Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:27 AM - Re: can corperate jets "see" me? (TomTravis@aol.com)
2. 01:29 AM - Re: can corperate jets "see" me? (TomTravis@aol.com)
3. 04:27 AM - Re: can corperate jets "see" me? (COZYPILOT@aol.com)
4. 06:38 AM - Class B smoking section in Cleveland (Michael D Cuy)
5. 12:06 PM - does smoke oil make a mess? (walter evans)
6. 12:42 PM - Re: aileron connections; was strut bracing (Alan James)
7. 12:43 PM - Re: does smoke oil make a mess? (Michael D Cuy)
8. 04:32 PM - Re: aileron connections; was strut bracing (Les Schubert)
9. 05:15 PM - Re: can corperate jets "see" me? (Michael Conkling)
Message 1
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: can corperate jets "see" me? |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: TomTravis@aol.com
Walt,
All airliners and most corporate aircraft have Traffic Collision and
Avoidance Systems (TCAS) on board. These systems only "see" airplanes that
are transponder equipped and get resolution alerts from those with at least a
Mode C transponder (Altitude reporting).
Having spent over 35 years as an airline pilot and 18 of those years as a
check airman I can tell you airline crews typically spend very little time
looking outside. That drove me nuts. I'm now a corporate pilot and my
experience has been that they (we) are even worse than airline crews about
keeping a good traffic watch. I just got in from a trip tonight and my
copilot had his head buried inside the cockpit almost the whole time. I have
to cut him a little slack because he's brand new and was just along for the
experience and was totally lost.
The point is corporate and airline crews have the tools to detect transponder
equipped airplanes but don't expect them to be looking outside much. We're on
our own in our Piets. Actually I feel pretty safe in mine right now as long
as it doesn't fall off the sawhorses in the garage.
The suggestions to stay low and keep a sharp lookout are the best advice I've
seen. Hope this helps.
Tom
Message 2
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: can corperate jets "see" me? |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: TomTravis@aol.com
Walt,
P.S. I fly in and out of Teterboro a lot and will be looking for you.
Tom
Message 3
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: can corperate jets "see" me? |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: COZYPILOT@aol.com
They can only see you if you have a mode C transponder. Scary
Huh!!!!!!!!!!!!
Message 4
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Class B smoking section in Cleveland |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy@grc.nasa.gov>
Flying under Cleveland's Class B airspace for quite a few years, us
non-electric planes (which we have quite a few of) fly all the time with no
transponders or encoders. It's very common to be at the same altitude as
airliners and commuters on the approach to Cleveland and we just have to be
vigilant on VFR days. One thing that the smoke system is REALLY good for
is as a collision avoidance tool if you have no radio. Just a puff or two
of smoke and anyone looking out the cockpit of a nearby plane can see
you. I use it quite often when approaching a fly-in where there are lots
of planes in the pattern. (course everyone wants to know when I'm going to
fix the rings on my pistons when I land:) Going into Goshen, IN a few
years ago I was on a long approach to the east and for some reason looked
over my shoulder. A Gulfstream corporate jet was about a mile behind
me. I shifted about 1,000 feet to the right and he tooled on by me and
made the landing ahead of me. I landed behind him, turned off and taxied
to the gas pumps while he was still back-taxiing to the terminal. It's a
non-tower airport so no radio required. I talked with the pilots and they
thanked me for moving over. I asked if they could see me and they said
yes, very clearly and were just going to make a pass to my left to overtake
me since there was plenty of time ahead of us. Was funny how I drooled
of the Gulfstream and they drooled over the Pietenpol !
Mike C.
Message 5
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | does smoke oil make a mess? |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "walter evans" <wbeevans@worldnet.att.net>
Mike Cuy and all.
This smoke thing is interesting, but does the smoke have to be kept well clear
of the fuse? I'm just assuming that wherever the smoke goes, there's some kind
of residue on the plane.
I built my pipes out to the side (A-65), and if there were "slime" left, mine would
be a mess in no time.
thanks
walt
NX140DL
(north N.J.)
Message 6
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: strut bracing |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Alan James" <MADjames@theknapp.freeserve.co.uk>
Hi Ted,
Yes, its a quick connect. As you offer the wing up to the centre section, 2
levers come face to face to complete a control loop to the aileron. Apart
from making it a little quicker to assemble, I believe it was also intended
to get around the need for duplicate control inspections as required by the
PFA. Jim also came up with some quick-release bracing cables (between the
lift struts). Personally, I would not bother with this mod unless you intend
assembling and dis-assembling the machine every other weekend. After all,
its only three cables that need joining -one on each side of the aileron
torque/control arm and a break in the balance cable in the centre section.
Regards
Alan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ted Brousseau" <nfn00979@naples.net>
Subject: Re: aileron connections; was Pietenpol-List: strut bracing
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Ted Brousseau"
<nfn00979@naples.net>
>
> Alan,
>
> Please tell us more about that auto-aileron connect facility. Is that a
> quick connect?
>
> Ted
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alan James" <MADjames@theknapp.freeserve.co.uk>
> To: <pietenpol-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: strut bracing
>
>
> > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Alan James"
> <MADjames@theknapp.freeserve.co.uk>
> >
> > Gene,
> > Most UK Piets have been built to a slightly modified drawing by Jim
Wills
> > and approved by our PFA who oversee such things. The main differences
> > include:
> > 1. A three piece wing with (optional) auto-aileron connect facility.
> > 2. Built-up spars and 'D' box leading edge of 1/16" ply.
> > 3. Heavier than original lift struts.
> > As a consequence, the max weight has been increased from the original
> 1050lb
> > to 1200lb. Stress calculations made at the time suggested that jury
struts
> > were not necessary and this is how I first flew G-BUCO back in '92.
> However,
> > it soon became apparent that at certain angles of attack and rpm
settings
> > the front struts would start vibrating. I first experienced this over
The
> > Solent, a stretch of water that separates England from The Isle of
Wight.
> > This happened on at least 2 of the 5 UK Piets finished at the time and
was
> > not good for the nerves! Fixes included setting the strut at an angle to
> the
> > slipstream but the PFA decided on a mandatory modification of adding
jury
> > struts to the front only.
> > I hope this clears things up.
> > Good luck with your Piet.
> > Alan James
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <ZigoDan@aol.com>
> > To: <pietenpol-list@matronics.com>
> > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: strut bracing
> >
> >
> > > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: ZigoDan@aol.com
> > >
> > > Gene,
> > >
> > > I have not looked at my plans in a long time. All I am saying is that
> > don't
> > > by any means delete something just for convince. Adding parts like
jury
> > > struts, better AN hardware is an improvement in my opinion. Thanks
for
> > > correcting me on my oversight.
> > >
> > > Dan
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
Message 7
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: does smoke oil make a mess? |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy@grc.nasa.gov>
Walt ! YES. The smoke oil does leave some residue on my right gear legs
and the belly ( I have Aeronca stacks) but nothing too bad. (It makes
the wood shine:) If you are at idle and accidentally hit the smoke oil, it
will not vaporize at all and will come out just like Wesson oil and make
the appropriate mess. Long as you have good heat/higher rpm's it's not too
bad. You might cause more mess on the fuse side though with your stack
arrangement. Plus there is no need to route the oil to multiple
cylinders. (unless you are Shawn Tucker or Julie Clark) One thing that
the smoke oil will do is eventually make the rubber strands in your bungee
cords get a bit stiff/brittle. Nothing major, but when I replaced my
bungees a while back I noticed the smoking side was not quite as pliable as
the non-smoking side of the gear. The smoke is a hoot, really. Well
worth any mess in my mind.
Mike C.
Message 8
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: strut bracing |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Les Schubert <leskarin@telus.net>
Alan
any chance of a picture of how this works. It sounds quite interesting.
I am still building and was pondering how to connect the control cables
for the 3 piece wing.
Les
At 08:42 PM 29/01/2003 +0000, you wrote:
>--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Alan James"
><MADjames@theknapp.freeserve.co.uk>
>
>Hi Ted,
>Yes, its a quick connect. As you offer the wing up to the centre section, 2
>levers come face to face to complete a control loop to the aileron. Apart
>from making it a little quicker to assemble, I believe it was also intended
>to get around the need for duplicate control inspections as required by the
>PFA. Jim also came up with some quick-release bracing cables (between the
>lift struts). Personally, I would not bother with this mod unless you intend
>assembling and dis-assembling the machine every other weekend. After all,
>its only three cables that need joining -one on each side of the aileron
>torque/control arm and a break in the balance cable in the centre section.
>
>Regards
>Alan
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Ted Brousseau" <nfn00979@naples.net>
>To: <pietenpol-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: Re: aileron connections; was Pietenpol-List: strut bracing
>
>
> > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Ted Brousseau"
><nfn00979@naples.net>
> >
> > Alan,
> >
> > Please tell us more about that auto-aileron connect facility. Is that a
> > quick connect?
> >
> > Ted
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Alan James" <MADjames@theknapp.freeserve.co.uk>
> > To: <pietenpol-list@matronics.com>
> > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: strut bracing
> >
> >
> > > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Alan James"
> > <MADjames@theknapp.freeserve.co.uk>
> > >
> > > Gene,
> > > Most UK Piets have been built to a slightly modified drawing by Jim
>Wills
> > > and approved by our PFA who oversee such things. The main differences
> > > include:
> > > 1. A three piece wing with (optional) auto-aileron connect facility.
> > > 2. Built-up spars and 'D' box leading edge of 1/16" ply.
> > > 3. Heavier than original lift struts.
> > > As a consequence, the max weight has been increased from the original
> > 1050lb
> > > to 1200lb. Stress calculations made at the time suggested that jury
>struts
> > > were not necessary and this is how I first flew G-BUCO back in '92.
> > However,
> > > it soon became apparent that at certain angles of attack and rpm
>settings
> > > the front struts would start vibrating. I first experienced this over
>The
> > > Solent, a stretch of water that separates England from The Isle of
>Wight.
> > > This happened on at least 2 of the 5 UK Piets finished at the time and
>was
> > > not good for the nerves! Fixes included setting the strut at an angle to
> > the
> > > slipstream but the PFA decided on a mandatory modification of adding
>jury
> > > struts to the front only.
> > > I hope this clears things up.
> > > Good luck with your Piet.
> > > Alan James
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: <ZigoDan@aol.com>
> > > To: <pietenpol-list@matronics.com>
> > > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: strut bracing
> > >
> > >
> > > > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: ZigoDan@aol.com
> > > >
> > > > Gene,
> > > >
> > > > I have not looked at my plans in a long time. All I am saying is that
> > > don't
> > > > by any means delete something just for convince. Adding parts like
>jury
> > > > struts, better AN hardware is an improvement in my opinion. Thanks
>for
> > > > correcting me on my oversight.
> > > >
> > > > Dan
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
Message 9
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: can corperate jets "see" me? |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Michael Conkling" <hpvs@southwind.net>
You can use a sailboat radar reflector ( an aluminized "kite" affair) inside
the fuselage -- maybe between the back seat & the walking beam. Or use
"window" to announce your position ( Dad said they had that on the B-26's in
WW2 --it was shredded Alum foil that was dropped out to "fog" the German
radar with the reflections!!) This stuff will show up on radar -- I don't
know if there is an emergency ELT-like transponder for light planes -- it's
too easy to just require a real life transponder.
500 ft to 1000 ft cruse altitude should get you below 99% of the in route
traffic -- for us the other 1% will be the Air Guard going over at 400 ft
AGL & our neighbor in his spray plane (but only if it's "dead calm"!!)
Mike C.
Pretty Prairie, KS
WW@mmnopounce
----- Original Message -----
From: "clif" <cdawson5854@shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: can corperate jets "see" me?
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: clif <cdawson5854@shaw.ca>
>
> As for radar, don't forget you're flying a wood frame
> and fabric little mosquito. As Dan says, communicate.
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|