Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:12 AM - Re: Re: Torque Tube (Phillips, Jack)
2. 04:16 AM - Re: Landing Gear (Phillips, Jack)
3. 08:21 AM - Re: Re:C90 or C85 prop size (Richard Navratil)
4. 08:21 AM - Re: aircraft repairman (Michael D Cuy)
5. 08:44 AM - Re: aircraft repairman (cgalley)
6. 09:05 AM - Fly Baby gear (Michael D Cuy)
7. 09:33 AM - Re: C90 or C85 prop size (alexms1@comcast.net)
8. 09:39 AM - Re: Landing Gear (alexms1@comcast.net)
9. 09:49 AM - Re: Fly Baby gear (Jim Markle)
10. 10:08 AM - Re: Landing Gear (Phillips, Jack)
11. 07:51 PM - Re: Landing Gear ()
12. 08:58 PM - Landing Gear (David Paulsen)
13. 09:01 PM - Re: Modern Ford Engines for the Pietenpol ()
14. 09:08 PM - Re: Landing gear (ADonJr@aol.com)
15. 11:37 PM - Re: C90 or C85 prop size (Shawn Wolk)
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 |
|
I also laminated my gear struts. Each strut was made of 4 laminations
of Sitka Spruce. The undercarriage survived my recent off-airport
landing, even thought he axle broke and the plane ground-looped (new
axle will be thicker walled, and heat-treated for greater strength).
Lamination adds considerable strength and rigidity, and if a crack
develops it is generally contained within a single lamination.
Jack Phillips
----- Original Message -----
Dave,
I suspect that it really depends upon the species of wood that is used
in the landing gear. Maybe the Fly Baby used a wood in the gear that
was not suitable for shock loads? Or maybe the wood used had flaws in
it such as pitch pockets, grain run out, or was not a quarter cut
specimen. You might want to get the EAA book "Wood ???" which will give
guidelines for suitable woods and the required characteristics for
aircraft use.
I used two pieces of 1/2" ash laminated together for each gear leg and
then used an old fashioned draw knife to form the airfoiled cross
section. This gear has survived some terrible landings that I have made
without any damage.
John
Thanks John, for the idea and the photos.
I can't help but notice that virtually everyone has sanded down or
shaped their wooden landing gear struts from the top to the bottom
brackets. It does look good and saves weight. However, I once had an
off field landing in a Flybaby and the wooden legs broke like
toothpicks. So I haven't done any sanding or shaping with the Piet gear
thinking that the amount of weight saved may not be worth the loss of
extra strength. Any comments?
Dave Paulsen
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 |
|
Hi Fred,
You don't want the gear to be so strong that it survives a really hard
landing, only to transmit devastating loads to the airframe.
Recommended G loading for landing gear to withstand is about 3.1 G's.
My axle was good for a little over 2 G's, and that was not enough. My
new axle will be capable of withstanding loads of 3.8 G's without
yielding.
Jack
-----Original Message-----
I've been reading the posts regarding landing gear and had a 2-cent
thought -- kind of like Loyd in "Dumb and Dumber": "Uh, wait a
minute...uh, yup, I just had an idea." : )
Is it possible to make the landing gear so bullet-proof that in a
forced, really "off-field" landing, the landing gear survives reasonably
well but transmits damage to the fuselage proper? Obviously it should be
as strong as possible, but I would think in some instances, I'd rather
sacrifice the landing gear than the airframe and my bod. Then again, if
you wipe out the gear, you'll probably damage the fuselage, too... Was
just thinking about it...
My plan of the day is to rip some white ash into 2-inch strips for the
lower fuselage cross braces...
Have a great day, everyone!
Fred B.
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: RE:C90 or C85 prop size |
Shawn
What is the model # of that warp drive prop? I would like to look into that.
Dick N.
----- Original Message -----
From: Shawn Wolk
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2004 2:57 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: RE:C90 or C85 prop size
Consider going to a two blade Warp Drive prop. You can pitch it to find the
best combination of climb and speed. When I switched from a wood Sensenich (I
may have been overpropped) the difference was incredible. The A65 powered Piet
went from anemic to a blast. At gross (1180#) it now climbs as it did before
with no pass. and minimal fuel. I used to use a sprayplane type of t/o run.
Holding the plane on the ground with the stick forward to get up some speed. I
would usually move the stick forward after the tail come back. Now if I don't
move the stick forward the instant the tail comes up, the plane starts to fly.
Just put my skis on yesterday, waiting for it to stop snowing so I can go
flying.
Shawn Wolk
C-FRAZ
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: aircraft repairman |
Dick--- All I had to do was have the guy who inspected my plane go over to
the FSDO office (or he called them I think) and tell them that I was coming
down to fill out the paper work for the repairman certificate. Your
Airworthiness Certificate with your name as the Manufacturer is proof that
you built
it and no other exam or crap should be required. I'd tell those boys to
stuff it.
Mike C.
At 10:27 PM 12/9/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>Dick. It sounds like you're just dealing with typical beaurocratic FAA
>crap. I thought that typically one could simply apply for the repairman
>certificate at the time of inspection/airworthiness certificate. That's
>what I am doing.
>
>You should ask that "examiner" how many airplanes he's built and
>flown. Tell him to call you Monday for an appointment so he can block out
>an hour of HIS time, come to your hangar, and you'll give him an hours
>instruction on how to build an airplane. Tell him you'll even do it at no
>charge - cause your a nice guy.
>
>
>I'll send you the rest of MY ADVICE off list.
>
>See ya,
>Bert
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <mailto:horzpool@goldengate.net>Richard Navratil
>To: <mailto:pietenpol-list@matronics.com>pietenpol-list@matronics.com
>Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 9:10 PM
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: aircraft repairman
>
>I don't recall seeing this subject discussed before. I have had my
>application form for the Aircraft Repairman sitting around and finally
>called about getting the rating. The examiner gave me an appointment for
>next week and told me to bring in all logs and be prepaired to discuss
>construction and that the oral interview should take about an hour. Has
>anyone else had a similar going over? Do I just live in a area with very
>strict standards?
>Dick N
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: aircraft repairman |
I'm sorry to disagree but the FSDO man is following the guide lines and doing his
job the way it is supposed to be done. Why cause problems as he can deny the
certificate and then how do you get it?
Some one said, "Don't ruffle the feathers of the eagle!"
Cy Galley
EAA Safety Programs Editor
Always looking for ideas and articles for EAA Sport Pilot
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael D Cuy
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 10:21 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: aircraft repairman
Dick--- All I had to do was have the guy who inspected my plane go over to the
FSDO office (or he called them I think) and tell them that I was coming
down to fill out the paper work for the repairman certificate. Your Airworthiness
Certificate with your name as the Manufacturer is proof that you built
it and no other exam or crap should be required. I'd tell those boys to stuff
it.
Mike C.
At 10:27 PM 12/9/2004 -0500, you wrote:
Dick. It sounds like you're just dealing with typical beaurocratic FAA crap.
I thought that typically one could simply apply for the repairman certificate
at the time of inspection/airworthiness certificate. That's what I am doing.
You should ask that "examiner" how many airplanes he's built and flown. Tell
him to call you Monday for an appointment so he can block out an hour of HIS
time, come to your hangar, and you'll give him an hours instruction on how to
build an airplane. Tell him you'll even do it at no charge - cause your a nice
guy.
I'll send you the rest of MY ADVICE off list.
See ya,
Bert
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Navratil
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 9:10 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: aircraft repairman
I don't recall seeing this subject discussed before. I have had my application
form for the Aircraft Repairman sitting around and finally called about
getting the rating. The examiner gave me an appointment for next week and told
me to bring in all logs and be prepaired to discuss construction and that the
oral interview should take about an hour. Has anyone else had a similar going
over? Do I just live in a area with very strict standards?
Dick N
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 |
|
0.26 UPPERCASE_25_50 message body is 25-50% uppercase
Dave-- the Piet axle has suspension, the Fly Baby (as you know) does
not. The only thing that cushions your landings in a Fly Baby
are the tires. We had a Fly Baby that made a hard landing here too a
few years ago and the gear legs shattered like toothpicks---laminated too
they are !
I would have no reservation in sanding down the gear legs on a Piet to an
airfoil/teardrop shape again. Our strength in the Piets gear legs comes
from those two sets of X brace cables----and boy is that gear ever
tough. A local pilot used to always tell me how "frail" the gear legs
looked but I could
never convince the hard head that the strength of the gear is in the cable
bracing.
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: C90 or C85 prop size |
Craig,
I have a new Warp Drive to use with my Corvair engine. I bought the 68" dia. and
being ground adjustable, I can make it any pitch for what ever purpose. William
Wynne gave it high marks as that is what he had used on his Pietenpol so
I ordered it from him.
Alex S.
-------------- Original message --------------
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Craig R.Lawler"
>
> What prop are you guys using with a C-90 or C-85? I have a C-65 now and
> am getting real serious about changing my engine. We have a 1,200ft
> strip at home. One person is fine now. It would be nice to continue to
> haul the neighbor kids around. The C-65 did fine till they got above
> 70lbs or so.
>
> Craig
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Craig,
I have a new Warp Drive to use with my Corvair engine. I bought the 68" dia. and
being ground adjustable, I can make it any pitch for what ever purpose. William
Wynne gave it high marks as that is what he had used on his Pietenpol so I
ordered it from him.
Alex S.
========================================
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 |
|
Jack,
Will your new axle be 1 1/2" X .120?
Alex S.
-------------- Original message --------------
Hi Fred,
You dont want the gear to be so strong that it survives a really hard landing,
only to transmit devastating loads to the airframe. Recommended G loading for
landing gear to withstand is about 3.1 Gs. My axle was good for a little over
2 Gs, and that was not enough. My new axle will be capable of withstanding
loads of 3.8 Gs without yielding.
Jack
-----Original Message-----
I've been reading the posts regarding landing gear and had a 2-cent thought --
kind of like Loyd in "Dumb and Dumber": "Uh, wait a minute...uh, yup, I just had
an idea." : )
Is it possible to make the landing gear so bullet-proof that in a forced, really
"off-field" landing, the landing gear survives reasonably well but transmits
damage to the fuselage proper? Obviously it should be as strong as possible,
but I would think in some instances, I'd rather sacrifice the landing gear than
the airframe and my bod. Then again, if you wipe out the gear, you'll probably
damage the fuselage, too... Was just thinking about it...
My plan of the day is to rip some white ash into 2-inch strips for the lower fuselage
cross braces...
Have a great day, everyone!
Fred B.
Jack,
Will your new axle be 1 1/2" X .120?
Alex S.
-------------- Original message --------------
<STYLE>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{margin-right:0in;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.EmailStyle17
{font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</STYLE>
<FONT id=role_document face=Arial color=navy size=2>Hi Fred,
You dont want the gear to be so strong that it survives a really hard landing,
only to transmit devastating loads to the airframe. Recommended G loading for
landing gear to withstand is about 3.1 Gs. My axle was good for a little over
2 Gs, and that was not enough. My new axle will be capable of withstanding loads
of 3.8 Gs without yielding.
Jack
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in">-----Original Message-----
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in">I've been reading the posts regarding
landing gear and had a 2-cent thought -- kind of like Loyd in "Dumb and Dumber":
"Uh, wait a minute...uh, yup, I just had an idea." : )
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in">
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in">Is it possible to make the landing
gear so bullet-proof that in a forced, really "off-field" landing, the landing
gear survives reasonably well but transmits damage to the fuselage proper?
Obviously it should be as strong as possible, but I would think in some instances,
I'd rather sacrifice the landing gear than the airframe and my bod. Then
again, if you wipe out the gear, you'll probably damage the fuselage, too... Was
just thinking about it...
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in">
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in">My plan of the day is to rip some
white ash into 2-inch strips for the lower fuselage cross braces...
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in">
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in">Have a great day, everyone!
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in">Fred B.
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fly Baby gear |
Well, I think the cables may actually provide only minimal compressive
strength at landing. It does seem to me that the real benefit at landing is
in the compression of the spruce gear legs themselves.
In my incredibly naive, rather short sighted, no engineering background,
usually don't know what the heck I'm talking about....opinion......BHP's
design is well within safe limits.
The maximum compressive crushing strength parallel to the grain of spruce
being 5650 lbs per square inch, in addition to the shock absorbing
properties of the bungy, probably explains why this design has been working
pretty darn well for over 70 years..... :-) I may be using the wrong
number from the spruce strength table but even if I use any of the other
small numbers (except the tension numbers), I'm still ok....
Jim in Plano.....
> Dave-- the Piet axle has suspension, the Fly Baby (as you know) does
> not. The only thing that cushions your landings in a Fly Baby
> are the tires. We had a Fly Baby that made a hard landing here too a
> few years ago and the gear legs shattered like toothpicks---laminated too
> they are !
> I would have no reservation in sanding down the gear legs on a Piet to an
> airfoil/teardrop shape again. Our strength in the Piets gear legs comes
> from those two sets of X brace cables----and boy is that gear ever
> tough.
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 |
|
No, it will be 1-1/2" x .188" wall, heat treated to 160,000 psi ultimate
tensile strength, which should give a yield strength of about 105,000
psi. That will be stronger than a non heat treated axle of 1-1/2" x
.25" wall, and about 8 lbs lighter. 4130 can be heat treated up to
about 225,000 psi ultimate, but there would be little toughness and it
would be pretty brittle.
I must admit I was a little shocked when I ran a stress analysis on my
axle and found it only good for a little over 2 G's. I had not analyzed
it before, trusting to make it like others before me, although now I
can't remember who told me they had used .120 wall. I can tell you from
personal experience that 2 G's is not strong enough.
I have the new material on hand now and hope to take Friday off from
work and spend the day fabricating my new axle. I am trying to line up
a heat treat facility (there are several in this area) that will do it
for me at a reasonable price.
Jack Phillips, PE
Sr. Manager, Disposables Product Development
Clinical Technologies and Services
Cardinal Health
Creedmoor, NC
(919) 528-5212
-----Original Message-----
From: alexms1@comcast.net [mailto:alexms1@comcast.net]
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
Jack,
Will your new axle be 1 1/2" X .120?
Alex S.
-------------- Original message --------------
Hi Fred,
You don't want the gear to be so strong that it survives a really hard
landing, only to transmit devastating loads to the airframe.
Recommended G loading for landing gear to withstand is about 3.1 G's.
My axle was good for a little over 2 G's, and that was not enough. My
new axle will be capable of withstanding loads of 3.8 G's without
yielding.
Jack
-----Original Message-----
I've been reading the posts regarding landing gear and had a 2-cent
thought -- kind of like Loyd in "Dumb and Dumber": "Uh, wait a
minute...uh, yup, I just had an idea." : )
Is it possible to make the landing gear so bullet-proof that in a
forced, really "off-field" landing, the landing gear survives reasonably
well but transmits damage to the fuselage proper? Obviously it should be
as strong as possible, but I would think in some instances, I'd rather
sacrifice the landing gear than the airframe and my bod. Then again, if
you wipe out the gear, you'll probably damage the fuselage, too.... Was
just thinking about it...
My plan of the day is to rip some white ash into 2-inch strips for the
lower fuselage cross braces...
Have a great day, everyone!
Fred B.
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: Landing Gear |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: <gcardinal@mn.rr.com>
Hi Forrest,
Did Bernard consider the steel tube gear more
robust than the
wood gear?
Or was the change simply to keep up with the
current
trends in airplanes at the time?
Greg Cardinal
Minneapolis
----- Original Message -----
From: <FTLovley@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Landing Gear
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by:
> FTLovley@aol.com
>
> Of course, Bernard wrote that landing gear
> statement for the Flying & Glider
> Manual before he himself switched to a
> steel tube gear for the 1933 Improved
> Air Camper. He was talking about not
> substituting steel for wood in the legs
> of the straight axle gear.
> Forrest Lovley
>
>
> Forum -
> through the Contributions
> banner ads or any other
> Matronics Forums.
> pietenpol-list@matronics.com
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/Pietenpol-List.htm
> http://www.matronics.com/search
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
>
>
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 |
|
Thanks for the comments about landing gear strength. I'm very close to being finished
with the gear. I disassembled my gear assembly tonight and put an undercoat
on all the metal parts. I'll shape the wood legs like most of you suggested.
Mike and John were right about the Flybaby gear. It was made with pine
wood and the only shock absorption was low air pressure in the tires. Thanks.
Dave Paulsen
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: Modern Ford Engines for the Pietenpol |
>
> From: Michael Fisher <mfisher@gci.net>
> Date: 2004/12/11 Sat PM 09:35:53 EST
> To: pietenpol-list-digest@matronics.com
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Modern Ford Engines for the Pietenpol
>
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael Fisher <mfisher@gci.net>
>
>
> Pieters,
> Here is a minor update on alternative engines for the Pietenpol. The
following text was copied from an Email to a friend. The airplane referenced
is Mountain Piet.
> This airplane could have been bought for about $9800.00 in damaged
condition, as pictured. It was well worth the price. The three-piece wing would
have enabled me to keep it in my shop.
> I suggested to Kitty and Bob that it might be a good thing for their
two sons. Its home base was Salida, Colorado, about a two hour drive from their
home in Edwards. The way things played out, it was just as well that they
were occupied with other projects.
> This would have been a great little airplane for Talkeetna, Alaska.
I could have handled all the repairs except for the fabric and would have asked
for your help on that.
> The buider, John Dilatush, has found new owners who he believes will
restore his aircraft with full respect for the original craftsmanship and planning
that went into it. I wish them well.
> Mountain Piet was much too nice to serve as a test-bed for an engine
even less proven than the Subaru i.e., my 116 cubic inch inverted Ford Escort,
especially over rough country.
> Work continues on that project. I'm pretty close to spinning it up
electrically to check the oiling and coolant circulation systems.
> When you come up to look at the press-brake, I have a bleed-off resistor
for your phase converter.
> Go to the link below for a great slide show on a very interesting aircraft.
> Happy landings,
> Mike
>
> http://www.flysquirrel.net/piets/John_piet.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I have a piet that I am restoring,you all might be interested in the the before
and after pics,.
It now sits on its airframe ...not so well after the hurricanes down here in florida..butt
still in good,fair shape,I have a 110hp corvair motor on it, and
in the process of doing the william wynne conversion...lol,so I hope to be up
and airbourne by march,for a good cross country trip to missouri...,.
We shall seee.......,anyway I can use some info on the airframe and cabane strutts...love
a set of plans?.........
heres a couple of now pics.....any advice..........?
sincerely ..Mark Thomson.................................................
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: Landing gear |
Hello Group,
I addressed this subject with the group a while ago, but got no
response...I'd like to use the landing gear configuration used on the Sky Scout
on my
Aircamper. I've done some preliminary design for adapting the fittings and
it looks feasable. Has anyone had any experience with this? It looks like
the forward cabane fitting can be combined with the upper shock strut fitting
without modifying the fuselage truss. Am I missing something here?
Don Cooley
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: | RE: C90 or C85 prop size |
The warp drive is a 2 - blade 72" HP blades and HP hub. The guys with Corvairs
I assume are using a 3 - blade 68" HP blades and hub. If you want to have
the ability to hand prop, you really want a 2 - blade. The guys at Warp drive
will likely recommend the 2 - blade up to 100 HP. Then the 3 - blade for 100 HP
and up.
I am sold on them. The nickel leading edge that most people seem to want slows
down the order/shipping time. I have my blades w/o this. I put the leading
edge tape on and have found this works quite well, even in the rain. I had to
replace one leading edge tape only because i installed it poorly.
Shawn Wolk
C-FRAZ Pietenpol Aircamper
C-GZOT Skyhopper 2
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! --
|