Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:52 AM - Tail sections building question (At7000ft@aol.com)
2. 08:29 AM - Re: Tail sections building question (Gadd, Skip)
3. 11:16 AM - Re: Tail sections building question (walt evans)
4. 11:31 AM - Picky questions (Hodgson, Mark O)
5. 12:41 PM - Re: Picky questions (At7000ft@aol.com)
6. 05:13 PM - From www.eaa.org (Richard Navratil)
7. 10:13 PM - picy questions (Clif Dawson)
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: | Tail sections building question |
From all the tail section pictures I have seen and going through the archives
it doesn't look like many people build their elevators and rudders with the
'trailing edge' specified in the plans. Looks like the 'leading edge' profile
is used on the 3 outside edges and 'main bean' used where the hinges go. Looks
like an easier way to do it anyhow. Am I wrong here?
RickH
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: | Tail sections building question |
I did mine per the plans.
If I were to do another I would make the side edges just as a rectangle (not
T shaped) than after gluing up would use 3/8 X 3/16 balsa pieces between the
gussets to make the T shape.
Skip
From all the tail section pictures I have seen and going through the
archives it doesn't look like many people build their elevators and rudders
with the 'trailing edge' specified in the plans. Looks like the 'leading
edge' profile is used on the 3 outside edges and 'main bean' used where the
hinges go. Looks like an easier way to do it anyhow. Am I wrong here?
RickH
Message
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=GENERATOR>
I did mine per the plans.
If I were to do another I would make the
side edges just as a rectangle (not T shaped) than after gluing up would use 3/8
X 3/16 balsa pieces between the gussets to make the T shape.
Skip
<FONT
face=Tahoma>
From all the tail section pictures I have seen and going through the
archives it doesn't look like many people build their elevators and rudders
with the 'trailing edge' specified in the plans. Looks like the 'leading edge'
profile is used on the 3 outside edges and 'main bean' used where the hinges
go. Looks like an easier way to do it anyhow. Am I wrong here?
RickH
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: Tail sections building question |
Rick,
I did mine per plans. Usually the trailing edge would be assembled and glued without
the rounded taper shape for ease of handling. I finished mine then shaped
it with a small plane (no pun)
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: At7000ft@aol.com
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 9:52 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Tail sections building question
From all the tail section pictures I have seen and going through the archives
it doesn't look like many people build their elevators and rudders with the 'trailing
edge' specified in the plans. Looks like the 'leading edge' profile is
used on the 3 outside edges and 'main bean' used where the hinges go. Looks
like an easier way to do it anyhow. Am I wrong here?
RickH
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 |
|
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Hodgson, Mark O" <mhodgson@bu.edu>
Kudos to Dick Navratil for the POH--you could have made some money on
it, you know!
After a long period of procrastination or analysis (depending on one's
perspective) I'm actually beginning to bend capstrips and build the wing
rib jig, and I hope to have the ribs complete and be working on the
tailfeathers by Brodhead. OK, so I'm shooting to have the plane flying
by the centennial in 2029. I did find the list archive really useful
for preparation.
I was originally going to rubber-cement the wing rib drawing to the jig
and work from there, so I copied it on vellum to save the good copy for
further reference. The Kopy Kop version turned out to be so off-scale
that it is unusable (except for giving me the curve for the bending
jig). So I wound up transferring the exact dimensions to the jig. But
as I was measuring off the contour points on the jig this weekend, and
in spite of the archive research, I found some pickable gnits. I'm
seeking some list wisdom here:
1) Are there upright braces inboard of the spars per the full scale
wing rib drawing, or not, per the Flying and Glider Manual, the
Pietenpol Manual, and the general plans?
2) The general plans and the full scale wing rib drawing show a
rear brace descending aft of the spar, but the F & G Manual and the P.
Manual show otherwise, with a comment in the P. Manual saying to do it
that way. General plans were drawn in 1934, F & G Manual is 1932, P.
Manual is post-60's because of Corvair stuff, no date on the full-scale
wing rib drawing (but Don's initials are on it, not his dad's). Which
way is right? My intuition is going with the brace descending aft of
the spar (better to handle compression from lift?), but I'm no
engineer.
The following I wouldn't mention to the list, except that now that I've
started I'll bring them up for any comments--since I'm just starting I
want to do things right, and it will give me a good gauge for how to
handle these things when the inevitable discrepancies pop up. Some
things really, really matter, like C.G. location, some don't, like
whether you use mahogany or birch plywood, and I'm just trying to get a
sense of it all.
3) F & G Manual points out error on a 6" measure on top of wing
which is supposed to be 6 1/8"; however, all drawings show 6". P.
Manual applies to Sky Scout wing but says that it's identical to Air
Camper. Hard to believe that this 1/8" really matters, especially where
it's located on the wing (well aft of leading edge)--or does it?
4) There's no height from the baseline to the bottom of the leading
edge on the first (1/2") increment aft of leading edge. I'm going to
ignore it, assuming that the cap strip will bend appropriately there.
Is that OK?
5) On F & G Manual and P. Manual, after seven consecutive 1"
increments aft of leading edge, there are three 11/2" increments; on the
plans, the first of these is 1 1/8 rather than 1 1/2. I did it the
plans way. Correct?
6) I am assuming that I can just measure and replicate the brace
dimensions from the full-scale drawing and that being super exact about
their location isn't that important (except for the ones adjacent to
spars). Correct?
Mark Hodgson
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: Picky questions |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: At7000ft@aol.com
Mark
I am about 2 months ahead of you (just finished my ribs yesterday) and have had
all these same questions (and many more). I am an engineer and usually expect
fairly exact specifications before I build something (especially something that
I have never built before and can kill me). But that is something that you
will not get with a Pietenpol. But the good news is that is doesn't seem to matter
much. Builders are always commenting on how everyone seems to build it differently.
I assume the main reason for this is because of the ambiguities in
the plans and the differences in the different plan sets available (which is your
current concern).
Most sane people would question proceeding with such a project when plans are available
for other aircraft which are exact, unambiguous, some full size, etc.
And I would have moved on to a different project if it wasn't for the fact that
hundreds of these things have been built over the years and I have yet to hear
of an accident caused because of the Pietenpol design, even though their is
no one Pietenpol design since no two Piets are the same, (although at a distance
to the untrained eye they all look about the same). Hell somebody even made
a Piet biplane!
Concerning your rib jig, yes the full size rib plan is different than the rib spec
on the 32 plans (the spars are not even the correct distance apart). As several
on this group recommended throw the full-size plans in the trash and loft
the points from the 32 plans. Something else that worked well was to cover the
rib plan with a piece of clear plexiglass (I got a piece from a cheap Walmart
picture frame and cut it in half length-wise).
RickH
> Kudos to Dick Navratil for the POH--you could have made some money on
> it, you know!
>
> After a long period of procrastination or analysis (depending on one's
> perspective) I'm actually beginning to bend capstrips and build the wing
> rib jig, and I hope to have the ribs complete and be working on the
> tailfeathers by Brodhead. OK, so I'm shooting to have the plane flying
> by the centennial in 2029. I did find the list archive really useful
> for preparation.
>
> I was originally going to rubber-cement the wing rib drawing to the jig
> and work from there, so I copied it on vellum to save the good copy for
> further reference. The Kopy Kop version turned out to be so off-scale
> that it is unusable (except for giving me the curve for the bending
> jig). So I wound up transferring the exact dimensions to the jig. But
> as I was measuring off the contour points on the jig this weekend, and
> in spite of the archive research, I found some pickable
> gnits. I'm
> seeking some list wisdom here:
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: | From www.eaa.org |
The article below has further information on progress on the Sport Pilot Rating.
Dick N.
http://www.eaa.org/communications/eaanews/040325_sp.html
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 |
|
One thing to watch is the direction of that last diagonal
just before the trailing edge, the realy long one. In the
Aircamper article, F+G #32 it goes from bottom at rear
spar upwards to the last upright. Bernard corrected this
in the Scout article in F+G #33, reversing it as he found
they were prone to breaking. Use the later version.
As for the discrepancy in the hieght of that 6" to 6 1/8"
station I simply faired the curve through that area.
Clif
PS, What do you call a pregnant stewardess?
Pilot error.
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! --
|