By the way I have fixed
>>cars for a living for more than 30 years.
>> Now back on the subject of hardware store stuff in an airplane. First
>>and foremost weight in an airplane is bad period. Weight gets in an airplane
>>a half ounce at a time. If you can find something in a hardware store that
>>is just as strong that will be just as dependable and is just as light as
>>aircraft grade stuff then that is what should be used. If hardware store
>>stuff is more heavy but just as strong you will pay the price when you fly
>>your plane that has a poor climb rate, longer takeoff and landing roll, less
>>range( gotta leave the throttle wide open longer to get to altitude), higher
>>stall speed, less payload and I could go on and on. I have a few friends
>>that have 2 seat homebuilts that never carry a passenger because thair
>>planes are so heavy, on a hot day a passenger is not possible. Now I hope
>>we can agree that we would not use something that we knew was not as strong
>>as the part specified in the plans. Now we have how long will it last? I
>>mean why would you go to all of the trouble and time that it takes to build
>>a plane if you thought it was not going to last you at least 20 years or
>>more?
>> Now here is my experience with some hardware store aircraft parts.
>>Hinges, my Rag-A-Muffin plans specified steel hardware store hinges for the
>>rudder and elevator, I got mine at Ace but the pins had to be replaced
>>because they were aliminum pins in steel hinges, they work fine. I could not
>>find good aluminum piano hinge for my ailerons at thr hardware store so I
>>got aircraft piano hinge. Aluminum tube, I live in Lafayette Indiana home of
>>the worlds largest aluminum extrusion plant, Alcoa. They wouldn't sell to
>>me, the local metal supplier did not stock the sizes I needed and would not
>>order unless I bought an amount that was way more than I needed, same for
>>steel tube. I bought my tubing from an aircraft supplier. Pullys, I looked
>>at boat stuff, garage door stuff, looked in industrial supply catalogs and
>>finally bit the bullet and bought aircraft pullys thay are light, strong,
>>smooth and expensive. Cable, I could have used 7x7 hardware cable for my
>>rudder cables and flying wires but I could not find 7x19 cable in a hardware
>>store. I needed the more flexable 7x19 for the ailerons to run over the
>>expensive pulleys. So I bought all 7x19 for 18 cents a foot from Wicks. Nuts
>>and bolts. Most nut and bolt applications on a wood airplane do not need the
>>strength of aircraft bolts. But most automotive and hardware bolts have 2
>>problems. First is corrosion resistance, in the few places that I used
>>hardware bolts they have already started to rust, none of the AN bolts have
>>a speck of rust on them. AN bolts will rust as I have seen on old planes but
>>they seem to hold up better as far as corrosion resistance. Stainless
>>hardware bolts cost as much as AN bolts. Second automotive and hardware
>>bolts come with half or more of the bolt threaded and come in 1/2"
>>increments of length. AN bolts have the last 1/2" or so threaded and come
>>in 1/8" length increments. Airplanes are made out of small sticks and thin
>>plywood when you bolt something to the wood you do not want any threads in
>>the hole so you get a good bearing area. If you have threads in the hole you
>>do not have good bearing area and vibration tends to wallow out the hole.If
>>you use automotive bolts then you will have either threads in the hole
>>(wallow) or a lot of thread sticking out and a lot of washers (weight).
>>Glue, You can get Weldwood Resorcinol glue at the hardware store and I
>>understand it is good stuff and is aircraft grade. I tried Excel
>>Polyurethane glue and it is good also but by my tests T88 was better. You
>>can't get T-88 in my Ace store. Plywood, none of the lumberyards in my town
>>stock plywood better than AB, smallest thickness is 1/4". I could special
>>order Marine plywood at a local lumber yard but I had to get 4x8 sheets and
>>the thinnest sheet was 3 ply 1/8". I did find a cabnet shop that sold Baltic
>>Birch plywood thinnest sheet was 1/8" and they said it was interior grade. I
>>bought aircraft Plywood from Harbor Marine in Baltimore. Yes I used latex
>>paint to paint my plane I do not know how long it will last and I know it is
>>heavier than Polytone. I used all Douglas fir lumber from the local yard. My
>>plane is about 15% heavier than it should have been and and I did save some
>>money on the paint and lumber but I pay for it when I fly it. If I decide to
>>build a Piet I will spend the extra money and save a half ounce every place
>>I can. Wood A Spacewalker 2 seat plane had a wing come off in flight in
>>Conroe Texas in 1999. It had Basswood Spars and the spar broke. The NTSB
>>thinks that basswood is unsuitable for spars and caused the fatal crash.
>> Now Cy, tell me about this alloy that is better and cheaper than 4130
>>and where I can get it.
>> Fisherman, I know a young guy that has a Kolb Firefly ultralight with a
>>53 horsepower engine on it that is definately not underpowered.
>>
>>Wayne McIntosh Lafayette,IN
>>
>>
>
>
>FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
>http://www.FindLaw.com
>Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
>http://mail.Justice.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Re: Wood and wooden planes |
....forgot
3. The theory is to use full throttle, but use a larger prop to keep
the rpm down
Larry
Fisherman Caye wrote:
>
>Wayne
>
> I'm just considering using the 3.3 engine I have and not chasing down some other.
Somebody mentioned that the 150 hp is at high rpm or about 4500 rpm. That
probably is right. In other words, if I only need 70 hp, I could put a stop
on the throttle to prevent going over 2500 rpm and have all the horsepower
I need. That means I could also go straight drive off the crank like a VW without
a need for reduction gear. Sounds good to me. What is wrong with this scenario?
>
>
>On Mon, 28 January 2002, "Wayne McIntosh" wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Fisherman Caye" <cayecaulker(at)justice.com>
>>To:
>>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood and wooden planes
>>
>>Fisherman, Cy, and others,
>> First there was a question about the Chrysler 3.3 engine in the
>>Chrysler/Dodge minivan. It has an iron block and some versions have iron
>>heads others have aluminum heads. There was also mention of a Mitsubichi
>>engine which Chrysler used in their minivan and that was a 3 liter with iron
>>block and aluminum heads. The 3.3 engine gives good service and seems to be
>>generally trouble free, the 3 liter mitsu engine is no longer sold in the US
>>but parts are still readily available. The 3 litre Mitsu seemed to have
>>trouble with head gaskets although that may have been a maintainance
>>problem. Of the 2 the 3.3 is in my opinioin the better engine. Both are port
>>fuel injected and you would have to devise a way to trick the computer into
>>thinking the transmission was in high gear and the vehicle was driving at
>>high speed. This can be done electronically but if weight and balance makes
>>your eyes gloss over tricking the computer may do that too. Neither of these
>>engines were ever sold in the US without FI and a computer. I have never
>>heard of either being used in a plane but I do not see why they would not
>>work. Both of these engines weigh more than a Corvair engine or a model A
>>engine with aluminim head as I have seen in a Piet. By the way I have fixed
>>cars for a living for more than 30 years.
>> Now back on the subject of hardware store stuff in an airplane. First
>>and foremost weight in an airplane is bad period. Weight gets in an airplane
>>a half ounce at a time. If you can find something in a hardware store that
>>is just as strong that will be just as dependable and is just as light as
>>aircraft grade stuff then that is what should be used. If hardware store
>>stuff is more heavy but just as strong you will pay the price when you fly
>>your plane that has a poor climb rate, longer takeoff and landing roll, less
>>range( gotta leave the throttle wide open longer to get to altitude), higher
>>stall speed, less payload and I could go on and on. I have a few friends
>>that have 2 seat homebuilts that never carry a passenger because thair
>>planes are so heavy, on a hot day a passenger is not possible. Now I hope
>>we can agree that we would not use something that we knew was not as strong
>>as the part specified in the plans. Now we have how long will it last? I
>>mean why would you go to all of the trouble and time that it takes to build
>>a plane if you thought it was not going to last you at least 20 years or
>>more?
>> Now here is my experience with some hardware store aircraft parts.
>>Hinges, my Rag-A-Muffin plans specified steel hardware store hinges for the
>>rudder and elevator, I got mine at Ace but the pins had to be replaced
>>because they were aliminum pins in steel hinges, they work fine. I could not
>>find good aluminum piano hinge for my ailerons at thr hardware store so I
>>got aircraft piano hinge. Aluminum tube, I live in Lafayette Indiana home of
>>the worlds largest aluminum extrusion plant, Alcoa. They wouldn't sell to
>>me, the local metal supplier did not stock the sizes I needed and would not
>>order unless I bought an amount that was way more than I needed, same for
>>steel tube. I bought my tubing from an aircraft supplier. Pullys, I looked
>>at boat stuff, garage door stuff, looked in industrial supply catalogs and
>>finally bit the bullet and bought aircraft pullys thay are light, strong,
>>smooth and expensive. Cable, I could have used 7x7 hardware cable for my
>>rudder cables and flying wires but I could not find 7x19 cable in a hardware
>>store. I needed the more flexable 7x19 for the ailerons to run over the
>>expensive pulleys. So I bought all 7x19 for 18 cents a foot from Wicks. Nuts
>>and bolts. Most nut and bolt applications on a wood airplane do not need the
>>strength of aircraft bolts. But most automotive and hardware bolts have 2
>>problems. First is corrosion resistance, in the few places that I used
>>hardware bolts they have already started to rust, none of the AN bolts have
>>a speck of rust on them. AN bolts will rust as I have seen on old planes but
>>they seem to hold up better as far as corrosion resistance. Stainless
>>hardware bolts cost as much as AN bolts. Second automotive and hardware
>>bolts come with half or more of the bolt threaded and come in 1/2"
>>increments of length. AN bolts have the last 1/2" or so threaded and come
>>in 1/8" length increments. Airplanes are made out of small sticks and thin
>>plywood when you bolt something to the wood you do not want any threads in
>>the hole so you get a good bearing area. If you have threads in the hole you
>>do not have good bearing area and vibration tends to wallow out the hole.If
>>you use automotive bolts then you will have either threads in the hole
>>(wallow) or a lot of thread sticking out and a lot of washers (weight).
>>Glue, You can get Weldwood Resorcinol glue at the hardware store and I
>>understand it is good stuff and is aircraft grade. I tried Excel
>>Polyurethane glue and it is good also but by my tests T88 was better. You
>>can't get T-88 in my Ace store. Plywood, none of the lumberyards in my town
>>stock plywood better than AB, smallest thickness is 1/4". I could special
>>order Marine plywood at a local lumber yard but I had to get 4x8 sheets and
>>the thinnest sheet was 3 ply 1/8". I did find a cabnet shop that sold Baltic
>>Birch plywood thinnest sheet was 1/8" and they said it was interior grade. I
>>bought aircraft Plywood from Harbor Marine in Baltimore. Yes I used latex
>>paint to paint my plane I do not know how long it will last and I know it is
>>heavier than Polytone. I used all Douglas fir lumber from the local yard. My
>>plane is about 15% heavier than it should have been and and I did save some
>>money on the paint and lumber but I pay for it when I fly it. If I decide to
>>build a Piet I will spend the extra money and save a half ounce every place
>>I can. Wood A Spacewalker 2 seat plane had a wing come off in flight in
>>Conroe Texas in 1999. It had Basswood Spars and the spar broke. The NTSB
>>thinks that basswood is unsuitable for spars and caused the fatal crash.
>> Now Cy, tell me about this alloy that is better and cheaper than 4130
>>and where I can get it.
>> Fisherman, I know a young guy that has a Kolb Firefly ultralight with a
>>53 horsepower engine on it that is definately not underpowered.
>>
>>Wayne McIntosh Lafayette,IN
>>
>>
>
>
>FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
>http://www.FindLaw.com
>Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
>http://mail.Justice.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Learn about the Flying Flea. |
From: | "D.Dale Johnson" <dd5john(at)juno.com> |
Hi Larry
This may not be much help because we are using eyebrows.
Now don't laugh.
I built a nose bowl using the lid from a electric frying pan.
Cut the lid in half and added 11" of alum.
This gave me a nose bowl that 12 x 23 ".
Mounted it on our cont 65a and it looks good.
By cutting it in half I was able to save all four compound corners.
These lids are well made and cheap
About 2 bucks at a garage sale.
Dale Mpls
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Learn about the Flying Flea. |
In a message dated 1/29/02 12:25:44 AM Eastern Standard Time,
ggower_99(at)yahoo.com writes:
<<
http://www.flyingflea.org/ This is a USA page.
FIRST take look to (in the left) "HM-1100" the
ultimate machine. THEN read the tranlation of Mignet
diary of 1936 in HM-14. I am sure you all will enjoy
it. THIRD go to Dunnes 2001 (the equivalent to the
Piet gadering) once a year event with Flying Fleas in
France.
Then Gene, you can say IF is worth a D****d.
Sorry for being so rude Gene, I sincerely apologize,
but is sad to hear a pilot talk (write) against an
airplane, without knowing what he says, like women
talking about the neighbors in the corner store.
If you keep your interest, Maybe you will fall in love
of the Flying Flea the same way Don Campbel, Phyl
Howell, Jack McWorther (USA), myself (Mexico) and lots
of other pilots and builders around the world.
>>
Very well said, and thank you for bringing this little plane to my attention.
I am glad you are on this list, and happy you contribute.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Re: Learn about the Flying Flea. |
Dale, that's the kind of stuff I'm looking for. Did you mount directly
to the engine?
If I do eyebrows I'll have to do something Corvair-ish, of course, but
the Cub style nosebowl is plan A.
Sounds great, thanks. - Larry
D.Dale Johnson wrote:
>
>Hi Larry
>This may not be much help because we are using eyebrows.
>Now don't laugh.
>I built a nose bowl using the lid from a electric frying pan.
>Cut the lid in half and added 11" of alum.
>This gave me a nose bowl that 12 x 23 ".
>Mounted it on our cont 65a and it looks good.
>By cutting it in half I was able to save all four compound corners.
>These lids are well made and cheap
>About 2 bucks at a garage sale.
>Dale Mpls
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
Subject: | Re: Learn about the Flying Flea. |
My first choice of buildng my first plane, was the Flying Flea. But there were
no plans available that I trusted for a two place. So, I went Pietenpol.
But they are now building for the French Military a host of Flying Flea larger
craft. If someone ever comes out with some plans, I would be interested.
On Tue, 29 January 2002, Dmott9(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> In a message dated 1/29/02 12:25:44 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> ggower_99(at)yahoo.com writes:
>
> <<
> http://www.flyingflea.org/ This is a USA page.
>
> FIRST take look to (in the left) "HM-1100" the
> ultimate machine. THEN read the tranlation of Mignet
> diary of 1936 in HM-14. I am sure you all will enjoy
> it. THIRD go to Dunnes 2001 (the equivalent to the
> Piet gadering) once a year event with Flying Fleas in
> France.
>
> Then Gene, you can say IF is worth a D****d.
>
> Sorry for being so rude Gene, I sincerely apologize,
> but is sad to hear a pilot talk (write) against an
> airplane, without knowing what he says, like women
> talking about the neighbors in the corner store.
>
> If you keep your interest, Maybe you will fall in love
> of the Flying Flea the same way Don Campbel, Phyl
> Howell, Jack McWorther (USA), myself (Mexico) and lots
> of other pilots and builders around the world.
> >>
> Very well said, and thank you for bringing this little plane to my attention.
> I am glad you are on this list, and happy you contribute.
>
>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Jack Phillips" <jackphillips(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Learn about the Flying Flea. |
Don Cooley wrote:
Hey, folks'
I think the Corvair is too much maligned! It was not a "bad" car, it
was a car that American drivers were not used to because of the different
weight distribution of a rear-engined car. In the hands of a competent
driver, it was and remains, an excellent car. If it hadn't have been for
that @#%%#@*% Mr. Nader and his open-mouth-insert-foot-never-mind-the-facts
politicking, the Corvair might have been one of Detroit's success stories,
instead of the butt of a lot of ill-informed misinformation. By his logic,
we should condemn all aircraft whose nose-wheel is mounted on the tail-post,
because they are less stable on the ground than those with the nose-wheel in
front. Think it over! Don Cooley
I have to disagree. I owned a 1966 Corvair and found it to be an absolute
delight to drive. It cornered well, had plenty of pep (mine was the twin
carburetor 110 hp version, with a "4-on-the-floor") and was economical. It
was also a "bad" car. It was built of very shoddy materials and literally
began falling apart in only three years. By the time it was three years
old, with 39,000 miles on it, the floorboard had rusted through to the point
that you could watch the road pass by underneath. The engine was wonderful,
after I figured out that if I ran 50 wt Aeroshell in it the oil wouldn't
leak past the pushrod seals so badly. The fanbelt design was incredibly
bad. The v-belt was required to bend 90 degrees each way transverse to the
direction of travel. I always had to carry two spare fanbelts with me,
because if the pulleys got out of alignment and the original fanbelt broke,
unless I spent several hours re-aligning the pulleys, the second belt would
break within a couple of hundred miles. When I was studying Mechanical
Engineering in college, they used the Corvair as an example of how NOT to
design a v-belt drive. (The Corvair could have successfully used the
electric fans now popular on Japanese cars).
No, the Corvair was not a good car, if good means reliable service for
hundreds of thousands of miles. It was not guilty of the flaws that the
idiot Nader claimed. It was just a cheaply made car that had a few really
good design ideas, and a few really bad ones. The materials were very
poor - a trait that GM brought to full fruition in the Vega.
Jack Phillips
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com> |
Subject: | Re: Wood and wooden planes |
Kip
That sounds like good advice? I'm printing it out and sticking it in my engine
reference file. Appreciate any other experiences and stories from anyone gone
the route I am travelling before?
Rained here last night! Glad I covered the table and wood pieces set out for
the elevator under the mango trees in the backyard with plastic covering. How
is the snow up north? Looks mild on the satellite photo.
On Tue, 29 January 2002, Kip & Beth Gardner wrote:
>
>
> Fisherman,
>
> Your ability to keep costs as low as possible is noteworthy, but you really
> need to put some consideration into your engine choice, and not approach it
> from the viewpoint of saving big bucks.
>
> First off, don't think you can pick up a working used auto engine of some
> type and 'drop' it into your airframe. There is NO automotive engine out
> there that can go into a plane without substantial conversion. Also, since
> most of the most suitable types of engines are generally old or run-out, it
> makes the most sense to pick up a junk engine & overhaul it as you convert
> it.
>
> Don't sell the Corvair short. If you look around, you can pick up a run-out
> Corvair for $50-100. Because of the eccentricities of the Corvair engine,
> you will need to to put on 'new' rebored cylinders - which only the Corvair
> suppliers (Clark's, Underground, etc) know how to rebore properly. You'll
> also need new pistons to go with 'em, heads overhauled, new seals, safety
> shaft installed on the crank, new cam, etc, etc. All that said, you will
> end up with a VERY good engine for about $2000 & even if you wanted to go
> the Chrome-plated route, you'd still probably not spend more than $4000.
> There's a guy over in Port Orange named William Wynne, who is THE authority
> on coverting the Corvair (www.flycorvair.com), go talk to him & you'll get
> a pretty good idea of what it's all about; he's a great guy, & it will be
> worth your time. He sells an excellent conversion manual.
>
> If your junkyard is charging more than $100 for a Corvair engine you are
> being ripped. Find your local chapter of CORSA - they always have some
> member with a collection of engines who's willing to get rid of one to a
> good project. This is the route I'm going.
>
> Other possibilities for engines you might want to consider are the Ford
> Fiesta engine and the Toyota R22 truck engine. I think the Fiesta is pretty
> much the same as the old Pinto engine, which was the easiest engine I ever
> overhauled - only took 3 days, not counting waiting to get the heads and
> pistons back from the shop & I'm strictly a shade tree mechanic. The only
> problems I ever had with the Pinto engine (as opposed to the damn car) is
> that it's kind of tricky to set the valves properly, and the stock
> ingintion was kind of squirrley - very prone to moisture under the cap.
> There are a couple of Piets out there flying on Fiestas, maybe someone on
> the list knows who.
>
> The Toyota is about the most 'bulletproof' engine I've ever worked on. It's
> a real Energizer Bunny, 250,000miles+ before overhual is not uncommon. It's
> only real problems are that the crank seals start to leak at about
> 150,000mi & you have to tear the engine down to replace them (in the truck
> it's simpler to just add oil & keep going). Also, the timing chain
> tensioner needs to be watched on high-mileage, pre-1986 engines, it can pop
> out of it's guide if the chain gets too slack. Doug Bryant knows someone
> with experience converting this engine for aircraft.
>
> Bernie Pietenpol's grandson, Andrew, told me in no uncertain terms, don't
> even THINK about using a VW engine on a Piet, reduction unit or not. It's
> been tried, it was almost a disaster. The VW just does not generate enough
> thrust at any output to fly a Piet. Forget it's rated hp, it means nothing.
>
> Like I said, pick up a rebuildable JUNK engine for next to nothing & put
> your money into overhaul & conversion. Don't trust your average automobile
> mechanic with the conversion, get conversion plans specific to the type of
> engine you choose & do it yourself. I seriously doubt you'll be able to do
> it for $1000 no matter how lucky or good you are at scrounging. With the
> Corvair, you might do it for $1500 if you're lucky & do a simple, no-frills
> conversion. William Wynne told me that least he ever saw it done for was
> about $1200, by a guy who had lots of free time to scrounge. You'll have a
> much better engine for the Piet than the VW could ever be on it's best day.
> Bernie never flew anything but Corvairs in his Piets after he tried one &
> his opinion of them is legendary. The last one he built in 1966, or
> thereabouts, is still flying. Andrew has it at his home & it's still a nice
> plane.
>
> From everything I've heard, the Civic engine makes a great conversion, but
> it's really expensive to do it right.
>
>
> > The only reason I mentioned the 3.3 V6, was I have a 1991 Plymouth
> >Voyager in the yard with a bad transmission. The junk yard wants to give
> >me $50 for it and they want $2000 for a rebuilt Volkswagon engine. Or
> >about $1200 for a Honda Civic engine. I had the engine and radiator
> >changed about a year ago. Hate to lose the $2500 I put in it, to a
> >mechanic.
>
> > I cannot figure out from the photographs how to make the reduction gear
> >for the Honda Civic. It goes on the flywheel side, but I am not sure how?
> >Corvair used engines at the auto yards are expensive too, more than
> >Volkswagon. More than V.W. But the V.W. is underpowered for the
> >Pietenpol, though with a reduction gear, you could get more torque and
> >usable horsepower out of it.
>
> > I would really like a $500 used automobile engine and another $500 for
> >any upgrades, reduction gear, or whatever. The stats on the 3.3, V6 say
> >it weighs 150 pounds. The Ford A motor says to allow 245 pounds. I think
> >one needs at least 70 hp at take off, too be comfortable. Sure you can do
> >it with less, but why?
>
> Good luck.
>
> Kip Gardner
>
> 426 Schneider St. SE
> North Canton, OH 44720
> (330) 494-1775
>
>
FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
http://www.FindLaw.com
Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
http://mail.Justice.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "KenGailGriff" <kengg(at)texas.net> |
Subject: | Re: Learn about the Flying Flea. |
I ordered plans for the two-place HM-380 from a flea builder in New Zealand
and studied them for a few weeks. Then I came across some accident reports.
It looks like the center of gravity can still be an issue. One homebuilt
HM -380 had been flying great for four years -- until he took a heavy
passenger for a ride. Both the pilot and passenger were killed.
A gorgeous example was featured in Sport Aviation a couple of years ago. The
article said it came out heavy and usually flies as a single place.
I concluded that the design needs refinement. I am not experienced enough to
take on a project like that.
Ken Chambers
In the early stages
Austin, Texas
----- Original Message -----
From: Fisherman Caye <cayecaulker(at)justice.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Learn about the Flying Flea.
>
>
> My first choice of buildng my first plane, was the Flying Flea. But
there were no plans available that I trusted for a two place. So, I went
Pietenpol.
>
> But they are now building for the French Military a host of Flying Flea
larger craft. If someone ever comes out with some plans, I would be
interested.
>
>
> On Tue, 29 January 2002, Dmott9(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > In a message dated 1/29/02 12:25:44 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> > ggower_99(at)yahoo.com writes:
> >
> > <<
> > http://www.flyingflea.org/ This is a USA page.
> >
> > FIRST take look to (in the left) "HM-1100" the
> > ultimate machine. THEN read the tranlation of Mignet
> > diary of 1936 in HM-14. I am sure you all will enjoy
> > it. THIRD go to Dunnes 2001 (the equivalent to the
> > Piet gadering) once a year event with Flying Fleas in
> > France.
> >
> > Then Gene, you can say IF is worth a D****d.
> >
> > Sorry for being so rude Gene, I sincerely apologize,
> > but is sad to hear a pilot talk (write) against an
> > airplane, without knowing what he says, like women
> > talking about the neighbors in the corner store.
> >
> > If you keep your interest, Maybe you will fall in love
> > of the Flying Flea the same way Don Campbel, Phyl
> > Howell, Jack McWorther (USA), myself (Mexico) and lots
> > of other pilots and builders around the world.
> > >>
> > Very well said, and thank you for bringing this little plane to my
attention.
> > I am glad you are on this list, and happy you contribute.
> >
> >
>
>
> FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
> http://www.FindLaw.com
> Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!
> http://mail.Justice.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Gadd, Skip" <Skip.Gadd(at)ssa.gov> |
Subject: | Learn about the Flying Flea. |
Anyone got any thoughts on good looking cowlings
for my long-nose Pietenpol? I'm thinking of pressure cowlings vs
eyebrows vs cylinders-in-the-wind. Any comments would be appreciated.
Larry
Larry,
I think it is still possible to get a Pietenpol/Corvair cowl.
Dwayne Tauba, who up until last year brought his gray and black Corvair Piet
to Brodhead every year for 10 or 12 years has Pietenpol's actual cement
molds. He was selling cowls for $125.00 a couple years ago when I got mine.
He was also selling cowls like the one on his Piet.
The Pietenpol/Corvair cowl are like the cowl on the Last Original and the
2nd to last original which is
http://www.russellw.com/museums/oshkosh/photo_enlargement.asp?PicID=13 at
Pioneer field the Oshkosh museum.
I am not running a blower on my Corvair but plan to use the above cowl as a
pressure cowl.
Skip
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Larry Neal <llneal2(at)earthlink.net> |
Subject: | Re: Learn about the Flying Flea. |
Skip,
I'd not heard about the cowl molds, that's worth thinking about. This
plan is where I started with the pressure cowl.
I agree with you about losing the blower, just weight and more things to
break.
Pressure cooling is what the car used, but the prop is pushing the air.
DRAT!, just realized I let the lower cylinder baffles go to the dump,
jeez, I can't believe I did that... how do you kick yourself in email??
I'm thinking about making the inlet larger. I'm now looking for
closeups of G-BUCO as I think what he did was use this idea in a similar
fashion.
BUCO raised the nose a bit and it looks pretty good from the small
pictures I've seen.
I've been making noises about making my Piet look like a mail plane or
Bendix racer. With Rolls-Royce on the valve covers, maybe I should
build a grill and get a hood ornament!
Larry
Gadd, Skip wrote:
>
>
> Anyone got any thoughts on good looking cowlings
>for my long-nose Pietenpol? I'm thinking of pressure cowlings vs
>eyebrows vs cylinders-in-the-wind. Any comments would be appreciated.
>Larry
>
>Larry,
>I think it is still possible to get a Pietenpol/Corvair cowl.
>Dwayne Tauba, who up until last year brought his gray and black Corvair Piet
>to Brodhead every year for 10 or 12 years has Pietenpol's actual cement
>molds. He was selling cowls for $125.00 a couple years ago when I got mine.
>He was also selling cowls like the one on his Piet.
>The Pietenpol/Corvair cowl are like the cowl on the Last Original and the
>2nd to last original which is
>http://www.russellw.com/museums/oshkosh/photo_enlargement.asp?PicID=13 at
>Pioneer field the Oshkosh museum.
>I am not running a blower on my Corvair but plan to use the above cowl as a
>pressure cowl.
>Skip
>
>
January 23, 2002 - January 30, 2002
Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-ch