Today's Message Index:
----------------------
0. 12:41 AM - Who is "Matt Dralle" & What Are "The Lists"? [Please Read] (Matt Dralle)
1. 04:13 AM - Re: T-88 vs. urethane (Gorilla Glue) ()
2. 06:04 AM - Re: Is a firewall necessary? (Ed G.)
3. 06:13 AM - Re: T-88 vs. urethane (Gorilla Glue) (Pietsrneat@aol.com)
4. 06:21 AM - Re: Is a firewall necessary? (HelsperSew@aol.com)
5. 06:23 AM - Re: T-88 vs. urethane (Gorilla Glue) (Scott Schreiber)
6. 06:45 AM - Re: T-88 vs. urethane (Gorilla Glue) ()
7. 07:33 AM - Re: Is a firewall necessary? (Dick Navratil)
8. 08:04 AM - Re: Is a firewall necessary? (Ed G.)
9. 08:19 AM - Re: Is a firewall necessary? (Phillips, Jack)
10. 08:28 AM - Re: Is a firewall necessary? (DJ Vegh)
11. 09:02 AM - you don't need a firewall (Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC])
12. 09:09 AM - Re: you don't need a firewall (Pietsrneat@aol.com)
13. 09:15 AM - Re: heavy piet (Phillips, Jack)
14. 09:33 AM - Re: heavy piet (Pietsrneat@aol.com)
15. 09:36 AM - Re: heavy piet ()
16. 10:01 AM - Re: heavy piet (Phillips, Jack)
17. 04:54 PM - Re: Is a firewall necessary? (Rcaprd@aol.com)
18. 05:42 PM - ()
19. 11:13 PM - Re: Fuse questions... (Gene Hubbard)
Message 0
| 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: | Who is "Matt Dralle" & What Are "The Lists"? [Please Read] |
Dear Listers,
Who is Matt Dralle and what exactly are these Lists? Well, I've been working in
the information technology industry for over 20 years primarily in computer
networking design and implementation. I have also done extensive work in web
development and CGI design during this period.
I started the Matronics Email Lists back in 1990 with about 30 fellow RV builders
from around the world. Since that time, I have added 63 other kinds of aircraft
related Lists to the line up and numerous other List related services such
as the Forums, Wiki, Archives and Search Engine just to name a few.
For flexibility and reliability, I have chosen to run all of my own servers here
locally. Other List-related systems include a 1 Gigabit, fully switched network
infrastructure, a commercial-grade Netscreen firewall, a Barracuda spam filter,
a local T1 Internet router, and a commercial-grade business T1 Internet
connection with full static addressing.
The computer servers found here include a brand new, quad-processor Xeon Linux
server for List web services, a dual-processor Xeon Linux system dedicated to
the email processing List functions, and another P4 Linux system serving as a
remote storage disk farm for the archives, databases, and for an on-line hard
drive-based backup system with 3.2 Terra Bytes of storage, soon to be upgraded
to over 6 Terra Bytes! This entire system is protected by three large, commercial-grade
uninterrupted power supply (UPS) systems that assure the Lists are
available even during a local power outage! Speaking of power, imagine how much
electricity it takes to run all of these systems. One month this Summer,
I had a staggering $1368 bill for electricity alone!
I recently upgraded all of the computer racking infrastructure including new power
feeds and dedicated air conditioning for the room that serves as the Computer
Center for the Matronics Email Lists. This year I added another rack to house
the new MONSTER quad-processor web system that didn't quite fit into the
first rack! Here's a composite photo of the List Computer Center before the addition
of the second rack:
http://www.matronics.com/MattDralle-ListComputerCenter.jpg
As you can see, I take running these Lists very seriously and I am dedicated to
providing an always-on, 24x7x365 experience for each and every Lister.
But building and running this system isn't cheap. As I've stated before, I don't
support any of these systems with commercial advertising on the Lists. It
is supported 100% through List member Contributions! That means you... and you...
and YOU!
To that end, I hold a List Fund Raiser each November and ask that members make
a small Contribution to support the continued operation and upgrade of this ever-expanding
system. Its solely YOUR Contributions that keeps it running!
Please make a Contribution today to support these Lists!
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Or, by dropping a personal check in the mail to:
Matronics / Matt Dralle
PO Box 347
Livermore CA 94551-0347
USA
(Please include your email address on the check!)
Thank you!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
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: | T-88 vs. urethane (Gorilla Glue) |
I mistakenly used gorilla glue on the rubber trim I put on the edges of
my wing end covers.It foamed up and I spent hours trying to get the
excess off of it without damaging the rubber and surface of the cover.As
you said it has it's place.Exactly where that is I'm not sure but it
sure wasn't the place I put it.Live and learn.
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: | Is a firewall necessary? |
Hi Dan...A firewall is only necessary if your engine catches fire..Just
kidding...But then, a DAR will probably not sign off on your plane for it's
airworthness certificate if all the plywood is not protected by metal. If it
were my plane I would want the shelf area protected as well as the lower
section. If you ever need it it will be well worth the extra weight. Use the
lightest recommended gauge metal and back it up with firewall insulation
material.
Ed G.
>From: HelsperSew@aol.com
>To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: Is a firewall necessary?
>Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 02:18:34 EST
>
>Hi All,
>
>I am using a Ford A motor and am contemplating adding a stainless firewall
>to the airplane. Of course it will add unwelcome weight and I am concerned
>with that. Should I put it only on the large vertical area or also to the
>"shelf" part where the mag goes? What are the opinions out there on this
>subject
>of firewalls?
>
>Dan Helsper
>Poplar Grove, IL
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: T-88 vs. urethane (Gorilla Glue) |
In a message dated 11/28/2006 12:53:11 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
jimboyer@hughes.net writes:
Hi Ron,
I don't believe Titebond III is a urethane glue; it is an alphatic resin and
is much more resistant to moisture, etc. It is a very good woodworking
glue.
Cheers, Jim
I realize that, Jim. I was just pointing out another instance where
someone used an adhesive that might not be appropriate for aircraft.
Harvey then wrote about using the urethane glue, then having to spend
hours cleaning up the part after the glue expanded and cured. This is one major
reason I would never even consider it for a Piet. I use it in my sign
business when I need to glue and clamp up narrower widths of wood to produce wider
boards. For this purpose, it is great because it is strong and easy to sand
and clean up the joints (which must be perfect).
Ron
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: Is a firewall necessary? |
Ed,
What is the firewall insulation material you refer to?
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
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: T-88 vs. urethane (Gorilla Glue) |
I didn't mean to suggest using it as a structural glue, but it has some
great uses in the model world. Holding hinges in the wood, locking ribs onto
a trailing edge sheet, etc.
----- Original Message -----
From: <harvey.rule@bell.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 7:12 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: T-88 vs. urethane (Gorilla Glue)
>
> I mistakenly used gorilla glue on the rubber trim I put on the edges of
> my wing end covers.It foamed up and I spent hours trying to get the
> excess off of it without damaging the rubber and surface of the cover.As
> you said it has it's place.Exactly where that is I'm not sure but it
> sure wasn't the place I put it.Live and learn.
>
>
>
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: | T-88 vs. urethane (Gorilla Glue) |
I didn't use it as a structural glue.I just wanted something to hold the
rubber trim on.I could have used the same stuff they use for putting
model aircraft together but I figured I would try this stuff called
Gorilla.I knew it would expand but I had no idea how much.I should have
just tried it on a small piece to see what the outcome would be and go
from there.Like I said live and learn.I figure by the time I'm 150 years
old I'll have it down pretty good.
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: Is a firewall necessary? |
I used aluminum instead of stainless for the firewall, not knowing
better at the time. I then glued on a fiberfrax matting on front of it,
good to 2800 degrees. Above the shelf, I used Firewall 2000 blanket,
behind the galvanized former for the turtle deck. Both products are in
the Aircraft Spruce catalog.
If I was going to do it again, I would just use .024 stainless. Don't
worry so much about weight foreward of C.G.
Dick N.
----- Original Message -----
From: HelsperSew@aol.com
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 1:18 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Is a firewall necessary?
Hi All,
I am using a Ford A motor and am contemplating adding a stainless
firewall to the airplane. Of course it will add unwelcome weight and I
am concerned with that. Should I put it only on the large vertical area
or also to the "shelf" part where the mag goes? What are the opinions
out there on this subject of firewalls?
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL
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: | Re: Is a firewall necessary? |
I can't pull the name of it out of my head right now and I don't have an ACS
catalog with me here at work. The stuff I used looks similar to asbestos
sheet and comes in either 1/16" or 1/8" thickness. It sandwiches between the
metal and wood. It's purpose is to keep the hot sheet metal from setting the
wood on fire hopefully buying you enough time to get on the ground. I used
the 1/8" . I think it's in the "firewall" section of your Aircraft Spruce
catalog. It's not required but it is good insurance. A gasoline or oil fire
fed by 70 mph winds can get really hot, really fast. Ed
>From: HelsperSew@aol.com
>To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Is a firewall necessary?
>Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 09:21:24 EST
>
>Ed,
>
>What is the firewall insulation material you refer to?
>
>Dan Helsper
>Poplar Grove, IL.
>
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: | Is a firewall necessary? |
Fiberfrax. Page 128 of the current AS&S catalog. Good stuff.
Jack Phillips
Hoping to fly the Piet one last time tomorrow before it's annual expires
on Friday
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ed G.
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 11:04 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Is a firewall necessary?
I can't pull the name of it out of my head right now and I don't have an
ACS
catalog with me here at work. The stuff I used looks similar to asbestos
sheet and comes in either 1/16" or 1/8" thickness. It sandwiches between
the
metal and wood. It's purpose is to keep the hot sheet metal from setting
the
wood on fire hopefully buying you enough time to get on the ground. I
used
the 1/8" . I think it's in the "firewall" section of your Aircraft
Spruce
catalog. It's not required but it is good insurance. A gasoline or oil
fire
fed by 70 mph winds can get really hot, really fast. Ed
>From: HelsperSew@aol.com
>To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Is a firewall necessary?
>Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 09:21:24 EST
>
>Ed,
>
>What is the firewall insulation material you refer to?
>
>Dan Helsper
>Poplar Grove, IL.
>
_________________________________________________
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Is a firewall necessary? |
it's FiberFrax and I used it on my firewall as well. I've put a sample on a
piece of wood and held the torch to the sample for up to a minute and the
wood was only discolored not ignited.
DJ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ed G." <flyboy_120@hotmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 9:03 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Is a firewall necessary?
>
>
> I can't pull the name of it out of my head right now and I don't have an
ACS
> catalog with me here at work. The stuff I used looks similar to asbestos
> sheet and comes in either 1/16" or 1/8" thickness. It sandwiches between
the
> metal and wood. It's purpose is to keep the hot sheet metal from setting
the
> wood on fire hopefully buying you enough time to get on the ground. I used
> the 1/8" . I think it's in the "firewall" section of your Aircraft Spruce
> catalog. It's not required but it is good insurance. A gasoline or oil
fire
> fed by 70 mph winds can get really hot, really fast. Ed
>
> >From: HelsperSew@aol.com
> >To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
> >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Is a firewall necessary?
> >Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 09:21:24 EST
> >
> >Ed,
> >
> >What is the firewall insulation material you refer to?
> >
> >Dan Helsper
> >Poplar Grove, IL.
> >
>
>
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: | you don't need a firewall |
On a Breezy........
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: you don't need a firewall |
In a message dated 11/28/2006 12:05:08 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
michael.d.cuy@nasa.gov writes:
On a Breezy........
That was funny, Mike.
Do not archive
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 |
|
Hi Dan,
My original axle was .120" wall, 1-1/2" OD, 4130 Condition N. After a
forced landing broke the axle, causing substantial damage to the
airframe, I performed a stress analysis on the axle and found that at
.120 wall, the axle was only good for about 2 g's (which is about how
hard I hit on that landing, avoiding hitting a pickup truck).
The EAA recommends that landing gear be capable of handling 3.1 g's, no
more and no less. More, and a hard landing might damage other parts of
the structure. Less, and the gear may just not be strong enough (as
mine wasn't). In order to make an axle of 4130 condition N that can
handle 3.1 g's requires .25" wall. However, .25" wall tubing of the
length required weighs well over 20 lbs.
My new axle is .188" wall, then I had it heat treated to 160,000 psi
tensile strength (condition N has a tensile strength of 90,000 psi). I
was incorrect in saying it weighed 20 lbs. It weighs 12 lbs, according
to my notes. I was apparently remembering the weight of the .25" wall
axle, which IS over 20 lbs. That is why I elected to heat treat my new
axle, to get it to the same strength as the 20 lbs axle without all
that weight. Expensive process though. Cost $475 to heat treat it, or
about $50 per pound of weight saved.
Don't get me wrong, my Pietenpol flies well, but it will never set a
record on climb performance, and I wish it were lighter. I tried to be
very weight conscious during the construction but a number of factors
added up to more weight than I like. If I built another one, I would
not make the fuselage wider. I certainly would not paint another one
with Aerothane - that paint is VERY heavy. I figure I'm carrying
around close to 60 lbs of paint. I wish I didn't need a radio or
transponder in mine, but it sure makes it easier flying in Raleigh's
Class C airspace (which is scheduled to go to Class B soon). The
battery and the avionics add nearly 18 lbs of useless weight. The ELT
(which didn't go off during the forced landing, even though it was hard
enough to break the axle) adds another 4 lbs. My leather seats with
Temperfoam padding add another couple of pounds, but they sure were nice
and comfortable on the 37 hour round trip to Brodhead and OSH and back.
Everything is a trade off. I know there are a number of Piets that are
considerably heavier than mine.
-----Original Message-----
Jack,
What wall thickness was your straight axle? You mentioned a
weight of 20 lbs, so I went out to my hangar and weighed mine (a full
72" long at this point before trimming) and it was only about 10 lbs.
The thickness on mine is .120 I believe.
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL
_________________________________________________
This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privilege
d, proprietary, or otherwise private information. If you have received it i
n error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any
other use of the email by you is prohibited.
Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese - Nederlands - N
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 |
|
In a message dated 11/28/2006 12:18:14 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
Jack.Phillips@cardinal.com writes:
I certainly would not paint another one with Aerothane - that paint is VERY
heavy.
What would you use, Jack? I was planning to use Aerothane on mine.
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 |
|
Go naked!
Do not archive
________________________________
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Pietsrneat@aol.com
Sent: November 28, 2006 12:33 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: heavy piet
In a message dated 11/28/2006 12:18:14 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
Jack.Phillips@cardinal.com writes:
I certainly would not paint another one with Aerothane - that
paint is VERY heavy.
What would you use, Jack? I was planning to use Aerothane on mine.
Message 16
| 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 |
|
PolyTone. Lighter and one heck of a lot easier to repair
Jack
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Pietsrneat@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 12:33 PM
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: heavy piet
In a message dated 11/28/2006 12:18:14 P.M. Eastern Standard
Time, Jack.Phillips@cardinal.com writes:
I certainly would not paint another one with Aerothane -
that paint is VERY heavy.
What would you use, Jack? I was planning to use Aerothane on
mine.
_________________________________________________
This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privilege
d, proprietary, or otherwise private information. If you have received it i
n error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any
other use of the email by you is prohibited.
Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese - Nederlands - N
Message 17
| 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: Is a firewall necessary? |
In a message dated 11/28/2006 1:20:33 AM Central Standard Time,
HelsperSew@aol.com writes:
What are the opinions out there on this subject of firewalls?
Dan,
Yes, a Firewall is Definately necessary !! The only material that should be
used for Firewalls, are either Stainless Steel, or the less expensive
Galvanized steel. When I had the Model A on my Pietenpol, I used Galvanized just
up
to the top edge of the face of the firewall, but not into the shelf area. It
would be very difficult to build enough protection into the shelf area because
there is so many inside corners and sides to protect. That would also cause a
place for moisture to collect. For this reason, the Model A Pietenpol is a
very difficult design to protect from an engine fire. When I did the Firewall
Forward retrofit to the Continental A65 engine, I used a full face - one
piece Stainless Steel firewall, and backed it up with the thickest fiberglass matt
(not weave) I could find which is about 1/16" thick. I think it's a good
idea to back it up with FiberFrax (which is a Ceramic fiber), which is superior
to fiberglass...just have to be carefull not to compress the thickness of the
FiberFrax. I'm using 1/8" FiberFrax behind the firewall on my Tailwind. Lynn
Knoll and I did a flame test on the Fiberfax, and it simply will Not burn.
Chuck G.
NX770CG
Message 18
| 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 |
|
Message 19
| 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: Fuse questions... |
Phillips, Jack wrote:
> A couple of concerns, Ken,
>
> I made my Pietenpol 1" wider than plans, and used the long fuselage
> plans. The result is a pretty heavy Pietenpol (empty weight 745 lbs),
> which climbs even worse than usual for a Piet. There are a couple of
> problems with the long, wide fuselage. The first is weight. SOme
> years ago, someone on this list compiled a list of Pietenpols at
> Brodhead, comparing their empty weights and CG locations. Every one
> of the long fuselage Piets came in at over 700 lbs, and a couple were
> over 800 lbs. You wouldn't think that adding 9" or so would add 50 to
> 100 lbs, but it seems to do so. Making it wider adds substantial
> weight as well. The other problem with a wider fuselage is in
> expense. With a 24" wide fuselage, you can use a single sheet of
> plywood ripped lengthwise for the floorboards and firewall. If you
> make it wider, you will use a lot more plywood, with substantial waste.
>
> The Pietenpol is supposed to have a gross weight of about 1050 lbs.
> If you weigh 254 lbs, and carry 10 gallons of gas, your airplane can
> only weigh 736 lbs EMPTY, and you'd probably better not plan on
> carrying any passengers. I have flown mine with myself and a 205 lb
> passenger, and 15 gallons of fuel on board, for a gross weight of
> 1,240 lbs. It flew, but I was glad we were flying off a 6,000' paved
> runway. Climb rate was a shade under 100 feet per minute.
>
> If I were to build another one, I would build the short fuselage and
> keep it standard width. I'm 6'2 and 200 lbs, and I've flown Mike
> Cuy's standard width, short fuse Piet and found it nearly as
> comfortable as my own, with a better climb rate.
>
> Jack Phillips
> NX899JP
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> KMHeide
> Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2006 4:42 PM
> To: Pietenpol
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fuse questions...
>
> Fellow Pieters:
>
> Question.....If you are going to build a wider fuselage would you
> build it 3" or 4" wider? Also, are they going to be any major
> changes is the structural integrity, rigging etc.... Lastly, for a
> guy who is 6'0 and 254lbs....is the current size of the plane
> comfortable? what modification if any have you made to improve
> function and comfort of this plane design.
>
> Ken H.
> Fargo, ND
>
>
>
>_________________________________________________
>
>
>Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese - Nederlands - N
>
>
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! --
|