Today's Message Index:
----------------------
0. 12:05 AM - Fund Raiser Lagging Last Year By Over 30%... (Matt Dralle)
1. 05:07 AM - spar thickness reduction (Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC])
2. 05:23 AM - Re: Brakes (Phillips, Jack)
3. 05:31 AM - Re: Re: Resessed straps (Michael Perez)
4. 05:33 AM - Re: spar thickness reduction (Gene Rambo)
5. 05:34 AM - Re: Resessed straps (Michael Perez)
6. 05:46 AM - Re: spar thickness reduction (colinc)
7. 06:16 AM - Re: Re: Resessed straps (Gene Rambo)
8. 06:36 AM - Re: Re: Resessed straps (Ed G.)
9. 06:39 AM - Re: build vs. buy? (hvandervoo@aol.com)
10. 06:56 AM - Re: build vs. buy? (RAMPEYBOY@aol.com)
11. 07:06 AM - Re: build vs. buy? (Phillips, Jack)
12. 07:11 AM - Re: Re: Resessed straps (Michael Perez)
13. 07:22 AM - Resessed fittings #2 (Michael Perez)
14. 07:38 AM - Re: Re: Resessed straps (Ed G.)
15. 09:07 AM - Re: Re: Resessed straps (Bill Church)
16. 10:26 AM - Re: wing rib set for sale ? (TOPGUN)
17. 10:46 AM - MY CONTINENTAL A-80 AIRCRAFT ENGINE on EBAY & YouTube. (Roy Brooks)
18. 11:06 AM - Re: Re: spar thickness reduction (Lloyd Smith)
19. 11:10 AM - Re: MY CONTINENTAL A-80 AIRCRAFT ENGINE on EBAY & YouTube. (Roy Brooks)
20. 11:23 AM - Re: MY CONTINENTAL A-80 AIRCRAFT ENGINE on EBAY & YouTube. (Jack T. Textor)
21. 12:27 PM - Re: spar thickness reduction (Bill Church)
22. 12:59 PM - Re: spar thickness reduction (AMsafetyC@aol.com)
23. 02:19 PM - Re: spar thickness reduction (ALAN LYSCARS)
24. 02:21 PM - Re: MY CONTINENTAL A-80 AIRCRAFT ENGINE on EBAY & YouTube. (walt)
25. 02:32 PM - Re: spar thickness reduction (Bill Church)
26. 03:05 PM - Re: spar thickness reduction (Gene Rambo)
27. 03:31 PM - Re: spar thickness reduction (Bill Church)
28. 03:38 PM - Re: build vs. buy? (Gene & Tammy)
29. 05:21 PM - Re: spar thickness reduction (Michael Perez)
30. 05:33 PM - Re: spar thickness reduction (Clif Dawson)
31. 06:46 PM - Re: Brakes (Dick N.)
32. 07:14 PM - Re: Brakes (Bill Church)
33. 07:18 PM - Re: spar thickness reduction (Bill Church)
34. 07:20 PM - Re: spar thickness reduction (Bill Church)
35. 09:29 PM - Lockable Tailwheels (Richard Schreiber)
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: | Fund Raiser Lagging Last Year By Over 30%... |
As of the 13th, the Fund Raiser is currently about 30% behind last year in terms
of the number of Contributions. Yet, oddly the number of messages posted per
day is up by 10 to 20% on the average. It costs real money to run these Lists
and they are supported 100% though your Contributions during the Fund Raiser.
Won't you please take a minute right now to make your Contribution to keep
these Lists up and running?
Contribution Page:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you for your support!
Matt Dralle
Email List Admin.
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: | spar thickness reduction |
Group,
Mike P. tossed his idea around with me yesterday offlist and I said that
I didn't stray from the plans very much as my
goal was to build-to-fly but that you guys would know if his idea was
structurally sound or not. I made many cosmetic
changes to the Piet but can't really offer mechanical or structural
advice but in reading some of the replies to reducing
the spar thickness at any point raises a question: Why route a 1" or
3/4" spar then ? From what I'm reading the other
'meat' left thicker than that does you no good so why spend the money
for a 1" or 3/4" spar if you're going to route it in
many areas to become essentially 3/4" or 1/2" at it's 'weakest' point ?
I know there is some benefit from I-beam configurations
which remain after one routes the spar but not being a mechanical
engineer this just is my gut question de jour on this subject.
Mike C.
PS-- An I am gently torturing Mike into taking up TIG welding as if
you've ever seen his craftsmanship on other things his welds
would be a thing of beauty. Everything that Mike produces looks like
it came directly from some precision factory that makes
parts for Air Force One.
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 |
|
I primarily fly on grass, but occasionally fly off pavement. I use my
brakes A LOT. I would not consider flying a plane with no brakes on
pavement. Differential braking is very nice, particularly for parking
in taight spaces.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh, NC
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Marc
Dumay
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 10:46 PM
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
_________________________________________________
This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privilege
d, proprietary
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please
notify the sender
immediately and delete the original. Any other use of the email by you is p
rohibited.
Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese - Nederlands - N
orsk - Portuguese
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: Resessed straps |
I am not looking for a reaction, I am looking for some sound advise on some
thing that people may not have considered.--I miss-spoke before. When I
see the way things are done on the prints, I wonder if there is a way to d
o it differently. Not that the original design is bad, I just wonder if ove
r the years anyone has even thought about other ways.
-
I understand the need for the strap to be over the strut, but there are the
fittings on the center section that do not go over the strut... the wing a
nd cabane fittings. They bolt on the strut with some ply wood underneath. S
ome people rout out their spars down to 1/2 in the web area. If I were to g
o as deep as 1/8" , which is deeper then needed, I would still have the 1/2
" web as well as the two metal fittings both epoxied and bolted. I am no ex
pert, but I don't see the strength loss. Granted, the wing strut fitting I
understand, but what about the center section fittings?
-
With permission Bill, I would like to email you directly my ideas in more d
etail with pictures rather then tie up the whole list. It seems that maybe
putting my thoughts out to everyone is not that good of an idea. (Space wis
e.)
-
-
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: spar thickness reduction |
Mike:
A 1" I-beam has the same strength as a solid 1" spar but less
weight. That is why you would pay the money for a 1" spar. I just
finished routing my spars (one-piece wing, so 30' long spars) and wish I
had weighed them before and after. I can tell you it is a major
difference when you pock them up, though! I looked into a built-up spar
with a 1/2" web and 1/4" capstrips on either side, but it was more
expensive than solid 1" spars.
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC]<mailto:Michael.D.Cuy@nasa.gov>
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com<mailto:pietenpol-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 8:06 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: spar thickness reduction
Group,
Mike P. tossed his idea around with me yesterday offlist and I said
that I didn't stray from the plans very much as my
goal was to build-to-fly but that you guys would know if his idea was
structurally sound or not. I made many cosmetic
changes to the Piet but can't really offer mechanical or structural
advice but in reading some of the replies to reducing
the spar thickness at any point raises a question: Why route a 1" or
3/4" spar then ? From what I'm reading the other
'meat' left thicker than that does you no good so why spend the money
for a 1" or 3/4" spar if you're going to route it in
many areas to become essentially 3/4" or 1/2" at it's 'weakest' point
? I know there is some benefit from I-beam configurations
which remain after one routes the spar but not being a mechanical
engineer this just is my gut question de jour on this subject.
Mike C.
PS-- An I am gently torturing Mike into taking up TIG welding as if
you've ever seen his craftsmanship on other things his welds
would be a thing of beauty. Everything that Mike produces looks like
it came directly from some precision factory that makes
parts for Air Force One.
http://www.matronics.com/contribution<http://www.matronics.com/contributi
on>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List<http://www.matronics.co
m/Navigator?Pietenpol-List>
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: Resessed straps |
I admit that I don't weld. But, my ideas stem from more of a "why has this
been done this way and I wonder if anyone has tried to improve on it?" appr
oach. If I need something welded, as I see and hear that I will, I will fin
d someone to do it for me.- The wing strut fitting was a bad example, but
I would be more then willing to post my entire idea/thought process with p
ictures to those interested. I am not sure now, that it is worth-tying up
the list over it.
--- On Fri, 11/14/08, Ryan Mueller <rmueller23@gmail.com> wrote:
From: Ryan Mueller <rmueller23@gmail.com>
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 rationa
le would be for wanting to make such a modification?
Maybe, as Bill mentioned, part of it may be wanting to avoid welding the fi
tting. 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.- Ver
y reasonable and if you can't TIG you probably can't finger paint. I was am
azed by how easy it was to pickup TIG welding (where you feed the filler ro
d, it is not fed like in MIG) from a mechanic here at work who taught me ov
er 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 <speedbrake@sbcglobal.net> w
rote:
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 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: spar thickness reduction |
Consider that the fibres at the top and bottom of the spar are working in tension
and compression and their effectiveness/stress is proportional to the square
of their distance from the neutral axis. You will understand that those forces
reduce as you move toward the axis so that wood is less 'useful' in resisting
bending.
However the wood in the middle does have to work to keep those highly loaded parts
apart and to carry the shear loads in the spar. However it can be routed away
in areas where it does just that job and isn't carrying any loads into the
spar/fittings.
Narrowing the whole spar will reduce its beam strength proportionate to the reduction,
ie. 25% width reduction = 25% capacity reduction. Not a good thing to
do.
The best way to make the spar more economically is to go for a top/bottom spruce
members with a ply web. You'll see many pictures of Pietenpols built that way
on the internet. The Jim Will's wing design , the only one approved in the UK,
is built like that but also gains considerable strength from using a ply D-box
leading edge which is integral to the spar design. That design has also facilitated
a max weight of 1200 lbs in the UK.
Hope that helps?
Colin
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=214166#214166
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: Resessed straps |
Michael:
The depth of the routing is not the issue. The routing according to the
plans is rounded off at the edges and are not aligned straight across
the spar. The routing you describe for the fitting would substantially
decrease the strength of the spar in that location as well as add two
sharp stress risers that would ensure that the spar would fail at that
point. What you suggested is extremely dangerous. What is more, I
cannot understand what you want to gain by doing it?
The welded piece across the top of the strut fitting is really
unnecessary. I know, everyone is going to call it a "safety strap", but
if you pull three bolts out of the spar, that little strap over the top
is not going to do anything. You note that the cabane fittings do not
have the strap. As I said, it really serves no purpose on the strut
fitting, but the cabanes carry basically no load at all (more on the
3-piece wing than the one-piece), so even Bernie did not think it was
necessary.
Do not hesitate to share your ideas. that way, the really bad ones may
get headed off, and the good ones will be shared.
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Perez<mailto:speedbrake@sbcglobal.net>
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com<mailto:pietenpol-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 8:29 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Resessed straps
I am not looking for a reaction, I am looking for some sound
advise on something that people may not have considered. I miss-spoke
before. When I see the way things are done on the prints, I wonder if
there is a way to do it differently. Not that the original design is
bad, I just wonder if over the years anyone has even thought about other
ways.
I understand the need for the strap to be over the strut, but
there are the fittings on the center section that do not go over the
strut... the wing and cabane fittings. They bolt on the strut with some
ply wood underneath. Some people rout out their spars down to 1/2 in the
web area. If I were to go as deep as 1/8" , which is deeper then needed,
I would still have the 1/2" web as well as the two metal fittings both
epoxied and bolted. I am no expert, but I don't see the strength loss.
Granted, the wing strut fitting I understand, but what about the center
section fittings?
With permission Bill, I would like to email you directly my
ideas in more detail with pictures rather then tie up the whole list. It
seems that maybe putting my thoughts out to everyone is not that good of
an idea. (Space wise.)
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
http://www.matronics.com/contribution<about:blank3D"http://www.matronics.
com/contribution">
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
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List<about:blank3D"http://ww
w.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">
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
http://forums.matronics.com<about:blank3D"http://forums.matronics.com">
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
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: Resessed straps |
I used the spar strap design from the Britts built up spar design on my
solid 3/4" spruce spars with 1/8" ply under the straps. The Britt's straps
are longer than the origional Piet design and align with the struts at 28
degrees. By being aligned with the struts all three bolts carry the load
instead of concentrating the load on the lower bolt as in the origional
design. speading the bolt holes farther apart seems like it would help the
integrity of the spar and they don't require any welding as there is no
strap required across the top. Just another option. Ed G.
>From: Michael Perez <speedbrake@sbcglobal.net>
>To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Resessed straps
>Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 05:29:06 -0800 (PST)
>
>I am not looking for a reaction, I am looking for some sound advise on
>something that people may not have considered.I miss-spoke before. When I
>see the way things are done on the prints, I wonder if there is a way to do
>it differently. Not that the original design is bad, I just wonder if over
>the years anyone has even thought about other ways.
>
>I understand the need for the strap to be over the strut, but there are the
>fittings on the center section that do not go over the strut... the wing
>and cabane fittings. They bolt on the strut with some ply wood underneath.
>Some people rout out their spars down to 1/2 in the web area. If I were to
>go as deep as 1/8" , which is deeper then needed, I would still have the
>1/2" web as well as the two metal fittings both epoxied and bolted. I am no
>expert, but I don't see the strength loss. Granted, the wing strut fitting
>I understand, but what about the center section fittings?
>
>With permission Bill, I would like to email you directly my ideas in more
>detail with pictures rather then tie up the whole list. It seems that maybe
>putting my thoughts out to everyone is not that good of an idea. (Space
>wise.)
>
>
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: | Re: build vs. buy? |
Tom,
I build mine for about 15 K.
But did not put much effort in scrounging for the best deal.
Bought most airframe parts from either ACS or Wick's Corvair engine
parts from Clarks.
If I would build one again I feel confident I could shave off at least
2K in cost.
Hans
NX15KV (2005)
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Anderson <tomanderson_nc@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 3:26 pm
Subject: Pietenpol-List: build vs. buy?
<tomanderson_nc@yahoo.com>
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 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: build vs. buy? |
I'll throw my 2 cents into this. I'm building a Mustang II from kits. I have
three kids, oldest 4, youngest 1. My wife originally was "in". She was all
for it, yes dear, I know it will take a lot of time, I want you to be happy
all that. 4 yrs later, I'm still building, and get maybe 24 hours of work in
per month. I say per month, because I may go two or three weeks with no work
being done, then put in a couple 10 or 12 hour days. Nights don't work for me
because I like to see my kids before bed time, and by the time they are all in
bed, and I see the wife for a bit, it's time for me to go to bed. I could
stay up till midnight working on the plane, but I have to maintain a full time
job, like everyone else.
You can do it, with a family. But, be prepared to spend 5-10 yrs
building, as you have to maintain a good balance between family, work, and building.
It is very frustrating at times. Maybe the hardest part, and financially
most dangerous, is when you drag the project out so long, the chances of it ever
being finished drop dramatically. If I had it to do over, I think I might
buy a completed plane. But, I'm in too deep to stop mid project and take a
beating on reselling the parts. I do enjoy the work WHEN I can do it. In the mean
time, I dream about the day I can fly again! That's my take. You need to
figure out how much time you can really put into building.
Boyce
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 |
|
A very good post, John. I agree completely.
I already knew how to fly when I started my Pietenpol, but had not flown
a taildragger for several years. I bought a Cessna 140 for $11,500 and
flew it for 4 years while building the Pietenpol to get my tailwheel
skills back (and then got a couple of hours in a J-3 the week before I
flew the Piet for the first time). Sold the 140 for $14,000. If you
are careful and shop around, there are good deals out there and you can
find good airplanes for not a lot of money.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John
Hofmann
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 6:35 PM
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:
<tomanderson_nc@yahoo.com>
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
-- Please Support Your Lists This (And Get
-Matt Dralle, List - The -->
&n=======================
_________________________________________________
This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privilege
d, proprietary
or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please
notify the sender
immediately and delete the original. Any other use of the email by you is p
rohibited.
Dansk - Deutsch - Espanol - Francais - Italiano - Japanese - Nederlands - N
orsk - Portuguese
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: Resessed straps |
I believe in the supplemental plans, (I don't have them with me now) the wing strut
"strap" is indeed longer then the original strap. This strap is also at a
smaller angle, (more sloped to the spar) then the original. Are you saying that
this configuration does not need the metal welded piece over the top of the
spar?
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 |
|
| Subject: | Resessed fittings #2 |
As I said in the original thread, my example using the wing strut fitting w
as a poor example. I have no plans, (at the moment- 8^)-- ) to change
it.
-
My thoughts are on the center section. You have the 7" or so piece that is
angled and attaches to the wing, you have the cabane fitting over that and
you have the two piece pulley fitting as well. From what I can recall, (I d
on't have the prints in front of me) the added plywood piece is placed in a
way as to keep the fittings that are stacked over other fittings on the sa
me plane. In other words it acts as a spacer.
-
I have designed a new fitting that uses all of the existing bolt holes for
all of the above fittings in there current locations and it incorporates th
e strap, the cabane and the bottom pulley piece as one. The top pulley stra
p piece is then bent and bolted through my designed piece and through the s
par as originally shown.
-
Since most people end up milling their rib vertical brace to allow for this
fitting to pass by it, I thought to just recess the spar and nestle this n
ew fitting, as one piece flush with the spar face.
-
This is just a brief summation of what I had planned. If interested, I can
get some pictures together and re post a better narration.
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Resessed straps |
No... the British designed spar straps do not use a welded strap over the
top of the spar because there is no torque induced by the pull of the struts
like there is in the origional design. Because of their increased angle they
do need to be moved outboard about and inch to clear the adjacent rib but
that's no biggie unless you learn it the hard way like I did. Ed G.
>From: Michael Perez <speedbrake@sbcglobal.net>
>To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Resessed straps
>Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 07:11:20 -0800 (PST)
>
>I believe in the supplemental plans, (I don't have them with me now) the
>wing strut "strap" is indeed longer then the original strap. This strap is
>also at a smaller angle, (more sloped to the spar) then the original. Are
>you saying that this configuration does not need the metal welded piece
>over the top of the spar?
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Resessed straps |
Okay, just checking. This last question just seemed to be a little "out in
left field". Thought you might be pulling our collective leg.
As for the question of whether there are other ways to do things, of course
ther are other ways things can be done. There almost always is (in any
field). Many people, for one reason or another, have decided to "improve" on
the old design. Some ideas work, and others don't. The most important thing
to keep in mind is to have a valid reason for changing anything. When you
make one change, it often will have other, possibly unforseen impacts of
several other components or functions of those components. And, before going
ahead with any change, one must make sure that the new design will not
compromise the integrity of the resulting structure. But it has been said
many times over that analysis shows that Mr. Pietenpol pretty much did
whatever he did for a reason. The design works very well the way it has been
drawn. The Air Camper is a sturdy design which allows it to be built by a
person with average skills, and with everyday equipment. It is surprising
that Pietenpol was able to do what he did, given his lack of formal training
in engineering or aeronautics. Probably the best known example of someone
thinking of other ways to build a Pietenpol was Mr. John Grega, who
published his plans for the GN-1 Aircamper. This design was touted as a
"modern" Pietenpol, and incorporated many design changes. Some would argue
that the design changes were not improvements - just changes.
The wing fittings (that attach to the lift struts) carry basically the whole
load when in flight.
The cabanes carry very little (something like 50 pounds per cabane) when in
flight.
Thus, the wing fittings need to be much stronger than the cabane fittings.
In general, the spars should not be messed with. They are the main
structural component of the wings, and any cutting into that wood, to a
certain extent, compromises the strength of that member. Having said that,
we must recognise that a certain amount of cutting is necessary - namely the
drilling of bolt holes for the attachment of necessary fittings. After all,
it doesn't matter how strong the wing is, if the wing isn't attached to the
fuselage.
The spar acts like an I-beam, such as you might see in any steel structure.
When a beam is loaded horizontally (like a wing, or a roof) the top part of
the beam is placed in compression, and the bottom part is placed in tension.
The maximum stresses are in the top-most and bottom-most parts of the beam.
The very center of the beam is not stressed (neutral). Because of this
loading, scientists (engineers) determined that beams could be made much
lighter, by using the I-beam shape, as opposed to a solid rectangular shape.
The resulting I-beam is almost (but not quite) as strong as a solid
rectangular beam of the same dimensions. Since the top-most and bottom-most
edges of the spar are under the maximum stresses, they become the most
critical parts of the beam. Any reduction in their cross-section (notches,
holes, etc.) will dramatically reduce the strength of the beam. When a 1"
spruce spar is routed, it is essential that the top and bottom parts, which
do not get routed are left intact, as these will be carrying the highest
stresses.
As for direct contact with me, offlist - no problem - fire away.
Bill C.
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael
Perez
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 8:29 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Resessed straps
I am not looking for a reaction, I am looking for some sound advise on
something that people may not have considered. I miss-spoke before. When I
see the way things are done on the prints, I wonder if there is a way to do
it differently. Not that the original design is bad, I just wonder if over
the years anyone has even thought about other ways.
I understand the need for the strap to be over the strut, but there are the
fittings on the center section that do not go over the strut... the wing and
cabane fittings. They bolt on the strut with some ply wood underneath. Some
people rout out their spars down to 1/2 in the web area. If I were to go as
deep as 1/8" , which is deeper then needed, I would still have the 1/2" web
as well as the two metal fittings both epoxied and bolted. I am no expert,
but I don't see the strength loss. Granted, the wing strut fitting I
understand, but what about the center section fittings?
With permission Bill, I would like to email you directly my ideas in more
detail with pictures rather then tie up the whole list. It seems that maybe
putting my thoughts out to everyone is not that good of an idea. (Space
wise.)
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: wing rib set for sale ? |
I HAVE A COMPLETE SET OF GN1 RIBS, SPARS AND ALL THE METAL FITTINGs (LAZER CUT)
FOR SALE IF THAT INTERESTS HIM. ($800.00)
Chris
crusch@lakefield.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=214226#214226
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: | MY CONTINENTAL A-80 AIRCRAFT ENGINE on EBAY & YouTube. |
PIETERS=85
I am selling my Continental A-80 engine (as I advised here a month or so ag
o) and now seen on YouTube. Just type in =93A-80 Continental Aircraft Engin
e.=94 If that doesn=92t work=2C use this direct link =85
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O31jul0OYUI
This engine will go on Ebay and I=92ll post a note here to give interested
parties a =93heads-up=94 the day it goes up for auction. It will be sold th
rough Ebay to the highest bidder. I=92ll probably start the auction at $1.
It will be necessary for the winning bidder to pick the engine up at Bruce
Field in Ballinger=2C Texas.
Here are some details about the history of this engine. This is a long stor
y and if you ARE NOT in the market for an engine being sold for PARTS ONLY
please save yourself some time and don=92t bother reading this.
I made this video for YouTube in order to show some of the =93highlights=94
about the overhaul on this engine done by my father in 2005.
My father was an A&P Mechanic and had 5 type ratings in jets when he retire
d. He overhauled my Continental A-80 engine and passed away soon after sign
ing the engine logbook. It is bittersweet having to sell this engine=2C be
cause his signature in the logbook is the last thing he ever signed before
he passed away in 2005.
My dad learned he had a relapse of colon cancer and at age 85=2C and he sim
ply decided NOT to undergo chemotherapy a second-time after seeing my mom g
o though cancer treatment with chemo and radiation not working for her=2C j
ust a year earlier. Getting my dad to overhaul the engine helped to keep h
im occupied when that he was living alone as a widower and I simply did not
have the savvy to attempt this myself.
My dad was tough as nails and the last thing he wanted to accomplish in lif
e was to overhaul my Continental A-80 engine. When he was 78=2C he overhaul
ed my Lycoming 0-320 E2A engine. In my youth=2C he overhauled my 1963 Ford
van engine=2C my 1965 Mustang engine and transmission=2C half a dozen motor
cycle engines=2C he built boats=2C campers=2C travel trailers. When he was
younger=2C he rebuilt and flew several old Army Air Corp trainers. He was a
n instructor pilot during WW2 in the Army Air Corp. The man was a gifted m
echanic and I was the =93artist=94. He built stuff=2C I made them look nice
. It was a great partnership for 54 years. When he was 82=2C he bought a Vo
lkswagen Westfalia and we pulled the engine from that (see this on YouTube
=2C =93Rebuilding my dad=92s Westfalia). I can=92t even remember how many
VW based dune buggies my dad and I built=2C but it was ALWAYS a common sigh
t to see split engine cases and air cooled engines in our garage when I was
young.
I am not in the position to warranty this engine or guarantee the sufficien
cy of this engine for use in either a certificated or experimental airplane
. By being =93up-front=94 with everyone about the condition of my father (h
e was in Hospice Care at home when he did this overhaul) it is my goal to b
e as above-board as possible. I am selling this engine on Ebay as a =93PART
S ENGINE.=94 All bidders will need to understand this is a salvage project
for the value of the parts that can be obtained when they disassemble the e
ngine. A Bill Of Sale signed by me and the successful bidder will reflect
=93PARTS ENGINE.=94
I can tell you that had I NOT become so decrepit myself=2C I would have had
no reservation about putting this engine on the Piet project my dad and I
were working on. My dad NEVER let me down=2C and my confidence level in th
is engine is very high. But that being said=2C I want to emphasize=2C THIS
IS A PARTS ENGINE and must be disassembled by whoever purchases it=2C for u
se of parts that can be salvaged.
This engine was originally in a Pietenpol I bought in November 2003 (the fi
rst time my dad was sick with colon cancer). I had previously committed to
travel out-of-state with my father to inspect and purchase a Pietenpol=2C b
ut my father became ill within a day or so of my trip out of town and he wa
sn=92t able to go with me. The guy who was selling a Piet (in 2003) sent me
e-mails stating the engine had only 5 hours since major overhaul. I made a
quick trip out-of-state to buy the Piet and I brought it home on a trailer
.
When my dad was finally well enough to leave his house=2C he came out to my
farm so we could start the engine. It began leaking oil and gas and ran v
ery rough=2C despite having fresh gasoline (I think the ride back to Texas
on a trailer was all that was needed to make this engine spring a leak.)
I pulled the engine out of the Pietenpol=2C took it to my father=92s house
and we disassembled it in his garage (watch the YouTube video.) It was sca
ry to see what was inside the engine as we pulled the oil tank off=2C remov
ed the cylinders and split the case. The lobes on the camshaft were out of
tolerance=2C the crankshaft was so pitted=2C the journals looked like Swiss
cheese (see this on YouTube=2C it is pathetic) and the guy who re-built it
was so cheap=2C he made many of engine gaskets rather than purchase REAL O
EM gaskets. It was also evident old cotter pins were re-used (inside the e
ngine) and the builder failed to adequately safety-wire the oil pick-up tub
e onto the engine. The tube could have fallen of into the oil sump! (The li
st of horrors goes on=85)
Long story made short (nearly $7=2C000 later) I sent the engine case off to
Divco=2C the accessory case went to Drake=2C I bought a NEW camshaft=2C ha
d the cylinders rebuilt (Cerminil) bought a new oil pump-kit=2C new rod bol
ts=2C all new gaskets=85 the list of new stuff goes on and on and on.
Shortly after the case and parts came back=2C my father had a relapse of co
lon cancer and he basically threw in the towel so to speak. He didn=92t wan
t to do chemo again=2C but he did want to rebuild the engine=85 This was hi
s last priority in life.
I think if you will take the time to look at my YouTube video=2C you=92ll a
gree=2C this is the one of the BEST looking A-series engines you will have
ever seen. I spared no expense in bringing this engine back to life. I even
bought new air-intake tubes=2C new pushrod tubes and had them powder coate
d in Candy Apple Blue. I powder coated the valve covers in Continental Gold
=85 All new rubber=2C all new clamps=2C all new bolts inside and outside th
e engine.
The Slick Mags appeared relatively new when I bought the Pietenpol=2C They
are dual-impulse coupler and they sparked nice and hot. That was the best t
hing about this Piet project was the new Slick mags. I am not certain where
the wiring harness is=2C but I=92m fairly confident I can find them.
When I put the engine on Ebay=2C bidders will have to be pre-approved prior
to submitting a bid. NOBODY gets to bid unless they contact me through Eba
y and state they understand the =93no warranty=2C no guarantee=2C this is a
PARTS engine=94 and they understand it is not being intended for use in an
y airplane because it is a PARTS ENGINE. I simply can=92t take on the liab
ility and as such=2C I=92ll be taking a price-beating on this engine by not
stating it is =93airworthy.=94
For anybody wanting to see my receipts=2C yellow tags=2C release forms=2C C
erminil process and ALL THE PARTS I bought=2C I am willing to send you a CD
of the receipts and a DVD (as the one YouTube except with better resoluti
on) for $20. I can=92t afford to be mailing CDs and DVDs out to every =93ti
re-kicker=94 out there and the $20 will be refunded to who ever actually wi
ns the bid. $20 gets you the CD of the receipts with some pictures AND the
DVD as shown on YouTube. The DVD should have better resolution than the vid
eo I uploaded onto YouTube. Simply send me a money order with your mailing
address=2C and I am happy to put the discs and info in the mail to you. My
mail address is P.O. Box 1991. Abilene=2C Texas 79604. The video on YouTube
isn't too bad=2C but the CD and DVD have greater detail and resolution.
Please let me make it clear=2C the engine will be sold on Ebay=2C I will no
t end the auction early=2C I will not have a buy-it-now price=2C nor an ask
ing price.
I added up the receipts I could find=2C and the math comes to around $6=2C6
00 (not including the powder coating for valve covers=2C air intake tubes
=2C pushrod tubes and other engine parts.) My expense on this engine pushes
the $7=2C000 mark easily.
In a few weeks=2C I will be getting ready the Piet project (NOT THE JUNK PI
LE I FIRST BOUGHT) BUT THE SECOND FINER EXAMPLE OF fuselage=2C wings=2C cen
ter section=2C lift struts etc. and offering pictures and a YouTube video o
f it in about a month or so. It is a Piet Fuselage with Grega wings. It was
originally started by an Air Force Maintenance Office who worked on the B-
1 program. He was also a B-2 Maintenance Officer at a base in MO. when he r
etired. It is my understanding he is also an A&P/IA and HE works at Cessna
in Wichita=2C Kansas. I felt pretty confident in this guys abilities and th
is time=2C I took my father with me for a pre-buy inspection. My dad liked
what he saw on this project and I bought it.
The original builder had this Aircamper project set up for a Corvair=2C but
I elected to go with my Continental A-80. I sold the Corvair parts and mo
tormount to a TACO official not too far from me. MORE DETAILS ABOUT THIS WI
LL COME IN A FEW WEEKS.
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live Hotmail now works up to 70% faster.
http://windowslive.com/Explore/Hotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_hotmail_acq_fast
er_112008
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: spar thickness reduction |
Colin, I just did a google search and it returned a link to the matronics
list from 2004 that indicated Mr. Will was hesitant to sell the drawings for
the built up D-cell wing design to those of us in the US due to liability
reasons. I am interested in the possibility of this design as well. That
posting also was followed up by a post by Doc Mosher that he had an
"epiphany" and came up with something similar. Did that ever come to
fruition Doc?
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 8:45 AM, colinc <cheesecolin@aol.com> wrote:
>
> Consider that the fibres at the top and bottom of the spar are working in
> tension and compression and their effectiveness/stress is proportional to
> the square of their distance from the neutral axis. You will understand that
> those forces reduce as you move toward the axis so that wood is less
> 'useful' in resisting bending.
>
> However the wood in the middle does have to work to keep those highly
> loaded parts apart and to carry the shear loads in the spar. However it can
> be routed away in areas where it does just that job and isn't carrying any
> loads into the spar/fittings.
>
> Narrowing the whole spar will reduce its beam strength proportionate to the
> reduction, ie. 25% width reduction = 25% capacity reduction. Not a good
> thing to do.
>
> The best way to make the spar more economically is to go for a top/bottom
> spruce members with a ply web. You'll see many pictures of Pietenpols built
> that way on the internet. The Jim Will's wing design , the only one approved
> in the UK, is built like that but also gains considerable strength from
> using a ply D-box leading edge which is integral to the spar design. That
> design has also facilitated a max weight of 1200 lbs in the UK.
>
> Hope that helps?
>
> Colin
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=214166#214166
>
>
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: | MY CONTINENTAL A-80 AIRCRAFT ENGINE on EBAY & YouTube. |
For some reason=2C my YouTube link doesn't seem to come up=2C so here it is
again. Maybe Mattronics has something that eliminates links=2C if so=2C go
to YouTube and just type in this (A-80 AIRCRAFT ENGINE.)
Sorry.... Here is the link one more try. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v
=O31jul0OYUI
From: n900ml@hotmail.com
Subject: Pietenpol-List: MY CONTINENTAL A-80 AIRCRAFT ENGINE on EBAY & YouT
ube.
PIETERS=85
I am selling my Continental A-80 engine (as I advised here a month or so ag
o) and now seen on YouTube. Just type in =93A-80 Continental Aircraft Engin
e.=94 If that doesn=92t work=2C use this direct link =85
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O31jul0OYUI
This engine will go on Ebay and I=92ll post a note here to give interested
parties a =93heads-up=94 the day it goes up for auction. It will be sold th
rough Ebay to the highest bidder. I=92ll probably start the auction at $1.
It will be necessary for the winning bidder to pick the engine up at Bruce
Field in Ballinger=2C Texas.
Here are some details about the history of this engine. This is a long stor
y and if you ARE NOT in the market for an engine being sold for PARTS ONLY
please save yourself some time and don=92t bother reading this.
I made this video for YouTube in order to show some of the =93highlights=94
about the overhaul on this engine done by my father in 2005.
My father was an A&P Mechanic and had 5 type ratings in jets when he retire
d. He overhauled my Continental A-80 engine and passed away soon after sign
ing the engine logbook. It is bittersweet having to sell this engine=2C be
cause his signature in the logbook is the last thing he ever signed before
he passed away in 2005.
My dad learned he had a relapse of colon cancer and at age 85=2C and he sim
ply decided NOT to undergo chemotherapy a second-time after seeing my mom g
o though cancer treatment with chemo and radiation not working for her=2C j
ust a year earlier. Getting my dad to overhaul the engine helped to keep h
im occupied when that he was living alone as a widower and I simply did not
have the savvy to attempt this myself.
My dad was tough as nails and the last thing he wanted to accomplish in lif
e was to overhaul my Continental A-80 engine. When he was 78=2C he overhaul
ed my Lycoming 0-320 E2A engine. In my youth=2C he overhauled my 1963 Ford
van engine=2C my 1965 Mustang engine and transmission=2C half a dozen motor
cycle engines=2C he built boats=2C campers=2C travel trailers. When he was
younger=2C he rebuilt and flew several old Army Air Corp trainers. He was a
n instructor pilot during WW2 in the Army Air Corp. The man was a gifted m
echanic and I was the =93artist=94. He built stuff=2C I made them look nice
. It was a great partnership for 54 years. When he was 82=2C he bought a Vo
lkswagen Westfalia and we pulled the engine from that (see this on YouTube
=2C =93Rebuilding my dad=92s Westfalia). I can=92t even remember how many
VW based dune buggies my dad and I built=2C but it was ALWAYS a common sigh
t to see split engine cases and air cooled engines in our garage when I was
young.
I am not in the position to warranty this engine or guarantee the sufficien
cy of this engine for use in either a certificated or experimental airplane
. By being =93up-front=94 with everyone about the condition of my father (h
e was in Hospice Care at home when he did this overhaul) it is my goal to b
e as above-board as possible. I am selling this engine on Ebay as a =93PART
S ENGINE.=94 All bidders will need to understand this is a salvage project
for the value of the parts that can be obtained when they disassemble the e
ngine. A Bill Of Sale signed by me and the successful bidder will reflect
=93PARTS ENGINE.=94
I can tell you that had I NOT become so decrepit myself=2C I would have had
no reservation about putting this engine on the Piet project my dad and I
were working on. My dad NEVER let me down=2C and my confidence level in th
is engine is very high. But that being said=2C I want to emphasize=2C THIS
IS A PARTS ENGINE and must be disassembled by whoever purchases it=2C for u
se of parts that can be salvaged.
This engine was originally in a Pietenpol I bought in November 2003 (the fi
rst time my dad was sick with colon cancer). I had previously committed to
travel out-of-state with my father to inspect and purchase a Pietenpol=2C b
ut my father became ill within a day or so of my trip out of town and he wa
sn=92t able to go with me. The guy who was selling a Piet (in 2003) sent me
e-mails stating the engine had only 5 hours since major overhaul. I made a
quick trip out-of-state to buy the Piet and I brought it home on a trailer
.
When my dad was finally well enough to leave his house=2C he came out to my
farm so we could start the engine. It began leaking oil and gas and ran v
ery rough=2C despite having fresh gasoline (I think the ride back to Texas
on a trailer was all that was needed to make this engine spring a leak.)
I pulled the engine out of the Pietenpol=2C took it to my father=92s house
and we disassembled it in his garage (watch the YouTube video.) It was sca
ry to see what was inside the engine as we pulled the oil tank off=2C remov
ed the cylinders and split the case. The lobes on the camshaft were out of
tolerance=2C the crankshaft was so pitted=2C the journals looked like Swiss
cheese (see this on YouTube=2C it is pathetic) and the guy who re-built it
was so cheap=2C he made many of engine gaskets rather than purchase REAL O
EM gaskets. It was also evident old cotter pins were re-used (inside the e
ngine) and the builder failed to adequately safety-wire the oil pick-up tub
e onto the engine. The tube could have fallen of into the oil sump! (The li
st of horrors goes on=85)
Long story made short (nearly $7=2C000 later) I sent the engine case off to
Divco=2C the accessory case went to Drake=2C I bought a NEW camshaft=2C ha
d the cylinders rebuilt (Cerminil) bought a new oil pump-kit=2C new rod bol
ts=2C all new gaskets=85 the list of new stuff goes on and on and on.
Shortly after the case and parts came back=2C my father had a relapse of co
lon cancer and he basically threw in the towel so to speak. He didn=92t wan
t to do chemo again=2C but he did want to rebuild the engine=85 This was hi
s last priority in life.
I think if you will take the time to look at my YouTube video=2C you=92ll a
gree=2C this is the one of the BEST looking A-series engines you will have
ever seen. I spared no expense in bringing this engine back to life. I even
bought new air-intake tubes=2C new pushrod tubes and had them powder coate
d in Candy Apple Blue. I powder coated the valve covers in Continental Gold
=85 All new rubber=2C all new clamps=2C all new bolts inside and outside th
e engine.
The Slick Mags appeared relatively new when I bought the Pietenpol=2C They
are dual-impulse coupler and they sparked nice and hot. That was the best t
hing about this Piet project was the new Slick mags. I am not certain where
the wiring harness is=2C but I=92m fairly confident I can find them.
When I put the engine on Ebay=2C bidders will have to be pre-approved prior
to submitting a bid. NOBODY gets to bid unless they contact me through Eba
y and state they understand the =93no warranty=2C no guarantee=2C this is a
PARTS engine=94 and they understand it is not being intended for use in an
y airplane because it is a PARTS ENGINE. I simply can=92t take on the liab
ility and as such=2C I=92ll be taking a price-beating on this engine by not
stating it is =93airworthy.=94
For anybody wanting to see my receipts=2C yellow tags=2C release forms=2C C
erminil process and ALL THE PARTS I bought=2C I am willing to send you a CD
of the receipts and a DVD (as the one YouTube except with better resoluti
on) for $20. I can=92t afford to be mailing CDs and DVDs out to every =93ti
re-kicker=94 out there and the $20 will be refunded to who ever actually wi
ns the bid. $20 gets you the CD of the receipts with some pictures AND the
DVD as shown on YouTube. The DVD should have better resolution than the vid
eo I uploaded onto YouTube. Simply send me a money order with your mailing
address=2C and I am happy to put the discs and info in the mail to you. My
mail address is P.O. Box 1991. Abilene=2C Texas 79604. The video on YouTube
isn't too bad=2C but the CD and DVD have greater detail and resolution.
Please let me make it clear=2C the engine will be sold on Ebay=2C I will no
t end the auction early=2C I will not have a buy-it-now price=2C nor an ask
ing price.
I added up the receipts I could find=2C and the math comes to around $6=2C6
00 (not including the powder coating for valve covers=2C air intake tubes
=2C pushrod tubes and other engine parts.) My expense on this engine pushes
the $7=2C000 mark easily.
In a few weeks=2C I will be getting ready the Piet project (NOT THE JUNK PI
LE I FIRST BOUGHT) BUT THE SECOND FINER EXAMPLE OF fuselage=2C wings=2C cen
ter section=2C lift struts etc. and offering pictures and a YouTube video o
f it in about a month or so. It is a Piet Fuselage with Grega wings. It was
originally started by an Air Force Maintenance Office who worked on the B-
1 program. He was also a B-2 Maintenance Officer at a base in MO. when he r
etired. It is my understanding he is also an A&P/IA and HE works at Cessna
in Wichita=2C Kansas. I felt pretty confident in this guys abilities and th
is time=2C I took my father with me for a pre-buy inspection. My dad liked
what he saw on this project and I bought it.
The original builder had this Aircamper project set up for a Corvair=2C but
I elected to go with my Continental A-80. I sold the Corvair parts and mo
tormount to a TACO official not too far from me. MORE DETAILS ABOUT THIS WI
LL COME IN A FEW WEEKS.
Windows Live Hotmail now works up to 70% faster. Sign up today.
_________________________________________________________________
Stay up to date on your PC=2C the Web=2C and your mobile phone with Windows
Live
Message 20
| 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: | MY CONTINENTAL A-80 AIRCRAFT ENGINE on EBAY & YouTube. |
Roy,
It worked for me, quite an engine and dad!
Jack
www.textors.com <http://www.textors.com/>
do not archive
Message 21
| 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: | spar thickness reduction |
Gene,
You're close, but not quite accurate. A solid 1" spar has a bit more
strength than a routed 1" spar (not equal).
Here's the brief engineering lesson for the day:
Every beam, regardless of the material it is made of, has "Section
Properties". These are properties of the shape (provided the section is
homogeneous - all one material throughout) that are used to determine (when
coupled with material properties), the load carrying capacity of that beam.
The Section Property in question here is called the Moment of Inertia about
the neutral axis (I sub x). The Moment of Inertia is directly related to the
load carrying capacity of the section, so a section with a Moment of Inertia
value of 2 can carry twice the load that a section with a Moment of Inertia
value of 1, and only half the load that a section with a value of 4 can, and
so on. I have calculated the Moments of Inertia for three spar sections
(routed 1", solid 1" and solid 3/4"). Using the routed 1" section as the
basis (since this is the section shown in the plans) we see that a solid 1"
spar can actually carry 119% as much as a routed 1" spar, and a solid 3/4"
spar can carry 89% as much as a routed 1" spar. This relationship holds, no
matter what material the spar is made of. The actual load carrying capacity
comes when we apply the Material Properties (using the appropriate formulas)
for the specific material that the spar is made of (Sitka Spruce, Douglas
Fir, 7075 Aluminum, old cheese etc.).
Calculations done by others have indicated that even the routed 1" spar is a
bit over-designed (let alone a solid 1" spar), and that a solid 3/4" spar is
sufficient to carry the loads. As we see from above, the solid 3/4" spar can
carry almost 90% the load that the routed 1" spar can, which allows a Piet
builder to save money and time.
I've made up a simple drawing to show these sections and their Moments of
Inertia, and attached it to illustrate.
There will be a brief written quiz on Monday. This concludes today's lesson.
Bill C.
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gene Rambo
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 8:33 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: spar thickness reduction
Mike:
A 1" I-beam has the same strength as a solid 1" spar but less weight.
Gene
Message 22
| 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: spar thickness reduction |
Well Done and thanks Bill
John
In a message dated 11/14/2008 3:28:55 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
eng@canadianrogers.com writes:
Gene,
You're close, but not quite accurate. A solid 1" spar has a bit more
strength than a routed 1" spar (not equal).
Here's the brief engineering lesson for the day:
Every beam, regardless of the material it is made of, has "Section
Properties". These are properties of the shape (provided the section is homogeneous
-
all one material throughout) that are used to determine (when coupled with
material properties), the load carrying capacity of that beam. The Section
Property in question here is called the Moment of Inertia about the neutral axis
(I sub x). The Moment of Inertia is directly related to the load carrying
capacity of the section, so a section with a Moment of Inertia value of 2 can
carry twice the load that a section with a Moment of Inertia value of 1, and
only half the load that a section with a value of 4 can, and so on. I have
calculated the Moments of Inertia for three spar sections (routed 1", solid 1"
and solid 3/4"). Using the routed 1" section as the basis (since this is the
section shown in the plans) we see that a solid 1" spar can actually carry 119%
as much as a routed 1" spar, and a solid 3/4" spar can carry 89% as much as
a routed 1" spar. This relationship holds, no matter what material the spar
is made of. The actual load carrying capacity comes when we apply the Material
Properties (using the appropriate formulas) for the specific material that
the spar is made of (Sitka Spruce, Douglas Fir, 7075 Aluminum, old cheese
etc.).
Calculations done by others have indicated that even the routed 1" spar is a
bit over-designed (let alone a solid 1" spar), and that a solid 3/4" spar is
sufficient to carry the loads. As we see from above, the solid 3/4" spar can
carry almost 90% the load that the routed 1" spar can, which allows a Piet
builder to save money and time.
I've made up a simple drawing to show these sections and their Moments of
Inertia, and attached it to illustrate.
There will be a brief written quiz on Monday. This concludes today's lesson.
Bill C.
____________________________________
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gene Rambo
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 8:33 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: spar thickness reduction
Mike:
A 1" I-beam has the same strength as a solid 1" spar but less weight.
Gene
**************Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news &
p://toolbar.aol.com/moviefone/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000001)
Message 23
| 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: spar thickness reduction |
Bill,
When you get a moment, we'd like to hear about modulus of elasticity
under typical live loadings in flight for these three shapes. I think
that sitka spruce compared to tofu would complete the exercise nicely.
Cheers,
Al Lyscars
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Church
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 3:26 PM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: spar thickness reduction
Gene,
You're close, but not quite accurate. A solid 1" spar has a bit more
strength than a routed 1" spar (not equal).
Here's the brief engineering lesson for the day:
Every beam, regardless of the material it is made of, has "Section
Properties". These are properties of the shape (provided the section is
homogeneous - all one material throughout) that are used to determine
(when coupled with material properties), the load carrying capacity of
that beam. The Section Property in question here is called the Moment of
Inertia about the neutral axis (I sub x). The Moment of Inertia is
directly related to the load carrying capacity of the section, so a
section with a Moment of Inertia value of 2 can carry twice the load
that a section with a Moment of Inertia value of 1, and only half the
load that a section with a value of 4 can, and so on. I have calculated
the Moments of Inertia for three spar sections (routed 1", solid 1" and
solid 3/4"). Using the routed 1" section as the basis (since this is the
section shown in the plans) we see that a solid 1" spar can actually
carry 119% as much as a routed 1" spar, and a solid 3/4" spar can carry
89% as much as a routed 1" spar. This relationship holds, no matter what
material the spar is made of. The actual load carrying capacity comes
when we apply the Material Properties (using the appropriate formulas)
for the specific material that the spar is made of (Sitka Spruce,
Douglas Fir, 7075 Aluminum, old cheese etc.).
Calculations done by others have indicated that even the routed 1"
spar is a bit over-designed (let alone a solid 1" spar), and that a
solid 3/4" spar is sufficient to carry the loads. As we see from above,
the solid 3/4" spar can carry almost 90% the load that the routed 1"
spar can, which allows a Piet builder to save money and time.
I've made up a simple drawing to show these sections and their Moments
of Inertia, and attached it to illustrate.
There will be a brief written quiz on Monday. This concludes today's
lesson.
Bill C.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gene
Rambo
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 8:33 AM
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: spar thickness reduction
Mike:
A 1" I-beam has the same strength as a solid 1" spar but less
weight.
Gene
Message 24
| 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: MY CONTINENTAL A-80 AIRCRAFT ENGINE on EBAY & YouTube. |
Think you have to Copy and Paste
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: Roy Brooks
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 2:10 PM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: MY CONTINENTAL A-80 AIRCRAFT ENGINE on
EBAY & YouTube.
For some reason, my YouTube link doesn't seem to come up, so here it
is again. Maybe Mattronics has something that eliminates links, if so,
go to YouTube and just type in this (A-80 AIRCRAFT ENGINE.)
Sorry.... Here is the link one more try.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O31jul0OYUI
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: n900ml@hotmail.com
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
Subject: Pietenpol-List: MY CONTINENTAL A-80 AIRCRAFT ENGINE on EBAY &
YouTube.
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 12:44:33 -0600
PIETERS=85
I am selling my Continental A-80 engine (as I advised here a month or
so ago) and now seen on YouTube. Just type in =93A-80 Continental
Aircraft Engine.=94 If that doesn=92t work, use this direct link =85
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O31jul0OYUI
This engine will go on Ebay and I=92ll post a note here to give
interested parties a =93heads-up=94 the day it goes up for auction. It
will be sold through Ebay to the highest bidder. I=92ll probably start
the auction at $1. It will be necessary for the winning bidder to pick
the engine up at Bruce Field in Ballinger, Texas.
Here are some details about the history of this engine. This is a long
story and if you ARE NOT in the market for an engine being sold for
PARTS ONLY please save yourself some time and don=92t bother reading
this.
I made this video for YouTube in order to show some of the
=93highlights=94 about the overhaul on this engine done by my father in
2005.
My father was an A&P Mechanic and had 5 type ratings in jets when he
retired. He overhauled my Continental A-80 engine and passed away soon
after signing the engine logbook. It is bittersweet having to sell this
engine, because his signature in the logbook is the last thing he ever
signed before he passed away in 2005.
My dad learned he had a relapse of colon cancer and at age 85, and he
simply decided NOT to undergo chemotherapy a second-time after seeing my
mom go though cancer treatment with chemo and radiation not working for
her, just a year earlier. Getting my dad to overhaul the engine helped
to keep him occupied when that he was living alone as a widower and I
simply did not have the savvy to attempt this myself.
My dad was tough as nails and the last thing he wanted to accomplish
in life was to overhaul my Continental A-80 engine. When he was 78, he
overhauled my Lycoming 0-320 E2A engine. In my youth, he overhauled my
1963 Ford van engine, my 1965 Mustang engine and transmission, half a
dozen motorcycle engines, he built boats, campers, travel trailers. When
he was younger, he rebuilt and flew several old Army Air Corp trainers.
He was an instructor pilot during WW2 in the Army Air Corp. The man was
a gifted mechanic and I was the =93artist=94. He built stuff, I made
them look nice. It was a great partnership for 54 years. When he was 82,
he bought a Volkswagen Westfalia and we pulled the engine from that (see
this on YouTube, =93Rebuilding my dad=92s Westfalia). I can=92t even
remember how many VW based dune buggies my dad and I built, but it was
ALWAYS a common sight to see split engine cases and air cooled engines
in our garage when I was young.
I am not in the position to warranty this engine or guarantee the
sufficiency of this engine for use in either a certificated or
experimental airplane. By being =93up-front=94 with everyone about the
condition of my father (he was in Hospice Care at home when he did this
overhaul) it is my goal to be as above-board as possible. I am selling
this engine on Ebay as a =93PARTS ENGINE.=94 All bidders will need to
understand this is a salvage project for the value of the parts that can
be obtained when they disassemble the engine. A Bill Of Sale signed by
me and the successful bidder will reflect =93PARTS ENGINE.=94
I can tell you that had I NOT become so decrepit myself, I would have
had no reservation about putting this engine on the Piet project my dad
and I were working on. My dad NEVER let me down, and my confidence
level in this engine is very high. But that being said, I want to
emphasize, THIS IS A PARTS ENGINE and must be disassembled by whoever
purchases it, for use of parts that can be salvaged.
This engine was originally in a Pietenpol I bought in November 2003
(the first time my dad was sick with colon cancer). I had previously
committed to travel out-of-state with my father to inspect and purchase
a Pietenpol, but my father became ill within a day or so of my trip out
of town and he wasn=92t able to go with me. The guy who was selling a
Piet (in 2003) sent me e-mails stating the engine had only 5 hours since
major overhaul. I made a quick trip out-of-state to buy the Piet and I
brought it home on a trailer.
When my dad was finally well enough to leave his house, he came out to
my farm so we could start the engine. It began leaking oil and gas and
ran very rough, despite having fresh gasoline (I think the ride back to
Texas on a trailer was all that was needed to make this engine spring a
leak.) I pulled the engine out of the Pietenpol, took it to my
father=92s house and we disassembled it in his garage (watch the YouTube
video.) It was scary to see what was inside the engine as we pulled the
oil tank off, removed the cylinders and split the case. The lobes on the
camshaft were out of tolerance, the crankshaft was so pitted, the
journals looked like Swiss cheese (see this on YouTube, it is pathetic)
and the guy who re-built it was so cheap, he made many of engine gaskets
rather than purchase REAL OEM gaskets. It was also evident old cotter
pins were re-used (inside the engine) and the builder failed to
adequately safety-wire the oil pick-up tube onto the engine. The tube
could have fallen of into the oil sump! (The list of horrors goes on=85)
Long story made short (nearly $7,000 later) I sent the engine case off
to Divco, the accessory case went to Drake, I bought a NEW camshaft, had
the cylinders rebuilt (Cerminil) bought a new oil pump-kit, new rod
bolts, all new gaskets=85 the list of new stuff goes on and on and on.
Shortly after the case and parts came back, my father had a relapse of
colon cancer and he basically threw in the towel so to speak. He
didn=92t want to do chemo again, but he did want to rebuild the
engine=85 This was his last priority in life.
I think if you will take the time to look at my YouTube video,
you=92ll agree, this is the one of the BEST looking A-series engines you
will have ever seen. I spared no expense in bringing this engine back to
life. I even bought new air-intake tubes, new pushrod tubes and had them
powder coated in Candy Apple Blue. I powder coated the valve covers in
Continental Gold=85 All new rubber, all new clamps, all new bolts inside
and outside the engine.
The Slick Mags appeared relatively new when I bought the Pietenpol,
They are dual-impulse coupler and they sparked nice and hot. That was
the best thing about this Piet project was the new Slick mags. I am not
certain where the wiring harness is, but I=92m fairly confident I can
find them.
When I put the engine on Ebay, bidders will have to be pre-approved
prior to submitting a bid. NOBODY gets to bid unless they contact me
through Ebay and state they understand the =93no warranty, no guarantee,
this is a PARTS engine=94 and they understand it is not being intended
for use in any airplane because it is a PARTS ENGINE. I simply can=92t
take on the liability and as such, I=92ll be taking a price-beating on
this engine by not stating it is =93airworthy.=94
For anybody wanting to see my receipts, yellow tags, release forms,
Cerminil process and ALL THE PARTS I bought, I am willing to send you a
CD of the receipts and a DVD (as the one YouTube except with better
resolution) for $20. I can=92t afford to be mailing CDs and DVDs out to
every =93tire-kicker=94 out there and the $20 will be refunded to who
ever actually wins the bid. $20 gets you the CD of the receipts with
some pictures AND the DVD as shown on YouTube. The DVD should have
better resolution than the video I uploaded onto YouTube. Simply send me
a money order with your mailing address, and I am happy to put the discs
and info in the mail to you. My mail address is P.O. Box 1991. Abilene,
Texas 79604. The video on YouTube isn't too bad, but the CD and DVD have
greater detail and resolution.
Please let me make it clear, the engine will be sold on Ebay, I will
not end the auction early, I will not have a buy-it-now price, nor an
asking price.
I added up the receipts I could find, and the math comes to around
$6,600 (not including the powder coating for valve covers, air intake
tubes, pushrod tubes and other engine parts.) My expense on this engine
pushes the $7,000 mark easily.
In a few weeks, I will be getting ready the Piet project (NOT THE JUNK
PILE I FIRST BOUGHT) BUT THE SECOND FINER EXAMPLE OF fuselage, wings,
center section, lift struts etc. and offering pictures and a YouTube
video of it in about a month or so. It is a Piet Fuselage with Grega
wings. It was originally started by an Air Force Maintenance Office who
worked on the B-1 program. He was also a B-2 Maintenance Officer at a
base in MO. when he retired. It is my understanding he is also an A&P/IA
and HE works at Cessna in Wichita, Kansas. I felt pretty confident in
this guys abilities and this time, I took my father with me for a
pre-buy inspection. My dad liked what he saw on this project and I
bought it.
The original builder had this Aircamper project set up for a Corvair,
but I elected to go with my Continental A-80. I sold the Corvair parts
and motormount to a TACO official not too far from me. MORE DETAILS
ABOUT THIS WILL COME IN A FEW WEEKS.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Windows Live Hotmail now works up to 70% faster. Sign up today.
ww.matronics.com/contribution
st">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
onics.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Stay up to date on your PC, the Web, and y19462413/direct/01/'
target='_new'>Click here
Message 25
| 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: | spar thickness reduction |
Al,
Tofu? What are you, crazy?
Tofu is much too heavy and bland for aircraft use.
BC
do not archive
Message 26
| 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: spar thickness reduction |
Thanks for the "lesson", but I completely disagree. I won't argue
engineering on here though.
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: ALAN LYSCARS<mailto:alyscars@verizon.net>
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com<mailto:pietenpol-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 5:18 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: spar thickness reduction
Bill,
When you get a moment, we'd like to hear about modulus of elasticity
under typical live loadings in flight for these three shapes. I think
that sitka spruce compared to tofu would complete the exercise nicely.
Cheers,
Al Lyscars
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Church<mailto:eng@canadianrogers.com>
To:
pietenpol-list@matronics.com<mailto:pietenpol-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 3:26 PM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: spar thickness reduction
Gene,
You're close, but not quite accurate. A solid 1" spar has a bit more
strength than a routed 1" spar (not equal).
Here's the brief engineering lesson for the day:
Every beam, regardless of the material it is made of, has "Section
Properties". These are properties of the shape (provided the section is
homogeneous - all one material throughout) that are used to determine
(when coupled with material properties), the load carrying capacity of
that beam. The Section Property in question here is called the Moment of
Inertia about the neutral axis (I sub x). The Moment of Inertia is
directly related to the load carrying capacity of the section, so a
section with a Moment of Inertia value of 2 can carry twice the load
that a section with a Moment of Inertia value of 1, and only half the
load that a section with a value of 4 can, and so on. I have calculated
the Moments of Inertia for three spar sections (routed 1", solid 1" and
solid 3/4"). Using the routed 1" section as the basis (since this is the
section shown in the plans) we see that a solid 1" spar can actually
carry 119% as much as a routed 1" spar, and a solid 3/4" spar can carry
89% as much as a routed 1" spar. This relationship holds, no matter what
material the spar is made of. The actual load carrying capacity comes
when we apply the Material Properties (using the appropriate formulas)
for the specific material that the spar is made of (Sitka Spruce,
Douglas Fir, 7075 Aluminum, old cheese etc.).
Calculations done by others have indicated that even the routed 1"
spar is a bit over-designed (let alone a solid 1" spar), and that a
solid 3/4" spar is sufficient to carry the loads. As we see from above,
the solid 3/4" spar can carry almost 90% the load that the routed 1"
spar can, which allows a Piet builder to save money and time.
I've made up a simple drawing to show these sections and their
Moments of Inertia, and attached it to illustrate.
There will be a brief written quiz on Monday. This concludes today's
lesson.
Bill C.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gene
Rambo
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 8:33 AM
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: spar thickness reduction
Mike:
A 1" I-beam has the same strength as a solid 1" spar but less
weight.
Gene
http://www.matronics.com/contribution<http://www.matronics.com/contributi
on>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List<http://www.matronics.co
m/Navigator?Pietenpol-List>
Message 27
| 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: | spar thickness reduction |
Gene,
What part do you "completely disagree" with?
I think this List is a better venue to discuss engineering than it is to
discuss the merits of Chinese imports, so if you take issue with anything I
wrote, please share your thoughts. Maybe I've overlooked something. Unless
someone can point out any errors in what I've written, I stand by what I
wrote.
By the way, the "lesson" was directed at the list members in general, not an
any one person. But more specifically, it was directed to those on the list
that are not familiar with strengths of materials, and who might appreciate
a basic explanation of some things that get brought up from time to time,
such as spar design.
Bill C.
Message 28
| 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: build vs. buy? |
Jim.
As I understand it, it is basically the same, except the conditional can be
signed off by an A&P and the Annual needs to be signed off by an A&P with an
inspection authorization. See FAR 91.409 (c). There may be more to it than
that and I'm sure someone here knows ....the rest of the story.
Gene in rainy, foggy Tennessee
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Ash" <ashcan@earthlink.net>
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 9:30 PM
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 <zharvey@bellsouth.net>
>>Sent: Nov 13, 2008 7:23 PM
>>To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
>>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: build vs. buy?
>>
>><zharvey@bellsouth.net>
>>
>>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" <ashcan@earthlink.net>
>>To: <pietenpol-list@matronics.com>
>>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 <tomanderson_nc@yahoo.com>
>>>>Sent: Nov 13, 2008 4:26 PM
>>>>To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
>>>>Subject: Pietenpol-List: build vs. buy?
>>>>
>>>><tomanderson_nc@yahoo.com>
>>>>
>>>>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
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Checked by AVG.
> 7:58 AM
>
>
Message 29
| 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: | spar thickness reduction |
That would be me...in need of a lesson in strengths. Please, if you would n
ot mind Gene, I would be interested in hearing you.
-
-
Message 30
| 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: spar thickness reduction |
But it does gain substantialy from soaking in soy sauce.
Clif
Al,
Tofu? What are you, crazy?
Tofu is much too heavy and bland for aircraft use.
BC
do not archive
Message 31
| 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 |
|
I have a M.C. brake actuator on the stick. I also have a steerable tail
wheel. I would get tighter turning radius with dual actuators, but for
simplicity, it's just fine for me.
Dick N.
----- Original Message -----
From: Marc Dumay
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 9:45 PM
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
| 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 |
|
About five years ago (April 12, 2003 to be exact) Pietenpol builder John McNarry
posted the following. It sounded like an interesting arrangement, but I can't
find any postings from John since 2004, so I don't know if it ever got operational.
The basic arrangement makes sense, just not sure how it would perform
in the real world
Bill C. :
I won't claim this works as I have only made a proof of concept mock up. I
have the straight axle gear 21" rims with cable operated drum brakes and the
rudder bar. The brake control is like a motorcycle hand brake mounted on the
front of the stick. The sheathed cable runs down the stick and splits into
two cables parallel to the aileron torque tube. These two cable sheaths are
anchored to the floor and the inner cable make a 180 degree turn back
towards the front at about under the seat. They then pass over moving
pulleys that are fastened with rod links to the rudder bar. This means the
cables have an S shaped path and exit the floor at about the rear landing
gear "V" strut. Sheathed motorcycle cables take the pull from there to the
drum brake levers.
With the handle squeezed hard toward the stick the wheels are locked. The
lever is at a bit of a stretch but I can get my fingers around it. When the
rudder bar is moved, the cable on the side the bar is pressed gets tighter.
The opposite side goes slack. The differential is enough that the opposite
wheel turns freely. The hand lever moves toward the stick slightly. The
slack cable is held on the pulleys by guards and fair lead tubes on the
torque tube. I haven't built the whole affair yet and plan to have a row of
holes on the pull rod attachment at the rudder bar. This will allow me to
find the right rudder bar pull point.
Benefits: Brakes!
I can hold the brakes with one hand.
Differential braking.
No Hydraulics.
Motorcycle cables are adjustable.
Thinking this up is a cure for insomnia.
Disadvantages: The pile of parts weighs about 2 lbs.
I can't seem to find the time to finish it.
Rudder bar? Well the first vehicles I drove where "Capital I go-karts" with
front axle steering. You pushed on the opposite side from the direction you
wanted to steer.
All my time has been in older tail draggers. The Tiger Moth has the only
rudder bar I've flown. It has no brakes and a funny linkage that keeps the
pedal attached to the bar from swinging in an arc. It still requires a lot
of leg motion.
Learn to dance. Fly a tail dragger!
John
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=214307#214307
Message 33
| 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: spar thickness reduction |
Is the substantial gain mostly in weight, or blandness?
(sorry, I should shut up now)
BC
But it does gain substantialy from soaking in soy sauce.
Clif
[quote]
Al,
Tofu? What are you, crazy?
Tofu is much too heavy and bland for aircraft use.
BC
do not archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=214308#214308
Message 34
| 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: spar thickness reduction |
Is the substantial gain mostly in weight, or blandness?
(sorry, I should shut up now)
BC
But it does gain substantialy from soaking in soy sauce.
Clif
[quote]
Al,
Tofu? What are you, crazy?
Tofu is much too heavy and bland for aircraft use.
BC
do not archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=214309#214309
Message 35
| 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: | Lockable Tailwheels |
Fellow Pieters,
I have a question for those who have built your own steerable tailwheels. Did you
make them lockable or not? If they are steerable, without locking for takeoff,
how do they behave in a crosswind? Most of the homemade assemblies I have
seen appear to be non-lockable, while the purchased units like Matco or the ACSS
Homebuilders special are lockable.
RicK Schreiber
Valparaiso, IN
lmforge@earthlink.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! --
|