Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 08:02 AM - Re: Adjusting tension in drag/antidrag cables. (Isablcorky@aol.com)
2. 09:00 AM - Piet tube fuse available (Dick and Marge Gillespie)
3. 10:41 AM - Re: Adjusting tension in drag/antidrag cables. (Alex Sloan)
4. 11:18 AM - Re: Adjusting tension in drag/antidrag cables. (Gnwac@cs.com)
5. 11:20 AM - Re: Piet tube fuse available (Gnwac@cs.com)
6. 11:38 AM - popsicle sticks and tramelling (Michael D Cuy)
7. 12:18 PM - Re: Axle Dissertation (Robert Haines)
8. 12:37 PM - Re: Adjusting tension in drag/antidrag cables. (Isablcorky@aol.com)
9. 02:10 PM - Fuel Cap Engraving, Labeling, Indentifying (Wayne Cahoon @ Aircraft Engravers)
10. 04:29 PM - Re: popsicle sticks and tramelling (Christian Bobka)
11. 04:31 PM - Re: Adjusting tension in drag/antidrag cables. (Christian Bobka)
12. 04:35 PM - Re: Axle Dissertation (Christian Bobka)
13. 04:59 PM - Re: popsicle sticks and tramelling (walt evans)
14. 06:12 PM - Re: popsicle sticks and tramelling (Bert Conoly)
15. 07:57 PM - Here is the man to do the inspections in MN (Christian Bobka)
16. 08:30 PM - Re: popsicle sticks and tramelling (Graham Hansen)
17. 09:35 PM - Re: Re: Axle Dissertation (Christian Bobka)
18. 09:36 PM - Re: Axle Dissertation (Christian Bobka)
19. 09:45 PM - Re: Axle Dissertation (Christian Bobka)
20. 10:09 PM - I am selling my capstrips on ebay (Christian Bobka)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Adjusting tension in drag/antidrag cables. |
On the rib/wire business, I also encountered the problem while building 41CC.
This time I will leave my ribs unattached, install wires and fittings, bring
up to tension,THEN move the ribs a skosh here and there for clearance before
glueing, skrewing or nailing. I hope it works easier. Same difference just
sorta working backwards
Corky in La/ with a new walking cane suffering HLS.
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: | Piet tube fuse available |
Piet long tubular fuse available with formers, floor boards, 2 sticks with torque
tube, rudder pedals and miscellaneous. $1500.00. Also available 2 Lyc.
0-145 65 HP, prop and eng. mts. For details call: Lloyd Moore
239/693-2605.
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: Adjusting tension in drag/antidrag cables. |
Corky,
Good to see you back up and talking and walking, even with a cane.
Alex Sloan
----- Original Message -----
From: Isablcorky@aol.com
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2004 10:01 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Adjusting tension in drag/antidrag cables.
On the rib/wire business, I also encountered the problem while building 41CC.
This time I will leave my ribs unattached, install wires and fittings, bring
up to tension,THEN move the ribs a skosh here and there for clearance before glueing,
skrewing or nailing. I hope it works easier. Same difference just sorta
working backwards
Corky in La/ with a new walking cane suffering HLS.
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: | Re: Adjusting tension in drag/antidrag cables. |
Good idea Corky,
Which ribs are affected during the thighting of the cables? I have not
started the ribs yet, but something to place in my notes to save time later.
Greg Menoche
Delaware
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: | Re: Piet tube fuse available |
Lloyd,
Where is area code 239?
Greg
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: | popsicle sticks and tramelling |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy@grc.nasa.gov>
Did what Corky is planning to do on his new wings---run the X-cables in the
wings then take most the slack out then slightly reposition the ribs to
clear the trusswork of affected ribs. I then squared up the spars to each
other with small nails pounded into the tops of the spars at each of the
four ends to measure each dimension as I tightened and keep them equal
(=square wing/parallel spars) Ended up gluing and nailing the ribs to the
spars while I could still slide the ribs left and right. After cured I
checked the tramell and snugged up the cables and safety wired
them. Where they cross over each other I slit some small aquarium hose or
clear tygon tube from Home Depot about an inch long. I slid those over
each cable where they crossed to protect them from chaffing each other and
used two small tie wraps to snug up the whole intersection against
vibration. In moving the very few ribs that are in your way, I only moved
them enough to just clear the ribs--then glued in some dry popsicle sticks
to the flat of the truss that came closest to touching the cable for added
protection. (similar to the doubler idea)
Mike C.
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 |
|
"Pietenpol-List Digest List" <pietenpol-list-digest@matronics.com>
| Subject: | Re: Axle Dissertation |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Robert Haines" <robertsjunk@hotmail.com>
My understanding is that the location of the axle is determined by the
location of the CG, both in height above and distance behind the axle. The
relationship between the location of the CG and the axle effects the balance
between a minimum longitudinal moment required during braking (needed to
apply brakes and not nose over) and an instability in the vertical axis
while on the ground (the propensity for a tail dragger to ground loop).
It's the relationship between the axle and the CG which matters, not the
axle and the wing. Since moving the wing back 4" only changes the CG
position a fraction of an inch, would it really be necessary to change the
axle location because of the new wing location?
Or, is it the fact that the 4" wing relcation is in response to a 4"
movement of the CG. Movement of the wing would then be an indicator of a CG
movement. With this said, I agree with DJ in the solution of moving the
engine forward for a tail heavy (or pilot heavy) Piet, which keeps the CG in
the same spot and the geometry between the CG and the axle (and also the CG
and the tail volume) the same.
Then again, I've not heard of any that have moved the wing back and found
they had control problems because of it.
Robert Haines
Du Quoin, Illinois
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: Adjusting tension in drag/antidrag cables. |
Greg,
Go ahead and string your ribs on the spars and position according to plans.
Small nail in each will hold until you find which ones to move. It's all so
very slight and not enough to spoil that FC-10 airfoil
Corky
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 |
|
| From: | "Wayne Cahoon @ Aircraft Engravers" <wayne@engravers.net> |
<xdp4000x-list@matronics.com>, <warbird-list@matronics.com>,
<ultralight-list@matronics.com>, <teamgrumman-list@matronics.com>,
<tailwind-list@matronics.com>, <stratus-list@matronics.com>,
<sonerai-list@matronics.com>, <smithmini-list@matronics.com>,
<seaplane-list@matronics.com>, <sailplane-list@matronics.com>,
<rv-list@matronics.com>, <rocket-list@matronics.com>,
<pitts-list@matronics.com>, <pietenpol-list@matronics.com>,
<pelican-list@matronics.com>, <lom-list@matronics.com>,
<lancair-list@matronics.com>, <l39-list@matronics.com>,
<kr-list@matronics.com>, <kolb-list@matronics.com>,
<kitfox-list@matronics.com>, <homebuilt-list@matronics.com>,
<glasair-list@matronics.com>, <fewmustang-list@matronics.com>,
<ez-list@matronics.com>, <europa-list@matronics.com>,
<czech-list@matronics.com>, <cadet-list@matronics.com>
| Subject: | Fuel Cap Engraving, Labeling, Indentifying |
Have your Fuel Caps engraved, it's permanent and easy to read. Aircraft Engravers
has been engraving fuel caps for over 14 years.
You can see our web page at http://engravers.net/aircraft/fuel_caps.htm
Other types of engraving jobs can be viewed at http://engravers.net/main/ac_products.htm
There are a few sets of loaner fuel caps for the more common styles if your tanks
are wet.
FREE shipping by USPS Priority mail for all fuel cap engraving orders in the month
of February.
Wayne Cahoon
Aircraft Engravers
(860) 653-2780
(860) 653-7324 Fax
http://engravers.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: popsicle sticks and tramelling |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Christian Bobka" <bobka@compuserve.com>
Mike,
I like the antichafe part. Tygon is teflon and should last forever. I
don't know about the aquarium hose though. I would rather know there are no
nicks or wearing of the wire crossing point especially if I can't see it.
Chris
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael D Cuy" <Michael.D.Cuy@grc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: popsicle sticks and tramelling
>
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy
<Michael.D.Cuy@grc.nasa.gov>
>
> Did what Corky is planning to do on his new wings---run the X-cables in
the
> wings then take most the slack out then slightly reposition the ribs to
> clear the trusswork of affected ribs. I then squared up the spars to each
> other with small nails pounded into the tops of the spars at each of the
> four ends to measure each dimension as I tightened and keep them equal
> (=square wing/parallel spars) Ended up gluing and nailing the ribs to the
> spars while I could still slide the ribs left and right. After cured I
> checked the tramell and snugged up the cables and safety wired
> them. Where they cross over each other I slit some small aquarium hose
or
> clear tygon tube from Home Depot about an inch long. I slid those over
> each cable where they crossed to protect them from chaffing each other and
> used two small tie wraps to snug up the whole intersection against
> vibration. In moving the very few ribs that are in your way, I only
moved
> them enough to just clear the ribs--then glued in some dry popsicle sticks
> to the flat of the truss that came closest to touching the cable for added
> protection. (similar to the doubler idea)
>
> Mike C.
>
>
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: | Re: Adjusting tension in drag/antidrag cables. |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Christian Bobka" <bobka@compuserve.com>
Believe it or not, the MacWhyte wires, when they were made here, had cut
threads.
Chris Bobka
----- Original Message -----
From: <Rcaprd@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Adjusting tension in drag/antidrag cables.
>
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Rcaprd@aol.com
>
> In a message dated 1/22/04 6:32:13 PM Central Standard Time,
djv@imagedv.com
> writes:
>
> << I am debating whether or not to use cables and turnbuckles or steel rod
> with fork ends. >>
>
> D.J.,
> The steel rods would be required to have rolled threads, and built to
> specific lengths. Probably end up being similar costs to the cables /
turnbuckles.
>
> Chuck G.
>
>
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: Axle Dissertation |
And greg meant to add that theirs is a bone stock long fuselage 170+"
Chris Bobka
----- Original Message -----
From: Alex Sloan
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 9:50 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Axle Dissertation
Greg,
Thanks. I will add that to my growing file of useful info on things to do to
mine when the appropriate time comes.
Alex Sloan
----- Original Message -----
From: Greg Cardinal
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 6:27 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Axle Dissertation
Dale Johnson and I are building a long fuselage, A-65 powered with original
style gear. The axle on ours is 19" aft of the firewall. We have not taxied yet
but it does look right.
Cabanes are slanted back about 3 inches.
Greg Cardinal in Minneapolis (-10 F this morning)
----- Original Message -----
From: Alex Sloan
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 5:27 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Axle Dissertation
Walt,
How far is your axle from your firewall? I ask as I am building the long
fuselage. I extended my engine mount 2" from the firewall. I will be using
the Corvair engine.
I am a long way from building the gear but assimilating as much info as this
old brain can hold.
----- Original Message -----
From: walt evans
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 3:54 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Axle Dissertation
I built the long fuselage with an A65 (mount extented about 1 3/4" to anticipate
my bodily weight of 215") And had to move the wing back (sorry, body
forward) 3 inches.
I used the split gear plans supplied. 14 gallon nose tank and 10 gal center
tank (usually run empty).
Had read an article by a "seat of the pants guy" who said something like
" if you can hold the plane on the mains with the tail up without a problem
on rollout, then the CG can't be far off.
When doing takeoff roll, no problem getting up on the mains, and after
a wheel landing, I can keep it on the mains for quite a while till it's quite
slow. Not like the tail slams to the ground.
If the wheel location was too far forward, wouldn't it show up in the rollout?
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: Rick Holland
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 2:12 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Axle Dissertation
Good points Christian, and your datum point does sound logical. For people
building the long (172") version no axle placement info is provided with
the supplemental plans. Most people just assume it is placed the same a shown
on the original Ford plans, at least until they read several of the postings
on the subject the last few days. To give us a ballpark idea how about doing an
FAA standard 180 lb. pilot (and maybe even 2 180 lb occupants) calculation for
axle placement for the long fuselage with everything else "per the plans" (10
gal. wing tank, wing in standard position, corvair engine, etc.?) I would be
interested in seeing how far off it is from the short fuselage position.
RH
Christian Bobka wrote:
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Christian Bobka" <bobka@compuserve.com>
Kirk,
First, let me recommend to you and everybody else we fly balance ships. Who
cares what the FAA says about 180 lb people. You are flying the plane and
it should balance with you in it.
Second, I recommend using something other than the wing leading edge as the
datum. It does not make any sense to do so. If you are moving the wing
around, then you are moving around the datum . The whole IDEA of the datum
is that it is a PLACE THAT DOES NOT MOVE. It is by definition, a fixed
reference point. I was at a loss as to what to use until some others
mentioned using the bolt on the left side were the front cabane attaches to
the fuselage. It seems that people will stretch and shorten the fuselage,
shift the wing forward and aft but this point seems to not get tampered
with. So let us use it going forth. If people give me good numbers, I will
calculate W and Balance for them if they think they can't do it. I agreee
that the Leading edge of the wing eventually becomes important because we
need to make sure the CG is within the fore and aft limits of the airfoil
but we can work that into the calculations later.
I suggest that you look in the archives under the discussions on axle
placement where one puts the axle at some angle forward from the vetical of
about 12-16 degrees with the angle measured at the longitudinal and vertical
CG point on the side of the fuselage. I forget what the number is and I
loaned the book out on it last night so I can't look it up. You will need
to compute the exact point on the aircraft where the CG is when looking at
it from the side. This means longitudinal (how far back from the bolt) and
vertical or up from the floor (Of course the aircraft is level
longitudinally and laterally). You are familiar with the longitudinal CG
but the vertical CG is new for most and this can be computed through a
method Hank Jarrett posted last week and I posted through Jim Markle where
he put it up at:
http://www.mykitplane.com/Planes/photoGalleryList2.cfm?AlbumID185
In short, yes, if you move the wing back, the axle needs to be moved back
too.
Chris
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kirk Huizenga" <Kirk.Huizenga@moundsviewschools.org>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Axle Dissertation
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Kirk Huizenga"
<Kirk.Huizenga@moundsviewschools.org>
Chris,
Thanks for the research. I have one question that I hope will be simply
answered. The question is what affect shifting the wing back would have on
the proper placement of the axle.
Example: For W&B reasons, one shifts the wing back 4in. In theory, this
doesn't change the CG much at all, but the center of lift changes enough to
allow for us that don't fit the FAA 180lb profile to fit leading edge datum
CG limits. Should this also cause a move rearward of the axle?
Thanks for your input
Kirk
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: | Re: popsicle sticks and tramelling |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "walt evans" <wbeevans@verizon.net>
My mentor is from the old school,,,whenever wires cross, he taught me to use
rib stitch cord,,,make about 4 turns around the "X", but not tight, now you
change direction and circle around between the two wires about 3 or 4 times
to make a "standoff" between the two cables. Winds up looking like a tight
hangmans knot with two loops. Now if the slack was right in the beginning,
when you pull the whole thing tight, It all goes tight. Tie it off with a
double knot, and a little varnish on the assy and you're done. It's
authentic to the 20's.
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael D Cuy" <Michael.D.Cuy@grc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: popsicle sticks and tramelling
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy
<Michael.D.Cuy@grc.nasa.gov>
>
> Did what Corky is planning to do on his new wings---run the X-cables in
the
> wings then take most the slack out then slightly reposition the ribs to
> clear the trusswork of affected ribs. I then squared up the spars to each
> other with small nails pounded into the tops of the spars at each of the
> four ends to measure each dimension as I tightened and keep them equal
> (=square wing/parallel spars) Ended up gluing and nailing the ribs to the
> spars while I could still slide the ribs left and right. After cured I
> checked the tramell and snugged up the cables and safety wired
> them. Where they cross over each other I slit some small aquarium hose
or
> clear tygon tube from Home Depot about an inch long. I slid those over
> each cable where they crossed to protect them from chaffing each other and
> used two small tie wraps to snug up the whole intersection against
> vibration. In moving the very few ribs that are in your way, I only
moved
> them enough to just clear the ribs--then glued in some dry popsicle sticks
> to the flat of the truss that came closest to touching the cable for added
> protection. (similar to the doubler idea)
>
> Mike C.
>
>
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: popsicle sticks and tramelling |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Bert Conoly" <bconoly@earthlink.net>
Walt. Thats what I did but I cheated and stuck a little square of rubber
motorcycle tube between them before I laced it all together. Seemed to work
well
BC.
----- Original Message -----
From: "walt evans" <wbeevans@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: popsicle sticks and tramelling
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "walt evans" <wbeevans@verizon.net>
>
> My mentor is from the old school,,,whenever wires cross, he taught me to
use
> rib stitch cord,,,make about 4 turns around the "X", but not tight, now
you
> change direction and circle around between the two wires about 3 or 4
times
> to make a "standoff" between the two cables. Winds up looking like a tight
> hangmans knot with two loops. Now if the slack was right in the
beginning,
> when you pull the whole thing tight, It all goes tight. Tie it off with a
> double knot, and a little varnish on the assy and you're done. It's
> authentic to the 20's.
> walt evans
> NX140DL
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael D Cuy" <Michael.D.Cuy@grc.nasa.gov>
> To: <pietenpol-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Friday, January 23, 2004 2:36 PM
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: popsicle sticks and tramelling
>
>
> > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy
> <Michael.D.Cuy@grc.nasa.gov>
> >
> > Did what Corky is planning to do on his new wings---run the X-cables in
> the
> > wings then take most the slack out then slightly reposition the ribs to
> > clear the trusswork of affected ribs. I then squared up the spars to
each
> > other with small nails pounded into the tops of the spars at each of the
> > four ends to measure each dimension as I tightened and keep them equal
> > (=square wing/parallel spars) Ended up gluing and nailing the ribs to
the
> > spars while I could still slide the ribs left and right. After cured I
> > checked the tramell and snugged up the cables and safety wired
> > them. Where they cross over each other I slit some small aquarium hose
> or
> > clear tygon tube from Home Depot about an inch long. I slid those over
> > each cable where they crossed to protect them from chaffing each other
and
> > used two small tie wraps to snug up the whole intersection against
> > vibration. In moving the very few ribs that are in your way, I only
> moved
> > them enough to just clear the ribs--then glued in some dry popsicle
sticks
> > to the flat of the truss that came closest to touching the cable for
added
> > protection. (similar to the doubler idea)
> >
> > Mike C.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Message 15
| 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: | Here is the man to do the inspections in MN |
IT'S OFFICIAL: EAA'S JOE NORRIS IS FIRST AUTHORIZE AB-DAR
January 23, 2004 - History was made Thursday morning when the first amateur-built
designated airworthiness representative (AB-DAR) was officially and fully
authorized to perform homebuilt aircraft inspections on behalf of the FAA.
Suitably, the first AB-DAR hails from EAA: Joe Norris, senior aviation information
specialist. Joe received his final orientation via telephone interview Thursday
from the principal inspector at Minneapolis (MSP) Manufacturing Inspection
District Office (MIDO).
EAA worked extensively with FAA over the past several years to develop the
AB-DAR program to help alleviate a growing backlog of inspection requests from
amateur-built aircraft builders. EAA facilitated recruiting more than 60 AB-DAR
candidates, and also played a key role in developing the required training
course and materials.
David R. Smith, an Aviation Safety Inspector (ASI-Manufacturing) working
out of MSP MIDO, gave Norris the orientation, the last required step in the AB-DAR
approval process. MSP MIDO Office Manager Andrew B. Lown signed Norris' DAR
certificate and letter of authorization.
"Now that all the steps are completed, Dave Smith will be sending me the
appropriate paperwork that I'll need when I certificate an amateur-built aircraft,"
Norris said. "I will then work with Dave on scheduling certifications that
he (or his office) would like me to handle."
Builders who wish to contact the MSP MIDO can call 612/713-4366. Builders
can contact the MIDO to request the Amateur-Built Certification Packet, which
will include all the applicable forms and FAA advisory circulars.
The first AB-DAR course will take place on January 27-29 at the FAA Academy
in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Conducted by the Transportation Safety Institute
(TSI), 18 AB-DAR appointees are scheduled to attend. Another course is scheduled
for June 8-10, 2004. Officials are also considering adding another course
date between January and June.
Message 16
| 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: popsicle sticks and tramelling |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Graham Hansen" <grhans@cable-lynx.net>
Another time-honored method of protecting cross wire bracing from
chafing is to place a micarta disc approximately one inch in diameter
between the wires where they cross. This disc is usually about 1/16"
thick and has some holes drilled in it beside the wires. Then rib lacing
cord is threaded through these holes and around the wires to hold the
disc in position. The whole thing is then coated with orange shellac.
I have seen this method used on DeHavilland Moths, etc. and used it
on my Pietenpol for the cabane wires and the wire bracing between
the lift struts. It would be fine for drag/antidrag wires, also. (I used
1/8"
cable with turnbuckles for all such bracing; turnbuckles were not very
expensive in the late 1960's when I bought mine.)
Graham Hansen (Pietenpol CF-AUN in freezing Alberta)
Message 17
| 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: Axle Dissertation |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Christian Bobka" <bobka@compuserve.com>
But if you make the engine forward, the tail volume requirement will change.
Moving the engine forward would destabilize in the vertical axis due to the
increased vertical surface area forward of the CG. This needs to be
countered with more of the quantity (surface area of the what is added
forward of the CG) x (mean distance forward of the CG the area is added)
added aft of the CG.
For instance, you move the firewall forward by 4" and then you build a cowl
for the A-65 forward of that. The A-65 on a motor mount is lonbger than the
Ford Model A installation. The end result is that you add about 8" more
length forward of the CG. This is 24" high so 192 sq in is added, say, an
average 38" forward of the CG. So you have to add 192 x 38 = 7296 cu. in.
aft of the CG. I am not looking at drawings, just throwing numbers out for
an example. So you add more vertical stabilizer area 130" aft of the CG to
counter. The amount to add is 7296/130 = 56 sq in. You would have to add
2" to the chord of the 30" high vertical stabilizer to counter the added
destabilizing area up front. And this weighs something 130" aft of the CG,
which has a large effect on CG etc etc
Chris Bobka
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Haines" <robertsjunk@hotmail.com>
<pietenpol-list-digest@matronics.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Axle Dissertation
>
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Robert Haines"
<robertsjunk@hotmail.com>
>
> My understanding is that the location of the axle is determined by the
> location of the CG, both in height above and distance behind the axle.
The
> relationship between the location of the CG and the axle effects the
balance
> between a minimum longitudinal moment required during braking (needed to
> apply brakes and not nose over) and an instability in the vertical axis
> while on the ground (the propensity for a tail dragger to ground loop).
> It's the relationship between the axle and the CG which matters, not the
> axle and the wing. Since moving the wing back 4" only changes the CG
> position a fraction of an inch, would it really be necessary to change the
> axle location because of the new wing location?
>
> Or, is it the fact that the 4" wing relcation is in response to a 4"
> movement of the CG. Movement of the wing would then be an indicator of a
CG
> movement. With this said, I agree with DJ in the solution of moving the
> engine forward for a tail heavy (or pilot heavy) Piet, which keeps the CG
in
> the same spot and the geometry between the CG and the axle (and also the
CG
> and the tail volume) the same.
>
> Then again, I've not heard of any that have moved the wing back and found
> they had control problems because of it.
>
>
> Robert Haines
> Du Quoin, Illinois
>
>
Message 18
| 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: Axle Dissertation |
"If the wheel location was too far forward, wouldn't it show up in the rollout?"
Walt,
Why have you been asking for instructions on how to land, then?
Chris
----- Original Message -----
From: walt evans
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 3:54 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Axle Dissertation
I built the long fuselage with an A65 (mount extented about 1 3/4" to anticipate
my bodily weight of 215") And had to move the wing back (sorry, body forward)
3 inches.
I used the split gear plans supplied. 14 gallon nose tank and 10 gal center
tank (usually run empty).
Had read an article by a "seat of the pants guy" who said something like " if
you can hold the plane on the mains with the tail up without a problem on rollout,
then the CG can't be far off.
When doing takeoff roll, no problem getting up on the mains, and after a wheel
landing, I can keep it on the mains for quite a while till it's quite slow.
Not like the tail slams to the ground.
If the wheel location was too far forward, wouldn't it show up in the rollout?
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: Rick Holland
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 2:12 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Axle Dissertation
Good points Christian, and your datum point does sound logical. For people
building the long (172") version no axle placement info is provided with the supplemental
plans. Most people just assume it is placed the same a shown on the
original Ford plans, at least until they read several of the postings on the
subject the last few days. To give us a ballpark idea how about doing an FAA
standard 180 lb. pilot (and maybe even 2 180 lb occupants) calculation for axle
placement for the long fuselage with everything else "per the plans" (10 gal.
wing tank, wing in standard position, corvair engine, etc.?) I would be interested
in seeing how far off it is from the short fuselage position.
RH
Christian Bobka wrote:
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Christian Bobka" <bobka@compuserve.com>
Kirk,
First, let me recommend to you and everybody else we fly balance ships. Who
cares what the FAA says about 180 lb people. You are flying the plane and
it should balance with you in it.
Second, I recommend using something other than the wing leading edge as the
datum. It does not make any sense to do so. If you are moving the wing
around, then you are moving around the datum . The whole IDEA of the datum
is that it is a PLACE THAT DOES NOT MOVE. It is by definition, a fixed
reference point. I was at a loss as to what to use until some others
mentioned using the bolt on the left side were the front cabane attaches to
the fuselage. It seems that people will stretch and shorten the fuselage,
shift the wing forward and aft but this point seems to not get tampered
with. So let us use it going forth. If people give me good numbers, I will
calculate W and Balance for them if they think they can't do it. I agreee
that the Leading edge of the wing eventually becomes important because we
need to make sure the CG is within the fore and aft limits of the airfoil
but we can work that into the calculations later.
I suggest that you look in the archives under the discussions on axle
placement where one puts the axle at some angle forward from the vetical of
about 12-16 degrees with the angle measured at the longitudinal and vertical
CG point on the side of the fuselage. I forget what the number is and I
loaned the book out on it last night so I can't look it up. You will need
to compute the exact point on the aircraft where the CG is when looking at
it from the side. This means longitudinal (how far back from the bolt) and
vertical or up from the floor (Of course the aircraft is level
longitudinally and laterally). You are familiar with the longitudinal CG
but the vertical CG is new for most and this can be computed through a
method Hank Jarrett posted last week and I posted through Jim Markle where
he put it up at:
http://www.mykitplane.com/Planes/photoGalleryList2.cfm?AlbumID185
In short, yes, if you move the wing back, the axle needs to be moved back
too.
Chris
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kirk Huizenga" <Kirk.Huizenga@moundsviewschools.org>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Axle Dissertation
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Kirk Huizenga"
<Kirk.Huizenga@moundsviewschools.org>
Chris,
Thanks for the research. I have one question that I hope will be simply
answered. The question is what affect shifting the wing back would have on
the proper placement of the axle.
Example: For W&B reasons, one shifts the wing back 4in. In theory, this
doesn't change the CG much at all, but the center of lift changes enough to
allow for us that don't fit the FAA 180lb profile to fit leading edge datum
CG limits. Should this also cause a move rearward of the axle?
Thanks for your input
Kirk
Message 19
| 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: Axle Dissertation |
Rick,
I would like to see the numbers too but I need some actual wieghts of a ship on
the scales with good measurement data on seat location, fuel location, etc.
If you do a weighing with the plane empty, then adding fuel, then oil, then pilot,
then passenger then bags, you can calculate the exact postion inches from
the datum of each thing you add so that you have really good numbers. We need
some really good numbers.
By late spring, I should have participated in Greg and Dales' Piet W and B as well
as Dick Navratil's so I will have good data.
Chris
----- Original Message -----
From: Rick Holland
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 1:12 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Axle Dissertation
Good points Christian, and your datum point does sound logical. For people building
the long (172") version no axle placement info is provided with the supplemental
plans. Most people just assume it is placed the same a shown on the
original Ford plans, at least until they read several of the postings on the subject
the last few days. To give us a ballpark idea how about doing an FAA standard
180 lb. pilot (and maybe even 2 180 lb occupants) calculation for axle
placement for the long fuselage with everything else "per the plans" (10 gal.
wing tank, wing in standard position, corvair engine, etc.?) I would be interested
in seeing how far off it is from the short fuselage position.
RH
Christian Bobka wrote:
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Christian Bobka" <bobka@compuserve.com>
Kirk,
First, let me recommend to you and everybody else we fly balance ships. Who
cares what the FAA says about 180 lb people. You are flying the plane and
it should balance with you in it.
Second, I recommend using something other than the wing leading edge as the
datum. It does not make any sense to do so. If you are moving the wing
around, then you are moving around the datum . The whole IDEA of the datum
is that it is a PLACE THAT DOES NOT MOVE. It is by definition, a fixed
reference point. I was at a loss as to what to use until some others
mentioned using the bolt on the left side were the front cabane attaches to
the fuselage. It seems that people will stretch and shorten the fuselage,
shift the wing forward and aft but this point seems to not get tampered
with. So let us use it going forth. If people give me good numbers, I will
calculate W and Balance for them if they think they can't do it. I agreee
that the Leading edge of the wing eventually becomes important because we
need to make sure the CG is within the fore and aft limits of the airfoil
but we can work that into the calculations later.
I suggest that you look in the archives under the discussions on axle
placement where one puts the axle at some angle forward from the vetical of
about 12-16 degrees with the angle measured at the longitudinal and vertical
CG point on the side of the fuselage. I forget what the number is and I
loaned the book out on it last night so I can't look it up. You will need
to compute the exact point on the aircraft where the CG is when looking at
it from the side. This means longitudinal (how far back from the bolt) and
vertical or up from the floor (Of course the aircraft is level
longitudinally and laterally). You are familiar with the longitudinal CG
but the vertical CG is new for most and this can be computed through a
method Hank Jarrett posted last week and I posted through Jim Markle where
he put it up at:
http://www.mykitplane.com/Planes/photoGalleryList2.cfm?AlbumID185
In short, yes, if you move the wing back, the axle needs to be moved back
too.
Chris
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kirk Huizenga" <Kirk.Huizenga@moundsviewschools.org>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Axle Dissertation
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Kirk Huizenga"
<Kirk.Huizenga@moundsviewschools.org>
Chris,
Thanks for the research. I have one question that I hope will be simply
answered. The question is what affect shifting the wing back would have on
the proper placement of the axle.
Example: For W&B reasons, one shifts the wing back 4in. In theory, this
doesn't change the CG much at all, but the center of lift changes enough to
allow for us that don't fit the FAA 180lb profile to fit leading edge datum
CG limits. Should this also cause a move rearward of the axle?
Thanks for your input
Kirk
Message 20
| 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: | I am selling my capstrips on ebay |
Guys,
You see that the 20 pieces or so of capstrip are up to 52 bucks on ebay? I am
selling mine! Be rich!
Chris Bobka
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! --
|