Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:54 AM - Re: Disassembly and Re-Assembly (Don Morris)
2. 07:51 AM - Re: slow Piet list (tmbrant1@netzero.com)
3. 08:04 AM - corvair parts (tmbrant1@netzero.com)
4. 08:48 AM - Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 9 Msgs - 11/10/05 (Tim Willis)
5. 08:48 AM - Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 9 Msgs - 11/10/05 (Tim Willis)
6. 12:42 PM - Re: Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 9 Msgs - 11/10/05 (Isablcorky@aol.com)
7. 04:55 PM - temporary instruments (Jeff Boatright)
8. 06:20 PM - Disassembly and Re-Assembly (Oscar Zuniga)
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: Disassembly and Re-Assembly |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Don Morris <don@donsplans.com>
Anyone can do the work on a homebuilt aircraft. There are no
requirements. The only maintenance requirement is that it have an
annual condition inspection, which must be performed by an A&P (IA not
required) or the person with the repairman certificate.
If you check part 43.1 (b) you will find that experimental aircraft are
exempted from ALL maintenance requirements in this part (which is not as
good as it sounds. This doesn't get us out of part 91, and some of this
refers us back to part 43). THe long and short of it is that there is
very little that is actually required to be completed in the way of
paperwork. This doesn't mean that it is wise, but it is the law. You
can always record things not required to be recorded.
Now, as to removal of wings and the subsequent reassembly, this is not a
major repair or alteration (check FAR 43 appendix A). So, yes, you can
drag it all over the contry, and subsequently reassemble and fly it on
your own knowledge only.
Hope this clears thing up a bit.
-Don
>> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Larry Nelson
>> <lnelson208@yahoo.com>
>>
>>
>>
>> Let's say a guy pulls the wings off of a Pietenpol and
>> hauls it across the country to a fly-in and then
>> re-assembles it. With a three piece wing, it wouldn't
>> be more than an hour to put the wings back on. What I
>> am talking about is the need for an A&P to sign off
>> the work. I have a "friend" who has hauled his across
>> the country, and while it has since gone thru an
>> annual, no mention has been made of the
>> dis-mantlement, and the subsequent re-mantlement. Has
>> my "friend" got himself in trouble?
>>
>> I think of this dilemma as I visited the website of
>> the unfortunate victim of the fatal crash of his
>> gyroplane, as he had hauled that thing all over
>> creation to different fly-ins. So...what ARE the rules
>> about this.
>>
>> Larry Nelson
>> Springfield, MO
>> Beechcraft Bonanza V-35B N2980A
>> Cessna 195 N9883A
>> Pietenpol Air Camper N444MH
>> 1963 GMC 4106-1618
>> SV/ Spirit of America
>> ARS WB0JOT
>>
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: | Re: slow Piet list |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "tmbrant1@netzero.com" <tmbrant1@netzero.net>
Oscar
I've noticed the slow list as well but figured a lot of people were doing the corvair
college thing... I wish I had been able to make it as I'm in the "gathering"
stage for my corvair engine. I've ran out of money and the heads are ending
up costing me mush more than anticipated. But, such is building your own
airplane...
So, do you have any photos of how the front seat thing is done with the pulley?
I'll be working on that area soon and it sounds like a good idea. Don't know
what to do for trim yet - probably just the bungee around the stick.
Tom 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 |
|
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "tmbrant1@netzero.com" <tmbrant1@netzero.net>
If anyone needs corvair parts, let me know. I've taken apart my second engine
and have stuff I need to part with. I'm keeping the rods and maybe one of the
heads.
Tom B.
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: Pietenpol-List Digest: 9 Msgs - 11/10/05 |
Pietenpol-List Digest List <pietenpol-list-digest@matronics.com>
This relates to cockpit room, and what to do about it. This has been bothering
me for many weeks, and the discussion re steel frame, short fuze, etc. brought
it to a head. I have been thinking about cockpit space for weeks, though, measuring
and rethinking.
Now I need some help with it, please.
I have a short wooden Piet fuze, completed except for adding the 2 x 2 foot firewall
itself and the two rounded cowlings and panels (passenger's and pilot's).
It is built to the print as it sits, but I can barely fit in it.
While I am only 6' 1" I have unusually long legs and arms for my size, and (regretably)
have a 48" waist and 260 pounds of weight. I also have size 13 E shoes.
Losing weight will only give me more room for the stick.
Everything else is, and will remain just too tight:
-- None of my shoes will fit through the bulkhead holes into the passenger compartment.
(Barefoot, I have 1/4" clearance.)
-- My shoulders have 1 inch of play left and right. My elbows rub.
-- My knees have 1/2" of clearance in any sitting position.
-- Sitting on the low seat as designed, my legs are virtually straight out and
my feet are only 3 inches benind the FRONT of the passenger seat, and well above
the top of the passenger's seat.
Obviously this Piet won't work for me as it sits. I need more room. I think the
stick will be fine as it is, but the legroom and pedals are problematic right
now.
To get the room, I want to extend the cockpit forward, so as not to make the craft
more tail-heavy. I will add cockpit and lose passenger length. My thought
is that passengers will be in it for only a few minutes, but I will be in it
for hours. It takes a while just to get out of Texas. I would like to make
1-2 long trips a year, esp. to Wisconsin. I want to do it all safely, though.
Here's what I want to do:
1. Widen and lengthen the present holes at the bottom for my feet. This means
cutting out both some plywood (the thin passenger seat back bulkhead) and some
passenger seat bracing. Leave most of the rest of the passenger seat bracing
in place (including the "V" from top to bottom, but modifed somewhat for knee-room),
and add some more bracing transversely to make up for it-- re-stiffening
the bulkhead.
2. Move the following forward 6 inches:
-- the pilot's cowling;
-- the passenger's cowling;
-- the passenger's seat.
3. Re each cowling, the present bracing underneath (a flat plywood rectangle with
two transverse spruce beams, either underneath or above) would become two
triangles behind the new rectangle forward. In the cockpit, these "triangles"
can be mounts for radios on the right and left.
4. Re the passenger's seat, I would add bracing and a new bulkhead in this forward
position, from top to bottom longerons, and tie the former and new bulkheads
together with a thin internal plywood skin. The present passenger seat would
be extended.
5. I want to raise the pilot's seat by five inches. This would not only make
me more upright, it puts my elbows above the fuze. For the seat, I would build
a box above the present frame, and hinge it all for storage and controls inspection.
6. I might raise the pilot's cowling by the same five inches. This would allow
room for bigger guages, to help my eyesight, as well.
7. Will I need to extend the cabanes, as well, perhaps by the same five inches,
or can I add even more?
8. If I allow for a full-sized adult forward, I might need to raise the passenger
seat forward and raise that cowl, as well, to improve the passenger's legroom.
Then most certainly the cabanes would have to go up. I have seen that
many have raised the cabanes by four inches, without doing any of the other tinkering
I am discussing. Is there a practical limit on how far up they can go,
and with what countervailing effects?
9. Raising some of the rest of this, should I not also increase the height of
the rear turtledeck, as well? Will there be turbulence on the rudder from added
height?
IMO, these changes would have:
-- made the cockpit workable for me, and perhaps nearly comfortable, for what
it is;
-- added some weight to regain strength where it might have been compromised;
-- increased the frontal area (if both or either cowling is raised);
-- alternatively (without higher cowlings) raised my head farther into the slipstream
(and/or raised the windshield).
Is this all workable? Is it safe? How will it fly differently?
Comments, please. Don't hold back.
Thanks,
Tim
===
---------------------------------
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: Pietenpol-List Digest: 9 Msgs - 11/10/05 |
Pietenpol-List Digest List <pietenpol-list-digest@matronics.com>
This relates to cockpit room, and what to do about it. This has been bothering
me for many weeks, and the discussion re steel frame, short fuze, etc. brought
it to a head. I have been thinking about cockpit space for weeks, though, measuring
and rethinking.
Now I need some help with it, please.
I have a short wooden Piet fuze, completed except for adding the 2 x 2 foot firewall
itself and the two rounded cowlings and panels (passenger's and pilot's).
It is built to the print as it sits, but I can barely fit in it.
While I am only 6' 1" I have unusually long legs and arms for my size, and (regretably)
have a 48" waist and 260 pounds of weight. I also have size 13 E shoes.
Losing weight will only give me more room for the stick.
Everything else is, and will remain just too tight:
-- None of my shoes will fit through the bulkhead holes into the passenger compartment.
(Barefoot, I have 1/4" clearance.)
-- My shoulders have 1 inch of play left and right. My elbows rub.
-- My knees have 1/2" of clearance in any sitting position.
-- Sitting on the low seat as designed, my legs are virtually straight out and
my feet are only 3 inches benind the FRONT of the passenger seat, and well above
the top of the passenger's seat.
Obviously this Piet won't work for me as it sits. I need more room. I think the
stick will be fine as it is, but the legroom and pedals are problematic right
now.
To get the room, I want to extend the cockpit forward, so as not to make the craft
more tail-heavy. I will add cockpit and lose passenger length. My thought
is that passengers will be in it for only a few minutes, but I will be in it
for hours. It takes a while just to get out of Texas. I would like to make
1-2 long trips a year, esp. to Wisconsin. I want to do it all safely, though.
Here's what I want to do:
1. Widen and lengthen the present holes at the bottom for my feet. This means
cutting out both some plywood (the thin passenger seat back bulkhead) and some
passenger seat bracing. Leave most of the rest of the passenger seat bracing
in place (including the "V" from top to bottom, but modifed somewhat for knee-room),
and add some more bracing transversely to make up for it-- re-stiffening
the bulkhead.
2. Move the following forward 6 inches:
-- the pilot's cowling;
-- the passenger's cowling;
-- the passenger's seat.
3. Re each cowling, the present bracing underneath (a flat plywood rectangle with
two transverse spruce beams, either underneath or above) would become two
triangles behind the new rectangle forward. In the cockpit, these "triangles"
can be mounts for radios on the right and left.
4. Re the passenger's seat, I would add bracing and a new bulkhead in this forward
position, from top to bottom longerons, and tie the former and new bulkheads
together with a thin internal plywood skin. The present passenger seat would
be extended.
5. I want to raise the pilot's seat by five inches. This would not only make
me more upright, it puts my elbows above the fuze. For the seat, I would build
a box above the present frame, and hinge it all for storage and controls inspection.
6. I might raise the pilot's cowling by the same five inches. This would allow
room for bigger guages, to help my eyesight, as well.
7. Will I need to extend the cabanes, as well, perhaps by the same five inches,
or can I add even more?
8. If I allow for a full-sized adult forward, I might need to raise the passenger
seat forward and raise that cowl, as well, to improve the passenger's legroom.
Then most certainly the cabanes would have to go up. I have seen that
many have raised the cabanes by four inches, without doing any of the other tinkering
I am discussing. Is there a practical limit on how far up they can go,
and with what countervailing effects?
9. Raising some of the rest of this, should I not also increase the height of
the rear turtledeck, as well? Will there be turbulence on the rudder from added
height?
IMO, these changes would have:
-- made the cockpit workable for me, and perhaps nearly comfortable, for what
it is;
-- added some weight to regain strength where it might have been compromised;
-- increased the frontal area (if both or either cowling is raised);
-- alternatively (without higher cowlings) raised my head farther into the slipstream
(and/or raised the windshield).
Is this all workable? Is it safe? How will it fly differently?
Comments, please. Don't hold back.
Thanks,
Tim
===
---------------------------------
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: | Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 9 Msgs - 11/10/05 |
Strategyguy,
Reading your plight I will offer a few suggestions if I may hoping they will
be accepted in all good faith.
First lets talk about the Pietenpol as designed. It's good, strong, simple
to construct and very safe if flown within it's design envelope. There are
many areas for design change, I didn't say improvement, I said change or
variation. No matter how you build, wood or steel, 1.7 oz or 3.5, Stits process
or
Wal mart vinly you will still arrive at the same performance, TO 40 MPH, climb
50-55, cruise at 65. Unless diving when you might get up to 70.
So why can't any of us vary the construction dimensions to better accomodate
our physical variations. NX41CC was tight for me, 68 in and 195 lbs. My test
pilot, Edwin Johnson, had plenty of room and was comfortable but he's about
like a fart in a whirlwind.
When I began building NX311CC I decided to build an airplane which would be
comfortable to fly either short flights on cross country. I chose the long
fuse design, wood construction and powered by the A65 engine and the three piece
wing. These are the changes from plans I made:
Widened the fuse from firewall to top of passenger V to 27in, wish I had
gone to 28in.
Moved the rudder bar to passenger feet and used Bellanca pedals w/ toe
brakes for pilot. Will have to raise passenger seat so my toes won't drag on
passenger's rear end.
Used a control column from a WWII Fairchild PT 19 or 23. Then a torque tube
to the elevator horn via a walking bell crank.
Nine stringers instead of the seven for turtledeck.
Two stringers for fuse bottom and three for each side.
Cut top longeron at passenger starboard side for a seven in hinged door.
Strengthened with 1X1 spruce to guarantee fuse strength.
Widened wheel track from 56 to 66 in.using steel coils for shocks
Center section spars 33in. Cabanes raised 4 1/2 in. The cabanes are not
vertical but widened at the top
Now I won't guarantee this machine will fly but I assure you that if I give
my Test Pilot enough
Dewar's he will sure try and when I fly it I will have plenty of room for
radio, peanuts.
Hope this let's you know what a fool I am and that it may help solve some of
your problems.
A Louisiana builder
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: | temporary instruments |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Jeff Boatright <jboatri@emory.edu>
I am interested in temporarily installing a few instruments in the
front cockpit for instructional purposes. I figure airspeed,
altitude, and tach at a minimum. I'd very much like to keep it cheap
and very small.
I'd prefer not to use an ASI on the strut, but rather, keep all the
instruments clustered right in front of the pilot.
Any suggestions?
Thanks,
Jeff
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: | Disassembly and Re-Assembly |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags@hotmail.com>
I've got mixed feelings on this one. Having taken the wings off of NX41CC,
I came to realize that while it is a fairly quick and easy project, it isn't
something you can do every weekend and expect the airplane to fly the same
after each time. There are struts, strut braces, control cables, wing
attach fittings, gap covers, pitot lines, possibly fuel lines (if you have a
wing tank in the outboard sections), and other things involved.
I don't know that I would consider it something that would require sign-off
though, any more than tweaking the rigging in the hangar yourself, after a
flight, to correct a heavy wing or something of the sort. However, it makes
sense to expect the work to be done by someone with knowledge of what they
are doing, and if a guy just goes and buys himself a Piet without having the
skills necessary to rig and adjust things, and he thinks he can take the
wings off and put them back on and get it right, there's an accident waiting
to happen. At the very least, there is the possibility of getting controls
reversed, not reconnecting controls, or rigging the wing in such a way as to
make the plane marginally controllable.
There... I've talked myself into the "get an Ao)
41CC will be due for an annual when I reattach the wings anyway, so mine is
a no-brainer.
Oscar Zuniga
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags@hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
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! --
|