---------------------------------------------------------- Pietenpol-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Wed 03/12/03: 7 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 07:21 AM - Q&A on internal antenna for wood or composite aircraft (Michael D Cuy) 2. 07:35 AM - Re: Q&A on internal antenna for wood or composite aircraft (Christian Bobka) 3. 05:42 PM - Re: Q&A on internal antenna for wood or composite aircraft (Jack Phillips) 4. 07:56 PM - Re: Q&A on internal antenna for wood or composite aircraft (Ted Brousseau) 5. 11:15 PM - Re: Junk yard wars (clif) 6. 11:43 PM - Re: Q&A on internal antenna for wood or composite (clif) 7. 11:46 PM - Re: Junk yard wars (Gary McNeel, Jr.) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 07:21:45 AM PST US From: Michael D Cuy Subject: Pietenpol-List: Q&A on internal antenna for wood or composite aircraft --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy Group........I don't know if this is the place I bought my flexible, (no ground plane required) flexible internal fuselage aircraft antenna for my hand held or not, but it is the same model. This page has some excellent questions and answers and a diagram with dimensions of what the antenna looks like. I mounted it behind the rear seat in an inverted "U" type shape up into the turtle deck curvature, then down each side of the fuselage. I ty-wrapped it to the wood structure. I ran a simple coax from the antenna to under my seat so I can hook it up to the hand held. In the process I lost my rubber duck antenna and Icom wants $30 bucks for a replacement. Arrrgh. Anyway, check this out if you so desire. Mike C. http://www.advancedaircraft.com/FAQs/faqs.htm ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 07:35:17 AM PST US From: "Christian Bobka" Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Q&A on internal antenna for wood or composite aircraft --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Christian Bobka" You can buy a set of documents from Jim Wier at RST and you can make your own antennas. That is what I did. He might even have the info available on the RST website. They are copies of articles that appeared in Kitplanes magazine maybe 15 years ago. Chris Bobka -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Michael D Cuy Subject: Pietenpol-List: Q&A on internal antenna for wood or composite aircraft --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy Group........I don't know if this is the place I bought my flexible, (no ground plane required) flexible internal fuselage aircraft antenna for my hand held or not, but it is the same model. This page has some excellent questions and answers and a diagram with dimensions of what the antenna looks like. I mounted it behind the rear seat in an inverted "U" type shape up into the turtle deck curvature, then down each side of the fuselage. I ty-wrapped it to the wood structure. I ran a simple coax from the antenna to under my seat so I can hook it up to the hand held. In the process I lost my rubber duck antenna and Icom wants $30 bucks for a replacement. Arrrgh. Anyway, check this out if you so desire. Mike C. http://www.advancedaircraft.com/FAQs/faqs.htm ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 05:42:29 PM PST US From: "Jack Phillips" Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Q&A on internal antenna for wood or composite aircraft --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Jack Phillips" Hi Mike, This is exactly the same antenna I mounted in my wing. I mounted it inside the plywood leading edge so I will have max range ahead and behind (which suits me just fine). I was worried that the silver pigment in the poly spray would attenuate the signal some, but I guess that's not a problem. Sure is nice to be able to have a high performance antenna without destroying the antique look of the plane. My Father-in-Law found it for me at a Fly market and paid $50 for it. They are about $125 in the ASS catalog. Jack -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael D Cuy Subject: Pietenpol-List: Q&A on internal antenna for wood or composite aircraft --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy Group........I don't know if this is the place I bought my flexible, (no ground plane required) flexible internal fuselage aircraft antenna for my hand held or not, but it is the same model. This page has some excellent questions and answers and a diagram with dimensions of what the antenna looks like. I mounted it behind the rear seat in an inverted "U" type shape up into the turtle deck curvature, then down each side of the fuselage. I ty-wrapped it to the wood structure. I ran a simple coax from the antenna to under my seat so I can hook it up to the hand held. In the process I lost my rubber duck antenna and Icom wants $30 bucks for a replacement. Arrrgh. Anyway, check this out if you so desire. Mike C. http://www.advancedaircraft.com/FAQs/faqs.htm ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 07:56:35 PM PST US From: "Ted Brousseau" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Q&A on internal antenna for wood or composite aircraft --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Ted Brousseau" Chris, I looked at his site last week. I seem to remember a kit he sells with copper, ferrite "donuts" (this is all from memory so may not be exact) and seems like something else for about $30. Is that what you put together? And it works good? Thanks, Ted ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christian Bobka" Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Q&A on internal antenna for wood or composite aircraft > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Christian Bobka" > > You can buy a set of documents from Jim Wier at RST and you can make your > own antennas. That is what I did. He might even have the info available on > the RST website. They are copies of articles that appeared in Kitplanes > magazine maybe 15 years ago. > > Chris Bobka > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Michael D > Cuy > To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Q&A on internal antenna for wood or composite > aircraft > > > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy > > > Group........I don't know if this is the place I bought my flexible, (no > ground plane required) flexible > internal fuselage aircraft antenna for my hand held or not, but it is the > same model. This page has some > excellent questions and answers and a diagram with dimensions of what the > antenna looks like. I mounted it > behind the rear seat in an inverted "U" type shape up into the turtle deck > curvature, then down each side of the > fuselage. I ty-wrapped it to the wood structure. I ran a simple coax > from the antenna to under my seat so I can > hook it up to the hand held. In the process I lost my rubber duck antenna > and Icom wants $30 bucks for a replacement. > Arrrgh. Anyway, check this out if you so desire. > > Mike C. > > http://www.advancedaircraft.com/FAQs/faqs.htm > > ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 11:15:50 PM PST US From: clif Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Junk yard wars --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: clif Watched it again, good point. I wonder how the bleriot would have flown with a double surfaced wing? > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "rambog@erols.com" > > In fact, the Brits DID steal it . . . the rules were that the airplane had > to be a period design, it had to BE something. What the Brits did was > build an ultralight that looked kind of like an old airplane do not archive ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 11:43:21 PM PST US From: clif Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Q&A on internal antenna for wood or composite aircraft --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: clif > This brings to mind a little story. A while back, visiting the local hot shot RC hobbyshop, I saw a pile of photos. In it was a HALF scale pietenpol built by a retired machinist. It had proper wire rigging and everything. Just beautiful. It crashed on it's first flight. The reason the "experts" came up with? All that wire interfered with the antenna signal at a certain angle of flight to the transmitter. Clif > This is exactly the same antenna I mounted in my wing. I mounted it inside > the plywood leading edge so I will have max range ahead and behind (which > suits me just fine). I was worried that the silver pigment in the poly > spray would attenuate the signal some, but I guess that's not a problem. > Sure is nice to be able to have a high performance antenna without > destroying the antique look of the plane. > Do not archive ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 11:46:21 PM PST US From: "Gary McNeel, Jr." Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Junk yard wars --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Gary McNeel, Jr." And it they had added the wing-warping or even simple ailerons. Theirs looked great. I agree, I missed the beginning of the show and did not know they were supposed to base it on an original design. I looks a little bit like a Santos-Dumont Demoiselle (circa 1909), but with two wings instead of one. They had to extend the nose because their CG was off, so if you shorten to their original design, it looks more like the Demoiselle. -Gary > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of clif > Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 1:17 AM > To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Junk yard wars > > > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: clif > > Watched it again, good point. I wonder how the bleriot would > have flown with a double surfaced wing? > > > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "rambog@erols.com" > > > > > In fact, the Brits DID steal it . . . the rules were that the > airplane had > > to be a period design, it had to BE something. What the Brits did was > > build an ultralight that looked kind of like an old airplane > > do not archive > >