---------------------------------------------------------- Pietenpol-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Tue 02/15/05: 9 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 12:04 AM - Re: OT - Quad City Challenger II (Clif Dawson) 2. 03:38 AM - Re: OT - Quad City Challenger II (Kevin Holcomb) 3. 04:42 AM - Re: Aileron Horn Question (Phillips, Jack) 4. 04:47 AM - Re: Aileron Horn Question (FTLovley@aol.com) 5. 05:56 AM - Re: Aileron Horn Question (Textor, Jack) 6. 12:32 PM - a useful FAA web site ! (Michael D Cuy) 7. 01:24 PM - Re: a useful FAA web site ! (DJ Vegh) 8. 05:28 PM - walking beam attachment (Richard Schreiber) 9. 07:46 PM - Re: walking beam attachment () ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 12:04:25 AM PST US From: Clif Dawson Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: OT - Quad City Challenger II --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Clif Dawson Too many www's, Chuck. Check the addy when it comes up in the address line and remove the extra http's and www's. There is apparently an issue with vertical tail effectiveness when the cockpit is fully enclosed. Most of the ones I've seen have plexy fins added at the ends of the stab, about a square foot each, just like the ones you see on float Beavers. I think in Britain you're required to install an addition to the vertical fin. There are a lot flying though. Clif > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Rcaprd@aol.com > > DJ, > I've never flown, and I don't think I've ever seen a Challenger II, but I've > heard of it somewhere...probably in one of the magazines. I'm always > interested in anything that flys, but the link you listed didn't work for me. Oh, > well....kit planes are for Sissy's !! :) He he he !! > > Chuck G. > ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 03:38:53 AM PST US From: "Kevin Holcomb" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: OT - Quad City Challenger II --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Kevin Holcomb" That Rotax may be loud, but trust me that is a good noise. I was gave a friend a BFR in the really nice Kitfox that he had built himself last year. That Rotax suddenly stopped making noise. It was shortly after takeoff with approx 250 feet to work with. We landed straight ahead, or rather right where we were because the airplane just doesn't glide very far. All we had to work with was Citrus grove so into the trees we went. After a real quick review of the situation, which with a Rotax does not take long, there just is not much to look at (fuel, ignition, throttle, and you are out of levers/buttons). The good news is that we demonstrated that if you keep her under control, get her slow and do your best flare you have a great chance of living. We did, I was unscratched, but rather bruised from the seatbelts and from a tube from the landing gear that buckled and drove itself up through the seat, thankfully the seat cushion was thick. My friend needed surgery for a destroyed ankle; he is just now getting back to walking. And of course the airplane is trash. There was fuel onboard, in fact the left wing tank split open so there was fuel everywhere. Only one prop blade was damaged so it wasn't turning at the time of impact. The engine, a Rotax 532 had 71 hours since new and about 2 hours since a teardown/inspection by Lockwood (the presumed experts.) The teardown was not inspired by any particular event, it was just the sort of careful over the top maintenance that my friend did on the airplane he built. Needless to say I am not impressed with Rotax. It did change the way I think while flying; where I would land is never far from my mind. Reliability seems a lot more important than it ever did before, and for myself I no longer have any interest in airplane engines without a long, happy and established history in the field. Friends don't let friends fly a Rotax, Kevin www.airminded.net > [Original Message] > From: Greg Bacon > To: > Date: 2/14/2005 11:51:20 PM > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: OT - Quad City Challenger II > > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Greg Bacon > > DJ, > > I met a Challenger II owner at the Brodhead fly-in last year. He mentioned > that he was selling his Challenger because it was "the most boring thing he > ever flew". You may want to get a ride in one before diving in. > > BTW, I did a little tail dragger training in a Kitfox with a 582 Rotax. The > noise and vibration of that two stroke was annoying and disconcerting. It > took a lot of enjoyment out of the flight experience for me. > > Greg Bacon > Prairie Home, MO > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 04:42:10 AM PST US Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Aileron Horn Question From: "Phillips, Jack" --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Phillips, Jack" Forrest is right - you don't actually bend the steel in a crease. You want to make the leading edge rounded. I hammered the thin steel sheet around a 1/2" steel rod to form the curve, then edge welded the two halves together. One of the most fun parts to make on the whole project. I can't understand why anyone would put up with the increased weight of solid .090" thick steel horns when these are so light and so much fun to make. Jack Phillips -----Original Message----- --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: FTLovley@aol.com I don't know how thick it is...but I watched Bernard make those aileron horns and elevator horns from the mild steel tops from 5 gallon dope cans. They didn't have an actual bend in them...he just formed them so that after brazing they were airfoil shaped with the thick section near the front. Forrest Lovley Jordan MN ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 04:47:28 AM PST US From: FTLovley@aol.com Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Aileron Horn Question --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: FTLovley@aol.com Gary...actually, I believe that the dope cans back in the 30"s were probably lighter material than today...I have some old ones from Berry Brothers and they are pretty thin...no OSHA, hazardous shipping regulations, etc, etc...also, they didn't have to be strong enough for uncaring shippers to mistreat. The material is very ductile mild steel that is easy to form, and not prone to cracks. And if you use them to build your airplane, it won't cost you anything to get rid of them...:>) Forrest Lovley ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 05:56:24 AM PST US Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Aileron Horn Question From: "Textor, Jack" Thanks to everyone for the great feedback! Jack Do not archive _____ ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 12:32:16 PM PST US From: Michael D Cuy Subject: Pietenpol-List: a useful FAA web site ! --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy Hey guys-- I was stumbling around looking for something on the web and found this site----VERY good for bookmarking. http://www.faa.gov/fsdo/phl/IAREF.HTM Mike C. ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 01:24:09 PM PST US From: "DJ Vegh" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: a useful FAA web site ! --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "DJ Vegh" Wow! nice find. I just went there and downloaded the safety belt attachment AC. 47 pages of kick arse info! tons of other goodies too! DJ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael D Cuy" Subject: Pietenpol-List: a useful FAA web site ! > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy > > Hey guys-- I was stumbling around looking for something on the web and > found this site----VERY good for > bookmarking. http://www.faa.gov/fsdo/phl/IAREF.HTM > > > Mike C. > > ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 05:28:00 PM PST US s=test1; d=earthlink.net; b=SNpIZ4LsJcLMfJv0/iBTQyhbkjAAhrtbJ4RGaOwHHjzIY2Xp6XCincNi7nhEalZw; From: "Richard Schreiber" Subject: Pietenpol-List: walking beam attachment 0.50 MIME_BOUND_NEXTPART Spam tool pattern in MIME boundary I'm ready to attach my walking beam for the elevator controls in my Aircamper and I like to see how others have done it. The original plans and the 1932 Glider manual show the bearings just attached the the vertical fuselage struts with 3/16" bolts. The Skyscout plans in the 1933 glider manual show the bearings attached to 2'' x 5" spruce blocks bolted and glued to the inside of the vertical struts. I have seen photos on the web with the spruce blocks, but they were only glued an no additional bolts. I've also seen examples of the original attacment method. I am a little reluctant to drill the two 3/16" holes through the strut since if the strut collapses I'll be in a heap of hurt. I'm assuming thats why Bernie changed it on the '33 skyscout plans. What have most others done? Thanks, Rick Richard Schreiber lmforge@earthlink.net ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 07:46:10 PM PST US From: Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: walking beam attachment Drill the holes and don't worry about it. I doubt if one of those uprights has ever broken because of the holes drilled through it. Greg Cardinal ----- Original Message ----- From: Richard Schreiber To: pietenpol list Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 7:25 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: walking beam attachment I'm ready to attach my walking beam for the elevator controls in my Aircamper and I like to see how others have done it. The original plans and the 1932 Glider manual show the bearings just attached the the vertical fuselage struts with 3/16" bolts. The Skyscout plans in the 1933 glider manual show the bearings attached to 2'' x 5" spruce blocks bolted and glued to the inside of the vertical struts. I have seen photos on the web with the spruce blocks, but they were only glued an no additional bolts. I've also seen examples of the original attacment method. I am a little reluctant to drill the two 3/16" holes through the strut since if the strut collapses I'll be in a heap of hurt. I'm assuming thats why Bernie changed it on the '33 skyscout plans. What have most others done? Thanks, Rick Richard Schreiber lmforge@earthlink.net