---------------------------------------------------------- Pietenpol-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Thu 11/27/03: 29 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 07:38 AM - Re: iet list observations (hjarrett) 2. 08:25 AM - Re: electronic ignition (Wizzard187@aol.com) 3. 08:33 AM - CG Check Station? (Franck) 4. 09:19 AM - Re: PietenpolProp glue (Wizzard187@aol.com) 5. 09:23 AM - Re:Electronic ignition (Fred Weaver) 6. 09:26 AM - Re: CG Check Station? (Fred Weaver) 7. 09:31 AM - Re: Re: PietenpolProp glue (Jack Phillips) 8. 10:20 AM - Re: Re: PietenpolProp glue (Al Latham) 9. 10:58 AM - Re: w/b (Alex Sloan) 10. 10:58 AM - Re: w/b (Alex Sloan) 11. 10:58 AM - Re: CG Check Station? (Alex Sloan) 12. 10:59 AM - Re: w/b (Alex Sloan) 13. 10:59 AM - Re: w/b (Alex Sloan) 14. 10:59 AM - Re: CG Check Station? (Alex Sloan) 15. 11:16 AM - Re: electronic ignition (Cy Galley) 16. 11:31 AM - Re: CG Check Station? (Cy Galley) 17. 11:46 AM - Re: Re: PietenpolProp glue (Cy Galley) 18. 01:08 PM - Re: Re: PietenpolProp glue (Lauritz Larsen) 19. 01:12 PM - Re: Yo DJ (At7000ft@aol.com) 20. 01:34 PM - Re: lead in fuel (At7000ft@aol.com) 21. 02:06 PM - Re: lead in fuel (Cy Galley) 22. 05:28 PM - Re: w/b (Ted Brousseau) 23. 07:08 PM - Re: w/b (Gnwac@cs.com) 24. 07:42 PM - Re: w/b (Gnwac@cs.com) 25. 08:34 PM - Re: w/b (Richard Navratil) 26. 08:35 PM - Re: w/b (Richard Navratil) 27. 08:41 PM - Re: Re: PietenpolProp glue (Clif Dawson) 28. 08:46 PM - Re: w/b (Rcaprd@aol.com) 29. 09:58 PM - Re: w/b (Rcaprd@aol.com) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 07:38:50 AM PST US From: "hjarrett" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: iet list observations --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "hjarrett" I am another one of those "lurkers" that just listens most of the time. I also don't have and probably never will have a Piet. I saw one at the WW-1 Flyin at Gardner Kansas last summer and got my socks knocked off by it. Since I have been lurking I have found you guys to be a really good group. You help each other and stay pretty much on topic. When you stray it is at least entertaining. You don't need to change. Keep up the good work and I hope to provide my Taylorcraft as a photo ship for some good Piet in-flight shots one day. I DO like the Ford engine on a Piet. Looks right, sounds right, flies right. Just an opinion. ;-) Hank J ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary Gower" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: iet list observations > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Gary Gower > > Bernard, > > This international list is great AS IS! We spend months without a > flame agreassion or any CAPITAL LETTERS :-) > > We are here, even builders of non Piet or GN-1 planes!! (I am > building a Zenith 701 STOL, is not even wood!). > > We are here because we love the Piet, and the way the list is going: > LOTS to learn, lots of friendship comments, lots of fun, even advice of > getting divorce :-) > > Please, let us alone, or best, keep your comments for yourself lurke > and learn how aviators share their real brotherhood, then when you are > ready, comment or better ask something you need to learn... > > Enough said, of the soap box. > > Saludos > Gary Gower > Guadalajara, Mexico. > Do not archive. > > > --- Barry Davis wrote: > > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Barry Davis" > > > > > > Please lurk somewhere else......we don't need this crap. > > > > OK Bert, you're next > > Barry Davis - iet Builder > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "allison waters" > > To: > > Subject: Pietenpol-List: iet list observations > > > > > > > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: allison waters > > > > > > > > Pieters- > > > I've been lurking on this list for a while and having built a > > couple of > > Piets in the past I thought I'd share a couple of observations as > > food for > > thought. Pease don't take these musings the wrong way as they are > > given in > > the spirit of helpfulness. > > > > > > I see that the GN-1 group has it's own website now. That's a really > > great > > step for the Piet guys as they won't have to put up with John Grega's > > wierd > > creation nor help further his (or his heirs) blatant plagerizied > > version of > > what is a wonderful airplane. Piets are Piets just as glassairs are > > glassairs. You don't see t-18 builders over-running the RV website on > > the > > basis of them being "almost the same". Hooray for whoever put the > > GN-1 site > > up, it's long, long overdue. ( I believe the PRINTED and STATED > > objective > > for the BPAN and this Matronics site are to further PIETENPOL > > aircraft............check it out, no mention of GN-1's) > > > > > > I've seen a couple of really nicely done but atrociously heavy > > Piets in > > the past year. Why put rotating beacons, nav and landing lights, > > radios, > > upholstery or cover the entire fuselage with PLYWOOD or put on other > > unnecessary add-ons that don't contribute one iota of flight > > capability to a > > great little airplane? If you want that kind of stuff, go buy a 150 > > or build > > a Deuce. Building an airplane should not be an excercise in seeing > > how high > > you can get your empty weight! > > > > > > There is alltogether too much drivel on the site that should be > > addressed > > to individuals off-line but gets posted anyway. Nobody cares what > > your > > credentials are or if you have a heated hangar while you are sailing > > on your > > vacation. It's pretty easy to spot who is helping the collective > > group and > > who is posting letters, pictures and videos just to blow their own > > horn. > > Stop it already......we don't care! > > > > > > Everyone should have and use their spell checker and some should > > get a > > grammar checker. > > > > > > Spruce really isn't that hard to find. Use it. > > > > > > Model "A" engines are just fine. Next time you're at Brodhead for > > the Piet > > reunion, take a look at those old powerplants that have been showing > > up for > > years and providing their owners with hundreds of hours of > > troublefree > > service. They might not be abundantly powerful, but they are every > > bit as > > reliable as other sources of power that are being used. Let's not get > > on the > > bandwagon of "I switched to a Continental because I wanted a reliable > > engine". And no, they are not motors! > > > > > > That's it for now. Keep up the good work and get those Piets in the > > air! > > > > > > Bernard > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > > > Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _-> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now > http://companion.yahoo.com/ > > ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 08:25:09 AM PST US From: Wizzard187@aol.com Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List:electronic ignition --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Wizzard187@aol.com Pieters: I am working with a 75 cont series 9 and cannot use a mag with a impulse and wonder if electric ignition might be my answer. Does anyone know a good information about this development. Ken Conrad, Long Grove, Iowa ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 08:33:30 AM PST US From: Franck Subject: Pietenpol-List: CG Check Station? --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Franck Sorry if this is a little off topic but.... After reading some posts about CG locations, gross weights/empty weights, etc., etc. I started wondering.... Wouldn't it be a great service to our flying community if, at local, regional, and national Fly-Ins, area EAA chapters would set up a "weight station" by providing a set of certified scales and the manpower for there use? In all the years of attending various Fly-Ins and the EAA Convention at Oshkosh I don't know that I've ever seen this service provided. I'm guessing there are a lot of aircraft, after years of equipment changes, paint jobs, etc. that a free CG check might be a real eye opener to owners. Or am I just opening another can of worms here? What do you think? Do not Archive ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 09:19:03 AM PST US From: Wizzard187@aol.com Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: PietenpolProp glue "see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview": Pieters@matronics.com, I.want.to.know.what.is.the.best.glue.for.laminations.for.a.prop.I.think.I.heard.once.that.resorsnal.is.good.but.cannot.find.any.Thanks@matronics.com (SP), Pieters@matronics.com, I.want.to.know.what.is.the.best.glue.for.laminations.for.a.prop.I.think.I.heard.once.that.resorsnal.is.good.but.cannot.find.any.Thanks@matronics.com (SP), "[...] Content analysis details": (4.2 points, 5.0 required) pts.rule.name.description.----.----------------------.--------------------------------------------------.2.1.BAYES_70.BODY:Bayesian.spam.probability.is.70.to.80@[score:0.7501] --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Wizzard187@aol.com Pieters, I want to know what is the best glue for laminations for a prop. I think I heard once that resorsnal(SP) is good but cannot find any. Thanks, ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 09:23:36 AM PST US From: "Fred Weaver" Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re:Electronic ignition --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Fred Weaver" Here you go.... http://www.lightspeedengineering.com/ Klaus can get you going..... ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List:electronic ignition > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Wizzard187@aol.com > > Pieters: > I am working with a 75 cont series 9 and cannot use a mag with a > impulse and wonder if electric ignition might be my answer. Does anyone know a > good information about this development. > Ken Conrad, Long Grove, Iowa > > ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 09:26:29 AM PST US From: "Fred Weaver" Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: CG Check Station? --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Fred Weaver" Actually, the EZ guys in Southern California do just that once in awhile at their events. It's a lot of fun to compare the empty weight on the placard to the "Actual" weight when they are finished. AND you are right, it's also an eye opener if it's been drifting aft... Fred ----- Original Message ----- From: "Franck" Subject: Pietenpol-List: CG Check Station? > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Franck > > Sorry if this is a little off topic but.... After reading some posts about > CG locations, gross weights/empty weights, etc., etc. I started wondering.... > Wouldn't it be a great service to our flying community if, at local, > regional, and national Fly-Ins, area EAA chapters would set up a "weight > station" by providing a set of certified scales and the manpower for there > use? In all the years of attending various Fly-Ins and the EAA Convention > at Oshkosh I don't know that I've ever seen this service provided. I'm > guessing there are a lot of aircraft, after years of equipment changes, > paint jobs, etc. that a free CG check might be a real eye opener to owners. > Or am I just opening another can of worms here? What do you think? > Do not Archive > > ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 09:31:52 AM PST US From: "Jack Phillips" Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: PietenpolProp glue --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Jack Phillips" IMHO Resorcinol is the best glue Period for wooden structures (it is still the only glue the FAA certifies for use on certificated aircraft). It is also a pain to work with, but I built nearly my entire Pietenpol with it. Aircraft Spruce & Secialty carries it, as do the better lumber companies (those catering to furniture builders). It makes a brown stain at the glue lines, which I think enhances the look of the laminations. Jack -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Wizzard187@aol.com Content preview : Pieters@matronics.com; SP; Pieters@matronics.com; SP; [...] Content analysis details : (4.2 points, 5.0 required) Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: PietenpolProp glue --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Wizzard187@aol.com Pieters, I want to know what is the best glue for laminations for a prop. I think I heard once that resorsnal(SP) is good but cannot find any. Thanks, ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 10:20:50 AM PST US From: "Al Latham" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: PietenpolProp glue --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Al Latham" Jack, Weldwood, now Dap Plastic Resin glue is also FAA certified. It also is what The Kimball's / Falcon Propellers used in their props. Not sure who owns Falcon now. Al Latham ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jack Phillips" Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: PietenpolProp glue > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Jack Phillips" > > IMHO Resorcinol is the best glue Period for wooden structures (it is still > the only glue the FAA certifies for use on certificated aircraft). It is > also a pain to work with, but I built nearly my entire Pietenpol with it. > Aircraft Spruce & Secialty carries it, as do the better lumber companies > (those catering to furniture builders). It makes a brown stain at the glue > lines, which I think enhances the look of the laminations. > > Jack > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of > Wizzard187@aol.com > Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 7:44 AM > To: if it isn't spam; see the administrator of that system for details. > Content preview : Pieters@matronics.com; SP; Pieters@matronics.com; SP; > [...] Content analysis details : (4.2 points, 5.0 required) > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: PietenpolProp glue > > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Wizzard187@aol.com > > Pieters, > I want to know what is the best glue for laminations for a > prop. I think I heard once that resorsnal(SP) is good but cannot find any. > Thanks, > > ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 10:58:49 AM PST US From: "Alex Sloan" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: w/b --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Alex Sloan" Chuck, Way to go. Better to be safe than scratched. Alex S. ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: w/b > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Rcaprd@aol.com > > Dick, > I weighed my short fuselage plane four times. I weigh 205 lbs. The first > time was from rented, calibrated scales. Each of the next three times (four > bathroom scales), agreed with the calibrated ones, and with each other - as far > as the C.G. is concerned. It took me all that, before I was convinced that I > knew where the C.G. is. As it turned out, I had to build the Continental > engine mount 8" longer than the plans show (using heavier wall tubing), to maintain > a safe C.G. location, without using ballast. Ballast sucks big time. > Pietenpols are notoriously tail heavy, most likely because Bernard Pietenpol was > only about 160 lbs, and he designed and built to his weight. Most folks today > are bigger and fatter, me included. > The most important thing is that you are convinced that you are not tail > heavy in the flying configuration. > > Chuck Gantzer > NX770CG > > Wanted: Good woman, with airplane. Please send picture of plane. > > ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 10:58:49 AM PST US From: "Alex Sloan" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: w/b --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Alex Sloan" Greg, If you were not so far from Florence, Al. I would be a member to take advantage of your fellowship and scales. Thanks. Alex S. ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: w/b > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: > > > Alex, > Chapter 25 is in the Minneapolis / St. Paul area. We have a hangar at > Lakeville (LVN). > > Greg Cardinal > Chapter 25 member since 1994 > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Alex Sloan" > To: > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: w/b > > > > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Alex Sloan" > > > > Chris, > > I will be more than happy to join chapter 25 and pay the fee to get my > > Pietenpol weighed accurately. > > Where is chapter 25? > > Alex Sloan > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Christian Bobka" > > To: > > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: w/b > > > > > > > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Christian Bobka" > > > > > > > > Dick, > > > > > > If you join EAA CHapter 25 for 25 bucks and donate another ten bucks, > you > > > can use the chapter certified and calibrated scales when I come look at > > your > > > ship. We could also weight the ship with you in it to determine the > EXACT > > > location of the cockpit CG. We could also do the same with someone in > > the > > > front 'pit. > > > > > > > > > Chris > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Richard Navratil" > > > To: > > > Subject: Pietenpol-List: w/b > > > > > > > > > > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Richard Navratil" > > > > > > > > > > > I did a safety re-weight of piet today and got a big suprise. The > scale > > I > > > originally weighed with was a bathroom type. When I stepped on, it > agreed > > > with my known weight 200lb. When I held 2- 5gal cans of gas while > > standing > > > on it the reading was 20 lb off. I had weighed the piet at 265 on each > > main > > > and 30 on the tail with a short fuse that would have been empty CG of > 7.01 > > > The actual weight turned out to be 297 on each main for a CG of 12.5. > > > > That error could have been very dangerous. > > > > Now I have to figure out how to deal with this. > > > > Dick > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 10:58:55 AM PST US From: "Alex Sloan" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: CG Check Station? --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Alex Sloan" Franck, I like the idea of a weighing station personally and think it would be a great addition to any flying event. It is a time consuming job and is not something that can be done quickly so trained personnel with a specific job would have to be available to assist. Just a few thoughts. Alex S. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Franck" Subject: Pietenpol-List: CG Check Station? > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Franck > > Sorry if this is a little off topic but.... After reading some posts about > CG locations, gross weights/empty weights, etc., etc. I started wondering.... > Wouldn't it be a great service to our flying community if, at local, > regional, and national Fly-Ins, area EAA chapters would set up a "weight > station" by providing a set of certified scales and the manpower for there > use? In all the years of attending various Fly-Ins and the EAA Convention > at Oshkosh I don't know that I've ever seen this service provided. I'm > guessing there are a lot of aircraft, after years of equipment changes, > paint jobs, etc. that a free CG check might be a real eye opener to owners. > Or am I just opening another can of worms here? What do you think? > Do not Archive > > ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 10:59:43 AM PST US From: "Alex Sloan" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: w/b --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Alex Sloan" Chuck, Way to go. Better to be safe than scratched. Alex S. ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: w/b > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Rcaprd@aol.com > > Dick, > I weighed my short fuselage plane four times. I weigh 205 lbs. The first > time was from rented, calibrated scales. Each of the next three times (four > bathroom scales), agreed with the calibrated ones, and with each other - as far > as the C.G. is concerned. It took me all that, before I was convinced that I > knew where the C.G. is. As it turned out, I had to build the Continental > engine mount 8" longer than the plans show (using heavier wall tubing), to maintain > a safe C.G. location, without using ballast. Ballast sucks big time. > Pietenpols are notoriously tail heavy, most likely because Bernard Pietenpol was > only about 160 lbs, and he designed and built to his weight. Most folks today > are bigger and fatter, me included. > The most important thing is that you are convinced that you are not tail > heavy in the flying configuration. > > Chuck Gantzer > NX770CG > > Wanted: Good woman, with airplane. Please send picture of plane. > > ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 10:59:46 AM PST US From: "Alex Sloan" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: w/b --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Alex Sloan" Greg, If you were not so far from Florence, Al. I would be a member to take advantage of your fellowship and scales. Thanks. Alex S. ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: w/b > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: > > > Alex, > Chapter 25 is in the Minneapolis / St. Paul area. We have a hangar at > Lakeville (LVN). > > Greg Cardinal > Chapter 25 member since 1994 > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Alex Sloan" > To: > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: w/b > > > > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Alex Sloan" > > > > Chris, > > I will be more than happy to join chapter 25 and pay the fee to get my > > Pietenpol weighed accurately. > > Where is chapter 25? > > Alex Sloan > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Christian Bobka" > > To: > > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: w/b > > > > > > > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Christian Bobka" > > > > > > > > Dick, > > > > > > If you join EAA CHapter 25 for 25 bucks and donate another ten bucks, > you > > > can use the chapter certified and calibrated scales when I come look at > > your > > > ship. We could also weight the ship with you in it to determine the > EXACT > > > location of the cockpit CG. We could also do the same with someone in > > the > > > front 'pit. > > > > > > > > > Chris > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Richard Navratil" > > > To: > > > Subject: Pietenpol-List: w/b > > > > > > > > > > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Richard Navratil" > > > > > > > > > > > I did a safety re-weight of piet today and got a big suprise. The > scale > > I > > > originally weighed with was a bathroom type. When I stepped on, it > agreed > > > with my known weight 200lb. When I held 2- 5gal cans of gas while > > standing > > > on it the reading was 20 lb off. I had weighed the piet at 265 on each > > main > > > and 30 on the tail with a short fuse that would have been empty CG of > 7.01 > > > The actual weight turned out to be 297 on each main for a CG of 12.5. > > > > That error could have been very dangerous. > > > > Now I have to figure out how to deal with this. > > > > Dick > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 10:59:54 AM PST US From: "Alex Sloan" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: CG Check Station? --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Alex Sloan" Franck, I like the idea of a weighing station personally and think it would be a great addition to any flying event. It is a time consuming job and is not something that can be done quickly so trained personnel with a specific job would have to be available to assist. Just a few thoughts. Alex S. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Franck" Subject: Pietenpol-List: CG Check Station? > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Franck > > Sorry if this is a little off topic but.... After reading some posts about > CG locations, gross weights/empty weights, etc., etc. I started wondering.... > Wouldn't it be a great service to our flying community if, at local, > regional, and national Fly-Ins, area EAA chapters would set up a "weight > station" by providing a set of certified scales and the manpower for there > use? In all the years of attending various Fly-Ins and the EAA Convention > at Oshkosh I don't know that I've ever seen this service provided. I'm > guessing there are a lot of aircraft, after years of equipment changes, > paint jobs, etc. that a free CG check might be a real eye opener to owners. > Or am I just opening another can of worms here? What do you think? > Do not Archive > > ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 11:16:54 AM PST US From: "Cy Galley" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List:electronic ignition --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" Curious. What is the reason that you can't use a mag with an impulse? Distance to firewall? The Slick 4330 is only 7 19/32" OAL, 5 11/16 behind the mounting flange and is listed as approved for the A-75 in my Slick Master Service Manual. You do have to replace the drive gears and use the correct spacer according to SL1-93. The spacer extends the mag from .79 to 1.04 inches. (add to the 5 11/16") Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh Editor, EAA Safety Programs cgalley@qcbc.org or experimenter@eaa.org Always looking for articles for the Experimenter ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List:electronic ignition > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Wizzard187@aol.com > > Pieters: > I am working with a 75 cont series 9 and cannot use a mag with a > impulse and wonder if electric ignition might be my answer. Does anyone know a > good information about this development. > Ken Conrad, Long Grove, Iowa > > ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 11:31:42 AM PST US From: "Cy Galley" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: CG Check Station? --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" If you have been to Oshkosh, you might have noticed the "Hangar Cafe" It was built to weigh ultralites. The EAA has never placed itself as an enforcer so I think it was quickly dropped. We prefer to educate not police. Doing a W&B on a non-standard plane cannot be done outdoors quickly. The plane must be in flight attitude with no-wind, which means inside. All gas must be emptied out which can be a real fire hazard. The liability of defueling with all the by standers is enough to make the weighing impossible. We tried it at the North-Central Flyin at Rock Fall, IL but all of the above problems occurred. The doubling of bath scales was done but outside which literally tells you very little if there is any wind. My Chapter has set of electronic scales but even keeping them calibrated and in good working order is very expensive. The load cells have a limit and if exceeded breaks them. Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh Editor, EAA Safety Programs cgalley@qcbc.org or experimenter@eaa.org Always looking for articles for the Experimenter ----- Original Message ----- From: "Franck" Subject: Pietenpol-List: CG Check Station? > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Franck > > Sorry if this is a little off topic but.... After reading some posts about > CG locations, gross weights/empty weights, etc., etc. I started wondering.... > Wouldn't it be a great service to our flying community if, at local, > regional, and national Fly-Ins, area EAA chapters would set up a "weight > station" by providing a set of certified scales and the manpower for there > use? In all the years of attending various Fly-Ins and the EAA Convention > at Oshkosh I don't know that I've ever seen this service provided. I'm > guessing there are a lot of aircraft, after years of equipment changes, > paint jobs, etc. that a free CG check might be a real eye opener to owners. > Or am I just opening another can of worms here? What do you think? > Do not Archive > > ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 11:46:05 AM PST US From: "Cy Galley" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: PietenpolProp glue --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" Weldwood has the two part (liquid and powder) Resorcinol glue. Wicks, Aircraft Spruce has it as well as many hardware and boat stores. Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh Editor, EAA Safety Programs cgalley@qcbc.org or experimenter@eaa.org Always looking for articles for the Experimenter ----- Original Message ----- From: ; ; "SP" ; ; "SP" ; "[...] Content analysis details : (4.2 points, 5.0 required)" <"pts.rule.name.description.----.----------------------.-------------------- ------"@[score:0.7501] Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: PietenpolProp glue > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Wizzard187@aol.com > > Pieters, > I want to know what is the best glue for laminations for a > prop. I think I heard once that resorsnal(SP) is good but cannot find any. > Thanks, > > ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 01:08:09 PM PST US From: "Lauritz Larsen" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: PietenpolProp glue --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Lauritz Larsen" Re: Kimballs/Falcon Props. Jim and Kevin Kimball sold their prop business some years back to some one in Oklahoma. I think Larry Williams bought a prop from the Okalhoma guy. Jim and kevin are quite busy with their Pitts 12 with the Russian radial engine. Our Chapter has our March Meeting at Kimballs and it is always a treat to see what they are doing. Happy Thanksgiving!!! Lou Larsen ----- Original Message ----- From: "Al Latham" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: PietenpolProp glue > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Al Latham" > > Jack, > > Weldwood, now Dap Plastic Resin glue is also FAA certified. It also is what > The Kimball's / Falcon Propellers used in their props. Not sure who owns > Falcon now. > > Al Latham > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jack Phillips" > To: > Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: PietenpolProp glue > > > > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Jack Phillips" > > > > > IMHO Resorcinol is the best glue Period for wooden structures (it is still > > the only glue the FAA certifies for use on certificated aircraft). It is > > also a pain to work with, but I built nearly my entire Pietenpol with it. > > Aircraft Spruce & Secialty carries it, as do the better lumber companies > > (those catering to furniture builders). It makes a brown stain at the > glue > > lines, which I think enhances the look of the laminations. > > > > Jack > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com > > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of > > Wizzard187@aol.com > > Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 7:44 AM > > To: if it isn't spam; see the administrator of that system for > details. > > Content preview : Pieters@matronics.com; SP; Pieters@matronics.com; SP; > > [...] Content analysis details : (4.2 points, 5.0 required) > > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: PietenpolProp glue > > > > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Wizzard187@aol.com > > > > Pieters, > > I want to know what is the best glue for laminations for a > > prop. I think I heard once that resorsnal(SP) is good but cannot find > any. > > Thanks, > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 01:12:04 PM PST US From: At7000ft@aol.com Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Yo DJ --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: At7000ft@aol.com Thanks for the info Skip What about adding a V strut to the split axle design in the 1934 plans? Probably another religious question but I see so many conventional gear designed with the V strut that I would assume it is a better, stronger design, opinions? Rick Holland When you look at a GN 1 you will notice the aft L/G attach point is about 6" forward of the aft lift strut attach point. This is because the Cub gear Grega used is shorter, and the GN 1 has an extra bay in the fuse sides just so there will be vertical members at both the aft L/G and aft lift strut attach points. You can go to DJ's website and see this. The 34 plans have a Cub like L/G, the Flyer and Glider plans have the solid axle L/G. Skip ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 01:34:26 PM PST US From: At7000ft@aol.com Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: lead in fuel --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: At7000ft@aol.com Roger in Libby Montana? Is that the home of the Libby Loggers football team? Do the cheerleaders still rev up their chainsaws on every touchdown? Sorry for the off topic. Rick Holland You are correct. There was no lead in the early fuels. I have run my Model A car and an 1911, 1 cylinder car on unleaded fuels for years with no problems. Lead was not needed until the higher compression engines came along. Roger Green Libby, Montana ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 02:06:31 PM PST US From: "Cy Galley" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: lead in fuel --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" The only car that I ever owned that really needed Ethyl gas was my 1957 Pontiac Starchief Convertible with 10.5 to 1 C.R. Since I was poor at the time, I retarded the timing just a bit and ran regular. After I got married, I didn't need to put my foot in it as often. It would still run the red spiral speedo around so it would start over at above 120 mph. But at that speed the tires would begin to smell and I would have to slow down. ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: lead in fuel > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: At7000ft@aol.com > > Roger in Libby Montana? Is that the home of the Libby Loggers football team? > Do the cheerleaders still rev up their chainsaws on every touchdown? > > Sorry for the off topic. > > Rick Holland > You are correct. There was no lead in the early fuels. > I have run my Model A car and an 1911, 1 cylinder car on unleaded fuels for > years with no problems. > Lead was not needed until the higher compression engines came along. > > Roger Green > Libby, Montana > > ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 05:28:59 PM PST US From: "Ted Brousseau" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: w/b --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Ted Brousseau" Dick, What does this revelation about your scales do for you TG dinner plans? Ted Do not archive ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Navratil" Subject: Pietenpol-List: w/b > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Richard Navratil" > > I did a safety re-weight of piet today and got a big suprise. The scale I originally weighed with was a bathroom type. When I stepped on, it agreed with my known weight 200lb. When I held 2- 5gal cans of gas while standing on it the reading was 20 lb off. I had weighed the piet at 265 on each main and 30 on the tail with a short fuse that would have been empty CG of 7.01 The actual weight turned out to be 297 on each main for a CG of 12.5. > That error could have been very dangerous. > Now I have to figure out how to deal with this. > Dick > > ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 07:08:35 PM PST US From: Gnwac@cs.com Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: w/b --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Gnwac@cs.com Just wondering? I plan on using a Cont O-200, and wiegh 200 lbs. Did you move the wing back a couple of inches to compensate for the tail wt? Many builders have. If you did, you had to move the engine 8 inches forward huh? What engine are you using? Thanks, Greg ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 07:42:53 PM PST US From: Gnwac@cs.com Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: w/b --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Gnwac@cs.com Off topic conversation, Not long ago someone mentioned the "emachineshop" for getting metal parts machine cut and produced. I downloaded the cad software and noticed that they do not carry 4130 sheet steel in their inventory of materials. What did you use? Secondly, rather than hundreds of Piet builders trying to draw each item into the cad software, are those emachineshop drawings stored in a data base aval. to others for time saving convenience? Thanks, Greg ________________________________ Message 25 ____________________________________ Time: 08:34:55 PM PST US From: "Richard Navratil" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: w/b --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Richard Navratil" My wing is back 5 in. and engine mount forward 2 in. I am going with ballast. Dick ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: w/b > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Gnwac@cs.com > > Just wondering? I plan on using a Cont O-200, and wiegh 200 lbs. Did you > move the wing back a couple of inches to compensate for the tail wt? Many > builders have. If you did, you had to move the engine 8 inches forward huh? What > engine are you using? > > Thanks, > Greg > > ________________________________ Message 26 ____________________________________ Time: 08:35:49 PM PST US From: "Richard Navratil" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: w/b --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Richard Navratil" Sorry, forgot to add A-65 engine 13 gal fuel in wing and 4 gal in nose. Dick ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: w/b > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Gnwac@cs.com > > Just wondering? I plan on using a Cont O-200, and wiegh 200 lbs. Did you > move the wing back a couple of inches to compensate for the tail wt? Many > builders have. If you did, you had to move the engine 8 inches forward huh? What > engine are you using? > > Thanks, > Greg > > ________________________________ Message 27 ____________________________________ Time: 08:41:45 PM PST US From: Clif Dawson Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: PietenpolProp glue --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Clif Dawson Resorcinal is not tolerant of any sloppyness in preparation of the surfaces. You also have to clamp the crap out of it. The link below gives some good info on the stuff. http://www.practical-sailor.com/newspics/charts/872adhesives.pdf Clif > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" > > Weldwood has the two part (liquid and powder) Resorcinol glue. Wicks, > Aircraft Spruce has it as well as many hardware and boat stores. ________________________________ Message 28 ____________________________________ Time: 08:46:53 PM PST US From: Rcaprd@aol.com Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: w/b --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Rcaprd@aol.com In a message dated 11/27/03 10:35:39 PM Central Standard Time, horzpool@goldengate.net writes: << I am going with ballast. >> Ballast !!??? My gradeschool teacher, Sister Ephrem, would smack your fingers with a wood ruler, for using such profanity !! :) Chuck G. ________________________________ Message 29 ____________________________________ Time: 09:58:59 PM PST US From: Rcaprd@aol.com Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: w/b --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Rcaprd@aol.com In a message dated 11/27/03 9:09:12 PM Central Standard Time, Gnwac@cs.com writes: << Just wondering? I plan on using a Cont O-200, and wiegh 200 lbs. Did you move the wing back a couple of inches to compensate for the tail wt? Many builders have. If you did, you had to move the engine 8 inches forward huh? What engine are you using? >> Greg, I had already moved the wing back 3 1/2" on my short fuselage, when I had the Model A engine installed, and I still had to use 14 lb ballast, bolted to the bellhousing mount of the Model A engine, in order to stay in the safe C.G. range. I couldn't move the wing back any more, without the cables going down through the middle of the windscreen. I cast the ballast from lead shot, with a wood mould that I made, so it fit under the nose cone. I cringed every time I had to take that 14 lb hunk of dead weight for a flight with me. I logged 22 hours in that configuration. Last November '02, I grounded my plane, for a firewall forward retrofit, using a Continental A65 engine. I weighed the plane once more before removing the Model A, just to re-confirm what I had a hard time believing. On paper, I removed the Model A engine and ballast, using it's arm to datum, then added the weight of the Cont A65, using it's arm to datum. I had to keep moving the Cont. A65 forward, one inch at a time on paper, until I had the configuration in the safe C.G. range. It ended up hanging out there 8". I've never heard of anyone hanging their Continental out so far, but I was NOT going to use ballast, and numbers just don't lie. Busy time for six months. I built all of the following: mold for the cowl tank (10.7 gal), built the fiberglass tank, .020" stainless steel firewall, engine mount 8" longer than the plans, A65 engine with channel chrome cylinders, 72 X 42 Birch prop, 3003 alum.040" eyebrows, steel carb heat box, cowling & cub nose bowl, brakes, and a bunch of other stuff. Now came the time to weigh it in this configuration, and see if I got the numbers right on paper.....BAM !! I nailed it right on the numbers I estimated on paper !! Now, no matter what amount of fuel, passenger, pilot at 205 lbs, I'm always in the safe C.G. range. I finished the flight test phase, and flew to Brodhead & Oshkosh for my final shakedown flight. Big Adventure !! I love this airplane !! The O-200 weighs more, with the starter, battery, and all the other associated crap that goes with it, so you probably won't have to make it look like a turbine engine hanging out there, like mine does. Chuck Gantzer NX770CG Wichita, KS looking forward to the 75th Anniversary - Brodhead '04