---------------------------------------------------------- Pietenpol-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Thu 11/13/08: 35 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 12:08 AM - Re: Spars arrived from Public Lumber (Clif Dawson) 2. 05:37 AM - Re: Spars arrived from Public Lumber (Michael Perez) 3. 05:52 AM - Elevator Trim (Oscar Zuniga) 4. 06:04 AM - Re: Elevator Trim (AMsafetyC@aol.com) 5. 06:35 AM - Re: Spars arrived from Public Lumber (Michael Perez) 6. 07:00 AM - Re: Spars arrived from Public Lumber (Michael Silvius) 7. 07:08 AM - Re: Spars arrived from Public Lumber (Bill Church) 8. 07:39 AM - Re: Spars arrived from Public Lumber (Michael Perez) 9. 07:58 AM - Re: Elevator Trim (Jeff Boatright) 10. 08:09 AM - Re: Spars arrived from Public Lumber (Ryan Mueller) 11. 08:24 AM - Re: Spars arrived from Public Lumber (Michael Perez) 12. 08:43 AM - Re: Spars arrived from Public Lumber (Ryan Mueller) 13. 09:16 AM - Re: Spars arrived from Public Lumber (Michael Perez) 14. 10:42 AM - Sky Scout Available (slowbilder@comcast.net) 15. 10:58 AM - Elevator Trim (Oscar Zuniga) 16. 11:16 AM - Re: Sky Scout Available (Michael Silvius) 17. 01:26 PM - build vs. buy? (Tom Anderson) 18. 01:53 PM - wing rib set for sale ? (Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]) 19. 02:54 PM - Re: build vs. buy? (Jim Ash) 20. 02:59 PM - Re: wing rib set for sale ? (Jim Ash) 21. 03:35 PM - Re: build vs. buy? (John Hofmann) 22. 04:24 PM - Re: build vs. buy? (Gene & Tammy) 23. 04:56 PM - Spar stock pictures (Michael Perez) 24. 05:02 PM - Spar stock pictures #2 (Michael Perez) 25. 05:08 PM - Resessed straps (Michael Perez) 26. 05:44 PM - Re: Resessed straps (Don Emch) 27. 07:31 PM - Re: build vs. buy? (Jim Ash) 28. 07:34 PM - Re: Spars arrived from Public Lumber (Clif Dawson) 29. 07:38 PM - Re: Sky Scout Available (Clif Dawson) 30. 07:38 PM - Re: Resessed straps (Bill Church) 31. 07:47 PM - Brakes (Marc Dumay) 32. 08:03 PM - build vs. buy (Oscar Zuniga) 33. 08:46 PM - Re: Resessed straps (Clif Dawson) 34. 09:05 PM - Re: Brakes (Ryan Mueller) 35. 09:23 PM - Re: Resessed straps (Ryan Mueller) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 12:08:41 AM PST US From: "Clif Dawson" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Spars arrived from Public Lumber I don't like it either, even though fir is stronger than spruce. Is this the one with the bow? In any case a half inch of bow is outside the possibility of straightening it by cutting it straight. Since you've essentialy got 1/4" of extra depth to the material the spar end will still be 1/4" bowed on the opposite edge albeit for only one and a half feet. Then again from the last rib it's 4" cut down to the wing tip bow so the bowed in part will only be 14" with a depth of 1/8" at the last rib. You'd have to watch the newly created runout too. Also the grain runout appears to be on the edge of acceptability in the photo. And we still don't know what the end grain angle is. Clif "Trifles make perfection, and perfection is no trifle." (Michelangelo) ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill Church To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 2:15 PM Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Spars arrived from Public Lumber Mike, When in doubt, refer to AC 43.13-1B (available here, if you don't have it) http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircu lar.nsf/0/99C827DB9BAAC81B86256B4500596C4E?OpenDocument&Highlight=43.13 From the photos, it looks like you might have a "pitch pocket", rather than a knot. And according to AC 43.13-1B (Chapter 1, paragraph 1-2): Notes for Table 1-1 1. Defects Permitted. e. Pitch pockets. Acceptable in center portion of a beam providing they are at least 14 inches apart when they lie in the same growth ring and do not exceed 1-1/2 inches length by 1/8 inch width by 1/8 inch depth, and providing they are not along the projecting portions of I-beams, along the edges of rectangular or beveled unrouted beams, or along the edges of the flanges of box beams. From the photo, it looks like the defect is roughly 2" long, and 3/16" wide, and probably deeper than 1/8" (hard to tell). So it appears to be outside of acceptable limits. Since this is going to be the main structural component of your wings, I don't think I would take a chance on it. What's the cost of a new spar - $100 or so? I would buy a new piece. You will be able to use the board for other parts. The wood looks nice. What does the end grain look like? Bill C. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com 11/11/2008 7:32 PM ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 05:37:33 AM PST US From: Michael Perez Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Spars arrived from Public Lumber I'll have to look at the bow more. While I had it on the floor, I looked at it while standing. I'll get it on a better surface and get down there with it and take a better look. - The one end of one board that I did look at had an almost vertical grain on the end, so it looked. A slight angle, but not very much. - I can put up more pictures either later today or tomorrow. ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 05:52:32 AM PST US From: Oscar Zuniga Subject: Pietenpol-List: Elevator Trim Walt and others have it exactly right... if you have your fuel in the wing, elevator trim really isn't necessary. 41CC has the fuel in the nose and I do notice a clear difference in stick position and pressure in cruise with full fuel and part fuel. I installed a trim system in the airplane but I've found that I never adjust it after I initially set it... basically it uses a bungee on the top arm of the elevator bellcrank behind the pilot's seat to make the elevator "light" (applies nose-up trim), and that has decreased the difference in stick feel when the fuel tank is full but it's still noticeable. Total weight of the trim system is probably half a pound. As others have noted, the only time you really notice it is on long flights (over an hour or so). Oscar Zuniga Air Camper NX41CC San Antonio, TX mailto: taildrags@hotmail.com website at http://www.flysquirrel.net ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 06:04:02 AM PST US From: AMsafetyC@aol.com Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Elevator Trim I may be using a dual tank set up, one in the wings and one in front, now is a good time for me to be thinking about it so if anyone has pics to share on the best design and installation I would appreciate seeing them. Along with any type of description all suggestions are appreciated along with any suggested improvements in the design to make it most effective, reliable and easy to use. I may abandon the entire idea but would really like to see what goes into a trim system for a Piet before I make that decision. Thanks to all that participate John In a message dated 11/13/2008 8:53:58 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, taildrags@hotmail.com writes: --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Oscar Zuniga Walt and others have it exactly right... if you have your fuel in the wing, elevator trim really isn't necessary. 41CC has the fuel in the nose and I do notice a clear difference in stick position and pressure in cruise with full fuel and part fuel. I installed a trim system in the airplane but I've found that I never adjust it after I initially set it... basically it uses a bungee on the top arm of the elevator bellcrank behind the pilot's seat to make the elevator "light" (applies nose-up trim), and that has decreased the difference in stick feel when the fuel tank is full but it's still noticeable. Total weight of the trim system is probably half a pound. As others have noted, the only time you really notice it is on long flights (over an hour or so). Oscar Zuniga Air Camper NX41CC San Antonio, TX mailto: taildrags@hotmail.com website at http://www.flysquirrel.net **************Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news & p://toolbar.aol.com/moviefone/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000001) ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 06:35:55 AM PST US From: Michael Perez Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Spars arrived from Public Lumber I find it strange that there are methods for repairing broken or cracked spars, ribs, skins, etc., but I can't find any place a repair for this so called pitch pocket. Seems you can mend a broken spar, but not fix a hole. ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 07:00:01 AM PST US From: "Michael Silvius" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Spars arrived from Public Lumber Michael: I have heard that there are those who have made their own spar stock up by laminating strips but I don't know about the criteria, so I suppose if you stock was tall enough and the grain was 100% straight throughout otherwise, you could run it through the table saw and rip out the offending 1/4 inch through the whole length and re-glue. But then you may as well order an other good length and rip that one with the pitch pocket up for cap strip. Don't know what the etiquette is on gussets but that may be an option as well if it is located in the right place and after you get your ribs on. Michael in Maine ----- Original Message ----- From: Michael Perez To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 9:35 AM Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Spars arrived from Public Lumber I find it strange that there are methods for repairing broken or cracked spars, ribs, skins, etc., but I can't find any place a repair for this so called pitch pocket. Seems you can mend a broken spar, but not fix a hole. ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 07:08:28 AM PST US From: "Bill Church" Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Spars arrived from Public Lumber Mike, If you really want to "repair" the pitch pocket you can always cut it out and do a proper splice joint in your spar. Again, refer to AC 43.13-1B Chapter 1 for details. But, in my opinion (as always, take it or leave it) you're talking about spending maybe two hundred bucks more for a new piece of wood that's going to be holding you (and maybe somebody you care about) up in the air. That's most likely to be less than 2% of the cost of the complete airplane. And you will still be able to use the "defective" board for other parts, so the net cost to you is much less. Bill C. ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 07:39:36 AM PST US From: Michael Perez Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Spars arrived from Public Lumber I agree with you Bill. I plan on buying a new spar and use this defective o ne for other stock. I just found it odd that there was no repairs noted for such a thing, yet if the spar is broke, you can fix it. Doesn't make sense to me. --- On Thu, 11/13/08, Bill Church wrote: From: Bill Church Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Spars arrived from Public Lumber Mike, - If you really want to "repair"-the pitch pocket you can always cut it out and do a proper splice joint in your spar. Again, refer to AC 43.13-1B Cha pter 1 for details. - But, in my opinion (as always, take it or leave it) you're talking about sp ending maybe two hundred bucks more for a new piece of wood that's going to be holding you (and maybe somebody you care about) up in the air.-That's most likely to be-less than 2% of the cost of the complete airplane.-A nd you will still be able to use the "defective" board for other parts, so the net cost to you is much less. - Bill C.- ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 07:58:37 AM PST US From: Jeff Boatright Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Elevator Trim Oscar, Excellent description of the "problem" and of your solution. Given that you set it and forget it, would a trim tab not do the same for you? I find that even with tabs, I would still like an in-flight trim solution, but I'd like to know your thoughts. Jeff At 7:49 AM -0600 11/13/08, Oscar Zuniga wrote: > > >Walt and others have it exactly right... if you have your fuel in the wing, >elevator trim really isn't necessary. 41CC has the fuel in the nose and I >do notice a clear difference in stick position and pressure in cruise with >full fuel and part fuel. I installed a trim system in the airplane but I've >found that I never adjust it after I initially set it... basically it uses a >bungee on the top arm of >the elevator bellcrank behind the pilot's seat to make the elevator "light" >(applies nose-up trim), and that has decreased the difference in stick feel >when the fuel tank is full but it's still noticeable. Total weight of the >trim system is probably half a pound. As others have noted, the only time >you really notice it is on long flights (over an hour or so). > >Oscar Zuniga >Air Camper NX41CC >San Antonio, TX >mailto: taildrags@hotmail.com >website at http://www.flysquirrel.net -- --- Jeffrey H. Boatright, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Ophthalmology Emory University School of Medicine Editor-in-Chief Molecular Vision ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 08:09:03 AM PST US From: "Ryan Mueller" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Spars arrived from Public Lumber One of the two repairs listed for broken solid spars is to cut out the failure and splice in a good piece of wood. This is the same repair that you would have to execute to remove a pitch pocket. The other method is to use reinforcing plates of spruce or ply on both sides of the spar to restore the shear strength lost to a longitudinal crack, but that is a repair for a crack and not an open void such as a pitch pocket. There must be a enough of a difference in the loss of integrity and strength to a void than a crack to make it applicable in one case, and not in the other. Ryan On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 9:39 AM, Michael Perez wrote: > I agree with you Bill. I plan on buying a new spar and use this defective > one for other stock. I just found it odd that there was no repairs noted for > such a thing, yet if the spar is broke, you can fix it. Doesn't make sense > to me. > > --- On *Thu, 11/13/08, Bill Church * wrote: > > From: Bill Church > Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Spars arrived from Public Lumber > To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com > Date: Thursday, November 13, 2008, 10:08 AM > > Mike, > > If you really want to "repair" the pitch pocket you can always cut it out > and do a proper splice joint in your spar. Again, refer to AC 43.13-1B > Chapter 1 for details. > > But, in my opinion (as always, take it or leave it) you're talking about > spending maybe two hundred bucks more for a new piece of wood that's going > to be holding you (and maybe somebody you care about) up in the air. That's > most likely to be less than 2% of the cost of the complete airplane. And you > will still be able to use the "defective" board for other parts, so the net > cost to you is much less. > > Bill C. > > ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 08:24:49 AM PST US From: Michael Perez Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Spars arrived from Public Lumber I was just looking at that Ryan. I am wondering if I can mill out the pocke t, insert a plug with epoxy and the maybe add the plates. --- On Thu, 11/13/08, Ryan Mueller wrote: From: Ryan Mueller Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Spars arrived from Public Lumber One of the two repairs listed for broken solid spars is to cut out the fail ure and splice in a good piece of wood. This is the same repair that you wo uld have to execute to remove a pitch pocket. The other method is to use reinforcing plates of spruce or ply on both side s of the spar to restore the shear strength lost to a longitudinal crack, b ut that is a repair for a crack and not an open void such as a pitch pocket . There must be a enough of a difference in the loss of integrity and stren gth to a void than a crack to make it applicable in one case, and not in th e other. Ryan On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 9:39 AM, Michael Perez w rote: I agree with you Bill. I plan on buying a new spar and use this defective o ne for other stock. I just found it odd that there was no repairs noted for such a thing, yet if the spar is broke, you can fix it. Doesn't make sense to me. --- On Thu, 11/13/08, Bill Church wrote: From: Bill Church Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Spars arrived from Public Lumber Mike, - If you really want to "repair"-the pitch pocket you can always cut it out and do a proper splice joint in your spar. Again, refer to AC 43.13-1B Cha pter 1 for details. - But, in my opinion (as always, take it or leave it) you're talking about sp ending maybe two hundred bucks more for a new piece of wood that's going to be holding you (and maybe somebody you care about) up in the air.-That's most likely to be-less than 2% of the cost of the complete airplane.-A nd you will still be able to use the "defective" board for other parts, so the net cost to you is much less. - Bill C.- ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 08:43:37 AM PST US From: "Ryan Mueller" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Spars arrived from Public Lumber Except for the fact that you now have a larger void, and if the void is the issue in the first place you have only exacerbated the problem. True, it is a filled void, but a void nonetheless. I don't know enough about the issue to say whether or not that would be acceptable. If you were to perform such a repair I would think your DAR is going to want data to back it up. That is not an acceptable spar repair according to AC 43.13, so that may be a problem. Off to work for the day. Have a good one, Ryan On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:24 AM, Michael Perez wrote: > I was just looking at that Ryan. I am wondering if I can mill out the > pocket, insert a plug with epoxy and the maybe add the plates. > > ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 09:16:06 AM PST US From: Michael Perez Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Spars arrived from Public Lumber Agreed. I do not know enough either, I am just throwing out ideas to see what others know. --- On Thu, 11/13/08, Ryan Mueller wrote: From: Ryan Mueller Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Spars arrived from Public Lumber Except for the fact that you now have a larger void, and if the void is the issue in the first place you have only exacerbated the problem. True, it is a filled void, but a void nonetheless. I don't know enough about the issue to say whether or not that would be acceptable. If you were to perform such a repair I would think your DAR is going to want data to back it up. That is not an acceptable spar repair according to AC 43.13, so that may be a problem. Off to work for the day. Have a good one, Ryan On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:24 AM, Michael Perez wrote: I was just looking at that Ryan. I am wondering if I can mill out the pocket, insert a plug with epoxy and the maybe add the plates. ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 10:42:30 AM PST US From: slowbilder@comcast.net Subject: Pietenpol-List: Sky Scout Available A friend of mine bought an Ford powered Pietenpol Sky Scout but his wife won't let him fly it so he would be interested in selling it. It is a very nice example which has been flown. It has hydraulic brakes and a three piece wing. It was built by a fellow who had previously built several other Pietenpols . The engine has about 25 hours on it and has a pressure oil system. If you are interested let me know and I'll put you in touch with the owner. Bob Humbert N491RH Battle Creek Michigan ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 10:58:34 AM PST US From: Oscar Zuniga Subject: Pietenpol-List: Elevator Trim Jeff wrote- >Given that you set it and forget it, would a trim tab not do the same for you? Yes. It will trim for a given configuration, which is pretty much what my adjustable setup does since I only set it once and never change it. Some have preferred not to have fixed tabs on their control surfaces for appearance purposes but my airplane already has a tab on the rudder so I wouldn't have cared. I thought I would like the adjustability but have not used it much. >I would still like an in-flight trim solution, but I'd like to know your thoughts. I've seen various ones, including Mike Cuy's simple biasing spring setup with a lever under the pilot's seat. Another one that I've seen is a lot more elaborate, with a trim wheel, bicycle chain segment, and cables/pulleys. I like trim wheels and it's probably what most of us are used to (except those who, like me, learned to trim by cranking a window handle either overhead or on the side of the cockpit). There is also a very simple system used in the Great Lakes and others, where you tug forward or aft on a cable that runs along the side of the cockpit(s) against a friction device. I don't think I've seen one on a Piet but it could work. The beauty of that one is that it can be run to both cockpits with very little extra effort. Oscar Zuniga Air Camper NX41CC San Antonio, TX mailto: taildrags@hotmail.com website at http://www.flysquirrel.net ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 11:16:56 AM PST US From: "Michael Silvius" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Sky Scout Available send him one of these: http://www.flycorvair.com/6522223.jpg ----- Original Message ----- From: slowbilder@comcast.net To: Piet Group Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 1:41 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Sky Scout Available A friend of mine bought an Ford powered Pietenpol Sky Scout but his wife won't let him fly it so he would be interested in selling it. It is a very nice example which has been flown. It has hydraulic brakes and a three piece wing. It was built by a fellow who had previously built several other Pietenpols. The engine has about 25 hours on it and has a pressure oil system. If you are interested let me know and I'll put you in touch with the owner. Bob Humbert N491RH Battle Creek Michigan ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 01:26:48 PM PST US Subject: Pietenpol-List: build vs. buy? From: "Tom Anderson" For those of you that have built a Piet in the past 5 yrs. or so, would you be willing to share how much your overall costs were? In talking with several members on this forum (thanks Jack, Jeff, and a couple of others), I have come to the conclusion that I'm likely not going to save much, if anything, by building a Piet. In fact, I've come to the conclusion that it may be in my best interest to purchase a well-built one that's already got the minimum hours flown off it and just learn to fly it. Then, when the kids have left home and I'm bored in my older age, build me one just like I want, if I'm still inclined to do so. Any comments, suggestions, or meaningful discussion? -------- Location: Wilson, NC Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=213979#213979 ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 01:53:59 PM PST US Subject: Pietenpol-List: wing rib set for sale ? From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" Group, I have an interested party who is willing to purchase a complete set of Pietenpol wing ribs (3 piece wing) if you have or know of anyone who might have a set of Charlie Ruebeck ribs or equal. Please contact me off list if you know of a source for a complete set of available Pietenpol ribs. Thank you, Mike C. ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 02:54:12 PM PST US From: Jim Ash Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: build vs. buy? If you're an A&P, that might work. But for those of us who aren't, buying one from someone else would require us to get our annuals professionally done by somebody else, just as if you'd bought a standard-type. If you built your own, you can get a special A&P certificate for that specific aircraft and do the annuals yourself. Jim Ash -----Original Message----- >From: Tom Anderson >Sent: Nov 13, 2008 4:26 PM >To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com >Subject: Pietenpol-List: build vs. buy? > > >For those of you that have built a Piet in the past 5 yrs. or so, would you be willing to share how much your overall costs were? >In talking with several members on this forum (thanks Jack, Jeff, and a couple of others), I have come to the conclusion that I'm likely not going to save much, if anything, by building a Piet. In fact, I've come to the conclusion that it may be in my best interest to purchase a well-built one that's already got the minimum hours flown off it and just learn to fly it. Then, when the kids have left home and I'm bored in my older age, build me one just like I want, if I'm still inclined to do so. > >Any comments, suggestions, or meaningful discussion? > >-------- >Location: Wilson, NC > > >Read this topic online here: > >http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=213979#213979 > > ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 02:59:58 PM PST US From: Jim Ash Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: wing rib set for sale ? I've got a set, but honestly, I personally value the ribs at an awful lot more than the money I could possibly get for them, even at 5 or 10 times any reasonable price. Jim Ash -----Original Message----- >From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]" >Sent: Nov 13, 2008 4:53 PM >To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com >Subject: Pietenpol-List: wing rib set for sale ? > > >Group, > >I have an interested party who is willing to purchase a complete set of >Pietenpol wing ribs (3 piece wing) if you have or know >of anyone who might have a set of Charlie Ruebeck ribs or equal. > >Please contact me off list if you know of a source for a complete set of >available Pietenpol ribs. > >Thank you, > >Mike C. > > ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 03:35:33 PM PST US From: John Hofmann Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: build vs. buy? Tom, This is a great question and one I feel I need to weigh in. This is a big decision you face and one I faced as well. I am an A&P mechanic and a pilot who just got back into the flying game a couple of years ago. I have had some tie to aviation since I was about 15. I am now 44. I have restored several aircraft but have not built from scratch. I have a prewar Taylorcraft to rebuild right now and the desire to build a Pietenpol with my daughter. She is ready to start with me and we are building the wing rib jig together over Thanksgiving break. There's some of the background. A lot more is available if interested. Please note this is only MY opinion, and based on myself and my observations over the years. I have thought this question over many times and seen it in person again and again. If you want to build for the sake of building and creating, then by all means have at it. If you want to build to fly, then get something to fly. You will more than likely, never finish the project. Can you get a good Pietenpol to fly? Absolutely. Can you learn to fly in it? Legally and under the right conditions, yes. Practically speaking, no. Good taildragger instructors are not in abundance and most of them will only instruct in their airplanes. That's where their insurance is. The reality is you will probably need to learn to fly in another airplane, become proficient and confident (those traits are not mutually inclusive) and have at it on your own. Also, please note, that aviation costs money....a lot of it at times. It boils down to how you want to spend your leisure dollar. I used to play a lot of golf when I was between wives. Four hours on a Saturday (at least) and depending on the course and beer cart girl, $100 - $200 to chase a little ball around was not uncommon. Aviation has been cheaper than that for me. So here are my options as I see 'em: 1. Rent, learn to fly and build. What if you don't like flying? You can buy a lot of time, pay as you go and learn to fly while building, also, on a pay as you go basis. No hangar, maintenance and insurance to worry about except a renters policy after you solo. Keep flying and stay current, renting while you build. I have a friend of mine who had a Cardinal RG. It flew all the time. He got close to finishing his Marquardt Charger and sold the Cardinal. 18 years later he is still close on the Charger but not current or proficient. Luckily his son has an L-2 and he is back in the air. 2. Buy an airplane and learn to fly it. If you don't mind what you are flying, and can pass a medical, 150s can be had for well under 20k if you look. You will get your money out of it when it is time to sell. The same can't necessarily be said for a Pietenpol. If you are a big guy and can pass a medical, Tri-Pacers are not much more. I know of a Tri-Pacer just out of annual that could be had for probably 15k. No beauty queen but a pretty solid airframe. They are out there if you are willing to look. 3. Want to own but can't pass a medical? T-Crafts are still reasonable and once in awhile a solid Champ shows up under 20K. Cubs are a premium because they are Cubs but you will never lose money on any of these three. All are taildraggers so you will need a taildragger instructor out of the box. 4. Build, then learn to fly. I always see this as the least doable option because of the time and money it takes before one can even get in the air. You will still have to rent to fly, more than likely, and you will be out the same amount of money as you would have in option one, except you have not learned to fly and become proficient during the build time. This is how I see it and certainly am no authority on all aviation. So what did I do? My wife made me get back into the flying part of aviation. For this reason, I am to refer to her as the best wife ever. She just may be. I am lucky in that I have as a good friend, Steve Krog. He and his wife Sharon run the Cub Club, about 35 minutes from my house. If you want a little perspective on the Krog's, see the article in the November 2007 issue of Sport Aviation. I had a 20 year flying layoff and forgot how much fun it was. I got my tailwheel endorsement after about six hours and started having a blast. The opportunity to buy a Cub (through information of a very good friend I met on this list) came up and purchased it in February of this year. I secured a hangar in Hartford with the rest of the Cubs and flew the J-3 from North Carolina to Wisconsin in early May of this year. It was my first cross country flight in 20 years. A big adventure! One other thing that I might as well mention. This is the finest internet list of which I have been a part. I have met several life- long friends from here. We all make the annual trip to Brodhead and have a great time for a couple of days. This list has done much to revitalize the Pietenpol design and show it to younger builders who are turning out excellent versions of this little airplane. So, if I were Tom Anderson what would I really do? I would see if I could take a couple or three weeks, go the Hartford, WI and learn to fly a Cub as a Sport Pilot. Last I knew, the hourly rate was $85. Cheap in this day and age. Then I would buy a Champ to fly, while I built my Pietenpol. When that was done, I would sell the Champ for more than I paid for it and as to paraphrase Walt, "Life would be grand." Of course your mileage may vary, -john- John Hofmann Vice-President, Information Technology The Rees Group, Inc. 2810 Crossroads Drive, Ste 3800 Madison, WI 53718 Phone: 608.443.2468 ext 150 Fax: 608.443.2474 Email: jhofmann@reesgroupinc.com On Nov 13, 2008, at 3:26 PM, Tom Anderson wrote: > > > > For those of you that have built a Piet in the past 5 yrs. or so, > would you be willing to share how much your overall costs were? > In talking with several members on this forum (thanks Jack, Jeff, > and a couple of others), I have come to the conclusion that I'm > likely not going to save much, if anything, by building a Piet. In > fact, I've come to the conclusion that it may be in my best interest > to purchase a well-built one that's already got the minimum hours > flown off it and just learn to fly it. Then, when the kids have > left home and I'm bored in my older age, build me one just like I > want, if I'm still inclined to do so. > > Any comments, suggestions, or meaningful discussion? > > -------- > Location: Wilson, NC > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=213979#213979 > > ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 04:24:36 PM PST US From: "Gene & Tammy" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: build vs. buy? Not completely correct. You would need to get a "condition inspection" not an annual for an experimental airplane. A lot of A & P's I know will let you do most, if not all, of the condition inspection under their supervision. On the experimentals I have owned I have usually paid between $50.00 and $150.00 for a condition inspection. Well worth the price to have another set of trained eyes looking over everything. I like to fly and can't affort to own a plane and build at the same time so buying a completed Piet was a good way for me to go. Besides, an experimentel airplane is never done and I'm always tinkering with it anyway. If you follow the airplanes selling on E-bay and Barnstormers have you ever wondered why there are so many homebuilt planes with 0 or very few hours for sale? So many of these have been built by folks that are going to wait until the plane is finished to learn to fly. Many times they have either gotten too old or they find they really don't like to fly. If you love to build then build for the love of it, not to get a cheap airplane. Many time (really I'd say most times) you can buy a well built experimental for less than you can build one for. My 2 cents worth Gene in beautiful Tennessee (spent the first half of the afternoon flying the Piet and the second half riding the Gold Wing. Life just doesn't get any better) Original Message ----- From: "Jim Ash" Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 4:51 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: build vs. buy? > > If you're an A&P, that might work. But for those of us who aren't, buying > one from someone else would require us to get our annuals professionally > done by somebody else, just as if you'd bought a standard-type. If you > built your own, you can get a special A&P certificate for that specific > aircraft and do the annuals yourself. > > Jim Ash > > > -----Original Message----- >>From: Tom Anderson >>Sent: Nov 13, 2008 4:26 PM >>To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com >>Subject: Pietenpol-List: build vs. buy? >> >> >> >>For those of you that have built a Piet in the past 5 yrs. or so, would >>you be willing to share how much your overall costs were? >>In talking with several members on this forum (thanks Jack, Jeff, and a >>couple of others), I have come to the conclusion that I'm likely not going >>to save much, if anything, by building a Piet. In fact, I've come to the >>conclusion that it may be in my best interest to purchase a well-built one >>that's already got the minimum hours flown off it and just learn to fly >>it. Then, when the kids have left home and I'm bored in my older age, >>build me one just like I want, if I'm still inclined to do so. >> >>Any comments, suggestions, or meaningful discussion? >> >>-------- >>Location: Wilson, NC >> >> >> >> >>Read this topic online here: >> >>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=213979#213979 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > -- > Checked by AVG. > 7:58 AM > > ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 04:56:51 PM PST US From: Michael Perez Subject: Pietenpol-List: Spar stock pictures Here are some pictures of my spar stock as I received them...nothing has been done to them. These pictures represent what I feel to be the worse areas of the boards, they only improve form these pictures. ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 05:02:56 PM PST US From: Michael Perez Subject: Pietenpol-List: Spar stock pictures #2 A few more. ________________________________ Message 25 ____________________________________ Time: 05:08:43 PM PST US From: Michael Perez Subject: Pietenpol-List: Resessed straps Just a hypothetical question here, lets take the flying strut as an example . Instead of making three pieces and welding them together at the top. Then taking it and fitting it over the strut and running bolts through it, how about making the two side pieces only and mill out the strut to the exact s ize and thickness of the fittings, epoxy in place and run the bolts through . This will give you the two fittings on either side of the spar, both nest led in its own recess, both flush with the spar face,-epoxied and bolted. What say you? ________________________________ Message 26 ____________________________________ Time: 05:44:11 PM PST US Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Resessed straps From: "Don Emch" I guess I'm not sure why you would go through all of that trouble and probably compromise the strength of the spar in the process. Please leave it like it is on the plans and when you are bouncing around in turbulence you will rest assured that you are hanging on a sound design with nearly 80 years of proven service. Don Emch NX899DE Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=214034#214034 ________________________________ Message 27 ____________________________________ Time: 07:31:45 PM PST US From: Jim Ash Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: build vs. buy? I guess I'm a little surprised to learn the rules are different for experimentals. For years, I thought they were the same. So what's the difference between a conditional inspection and an annual? Jim Ash -----Original Message----- >From: Gene & Tammy >Sent: Nov 13, 2008 7:23 PM >To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: build vs. buy? > > >Not completely correct. You would need to get a "condition inspection" not >an annual for an experimental airplane. A lot of A & P's I know will let >you do most, if not all, of the condition inspection under their >supervision. On the experimentals I have owned I have usually paid between >$50.00 and $150.00 for a condition inspection. Well worth the price to >have another set of trained eyes looking over everything. I like to fly and >can't affort to own a plane and build at the same time so buying a completed >Piet was a good way for me to go. Besides, an experimentel airplane is >never done and I'm always tinkering with it anyway. >If you follow the airplanes selling on E-bay and Barnstormers have you ever >wondered why there are so many homebuilt planes with 0 or very few hours for >sale? So many of these have been built by folks that are going to wait >until the plane is finished to learn to fly. Many times they have either >gotten too old or they find they really don't like to fly. If you love to >build then build for the love of it, not to get a cheap airplane. Many time >(really I'd say most times) you can buy a well built experimental for less >than you can build one for. >My 2 cents worth >Gene in beautiful Tennessee (spent the first half of the afternoon flying >the Piet and the second half riding the Gold Wing. Life just doesn't get >any better) > > >Original Message ----- >From: "Jim Ash" >To: >Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 4:51 PM >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: build vs. buy? > > >> >> If you're an A&P, that might work. But for those of us who aren't, buying >> one from someone else would require us to get our annuals professionally >> done by somebody else, just as if you'd bought a standard-type. If you >> built your own, you can get a special A&P certificate for that specific >> aircraft and do the annuals yourself. >> >> Jim Ash >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >>>From: Tom Anderson >>>Sent: Nov 13, 2008 4:26 PM >>>To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com >>>Subject: Pietenpol-List: build vs. buy? >>> >>> >>> >>>For those of you that have built a Piet in the past 5 yrs. or so, would >>>you be willing to share how much your overall costs were? >>>In talking with several members on this forum (thanks Jack, Jeff, and a >>>couple of others), I have come to the conclusion that I'm likely not going >>>to save much, if anything, by building a Piet. In fact, I've come to the >>>conclusion that it may be in my best interest to purchase a well-built one >>>that's already got the minimum hours flown off it and just learn to fly >>>it. Then, when the kids have left home and I'm bored in my older age, >>>build me one just like I want, if I'm still inclined to do so. >>> >>>Any comments, suggestions, or meaningful discussion? >>> >>>-------- >>>Location: Wilson, NC >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>Read this topic online here: >>> >>>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=213979#213979 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Checked by AVG. >> 7:58 AM >> >> > > ________________________________ Message 28 ____________________________________ Time: 07:34:26 PM PST US From: "Clif Dawson" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Spars arrived from Public Lumber Lay it flat and run a tight string from end to end parallel to the straightest section near the edge. Clif ----- Original Message ----- From: Michael Perez To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 5:37 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Spars arrived from Public Lumber I'll have to look at the bow more. While I had it on the floor, I looked at it while standing. I'll get it on a better surface and get down there with it and take a better look. The one end of one board that I did look at had an almost vertical grain on the end, so it looked. A slight angle, but not very much. I can put up more pictures either later today or tomorrow. 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= 3D 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= 3D 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= 3D 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= 3D ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com 11/13/2008 6:01 PM ________________________________ Message 29 ____________________________________ Time: 07:38:03 PM PST US From: "Clif Dawson" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Sky Scout Available This guy should be rich by now! :-) Clif send him one of these: http://www.flycorvair.com/6522223.jpg ________________________________ Message 30 ____________________________________ Time: 07:38:03 PM PST US Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Resessed straps From: "Bill Church" Mike, Are you coming up with these ideas just to get a reaction out of people? If I read your question correctly, you are proposing carving recesses into the spar, so that the brackets that attach the lift struts to the wing will sit flush with the faces of the spar. Your question begs another question...Why? Assuming that you had a solid 3/4" spar, and you routed a 1/8" deep slot for the fitting on each side, you will have effectively weakened your spar by 33%. And the benefit of this action would be... nothing. I have no idea why you would want the fittings to be flush with the faces of the spar. The recesses would do nothing other than weaken the spar. The epoxy bond between the steel strap and the wood can not be relied on to carry a load. The load is transferred from the fitting to the wood by two means: One is the bolts which pass through the fittings and the wood. The other is the metal strap across the top of the spar. Ideally, this would be a single bent piece of metal, rather than three pieces welded, but to make this fitting in one piece is not very feasible, thus it is designed as a welded fitting. I recall an earlier post of yours, indicating that you have capabilities in machining, but not in welding. Give in, Mike. You are either going to learn to weld, or find someone to do it for you. This old wooden airplane has lots of parts that NEED to be welded. Bill C. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=214059#214059 ________________________________ Message 31 ____________________________________ Time: 07:47:05 PM PST US From: "Marc Dumay" Subject: Pietenpol-List: Brakes Good day fellow mentors. Having no experience yet flying a tail dragger, especially a Pietenpol, I was curious as to what most Piet builders think of having brakes or not on their aircraft? We will be flying both grass and hard surface runways. We plan on having brakes, but not brake pedals. We are thinking of having a brake handle like on a motorcycle. The drawback, would be that we don't have individual braking " left or right", just both wheels would brake the same amount. We will have a antilock regulator and proportioning valve. We hope to use a steerable tail wheel, and are a bit concerned about the ease of taxing and turning without individual brakes on our Piet. Any input or advice would be appreciated. Marc and Larry ________________________________ Message 32 ____________________________________ Time: 08:03:15 PM PST US From: Oscar Zuniga Subject: Pietenpol-List: build vs. buy Can of worms here but I'll give my own opinion. 1. If you don't have a license, learn to fly in rented aircraft. Much easier than thinking you can build your own and then learn to fly in it. 2. Once you have your license, if you're a tinkerer or a builder or a gear-head or have a shop, you'll be happiest if you build your own airplane, whether it's from scratch or if you purchase a project and finish it. 3. If you're not a shop person or you're not sure, buy a completed aircraft and be flying in it tomorrow. Once you have it and are flying, you can tweak it to personalize it, or overhaul things you don't like, or modify to your heart's content (assuming it's an experimental, and that's what we're discussing here). There are plenty on the market for $15K or less, depending on finish and quality. That's the cost of buying a new car these days, so what's another vehicle in the driveway ;o) Oscar Zuniga Air Camper NX41CC San Antonio, TX mailto: taildrags@hotmail.com website at http://www.flysquirrel.net ________________________________ Message 33 ____________________________________ Time: 08:46:39 PM PST US From: "Clif Dawson" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Resessed straps You definitely DO NOT want to mill slots across your spars. Most of the stress from flight loads concentrates at this location. If you made a chart of measured compression loads along a beam with the support in the middle it would be a parabolic in nature, not straight. Even if this weren't the case, reducing the width of the spar at any point negates having that width anywhere else on this beam so that material becomes useless weight. This is the " weakest link " principle in living colour. :-) "Education: the path from cocky ignorance to miserable uncertainty." - Mark Twain, writer and humorist Miserably yours, Clif , Hahahaha. ----- Original Message ----- From: Michael Perez how about making the two side pieces only and mill out the strut to the exact size and thickness of the fittings, epoxy in place and run the bolts through. This will give you the two fittings on either side of the spar, both nestled in its own recess, both flush with the spar face, ________________________________ Message 34 ____________________________________ Time: 09:05:12 PM PST US From: "Ryan Mueller" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Brakes Well, the Tri-Pacer used the Johnson bar approach. If I recall it was supposedly due to having a glut of Cub master cylinders that needed to be used up. Either way, that is a nosewheel aircraft with a steerable nosewheel, not a tailwheel airplane. One other problem with having to operate a brake handle is that you are now removing your hand from the throttle (or the stick, but I would say you probably ought not do that). I would think that it would be inadvisable to do when landing, because the rudder is providing most of your directional control, and if you need a quick blast of power to keep yourself going where you want you now have the half second of time it takes to move your hand back to the throttle. Maybe that is enough time, maybe not. Not an issue on a nosewheel airplane with a steerable nosewheel, but on a tailwheel airplane it could be more of an issue. You could try to attach your handle to the stick, but that is going to only increase the complexity of the installation. If your master cylinder is located under the rear panel or on the side of the rear pit you are also going to have longer hose runs. Check out Kurt Shipman's brake setup (which I'm sure is based on Bill Rewey's): http://www.westcoastpiet.com/images/Kurt%20Shipman/P1010101.JPG And Bill's http://www.westcoastpiet.com/images/Bill%20Rewey/DSCF0016.JPG A pair of master cylinders on each side of the front cockpit, a few relatively short brake lines, and you are done. No need for an antilock regulator or proportioning valve. You have toe braking, and you can keep your hands on the stick and throttle. That's what we will be doing, but there are always other ways to skin a cat (or stop a Piet). On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 9:45 PM, Marc Dumay wrote: > Good day fellow mentors. > > > Having no experience yet flying a tail dragger, especially a Pietenpol, I > was curious as to what most Piet builders think of having brakes or not on > their aircraft? > > We will be flying both grass and hard surface runways. > > > We plan on having brakes, but not brake pedals. We are thinking of having a > brake handle like on a motorcycle. > > The drawback, would be that we don't have individual braking " left or > right", just both wheels would brake the same amount. > > We will have a antilock regulator and proportioning valve. > > We hope to use a steerable tail wheel, and are a bit concerned about the > ease of taxing and turning without individual brakes on our Piet. > > > Any input or advice would be appreciated. > > > Marc and Larry > ________________________________ Message 35 ____________________________________ Time: 09:23:05 PM PST US From: "Ryan Mueller" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Resessed straps Clif and Bill ably covered the answer to this question already, so I won't belabor their points. I would ask, well, why? I'm curious what your rationale would be for wanting to make such a modification? Maybe, as Bill mentioned, part of it may be wanting to avoid welding the fitting. To that end I will quote the learned gentleman from Ohio, Mike Cuy: "I'm impressed by the 120 VAC TIG units on the market out there now. Very reasonable and *if you can't TIG you probably can't finger paint. *I was amazed by how easy it was to pickup TIG welding (where you feed the filler rod, it is not fed like in MIG) from a mechanic here at work who taught me over a few lunch hours." If you can machine metal, I bet you could finger paint. Maybe you could buy Mike a few lunches? ;) Have a good night, Ryan On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 7:07 PM, Michael Perez wrote: > Just a hypothetical question here, lets take the flying strut as an > example. Instead of making three pieces and welding them together at the > top. Then taking it and fitting it over the strut and running bolts through > it, how about making the two side pieces only and mill out the strut to the > exact size and thickness of the fittings, epoxy in place and run the bolts > through. This will give you the two fittings on either side of the spar, > both nestled in its own recess, both flush with the spar face, epoxied and > bolted. What say you? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message pietenpol-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/Pietenpol-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/pietenpol-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/pietenpol-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.