---------------------------------------------------------- Pietenpol-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Thu 06/02/05: 24 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 12:01 AM - Official Usage Guideline [Please Read] [Monthly Posting] (dralle@matronics.com) 2. 12:08 AM - Re: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? (Clif Dawson) 3. 12:18 AM - Re: Grove Wheels/Brakes (DJ Vegh) 4. 07:11 AM - FAR which authorizes and A&P to do a condition inspection (Michael D Cuy) 5. 10:08 AM - Re: FAR which authorizes and A&P to do a condition (Mark) 6. 10:24 AM - Re: FAR which authorizes and A&P to do a condition inspection (Christian Bobka) 7. 11:16 AM - Re: FAR which authorizes and A&P to do a (John Hofmann) 8. 11:48 AM - there is no FAR which authorizes and A&P to do a conditioninspectio (Michael D Cuy) 9. 12:18 PM - Re: FAR which authorizes and A&P to do a condition inspection (Phillips, Jack) 10. 01:04 PM - my MIDO Chief friend confirms John H.'s response is correct (Michael D Cuy) 11. 01:15 PM - Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 06/01/05 (Brad Smith) 12. 01:26 PM - Re: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? (Steve Ruse) 13. 02:02 PM - Re: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? (walt evans) 14. 02:20 PM - Re: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? (DJ Vegh) 15. 02:21 PM - Re: Celebrity - was Cork float fuel-proof varnish? (DJ Vegh) 16. 02:24 PM - Re: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? (Steve Ruse) 17. 02:48 PM - Re: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? (Gordon Bowen) 18. 03:26 PM - Re: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? (Isablcorky@aol.com) 19. 03:53 PM - Re: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? (John Hofmann) 20. 04:06 PM - Re: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? (Isablcorky@aol.com) 21. 05:53 PM - Re: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? (Gene Rambo) 22. 06:58 PM - Re: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? (Mark) 23. 07:52 PM - Re: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? (Mike McCarty) 24. 11:14 PM - Re: EAA (Clif Dawson) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 12:01:41 AM PST US From: dralle@matronics.com Subject: Pietenpol-List: Official Usage Guideline [Please Read] [Monthly Posting] DNA: do not archive --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: dralle@matronics.com Dear Lister, Please read over the Pietenpol-List Usage Guidelines below. The complete Pietenpol-List FAQ including these Usage Guidelines can be found at the following URL: http://www.matronics.com/FAQs/Pietenpol-List.FAQ.html Thank you, Matt Dralle Matronics Email List Administrator ****************************************************************************** Pietenpol-List Usage Guidelines ****************************************************************************** The following details the official Usage Guidelines for the Pietenpol-List. You are encouraged to read it carefully, and to abide by the rules therein. Failure to use the Pietenpol-List in the manner described below may result in the removal of the subscribers from the List. Pietenpol-List Policy Statement The purpose of the Pietenpol-List is to provide a forum of discussion for things related to this particular discussion group. The List's goals are to serve as an information resource to its members; to deliver high-quality content; to provide moral support; to foster camaraderie among its members; and to support safe operation. Reaching these goals requires the participation and cooperation of each and every member of the List. To this end, the following guidelines have been established: - Please keep all posts related to the List at some level. Do not submit posts concerning computer viruses, urban legends, random humor, long lost buddies' phone numbers, etc. etc. - THINK carefully before you write. Ask yourself if your post will be relevant to everyone. If you have to wonder about that, DON'T send it. - Remember that your post will be included for posterity in an archive that is growing in size at an extraordinary rate. Try to be concise and terse in your posts. Avoid overly wordy and lengthy posts and responses. - Keep your signature brief. Please include your name, email address, aircraft type/tail number, and geographic location. A short line about where you are in the building process is also nice. Avoid bulky signatures with character graphics; they consume unnecessary space in the archive. - DON'T post requests to the List for information when that info is easily obtainable from other widely available sources. Consult the web page or FAQ first. - If you want to respond to a post, DO keep the "Subject:" line of your response the same as that of the original post. This makes it easy to find threads in the archive. - When responding, NEVER quote the *entire* original post in your response. DO use lines from the original post to help "tune in" the reader to the topic at hand, but be selective. The impact that quoting the entire original post has on the size of the archive can not be overstated! - When the poster asks you to respond to him/her personally, DO NOT then go ahead and reply to the List. Be aware that clicking the "reply" button on your mail package does not necessarily send your response to the original poster. You might have to actively address your response with the original poster's email address. - DO NOT use the List to respond to a post unless you have something to add that is relevant and has a broad appeal. "Way to go!", "I agree", and "Congratulations" are all responses that are better sent to the original poster directly, rather than to the List at large. - When responding to others' posts, avoid the feeling that you need to comment on every last point in their posts, unless you can truly contribute something valuable. - Feel free to disagree with other viewpoints, BUT keep your tone polite and respectful. Don't make snide comments, personally attack other listers, or take the moral high ground on an obviously controversial issue. This will only cause a pointless debate that will hurt feelings, waste bandwidth and resolve nothing. ------- [This is an automated posting.] ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 12:08:20 AM PST US From: Clif Dawson Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Clif Dawson Don't use shellac with auto fuel containing alcohol. Shellac is made by dissolving shellac flakes in ethanol or, in inferior products, methanol. An interesting point. Shellac, properly prepared, has superior water vapour resistance, above that of varnishes, epoxies, etc. and has been used as an undercoat for fine varnish finishes for centuries. http://antiquerestorers.com/Articles/jeff/shellac.htm Clif PS, More shellac stuff just for you, Mike; :-) :-) :-) http://www.geocities.com/BourbonStreet/4264/ Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy > . Shellac > is light too--epoxies can become heavy I think. Let's hear what the > other experts might > have to say though before you take my word:) > > Mike C. ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 12:18:22 AM PST US From: "DJ Vegh" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Grove Wheels/Brakes I have them and love 'em! Havent flown with them yet but they are of very high quality. Basically a Cleveland in sheeps clothing. I don't think you'll be dissappointed. DJ ----- Original Message ----- From: Lynn Knoll To: pietenpol list Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 5:36 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Grove Wheels/Brakes It's shopping time for wheels, brakes, tires, & master cylinders and there is a large price savings with Grove's. What advice can you all give? ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 07:11:18 AM PST US From: Michael D Cuy Subject: Pietenpol-List: FAR which authorizes and A&P to do a condition inspection m> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy Guys---I've looked at parts 91 and 43 Appendix D and can't specifically pinpoint where it says that an A&P is authorized to sign off an experimental aircraft for a condition inspection. There are many references to a homebuilt that is licensed under the light sport aircraft category, but not just plain old vanilla homebuilt. Can any of you find this needle in the haystack ? thank you, Mike C. in Ohio ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 10:08:34 AM PST US From: Mark inspection Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: FAR which authorizes and A&P to do a condition inspection --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Mark Michael D Cuy wrote: > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy > > > Guys---I've looked at parts 91 and 43 Appendix D and can't > specifically pinpoint where it says that an > A&P is authorized to sign off an experimental aircraft for a condition > inspection. There are many > references to a homebuilt that is licensed under the light sport > aircraft category, but not just plain old > vanilla homebuilt. Can any of you find this needle in the haystack ? > > thank you, > > Mike C. in Ohio > I am really not sure that there is much to gain by getting a fat ultralight certified Experimental LSA. In fact it might have some real pitfalls especially if looked at it in the light that no history is out there on how things should be handled, (with experimental you have a history on which to base decisions) you could be the one that gets to set that precedent. As far as operation as long as the aircraft meets LSA operational limitations, its my impression that its LSA an thats all you need. Mark ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 10:24:09 AM PST US d="scan'208"; a="1145496429:sNHT21427176" From: "Christian Bobka" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: FAR which authorizes and A&P to do a condition inspection --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Christian Bobka" Part 43. It is there Chris Braumeister und Inspektor der Flitzer und Flitzermotoren ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: FAR which authorizes and A&P to do a condition inspection > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Mark > > Michael D Cuy wrote: > > > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy > > > > > > Guys---I've looked at parts 91 and 43 Appendix D and can't > > specifically pinpoint where it says that an > > A&P is authorized to sign off an experimental aircraft for a condition > > inspection. There are many > > references to a homebuilt that is licensed under the light sport > > aircraft category, but not just plain old > > vanilla homebuilt. Can any of you find this needle in the haystack ? > > > > thank you, > > > > Mike C. in Ohio > > > I am really not sure that there is much to gain by getting a fat > ultralight certified Experimental LSA. In fact it might have some real > pitfalls especially if looked at it in the light that no history is out > there on how things should be handled, (with experimental you have a > history on which to base decisions) you could be the one that gets to > set that precedent. As far as operation as long as the aircraft meets > LSA operational limitations, its my impression that its LSA an thats all > you need. > > Mark > > ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 11:16:23 AM PST US condition inspection Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: FAR which authorizes and A&P to do a condition inspection From: John Hofmann --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: John Hofmann Mikee! It has been awhile since I have done this one but here goes. My FARS may be a little old but I think I got it right. Anyone feel free to correct me if I am off base: FAR Part 43.1(b) specifically excludes experimental aircraft. It reads, "This part does not apply to any aircraft for which an experimental airworthiness certificate has been issued, unless a different kind of airworthiness certificate had previously been issued for that aircraft." FAR 91.409(c)(1) exempts experimentally certificated aircraft from the normal inspection rules. The legal authority and basis to require an annual "Condition Inspection" is found in 14 CFR part 91.319(e), whereby the FAA Administrator (in this case, the certificating inspector) may issue any "additional limitations the Administrator considers necessary" to the aircraft's airworthiness certificate (Operating limitations) when the aircraft receives a special airworthiness certificate. This usually reads something like "No person shall operate this aircraft unless within the preceding 12 calendar months it has had a condition inspection performed in accordance with the scope and detail of appendix D to part 43, or other FAA-approved programs, and found to be in a condition for safe operation. This inspection will be recorded in the aircraft maintenance records." I used to do a lot of condition inspections of experimental aircraft after they changed hands. Is this for the Corby? -john- > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Mark > > Michael D Cuy wrote: > >> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy >> >> >> Guys---I've looked at parts 91 and 43 Appendix D and can't >> specifically pinpoint where it says that an >> A&P is authorized to sign off an experimental aircraft for a condition >> inspection. There are many >> references to a homebuilt that is licensed under the light sport >> aircraft category, but not just plain old >> vanilla homebuilt. Can any of you find this needle in the haystack ? >> >> thank you, >> >> Mike C. in Ohio ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 11:48:48 AM PST US From: Michael D Cuy n Subject: Pietenpol-List: there is no FAR which authorizes and A&P to do a conditioninspectio n --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy John-- you are right on. Part 43 does not apply to Experimental aircraft--it says it right up front. Where I found them was in my operating limitations issued with the airworthiness cert. of the aircraft. thank you ! Mike C. ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 12:18:34 PM PST US Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: FAR which authorizes and A&P to do a condition inspection From: "Phillips, Jack" --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Phillips, Jack" I've looked all through Part 43 and cannot find it. There are references to Light Sport Aircraft, but not Experimentals where it explicitly says who is authorized to perform Condition Inspections. I believe John Hoffmann is correct on this. I'll look at the Airworthiness Certificate for my Pietenpol when I get home tonight. Jack Phillips --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Christian Bobka" Part 43. It is there Chris Braumeister und Inspektor der Flitzer und Flitzermotoren ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: FAR which authorizes and A&P to do a condition inspection > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Mark Michael D Cuy wrote: --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy Guys---I've looked at parts 91 and 43 Appendix D and can't specifically pinpoint where it says that an A&P is authorized to sign off an experimental aircraft for a condition inspection. There are many references to a homebuilt that is licensed under the light sport aircraft category, but not just plain old vanilla homebuilt. Can any of you find this needle in the haystack ? thank you, Mike C. in Ohio ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 01:04:38 PM PST US From: Michael D Cuy Subject: Pietenpol-List: my MIDO Chief friend confirms John H.'s response is correct m> John, Guys-- here is the word from my local FAA guy.....and Champ owner Mike, There is not a reg that specifically says what you are looking for, however it is captured in your operating limitations which is part of the airworthiness certificated. I'm in Chicago right now, I'll be back in the office tomorrow if you would like to discuss in more detail. Our new number is .... ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 01:15:41 PM PST US s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=IwODnE7IIeI3/w4maacP5RkjRPHAy24nEv677qrVZeWQkHPwdzNCWzHaUw8nGZuuKKkU857/IqtFHpZWCXqO2M61QJjI6+PNMesoSJuoGD9i0Qgv1vx9YwAykhchBdlnIuv5A6NivneHhQQuYdJdn8axYrpx6b0orM6g0MF5zEU= ; From: Brad Smith Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 06/01/05 --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Brad Smith Answered in line below... >Mark, In many ways I agree with your statement. The >ship originally >was short >nosed and made for the heavy Model A Ford, then >adapted to a Corvair >and a small >Continental which messes up the vertical surface area >proportions with >those >motors' lighter weight and needed extended nose. >Then people got >bigger so >they can't get in and out so they raised the wing and >shifted it aft >and added >a flop for access, and then the ship needed the axle >moved to make it >handle >on the ground, and then the aft shifted wing, gear, >payload, and >resulting CG >upsets the tail moment arm (tail volume if you will) >of the stabilisers >so they >are undersized now and effectively getting smaller as >time goes on. This is my "beef" with the Piet. I dearly love this design, but at 250# I'm really too heavy for it as it was originally conceived, except perhaps as a single seat bird. >Then the plane is yet heavier with the three piece >wing which causes it >to cruise >it at a higher angle of attack which increases the >pitching moment >which calls >for a bigger horizontal stabiliser that nobody is >willing to give it. Hmmm... very good points. >For these reasons, although I appreciate the >Peitenpol design for what >it was and >is, it has lost its attractiveness for my purposes >although it can get >the >builder in the air cheaply, and probably the >cheapest, if that is where >he wants >to be. And I don't blame him for wanting to be there >but the choice >should >be rethought. Palns are virtually free and so is the >advice which is >worth what >you pay for it. I would probably disagree on the cheapest, but certainly it ranks right up there with the best of them. >It took I few years for me to make the realiasation >that too many >changes have >made the design get to the point where it should be >redesigned from a >clean sheet >of paper, sized and proportioned to be of utmost >utility in the future. >They >are barely true Pietenpols anymore and all the >accomodations and >bandaids >speak of this and detract from the excellence of the >no longer adequate >original. Agreed! >That is why I have become such a proponent of Lynn >William's Staaken >Flitzer line >as the aircraft fit today's people, use today's >available and reliable >motors >(does not the Ferdinand Porche flat four date to 1914 >or something like >that? >So much for today's motors) like the mere 50 year old >Corvair, Rotec >R2800, >Aerovee, etc,, yet look REALLY good and period, fly >well, and can be >constructed >using the same EXACT traditional methods as the >Pietenpol and just as >inexpensively. >We have it all in the Flitzer line including the cult >status the >Pietenpol >enjoys. We just need to get the word out. Ok... so the word is now out... I've never heard of these aircraft. Feel free to contact me off line with more info. >Much fame could be had (and maybe some money, Gary) >if a gifted >designer took all >the old classics and made them again viable by >upsizing them 10-15% or >even >20% and adding 75 years of design experience to >economise on the >structure while >preserving the ORIGINAL construction methods and >handling: Buhl Bull >Pup, >Long Longster, Georgias Special, Pietenpol Camper and >Scout, Heath Baby >Bullet >and Parasol, American Eaglet, Church Midwing, Chilton >DW1, UT-1, >Urbitis' ships, >and the list goes on and on. Roger Mann does semi-modern wooden versions of some of those. Loehle does a parasol also in wood. Graham Lee just released plans for the Heath in aluminum tube/pop rivet construction like his Nieuports (I have both the Heath and Nieuport 11 plans.) >Just look at original editions of the >Flying >and Glider Manual (not the chopped up EAA editions >that are missing >half of >the original content). The demand is there but >nobody with the ability >has stepped >up to the plate except Lynn and he is overwhelmed. I >wish I had the >ability >but lack the schooling and the process is yet still >mystifying to me. It is daunting for certain. >For >all the books I have, a hands on, start to finish >design has never been >put >in book form to the extent that I believe necessary >for me to be able >to copy >the technique and eventually be able to do it on my >own. Hiscocks or >Pazmany >come closest but use sheet metal as the medium which >is personally >undesireable. This book form analysis would have to > include flight testing and >retrospective >design analysis as a result of the corrections made >in the field as a >result >of flight testing. I am truly jealous of the >engineer's abilities! I can recommend the Beaujon ultralight book for a good resource. Best $35 I ever spent on aviation related stuff. (Well, except for the "introductory flight" that got me hooked I guess.) >It >seems that there is a plethora of magazine articles >or series of >articles that >nibble at the design process yet never stick to it >through to the end. >It is >apparent that few individuals possess the designer's >ability. There are a lot of details involved, and a change often has a domino effect, setting off waves of other required changes to make the first one viable. >I could imagine that the 1929 Piet with a Model A >motor and one piece >wing built >to the Hoopman plans (really! yeah right) and flown >by a 150 pound >pilot flies >as sweet as can be. But that design is no longer >realistic for today's >sized >people. >I am not advocating building a GN-1..... Not a bad design, but not what I want either. Brad Flitzer los! Chris __________________________________ http://discover.yahoo.com/ ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 01:26:46 PM PST US From: Steve Ruse Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Steve Ruse I found some shellac last night, but didn't buy any yet because I noticed one of the solvents is ethanol. I'm still undecided as to weather or not I'll use Mogas in the future, so I didn't buy the shellac yet, in case I run into a batch of Mogas with Ethanol (which I believe is a bad thing for other reasons, if I recall correctly). Chuck brings up a great point though, I hadn't considered the resin used to make my fiberglass tank. I need to test it for "ethanol resistance" before I continue thinking about Mogas. I guess that holds true for all fuel system components though. Someone on another forum suggested clear fingernail polish. Might be worth putting some dried samples in fuel to test? Thanks for the tips everyone! Steve Ruse N6383J - KFTW Quoting Michael D Cuy : > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy > > > Steve-- upon the advice of my IA and several restoration guys at our > airport, I dipped > my cork in a can of shellac, let it dry and repeated this about 4 > times. No chips or > troubles (like not floating) in almost 7 years of using avgas and a rare > dose of autofuel. > I did re-coat the cork about 2 years ago just to make sure she had a good > seal. Shellac > is light too--epoxies can become heavy I think. Let's hear what the > other experts might > have to say though before you take my word:) > > Mike C. > > ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 02:02:07 PM PST US From: "walt evans" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "walt evans" Some years back a friend of mine , who is now flying a Fisher Celebrity, made me a float out of Stainless steel wire put thru a ping pong ball. The ball was then sealed with epoxy. When I completed the Piet he made me another. So they have both been both autogas and 100LL for years, with no ill effects. I can post a photo , and find out the epoxy type, if anyone is interested. walt evans NX140DL ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Ruse" Subject: Pietenpol-List: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Steve Ruse > > I am replacing the cub-style fuel guage rod in my plane, and would like to > re-coat the cork while I have it out. There are a few chips in the existing > varnish, and I want to make sure it doesn't start absorbing fuel and sink > in-flight, as I've been told this can happen. > > Thanks, > > Steve Ruse > N6383J - KFTW > > ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 02:20:18 PM PST US From: "DJ Vegh" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "DJ Vegh" what about fabricating a float from thin brass sheet? I was thinking of buying some .020" brass sheet from the hobby store and soldering up a simple cylinder and then soldering the cyclinder to a piece of music wire run through it. Guaranteed to work with any type of fuel for many decades. DJ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Ruse" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Steve Ruse > > I found some shellac last night, but didn't buy any yet because I > noticed one of > the solvents is ethanol. I'm still undecided as to weather or not I'll use > Mogas in the future, so I didn't buy the shellac yet, in case I run into a > batch of Mogas with Ethanol (which I believe is a bad thing for other reasons, > if I recall correctly). > > Chuck brings up a great point though, I hadn't considered the resin > used to make > my fiberglass tank. I need to test it for "ethanol resistance" before I > continue thinking about Mogas. I guess that holds true for all fuel system > components though. > > Someone on another forum suggested clear fingernail polish. Might be worth > putting some dried samples in fuel to test? > > Thanks for the tips everyone! > > Steve Ruse > N6383J - KFTW > > Quoting Michael D Cuy : > > > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy > > > > > > Steve-- upon the advice of my IA and several restoration guys at our > > airport, I dipped > > my cork in a can of shellac, let it dry and repeated this about 4 > > times. No chips or > > troubles (like not floating) in almost 7 years of using avgas and a rare > > dose of autofuel. > > I did re-coat the cork about 2 years ago just to make sure she had a good > > seal. Shellac > > is light too--epoxies can become heavy I think. Let's hear what the > > other experts might > > have to say though before you take my word:) > > > > Mike C. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 02:21:40 PM PST US From: "DJ Vegh" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Celebrity - was Cork float fuel-proof varnish? --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "DJ Vegh" off topic, but how does he like that Celebrity? my dad has one that is about 85% complete. DJ ----- Original Message ----- From: "walt evans" > Some years back a friend of mine , who is now flying a Fisher Celebrity, > made me a float out of Stainless steel wire put thru a ping pong ball. ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 02:24:26 PM PST US From: Steve Ruse Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Steve Ruse I'd like to know the epoxy type, and see a picture if you have any. Thanks Walt! Steve Ruse N6383J - KFTW Quoting walt evans : > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "walt evans" > > Some years back a friend of mine , who is now flying a Fisher Celebrity, > made me a float out of Stainless steel wire put thru a ping pong ball. > The ball was then sealed with epoxy. > When I completed the Piet he made me another. So they have both been both > autogas and 100LL for years, with no ill effects. > I can post a photo , and find out the epoxy type, if anyone is interested. > walt evans > NX140DL > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Steve Ruse" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 1:15 PM > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? > > >> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Steve Ruse > >> >> I am replacing the cub-style fuel guage rod in my plane, and would like to >> re-coat the cork while I have it out. There are a few chips in the > existing >> varnish, and I want to make sure it doesn't start absorbing fuel and sink >> in-flight, as I've been told this can happen. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Steve Ruse >> N6383J - KFTW >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 02:48:35 PM PST US From: "Gordon Bowen" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Gordon Bowen" If you made you fiberglass tank out of epoxy resin or Derakane epoxy based vinyl ester resin, you shouldn't have any problem with Mogas with ethanol or methanol. But if you made it out of polyester resin, it depends on the type of polyester. Some boat fuel tanks are out of polyester and the type makes for better fuel resist. Most all canard pusher Rutanesque type planes have epoxy based fiberglass tanks, many guys run Mogas all the time for their o-200's and 235's, and have not reported problems after a 30 year history. Mogas will discolor the tank, but not dissolve. Biggest problem with Mogas is it varies with season and with location across the country. Also Mogas with alcohols will have an afffect on the gasketing. Gordon Bowen -Homer Alaska Cozy IV N64CY Osprey II N64SY Pietenpol N-1033B " But such is the constitution of my mind I cannot avoid forming an opinion", John Adams ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Ruse" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Steve Ruse > > I found some shellac last night, but didn't buy any yet because I > noticed one of > the solvents is ethanol. I'm still undecided as to weather or not I'll use > Mogas in the future, so I didn't buy the shellac yet, in case I run into a > batch of Mogas with Ethanol (which I believe is a bad thing for other reasons, > if I recall correctly). > > Chuck brings up a great point though, I hadn't considered the resin > used to make > my fiberglass tank. I need to test it for "ethanol resistance" before I > continue thinking about Mogas. I guess that holds true for all fuel system > components though. > > Someone on another forum suggested clear fingernail polish. Might be worth > putting some dried samples in fuel to test? > > Thanks for the tips everyone! > > Steve Ruse > N6383J - KFTW > > Quoting Michael D Cuy : > > > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy > > > > > > Steve-- upon the advice of my IA and several restoration guys at our > > airport, I dipped > > my cork in a can of shellac, let it dry and repeated this about 4 > > times. No chips or > > troubles (like not floating) in almost 7 years of using avgas and a rare > > dose of autofuel. > > I did re-coat the cork about 2 years ago just to make sure she had a good > > seal. Shellac > > is light too--epoxies can become heavy I think. Let's hear what the > > other experts might > > have to say though before you take my word:) > > > > Mike C. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 03:26:07 PM PST US From: Isablcorky@aol.com Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? Steve, I've told this story before but I'll repeat it once again. While restoring a 1926 Dodge Bros Touring car I had need to seal some pin holes in the fuel tank. I ordered a quart of tank sealer from Bill Hirsch in N.J.. It worked well. When I arrived at your present stage with 41CC I tried shellac and it didn't prove satisfactory. Suddenly I remembered the can of sealer left over sitting on the dusty shelf. I rolled the wired cork several times, vised the wire and went to bed. Next day dry and hard. Never found any trouble. This could handle car gas safely as that is what it was designed for. 311CC is corked, wired and coated likewise. Send me your mailing address and I will ship you a small quantity adequate for your cork. Corky in Louisiana ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 03:53:08 PM PST US Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? From: John Hofmann --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: John Hofmann Corky Corky's Cork Conundrum? Do not archive > Steve, > > I've told this story before but I'll repeat it once again. While restoring a > 1926 Dodge Bros Touring car I had need to seal some pin holes in the fuel > tank. I ordered a quart of tank sealer from Bill Hirsch in N.J.. It worked > well. When I arrived at your present stage with 41CC I tried shellac and it > didn't prove satisfactory. Suddenly I remembered the can of sealer left over > sitting on the dusty shelf. I rolled the wired cork several times, vised the > wire and went to bed. Next day dry and hard. Never found any trouble. This > could handle car gas safely as that is what it was designed for. 311CC is > corked, wired and coated likewise. > Send me your mailing address and I will ship you a small quantity adequate for > your cork. > > Corky in Louisiana > ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 04:06:16 PM PST US From: Isablcorky@aol.com Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? John, If it is a riddle maybe I'll send you a colored picture. Corky ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 05:53:44 PM PST US From: "Gene Rambo" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? the standard thing for cork floats is plain old fashion shellac. It is fuel proof. Gene ----- Original Message ----- From: Rcaprd@aol.com To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2005 12:12 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? In a message dated 6/1/2005 2:15:40 PM Central Standard Time, steve@wotelectronics.com writes: I am replacing the cub-style fuel guage rod in my plane, and would like to re-coat the cork while I have it out. There are a few chips in the existing varnish, and I want to make sure it doesn't start absorbing fuel and sink in-flight, as I've been told this can happen. Steve, I built both my tanks using fiberglass and Polyester Resin (auto body stuff). Problem is that any alcohol in the fuel could soften up the resin. For this reason, I coated my float with polyester resin to fuel proof it, as well as use it as a monitor for any softening effect of accidental alcohol in the fuel. Chuck G. ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 06:58:31 PM PST US From: Mark Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Mark Gordon Bowen wrote: >--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Gordon Bowen" > >If you made you fiberglass tank out of epoxy resin or Derakane epoxy based >vinyl ester resin, you shouldn't have any problem with Mogas with ethanol or >methanol. But if you made it out of polyester resin, it depends on the type >of polyester. Some boat fuel tanks are out of polyester and the type makes >for better fuel resist. Most all canard pusher Rutanesque type planes have >epoxy based fiberglass tanks, many guys run Mogas all the time for their >o-200's and 235's, and have not reported problems after a 30 year history. >Mogas will discolor the tank, but not dissolve. Biggest problem with Mogas >is it varies with season and with location across the country. Also Mogas >with alcohols will have an afffect on the gasketing. >Gordon Bowen -Homer Alaska >Cozy IV N64CY >Osprey II N64SY >Pietenpol N-1033B >" But such is the constitution of my mind I cannot avoid forming an >opinion", John Adams > > > The alcohol in gas may also work on some fuel lines, but the kicker is now that the mo gas companies no longer have to tell you when its in the gas. It used to be labeled as containing alcohol, but no longer. Most mogas now has some. ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 07:52:35 PM PST US From: "Mike McCarty" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Cork float fuel-proof varnish? --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Mike McCarty" > what about fabricating a float from thin brass sheet? > > I was thinking of buying some .020" brass sheet from the hobby store and > soldering up a simple cylinder and then soldering the cyclinder to a piece > of music wire run through it. Or just use a brass float from some old junk car or lawnmower carburetor... -Mac ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 11:14:18 PM PST US From: Clif Dawson Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: EAA <011201c56666$70879c00$0201a8c0@north> A very low track between two radio beacons. :-) Clif Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: EAA Dick, What is a Grass Route? Braumeister und Inspektor der Flitzer und Flitzermotoren