Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:07 AM - (Douwe Blumberg)
2. 08:35 AM - Re: Accident reports (Hodgson, Mark O)
3. 08:37 AM - Re: was insurance, now, flying with stones? (Hodgson, Mark O)
4. 09:25 AM - kindey stones & contact lenses (Michael D Cuy)
5. 12:05 PM - Accident reports (Oscar Zuniga)
6. 12:34 PM - Re: Accident reports (Barry Davis)
7. 01:59 PM - no one has made a successful canopy for a Pietenpol,,have they? (w b evans)
8. 02:52 PM - Talkeetna (Michael Fisher)
9. 02:59 PM - Re: (Richard Navratil)
10. 03:26 PM - Re: no one has made a successful canopy for a Pietenpol,,have... (Isablcorky@aol.com)
11. 05:19 PM - Re: no one has made a successful canopy for a Pietenpol,,have they? (John McNarry)
12. 06:22 PM - Re: no one has made a successful canopy for (dave rowe)
13. 06:30 PM - Continental pakette engine (Christian Bobka)
14. 07:56 PM - Re: kindey stones & contact lenses (Alex Sloan)
Message 1
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Douwe Blumberg" <douweblumberg@earthlink.net>
My project is in the final phase. I've always wanted to use a Ford, and even have
one being worked on as I write.
However, now that the "reality" is looking me in the face I am having second thoughts
about the reliability factor. From what I've read, it would "appear" that
a large majority of Ford flyers have experienced forced landings, which while
usually fine out here in the midwest, isn't something I'd like to have to
plan on.
I'd like any feedback/opinions on this subject. And, if I did decide to go the
Continental route, where is the best place to start looking, or are there shops
out there selling yellowtagged units?
Douwe
douweblumberg@earthlink.net
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: Accident reports |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Hodgson, Mark O" <mhodgson@bu.edu>
Carl,
Hey, I'm just a tax-paying user of the d.b.; I don't manage it! Like
any airplane there is probably always something on it that could use
some maintenance. But it is useful for getting an overall view, which
is how I have used it to help in researching a plane to build or an
engine to use (maybe someday I'll actually start building one--the
Bingelis books arrived at my doorstep 3 days ago and I just finished
watching Mike Cuy's video a second time).
Mark
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: was insurance, now, flying with stones? |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Hodgson, Mark O" <mhodgson@bu.edu>
Sam,
I sent a note to Kip yesterday outside the list mentioning my I own
successful bout with stones 2 years ago, but worth mentioning here is
that the senior AME who eventually cleared me told me that not once in
the history of aviation had a crash ever been attributed to kidney
stones. The conversation was a long time ago now, and I don't know the
exact words. He didn't deny that there might have been stone attacks at
altitude, only that had they ever occurred the belief was that where
there's a will, there's a way--like so many other aviation stories in
which pilots have managed to get the wheels back to the ground under
duress. Some people carry stones around most of their lives without
even knowing they're there (I have no idea how long the ones in me were
there before my first attack), and the likelihood of them causing an
emergency in the sky is remote. I felt fine and flew the morning before
my first attack, and unlike your situation, the onset of my pain that
night was gradual, gradual enough that had I been flying I'm pretty sure
I could have gotten the plane on the ground before the situation got out
of control. I didn't have another attack for 5 days, in fact, which is
when they finally diagnosed it as stones and not food poisoning. Of
course, having had the attack and the knowledge of the condition I
didn't fly solo until the condition was clear (and only after an M.D.'s
approval per the regs).
Why am I blathering? Because I'm an adamant believer that a driver's
license will be just fine for the Sport Pilot regs, and I'm concerned
that there is already too much resistance (T.S. Agency, airlines, etc.)
to the proposal. It sounds like you must have actually started passing
the stone without warning, which I think is pretty rare (hey, I'm not a
doctor), but kidney stones and most other medical issues statistically
just don't account for enough of a problem in the skies to warrant
additional restrictions on Sport Pilot and we need to keep a level
perspective on them.
Here's to many happy hours on NX115SM, unencumbered by bureaucracy!
Mark Hodgson
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: | kindey stones & contact lenses |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy@grc.nasa.gov>
>"kidney stones and most other medical issues statistically
>just don't account for enough of a problem in the skies to warrant
>additional restrictions"
Great quote there, (above) from Mark H. Even the Class One physical ATP
airline pilots that run 3 miles a day and eat veggies and low fat can have
a coronary at the controls of a 737. (don't mind me, I'm typing outloud:)
I think the FAA should have banned all pilots from wearing contact lenses
too:)) (I'm kidding !!!) But I have to tell you guys what happened to
me one night bringing a Tomahawk back for landing at night one summer in
1981. The runway was all lit up, everything was perfect......until I
turned from downwind to base. My left contact lens slid off center and
wound up over in the corner where it had gone before when I moved my eyes
too fast for it to follow. For those of you who wore hard contacts before
the soft ones were really available know that this experience causes
extreme discomfort, tearing, and loss of clear vision out of one eye. So
landing with one eye closed it wasn't the prettiest landing I've ever made
but it was one of the most annoying to execute. Anything can happen while
flying like those Yaks that have such tight clearance between the elevator
assy. and the floor that a piece of hard candy can lock the controls and
kill you if it gets in the wrong spot. Yikes !
Mike C. do not archive
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: | Accident reports |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags@hotmail.com>
Carl writes-
>One thing puzzles me. There are two crashes (both
>nonfatal, thank goodness) that don't show up. One is
>that of Wm. Wynne in N1777W on 7/14/01
Good question! Several things may complicate the search for this one. One
thing right away is that the NTSB lists it as a "Pitenpol Aircamper 1933"
(see http://www.ntsb.gov/NTSB/brief.asp?ev_id=20010720X01467&key=1 and it's
NTSB file MIA01LA186). Another is that William was not the pilot; he was
the passenger. And so it goes-! The search engine is extremely precise,
and if you have one little thing off in your search, it won't "hit".
Another thing to watch for is that many folks call their airplanes "Smith
Air Camper" or "Jones Aircamper" or "Frankenstein GN-1", or something else
other than including "Pietenpol". You'd almost have to weed through all the
NTSB reports with finer and finer search criteria, one by one, till you
found the majority of possibles that you're looking for. For one thing, the
NTSB database only goes back to 1962 and the Piet goes way further than
that. I suppose you can rule out a bunch of possibles by searching only on
experimentals. Then on single engine. Then... well, you get the idea.
And BTW- any of you who have met John Dilatush (turbo Subaru Piet) are
probably as amazed as I am to learn that he's in his mid 70's. The man is
greatly understated as to his abilities and capabilities! (But we all know
what his bladder capacity is, now that we heard his "gotta land" stories).
Oscar Zuniga
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags@hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
Great deals on high-speed Internet access as low as $26.95.
https://broadband.msn.com (Prices may vary by service area.)
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: Accident reports |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Barry Davis" <bed@mindspring.com>
If a search is conducted for "Pietenpol", it will get all the Pietenpols. It
will not get any "Aircampers" or "Davis Pietenpol" or "Big Piet". The search
only looks for the registered name of the aircraft. Unfortunately a lot of
builders register their planes with their names, so it makes searches almost
impossible. William Wynne's might have bed registered as a "Pietenpol
Aircamper" therefore it would be excluded from the search. ps: I don't know
how his Piet was listed, just using his for an example.
----- Original Message -----
From: <Carbarvo@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Accident reports
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Carbarvo@aol.com
>
> Thanks for your efforts, Mark. One thing puzzles me. There are two crashes
> (both nonfatal, thank goodness) that don't show up. One is that of Wm.
Wynne in
> N1777W on 7/14/01 and the other is a crash involving major damage to
N63SB,
> (resulting from loss of power due to loss of oil) flown by Jimmy Davenport
> sometime in 1993. I have a feeling that the reporting of these incidents
may be
> "spotty". What do you think? Carl Vought
>
>
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: | no one has made a successful canopy for a Pietenpol,,have |
they?
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "w b evans" <wbeevans@verizon.net>
With all the inventions going around, has anyone ever made a cold weather flying
canopy or Bubble??
this afternoon I was listening to the weather reports for tomorrow AM of mid 20's,
and this popped into my head. In looking at the Piet, it's not out of the
question. Kind of like a short AT-6 canopy for the rear hole.
The older I get, the more I'm thinking of a closed cabin.
walt evans
NX140DL
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 |
|
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael Fisher <mfisher@gci.net>
----- Original Message -----
From: rhartwig11@juno.com
Subject: Talkeetna
> Mike,
> I read your message on the Piet List. I don't know of any scouts for
> sale, but will ask around and let you know if I find anything.
>
> I have read Don Sheldon's books and considered him a real hero. Is
> Roberta Reeve Sheldon still living in Talkeetna? Her father, Bob
> Reeve,is from our little town (The depot in town is dedicated to
> his father.)
>
> Dick Hartwig
> Waunakee WI
>
Dear Mr. Hartwig,
I appreciate your offer to keep an eye open for a Scout. They are quite rare, compared
to the
Aircamper. I like the Scout for several reasons: A. It was designed after the
Aircamper and embodies refinements based on experience. B. It can be built very
light. The original plans state that it is heavier than necessary. C. The
spars can be routed from 12 foot blanks (with a short splice near the tip).
The 1.9 liter Ford, operated direct drive at an RPM suitable for a slow airplane
is only capable of about 32 honest horsepower. This is not sufficient to carry
two aloft with safe performance margins.
There is really no substitute for displacement. The original "T" engine was about
3 liters, and the"A" engine almost 3.4 liters.
Getting scalded with hot coolant after a rough landing was a common injury suffered
by early Pietenpol pilots. The radiator had to be mounted high for the thermo-siphon
system to work. I hope to eliminate this hazard.
Roberta is still alive and well in Talkeetna. She has written books on the subjects
of Alaska history and gold mining lore. One of her daughters is very interested
in flying and family history. I've been working with her on Supercub
and mountain operations. I flew for them for many years and now have a small,
country machine shop - - mostly repair and modification work on mining equipment,
riverboats, etc.
Best regards, Mike Fisher
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 |
|
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Richard Navratil" <horzpool@goldengate.net>
Douwe
There are Contintals around every corner. www.barnstrrmers.com or on ebay,
also Wentworth Aviation in Mpls, Mn. usually has lots of engines.. If you
have built a short fuse you may want to go to a O-200 or other model with a
starter and alternator for the extra weight up front.
Dick N.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Douwe Blumberg" <douweblumberg@earthlink.net>
Subject: Pietenpol-List:
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Douwe Blumberg"
<douweblumberg@earthlink.net>
>
> My project is in the final phase. I've always wanted to use a Ford, and
even have one being worked on as I write.
>
> However, now that the "reality" is looking me in the face I am having
second thoughts about the reliability factor. From what I've read, it would
"appear" that a large majority of Ford flyers have experienced forced
landings, which while usually fine out here in the midwest, isn't something
I'd like to have to plan on.
>
> I'd like any feedback/opinions on this subject. And, if I did decide to
go the Continental route, where is the best place to start looking, or are
there shops out there selling yellowtagged units?
>
> Douwe
> douweblumberg@earthlink.net
>
>
Message 10
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: no one has made a successful canopy for a Pietenpol,,have... |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Isablcorky@aol.com
Walt,
Waste of time. Who would ever need a canopy while flying a Piet. It takes a
MAN to fly that plane
Corky, a little boy in La
Message 11
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: | no one has made a successful canopy for a Pietenpol,,have |
they?
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "John McNarry" <jmcnarry@escape.ca>
Walt,
Its been very cold here and the air is so still the ride would be nice
and firm. The kind'a ride where the only bumps you make, and the only
vibration is the engine/prop. Have you considered a tonneau cover that
zips up to your shoulder/neck level. If you could see your instruments
and your arms could stay inside, all that needs to stick out is your
head. Lots of good helmet choices around.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of w b
evans
Subject: Pietenpol-List: no one has made a successful canopy for a
Pietenpol,,have they?
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "w b evans" <wbeevans@verizon.net>
With all the inventions going around, has anyone ever made a cold
weather flying canopy or Bubble??
this afternoon I was listening to the weather reports for tomorrow AM of
mid 20's, and this popped into my head. In looking at the Piet, it's
not out of the question. Kind of like a short AT-6 canopy for the rear
hole.
The older I get, the more I'm thinking of a closed cabin.
walt evans
NX140DL
=
==
==
==
==
Message 12
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: no one has made a successful canopy for |
aPietenpol,,have they?
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: dave rowe <rowed044@shaw.ca> aPietenpol,,have
they?
From those of us who live in the great white north (Canada), in WW II,
the Tiger Moth basic trainer was a little chilly in -40 temperatures, so
someone came up with a snap-on, zip up canopy. If you already have a
windshield, it can attach to that, only needs a couple of braces. Look
at the boat covers with plastic windows sewn in, same idea.
John McNarry wrote:
>
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "John McNarry" <jmcnarry@escape.ca>
>
> Walt,
> Its been very cold here and the air is so still the ride would be nice
> and firm. The kind'a ride where the only bumps you make, and the only
> vibration is the engine/prop. Have you considered a tonneau cover that
> zips up to your shoulder/neck level. If you could see your instruments
> and your arms could stay inside, all that needs to stick out is your
> head. Lots of good helmet choices around.
> John
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of w b
> evans
> To: piet discussion
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: no one has made a successful canopy for a
> Pietenpol,,have they?
>
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "w b evans" <wbeevans@verizon.net>
>
> With all the inventions going around, has anyone ever made a cold
> weather flying canopy or Bubble??
> this afternoon I was listening to the weather reports for tomorrow AM of
> mid 20's, and this popped into my head. In looking at the Piet, it's
> not out of the question. Kind of like a short AT-6 canopy for the rear
> hole.
> The older I get, the more I'm thinking of a closed cabin.
>
> walt evans
> NX140DL
>
> > ==
> ==
> ==
> ==
>
Message 13
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: | Continental pakette engine |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Christian Bobka" <bobka@compuserve.com>
I scanned the 60 pages or so of info I have on the continental packette engine
that is about the size of an O-200 from a GPU. Does anyone need a copy of the
CD? It is yours for a ten buck donation to EAA chapter 25.
Chris Bobka
Message 14
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: kindey stones & contact lenses |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Alex Sloan" <alexms1@bellsouth.net>
Michael,
Your experience with the contact reminded me of an experience I had in a
C-150 on a student solo cross country back in 1970. I was on short final
with a direct cross wind and about to touch down and the seat latch came
loose and the seat slid all the way to the rear. Now, you have to realize
that at 5'6" I do not have a lot of leg. I did not react as some would and
so I did not pull on the control yoke to bring my self back up. I was lucky
and flew the airplane around for a turn or two to gain control of myself and
the seat. I was able to get it on the ground and shortly after that is when
the FAA published a notice about this problem. I wrote them and agreed with
them.
Alex Sloan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael D Cuy" <Michael.D.Cuy@grc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: kindey stones & contact lenses
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy
<Michael.D.Cuy@grc.nasa.gov>
>
>
> >"kidney stones and most other medical issues statistically
> >just don't account for enough of a problem in the skies to warrant
> >additional restrictions"
>
>
> Great quote there, (above) from Mark H. Even the Class One physical ATP
> airline pilots that run 3 miles a day and eat veggies and low fat can have
> a coronary at the controls of a 737. (don't mind me, I'm typing
outloud:)
>
> I think the FAA should have banned all pilots from wearing contact lenses
> too:)) (I'm kidding !!!) But I have to tell you guys what happened to
> me one night bringing a Tomahawk back for landing at night one summer in
> 1981. The runway was all lit up, everything was perfect......until I
> turned from downwind to base. My left contact lens slid off center and
> wound up over in the corner where it had gone before when I moved my eyes
> too fast for it to follow. For those of you who wore hard contacts
before
> the soft ones were really available know that this experience causes
> extreme discomfort, tearing, and loss of clear vision out of one eye. So
> landing with one eye closed it wasn't the prettiest landing I've ever made
> but it was one of the most annoying to execute. Anything can happen
while
> flying like those Yaks that have such tight clearance between the elevator
> assy. and the floor that a piece of hard candy can lock the controls and
> kill you if it gets in the wrong spot. Yikes !
>
> Mike C. do not archive
>
>
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! --
|