Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:24 AM - Re: Airfoil question (helspersew@aol.com)
2. 05:11 AM - radioi (airlion@bellsouth.net)
3. 05:11 AM - steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear (Douwe Blumberg)
4. 06:43 AM - Re: spot... again... (Gene & Tammy)
5. 07:14 AM - Re: spot... again... (Bill Church)
6. 07:52 AM - Re: Piet progress (Michael Perez)
7. 07:54 AM - Great day at Columbia airport (Michael Perez)
8. 08:11 AM - Re: Airfoil question (Will42)
9. 12:21 PM - Re: Re: spot... again... (Gene & Tammy)
10. 12:25 PM - Re: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear (Mark Roberts)
11. 12:39 PM - Re: Airfoil question (Mark Roberts)
12. 01:10 PM - Re: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear (rameses32)
13. 01:33 PM - Air Camper performance (Oscar Zuniga)
14. 01:33 PM - Re: Re: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear (Mark Roberts)
15. 02:13 PM - Re: Air Camper performance (Gene & Tammy)
16. 03:13 PM - Corvair buy (Ameet Savant)
17. 03:13 PM - Re: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear (Ben Charvet)
18. 03:54 PM - Re: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear (amsafetyc@aol.com)
19. 04:13 PM - Re: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear (Rick Holland)
20. 05:27 PM - Re: Re: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear (Owen Davies)
21. 05:31 PM - Re: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear (rameses32)
22. 07:07 PM - Re: Re: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear (Mark Roberts)
23. 07:51 PM - Re: Corvair buy (shad bell)
24. 08:11 PM - Re: Re: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear (Michael Groah)
25. 08:19 PM - "Weed whacker comment" (shad bell)
26. 08:19 PM - Re: Corvair buy (Gary Boothe)
27. 08:38 PM - Re: Re: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear (Gary Boothe)
28. 08:38 PM - Re: Re: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear (Mark Roberts)
29. 09:14 PM - Re: Re: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear (Michael Groah)
30. 09:21 PM - Re: "Weed whacker comment" ()
31. 09:41 PM - Re: Re: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear (Mark Roberts)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Airfoil question |
Mark,
Bernard (he pronounced it?"Bernerd"), experimented with different airfoils and
settled on the one he outlines in the plans. Here is a quote from the words of?B.
H. Pietenpol himself......."I'm sticking to our home brew wing section and
I will until I can find something better--so far I haven't found one."
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Roberts <mark.rbrts1@gmail.com>
Sent: Sat, Jun 13, 2009 11:08 pm
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Airfoil question
What airfoil does the Piet have? Was it an 'original'?
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 |
|
hey pieters: does anyone know what the radio requirements are? do we have to
have a transponder/encoder if you have an electrical system? If so, where is it
written down? Gardiner
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "Dick N." <horzpool@goldengate.net>
>
>
> Mark
> Other than to make comments about diet is to add Horsepower. Some of us fly
> very well at 1250 lb or more. You will need a 100 hp+ engine for that.
> Consider a Corvair, O-200 or similar.
> You can build a basic short fuse Piet at 630 lb, that is without brakes or
> tail wheel. Add 395lb for pilot and pass and 100 lb fuel and you are still
> at 1175 lb.
> I had flight tested my A-65 Piet to 1150 lb and it flies fine but not on a
> 90+ degree day. My 110 hp Piet flies at 1310 lb. but it doesn't like it
> much. A better weight is 1250 lb.
> Dick N.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark Roberts" <mark.rbrts1@gmail.com>
> To: <pietenpol-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Friday, June 12, 2009 8:18 PM
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Weight differences between Wood and steel fuse
> versions
>
>
> >
> > Hi All:
> >
> > I am looking for a way to increase my useable load for the Piet. Last
> > wee I finally discovered (thanks to you nice folks) that the Piet's
> > Gross weight is around 1050 lbs, with a useful load after fuel of
> > somewhere around 400 or so pounds depending on engine, accessories,
> > and whether you got rid of all the diet coke you drank before you took
> > off :o)
> >
> > As I am 250 and 6'4", and my wife is a good looking 145 or so (it's
> > true she's good looking to me, but I also figured it's the only way I
> > think I'd live through the night if she found out I told her weight to
> > the world at large...). I am looking to make sure that the plane will
> > be as light as possible so I could CONSIDER taking some form of over
> > night bag or a tent to attend Brodhead sometime.
> >
> > So, I am looking at the steel verse wood option, even though I prefer
> > to work with wood, not steel. I don't look forward to cutting or
> > welding steel, but a man's gotta do what a man's gotta do if he
> > refuses to exercise (joking here...).
> >
> > I have no idea what the weight diference really is over all, and if it
> > is indeed significant, I have some people ready to help weld that have
> > quite a bit of experience. But, hanging my butt in the seat of
> > something I welded as my first project is not a reassuring message for
> > my wife.
> >
> > Any thoughts from you bunch would be very much appreciated. Also, what
> > are your various empty weights so I have some realistic idea of the
> > final over all weights in the real world...
> >
> > Thanks guys!!
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
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: | steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear |
I'm not an expert, but since nobody else has jumped in, I'll give it my best
shot.
Firstly, my knowledge is not based on first-hand, empirical data, but on
talking to people and over 20 years of Pietenpol newsletter backissues.
I think I can say catagorically that a steel tube fuselage IS lighter, the
question is by how much. This is one of those facts that is like nailing
jelly to the wall, it is really hard to get comparable, real-world weights.
The largest number I have seen is 30 lbs, which seems a bit high (but
certainly possible), but I wouldn't be at all surprised if it was around 20.
As to "the extra effort" of building a steel tube, if you can weld, it
would actually be easier and faster than building in wood. The standard
solution for people building steel who dont weld is to get a little rig and
learn to tack weld (very simple) and fabricate the whole thing then bring it
to a good welder to finish the welds for you.
If I were building again, I would seriously consider a steel fuse simply
because it IS faster and an easy way to save a chunk of weight.
The Scout gear is a fine gear. I've not seen it adapted to an Aircamper,
though I've heard lots of people talk about it. The vertial shock strut
interferes with one of the lift struts, though I see no reason why this
can't be avoided. Also, be sure the area on the fuse where you attach the
shock strut is up to those compression forces, might have to beef something
up there. I think the scout gear with big wire wheels is the prettiest gear
going, and you do save some weight over the jenny gear by not having that
big axle hanging down there.
Douwe
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: spot... again... |
Douwe, try to Google "SPOT".
Once you have the device (they do offer it on line for free, every so often)
you need to pay a yearly fee. It will be up to you what features you want
and you'll only pay for the ones you choose. The basic cost is $100 a year.
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: "Douwe Blumberg" <douweblumberg@earthlink.net>
Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2009 6:19 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: spot... again...
> <douweblumberg@earthlink.net>
>
> Couldn't load the spot site with my old dial up. Am I correct in
> understanding that once you have the device, you pay a monthly or yearly
> subscription for it to work? What does this cost?
>
> Douwe
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
17:56:00
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: spot... again... |
While I do not have ANY personal experience with the Spot system, I did run across
a first-hand account of one user's disappointment with the system. It can
be found here (about two thirds down the page):
http://www.ocis.net/tvsac/0906news.html
Just in case the link doesn't work, I've cut and pasted the relevant part:
Spot! Bad Spot!
Not Spot the Dog, but Spot the Satellite Tracker... Could that tracker be a real
dog? We bought one last month, and I have a few bones to pick!
Anyone who read the ads will be familiar with the claims that it will report your location every ten minutes, and send it to your computer. Yeah, right... The ads also show the different activities where you could use a Spot: Hiking, flying, climbing, hunting, etc... But if you have problems with the unit not working as promised they ask you to look at the fine print at http://www.spotwarranty.com/
Notice the part where they say: Buildings, inside cars or planes, dense wet tree
cover, mountains, caves, canyons, etccan reduce message delivery success.
Who are those people?!.... We had expected that it would work anywhere a GPS works.
Nobody I know would expect it to work inside a cave; but a car or an aircraft?
My GPS works there fine... And we bought the Spot to use in our aircrafts...
We found out that reliability can sometimes be as low as 50%. And you don't need
to be under "dense wet tree cover" for it to fail. Even the proximity of trees
or buildings seems to affect the performance. Their Customer Service Department
told me that even using it within 12 inches to a GPS or other electronics
might also screw it up.
The small size of the unit makes you believe that it would be ideal for hiking,
but don't count on it! You would have to keep it clipped to the top of your hat
so the logo always points up, and stay away from trees and cliffs.
>From what I have seen so far, it does not have the power needed to perform as
advertized. I would not mind if the unit was twice its size, if at least it was
reliable in my aircraft.
It might be better than nothing, but if you ever have to use it in an emergency,
be ready to drag yourself with broken legs out of the bush and to the top of
a hill with an "unobstructed view of the sky" if you want any chance of rescue.
If you are lucky it will already have tracked a few of your last positions
and transmitted them to your contacts.[/quote]
Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=248035#248035
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: Piet progress |
Man, I can't wait until I get to that point! I have taken a little break fr
om building the plane to work again on furniture for the living room. I wil
l wrap this current project up and get back to building the plane. Posts an
d pictures like this help keep me motivated- to build/fly.
-
Very cool, very nice picture and I thank you for the encouragement!
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: | Great day at Columbia airport |
I broke out one of my summer cars and dropped in on Mike Cuy at the Columbi
a airport unannounced. Like myself, I know he is not a big fan of people dr
opping by and yapin' and distracting him from what he has planned to get do
ne during the day. My plan was to say hello and leave. I ended up being the
re for about 4 hours! I helped when I could with his work and the big event
for me was doing an engine run up from the pilot seat! I got to see him ta
ke a test flight, complete with induced smoke for effect. He was pleased wi
th the apparent increase in horsepower, I was pleased to still be allowed a
t the hangar!- Thanks Mike for allowing me the opportunity to hang out an
d be around the type of plane I will some day fly.
-
With people on this list posting in-work pictures, progress pictures and st
ories, stories of great flights, word about upcoming fly-ins and events and
periodic trips to the hangar, I will stay motivated to see this endeavor t
hrough to the end. Thanks guys.
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: Airfoil question |
mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com wrote:
> What airfoil does the Piet have? Was it an 'original'?
The airfoil was probably original however, it is very close to the USA 27 as used
on the Lincoln Sport biplane and some Waco's. BPH liked the underside reflex
which seems to have been favored in the era.
Will
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=248041#248041
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: spot... again... |
Bill, Yes there are some folks that have found the SPOT not to be the magic
pill they are looking for. All I can tell you from personal experience is
that it works most of the time for me. I purchased the 10 min. update and
use it while I'm flying. I don't keep it in the best of locations and it
reports most of the time. It is located in the cockpit of my Piet on the
side wall, by my knee. I believe if I moved it to somewhere outside the
cockpit or even just behind the windscreen, it would work better. The
reason I use it is, I fly over heavily wooded areas and even if it hadn't
updated itself in the past 10 minutes it would give searchers a good idea
where to start to look (The Piet doesn't go very far in 10 minutes).
I have experienced the same results with ELTs that others you refer to have
reported with the SPOT but I still think an ELT is a good idea.
I'm in no way trying to talk anyone into using SPOT, just recording my
experience with it. Sure, I wish it always worked perfectly but in my book
it's an imporvement over anything else out there that I can afford.
Gene in Stormy Tennessee
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Church" <billspiet@sympatico.ca>
Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2009 9:13 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: spot... again...
> <billspiet@sympatico.ca>
>
> While I do not have ANY personal experience with the Spot system, I did
> run across a first-hand account of one user's disappointment with the
> system. It can be found here (about two thirds down the page):
>
> http://www.ocis.net/tvsac/0906news.html
>
> Just in case the link doesn't work, I've cut and pasted the relevant part:
>
> Spot! Bad Spot!
>
> Not Spot the Dog, but Spot the Satellite Tracker... Could that tracker be
> a real dog? We bought one last month, and I have a few bones to pick!
>
> Anyone who read the ads will be familiar with the claims that it will
> report your location every ten minutes, and send it to your computer.
> Yeah, right... The ads also show the different activities where you could
> use a Spot: Hiking, flying, climbing, hunting, etc... But if you have
> problems with the unit not working as promised they ask you to look at the
> fine print at http://www.spotwarranty.com/
>
> Notice the part where they say: Buildings, inside cars or planes, dense
> wet tree cover, mountains, caves, canyons, etc?can reduce message
> delivery success.
>
> Who are those people?!.... We had expected that it would work anywhere a
> GPS works. Nobody I know would expect it to work inside a cave; but a car
> or an aircraft? My GPS works there fine... And we bought the Spot to use
> in our aircrafts...
>
> We found out that reliability can sometimes be as low as 50%. And you
> don't need to be under "dense wet tree cover" for it to fail. Even the
> proximity of trees or buildings seems to affect the performance. Their
> Customer Service Department told me that even using it within 12 inches to
> a GPS or other electronics might also screw it up.
>
> The small size of the unit makes you believe that it would be ideal for
> hiking, but don't count on it! You would have to keep it clipped to the
> top of your hat so the logo always points up, and stay away from trees and
> cliffs.
>
>>From what I have seen so far, it does not have the power needed to perform
>>as advertized. I would not mind if the unit was twice its size, if at
>>least it was reliable in my aircraft.
>
> It might be better than nothing, but if you ever have to use it in an
> emergency, be ready to drag yourself with broken legs out of the bush and
> to the top of a hill with an "unobstructed view of the sky" if you want
> any chance of rescue. If you are lucky it will already have tracked a few
> of your last positions and transmitted them to your contacts.[/quote]
>
> Bill C.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=248035#248035
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
05:53:00
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: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear |
Thank you , thank you.
That is what I was wondering: by what factor is the steel version
lighter than the wood. It was an absolute unknow. I thought if it was
80-100 pounds that might be worth it. But for 30 pounds, the diet is a
much better and healthier option :o)
As to welding, I might just go that route. I can tack weld, and I know
a guy at Church that has been welding his whole life, so he offered to
help.
However, it is a different skill set to learn to bend and create the
parts with tubing, and that will take some learning too...
But ain't that what makes this fun!? I didn't know that the steel
would be faster, but now that you mention it, there are no gussets to
cut and glue, and a few steel straps to weld into place on the stress
areas, so that is less time consuming....
Thanks again. Any one else out there with info on tis, please educate
the student here... I'm eager to learn.
Mark
On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 5:09 AM, Douwe
Blumberg<douweblumberg@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> I'm not an expert, but since nobody else has jumped in, I'll give it my best
> shot.
>
> Firstly, my knowledge is not based on first-hand, empirical data, but on
> talking to people and over 20 years of Pietenpol newsletter backissues.
>
> I think I can say catagorically that a steel tube fuselage IS lighter, the
> question is by how much. This is one of those facts that is like nailing
> jelly to the wall, it is really hard to get comparable, real-world weights.
> The largest number I have seen is 30 lbs, which seems a bit high (but
> certainly possible), but I wouldn't be at all surprised if it was around 20.
>
> As to "the extra effort" of building a steel tube, if you can weld, it
> would actually be easier and faster than building in wood. The standard
> solution for people building steel who dont weld is to get a little rig and
> learn to tack weld (very simple) and fabricate the whole thing then bring it
> to a good welder to finish the welds for you.
>
> If I were building again, I would seriously consider a steel fuse simply
> because it IS faster and an easy way to save a chunk of weight.
>
> The Scout gear is a fine gear. I've not seen it adapted to an Aircamper,
> though I've heard lots of people talk about it. The vertial shock strut
> interferes with one of the lift struts, though I see no reason why this
> can't be avoided. Also, be sure the area on the fuse where you attach the
> shock strut is up to those compression forces, might have to beef something
> up there. I think the scout gear with big wire wheels is the prettiest gear
> going, and you do save some weight over the jenny gear by not having that
> big axle hanging down there.
>
> Douwe
>
>
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Airfoil question |
Thanks! I didn't recognize the little dimple in the underside of the
airfoil, so I wondered if it induced more drag and thus less lift. I
am not looking to change anything aerodynamically, as I want to trust
what I build. But, I am just curious as to the design elements like
that little 'dimple'.
Also, thanks for the 'Bernerd' pronunciation heads up. I always prefer
to know the real pronunciation of names and that was one I didn't
know.
Mark
On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 4:18 AM, <helspersew@aol.com> wrote:
> Mark,
>
> Bernard (he pronounced it"Bernerd"), experimented with different airfoils
> and settled on the one he outlines in the plans. Here is a quote from the
> words ofB. H. Pietenpol himself......."I'm sticking to our home brew wing
> section and I will until I can find something better--so far I haven't found
> one."
>
> Dan Helsper
> Poplar Grove, IL
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Roberts <mark.rbrts1@gmail.com>
> To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Sat, Jun 13, 2009 11:08 pm
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Airfoil question
>
>
> What airfoil does the Piet have? Was it an 'original'?
>
>
> ________________________________
> Make your summer sizzle with fast and easy recipes for the grill.
>
>
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: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear |
Just a reference for you pertaining to time that it takes to build a steel fuselage.
I built a Georgias Special fuselage, on gear, with controls, seat, and empanage,
it took me a total of 100 hours. No turtle deck or fairings, wing mounts
or any other details, but still, only 100 hrs. I'm looking forward to building
the Pietenpol in steel.
Charley
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=248076#248076
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: | Air Camper performance |
I've changed the subject line to more closely align with the comments
that are being exchanged lately. NX41CC is a very typical Air Camper
with A65 power. Empty weight and gross weight are right there with
most of the others, low 600s empty and around 1050-1100 gross. The
airplane performs beautifully on 65 HP solo. Example: yesterday it
was close to, or at, 100F when I took the airplane over and topped it
with fuel (16 gal.). It always lifts off in a short distance and
climbs out well, but I usually fly below 2000' so time to climb is not
a big factor. I would characterize the performance as "very satisfactory"
when flying solo. When temps are cool and load is light, performance
is almost exhilarating (to me, anyway).
With a passenger, it's another story. I would have had no hesitancy
taking either of my daughters up with me yesterday (about 110 lbs.
each), but I've flown in similar conditions with a 165 lb. pax and
with another who was closer to 190 lbs. and climb was not stellar.
Neither was the feel of the airplane with that loading condition. As
others have said, I would decline to offer rides under those condx.
I have no experience flying anything other than 65 HP so I'll leave
comments on Ford A, Corvair, O-200, Rotec, or other combinations to
those who have experience. However, after flying 41CC yesterday I
took it out of service for an engine upgrade. Everything has been
disconnected and the 65 is ready to hoist off. In a crate in my
hangar is a zero-timed and overhauled A75 and in a box is a new
Culver 72x36 prop that should let it turn the 2600 RPM needed for it
to develop full rated power. This combination should give me a bit
of extra margin when operating high/hot/gross. I will probably put
the A65 up for sale, complete and flying, with Stromberg carb and
Hegy prop.
Oscar Zuniga
Air Camper NX41CC
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags@hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
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: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear |
You know, I did not realize the difference in building speed with
steel over wood. That is interesting. That definately makes a bit of
difference in the decision making process.
So, what do you guys recommend?: Gas or MIG/TIG. I know of a guy that
built a Legal Egal with TIG welding and said it required more skill
than Gas welding, and the MIG was niot suitable for aircraft
construction.
I have 3 books on welding from EAA/Aircraft sources, and I also have 2
tapes on welding for aircraft construction (I once thought of building
a Pober Jr. Ace, and one day might). I planned to build the Jr. Ace,
but sold the Oxy-Acetylene rig I bought to pay for my practical flight
review for my license (I passed thank God!).
So I gotta get a new welding rig, or better yet, tack weld and let a
pro finish. That is more likely the route I'll take.
Thus, if I am to tack weld the fuse, can I tack weld with something
other than Gas and have it be compatible with the final welding system
(TIG or Gas). Does tack welding with one method interfere with another
method (or is melted metal simply melted metal...)
Thanks for the advice guys!
Mark
On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 1:10 PM, rameses32<rameses32@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Just a reference for you pertaining to time that it takes to build a steel fuselage.
I built a Georgias Special fuselage, on gear, with controls, seat, and
empanage, it took me a total of 100 hours. No turtle deck or fairings, wing mounts
or any other details, but still, only 100 hrs. I'm looking forward to building
the Pietenpol in steel.
> Charley
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=248076#248076
>
>
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: Air Camper performance |
Oscar, keep us posted on your upgrade to the A 75. Those of us with A 65's
will be very interested.
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: "Oscar Zuniga" <taildrags@hotmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2009 3:25 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Air Camper performance
>
>
> I've changed the subject line to more closely align with the comments
> that are being exchanged lately. NX41CC is a very typical Air Camper
> with A65 power. Empty weight and gross weight are right there with
> most of the others, low 600s empty and around 1050-1100 gross. The
> airplane performs beautifully on 65 HP solo. Example: yesterday it
> was close to, or at, 100F when I took the airplane over and topped it
> with fuel (16 gal.). It always lifts off in a short distance and
> climbs out well, but I usually fly below 2000' so time to climb is not
> a big factor. I would characterize the performance as "very satisfactory"
> when flying solo. When temps are cool and load is light, performance
> is almost exhilarating (to me, anyway).
>
> With a passenger, it's another story. I would have had no hesitancy
> taking either of my daughters up with me yesterday (about 110 lbs.
> each), but I've flown in similar conditions with a 165 lb. pax and
> with another who was closer to 190 lbs. and climb was not stellar.
> Neither was the feel of the airplane with that loading condition. As
> others have said, I would decline to offer rides under those condx.
>
> I have no experience flying anything other than 65 HP so I'll leave
> comments on Ford A, Corvair, O-200, Rotec, or other combinations to
> those who have experience. However, after flying 41CC yesterday I
> took it out of service for an engine upgrade. Everything has been
> disconnected and the 65 is ready to hoist off. In a crate in my
> hangar is a zero-timed and overhauled A75 and in a box is a new
> Culver 72x36 prop that should let it turn the 2600 RPM needed for it
> to develop full rated power. This combination should give me a bit
> of extra margin when operating high/hot/gross. I will probably put
> the A65 up for sale, complete and flying, with Stromberg carb and
> Hegy prop.
>
> Oscar Zuniga
> Air Camper NX41CC
> San Antonio, TX
> mailto: taildrags@hotmail.com
> website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
05:53:00
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 |
|
Well, this has been a great week!
I was excited to learn about the Corvair donation that Steve so graciously offered
to this group. I emailed him back, but he has already promised the engine
to someone else. I've been looking for good engine deals for many years but never
really found anything close to home. Having lost on Steve's engine coaxed
me into taking a look on ebay again... and there it was. A 1965 corvair engine
less than 50 miles away with no bid on it! It looked good, but with only a few
hours left for the auction to end, I had no time to ask the seller the questions
about the case number and crank number etc... so, I bid
and I won! I got it for $102.50. The seller even dropped it off at my house. (Bless
his heart)
Then I checked the numbers and found out this is a 1964 110HP engine with the correct
case and the correct heads and the correct crank for aircraft conversion!
I just can't believe how lucky I am to get this deal!
If it sounds like I am bragging... I am... This sort of thing never happens to
me. I usually pay more for everything! Wait till you see the pictures of this
thing.
Click link for pictures:
http://www.eaa80.org/show/show.php?tab=t5&title=Ameet%20Savant's%20Corvair buy&path=../projects/ameet_corvair/&back=/projects/index.php
Thank you Steve- your generosity made more than one person happy. If we all are
good toward furthering experimental aviation, only good things will come by,
even if they take unforeseen paths.
Ameet Savant
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear |
I did all the welding for my split cub style landing gear and A-65 motor mo
unt.- I don't see how cutting and fish-mouthing all that tubing and getti
ng the clusters to fit just right could possibly be faster than working wit
h wood.- If I hadn't milled all my own douglas fir, I believe I could tur
n out basic wood fuselage much faster than one made of 4130.
-
Of course it all depends on what you would rather work with.- I find work
ing with wood very comforting, and gas welding a little stressful.-
-
Ben Charvet
All covered and painted, nearly 1/2 way finished
--- On Sun, 6/14/09, Mark Roberts <mark.rbrts1@gmail.com> wrote:
But ain't that what makes this fun!?- I didn't know that the steel
would be faster, but now that you mention it, there are no gussets to
cut and glue, and a few steel straps to weld into place on the stress
areas, so that is less time consuming....
>
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: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear |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Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear |
I have spent nearly as much time cutting/grinding/welding steel and aluminum
on my "wood" Piet as I have cutting/sanding/gluing wood. If I built another
Piet I would also do a steel fuselage.
Rick
On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 6:09 AM, Douwe Blumberg <douweblumberg@earthlink.net
> wrote:
> douweblumberg@earthlink.net>
>
> I'm not an expert, but since nobody else has jumped in, I'll give it my
> best
> shot.
>
> Firstly, my knowledge is not based on first-hand, empirical data, but on
> talking to people and over 20 years of Pietenpol newsletter backissues.
>
> I think I can say catagorically that a steel tube fuselage IS lighter, the
> question is by how much. This is one of those facts that is like nailing
> jelly to the wall, it is really hard to get comparable, real-world weights.
> The largest number I have seen is 30 lbs, which seems a bit high (but
> certainly possible), but I wouldn't be at all surprised if it was around
> 20.
>
> As to "the extra effort" of building a steel tube, if you can weld, it
> would actually be easier and faster than building in wood. The standard
> solution for people building steel who dont weld is to get a little rig and
> learn to tack weld (very simple) and fabricate the whole thing then bring
> it
> to a good welder to finish the welds for you.
>
> If I were building again, I would seriously consider a steel fuse simply
> because it IS faster and an easy way to save a chunk of weight.
>
> The Scout gear is a fine gear. I've not seen it adapted to an Aircamper,
> though I've heard lots of people talk about it. The vertial shock strut
> interferes with one of the lift struts, though I see no reason why this
> can't be avoided. Also, be sure the area on the fuse where you attach the
> shock strut is up to those compression forces, might have to beef something
> up there. I think the scout gear with big wire wheels is the prettiest
> gear
> going, and you do save some weight over the jenny gear by not having that
> big axle hanging down there.
>
> Douwe
>
>
--
Rick Holland
Castle Rock, Colorado
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: | Re: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear |
Mark Roberts wrote:
> So, what do you guys recommend?: Gas or MIG/TIG. I know of a guy that
> built a Legal Egal with TIG welding and said it required more skill
> than Gas welding, and the MIG was niot suitable for aircraft
> construction.
> ...
> Thus, if I am to tack weld the fuse, can I tack weld with something
> other than Gas and have it be compatible with the final welding system
> (TIG or Gas).
Think of MIG as a glue gun. It's great for tack welding. You can weld
over it with TIG or gas without any problem.
Do remember we are talking about real MIG here, not flux-core, which
will leave slag to contaminate the final weld.
Owen
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: | Re: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear |
I am a fabricator, I've been welding and working with steel since I was 12, I love
doing it, some people enjoy working with wood and prefer using that, each
has it's benefits. I have better luck using wood in the stove in the winter time
to keep me warm while I weld, hehe. Buzz Bear on the other hand, made the most
beautiful Pietenpol from wood, you just didn't want to cover it and hide all
that fantastic craftsmanship. But that aircraft is still not in the air, and
unfortunately Buzz passed away before he could see it fly. That wonderful aircraft
has been in the building process for over 20 years. I'm using steel for
that reason.
Now if you are going to tack weld, Don't use Gasless mig, EVER! or Ark welding
either. You could use mig, but it's not the best idea. Use either tig or Oxy to
tack the fuselage, Oxy is easier to than Tig, but not alot. If you weld with
oxy, there is less chance for perosity in the welds and you don't have to normalize
when your finished. With tig there is less heat saturation and less chance
of warpage. If I were just tacking, I would use TIG, but if I was welding,
I would use Oxy.
Just my opinion
Charley
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=248117#248117
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: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear |
Thanks guys (you too Charlie...)
I have worked with wood all my life, so the idea of learning to weld
scared me a bit. 5 years ago I thought I was going to build a Jr. Ace
and got all of the books and how to tapes and have been reading them
lately as I consider welding up a fuse. I just might have a whack at
it.
I will need to get another welding set up but that's not a problem. I
am just needing to practice a bit to get the hang of it, and make sure
I have an advisor around for the first few formal joints. I think I
could learn to tack weld the parts in place fairly quickly, but a true
honest to goodness final weld should be under supervision :o)
Mark
On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 5:26 PM, Owen Davies<owen5819@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> Mark Roberts wrote:
>>
>> So, what do you guys recommend?: Gas or MIG/TIG. I know of a guy that
>> built a Legal Egal with TIG welding and said it required more skill
>> than Gas welding, and the MIG was niot suitable for aircraft
>> construction.
>> ...
>> Thus, if I am to tack weld the fuse, can I tack weld with something
>> other than Gas and have it be compatible with the final welding system
>> (TIG or Gas).
>
> Think of MIG as a glue gun. It's great for tack welding. You can weld over
> it with TIG or gas without any problem.
>
> Do remember we are talking about real MIG here, not flux-core, which will
> leave slag to contaminate the final weld.
>
> Owen
>
>
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 |
|
Procceed Cautiously!- Follow Wynne's mannual, and make sure to have the c
rank magnafluxed, nitrided, and make sure the journals are properly, and-
generously, radioused.- Corvairs do work good, but only if built Well.-
Feel free to contact me off list for info, or advise.- I am no expert, b
ut have learned a few cold had facts about corvairs, and will let you know
my experiances with failures, and succeseses.- I flew our piet/ vair for
about 3 hrs today and had a blast!
-
Shad
aviatorbell@yahoo.com=0A=0A=0A
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: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear |
Mark, I think I'd pick whatever method you prefer.- Either method will ta
ke lots of time as there are many, many parts to make.-- I am building
with wood because I like wood, have the tools and like the end product.-
It took very little time to build the basic fuselage with wood, it's the de
tail stuff that takes time. - I was amazed at how quickly it went togethe
r. I know it would have taken me twice as long to do it in metal with all t
he fishmouthing and fitting.- But that's just me.- As I've said before,
you're welcome to come down to Tulare and see my project.- You can see h
ow it's constructed and you can sit in it to try on the plans built cockpit
(or just to make airplane noises if you'd rather).
Mike Groah
Tulare CA
559-360-4089 (Cell)-
-
=0A=0A=0A
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: | "Weed whacker comment" |
Pieters, I flew the piet today about 3 hrs,-because i was-was basically
bored, with my wife and son out of town, and an unexpected day off of work
.- One airport I stopped at (because I never landed there before) a guy c
ame in the office and asked if that was my "Weed Whacker out there".- Wit
h out knowing what he flew in (a Cessna 150),-I proudly said "Yes it is,
doesn't go anywhere fast but it's fun".- Then he dramatically said "be ca
refull out there".- Had I known he flew in , in- a Cessna 150, and his
teenage son were not with him,-my comment would have been less polite, du
e to his sarcasim.- Maybe something like, "Well when you get done learnin
g how to fly-that trainer with training wheels, you can learn how to fly
a weed whacker like mine, and you will learn what those little rudder pedal
thingies are for".- But I just walked out started her up and flew off in
to the horizon.- Piets are great, the old timers love them, the real pilo
ts
admire them and the Cessna "Pilots" are scared of them.- What has happen
ed to all the real (tail dragger) pilots in this crazy world? -Seems like
the pilots with all the skill don't have the money, and the "pilots" with
all the money don't have any skill, and think- just because there airplan
e goes fast with a training wheel, that they are great pilots.- I think i
t's time for a test, us go slow, no gps, sectional readers, against the "Wh
ere in the hell am I at, my GPS failed" pilots".- You know where my money
is!
-
Sorry to get on my soap box,
Shad=0A=0A=0A
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 |
|
Ameet,
Sounds like your Lucky Day! I hope you bought a lottery ticket today....
Gary Boothe
Cool, Ca.
Pietenpol
WW Corvair Conversion
Tail done, Fuselage on gear
(13 ribs down.)
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ameet Savant
Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2009 2:57 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Corvair buy
Well, this has been a great week!
I was excited to learn about the Corvair donation that Steve so graciously
offered to this group. I emailed him back, but he has already promised the
engine to someone else. I've been looking for good engine deals for many
years but never really found anything close to home. Having lost on Steve's
engine coaxed me into taking a look on ebay again... and there it was. A
1965 corvair engine less than 50 miles away with no bid on it! It looked
good, but with only a few hours left for the auction to end, I had no time
to ask the seller the questions about the case number and crank number
etc... so, I bid
and I won! I got it for $102.50. The seller even dropped it off at my house.
(Bless his heart)
Then I checked the numbers and found out this is a 1964 110HP engine with
the correct case and the correct heads and the correct crank for aircraft
conversion! I just can't believe how lucky I am to get this deal!
If it sounds like I am bragging... I am... This sort of thing never happens
to me. I usually pay more for everything! Wait till you see the pictures of
this thing.
Click link for pictures:
http://www.eaa80.org/show/show.php?tab=t5&title=Ameet%20Savant's%20Corvair
buy&path=../projects/ameet_corvair/&back=/projects/index.php
Thank you Steve- your generosity made more than one person happy. If we all
are good toward furthering experimental aviation, only good things will come
by, even if they take unforeseen paths.
Ameet Savant
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: | Re: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear |
Mark,
That's good advice from Mike, as I understand he's quite an accomplished
welder. FYI - I have a brand new set of oxy/acetylene regulators that I will
sell to you for $100 (acetylene - Harris, oxygen - off brand) for both
(that's about 50% off).
Gary Boothe
Cool, Ca.
Pietenpol
WW Corvair Conversion
Tail done, Fuselage on gear
(13 ribs down.)
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael
Groah
Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2009 8:09 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear
Mark, I think I'd pick whatever method you prefer. Either method will take
lots of time as there are many, many parts to make. I am building with
wood because I like wood, have the tools and like the end product. It took
very little time to build the basic fuselage with wood, it's the detail
stuff that takes time. I was amazed at how quickly it went together. I
know it would have taken me twice as long to do it in metal with all the
fishmouthing and fitting. But that's just me. As I've said before, you're
welcome to come down to Tulare and see my project. You can see how it's
constructed and you can sit in it to try on the plans built cockpit (or just
to make airplane noises if you'd rather).
Mike Groah
Tulare CA
559-360-4089 (Cell)
-
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: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear |
You know Mike, with all the thinkin' and contemplating over this, I
forgot about just that very thing: Go have a peek at yours!!
I remembered you were down there and yet it didn't dawn on my thick
scull to call and have a look... Man, my head's in the clouds.
I will call to see when I could come by and see your project. I see
your cell number there, so I will call sometime this week. Mine's
559-917-5904.
Thanks for the reminder!
Mark
On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 8:09 PM, Michael Groah<dskogrover@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Mark, I think I'd pick whatever method you prefer. Either method will take
> lots of time as there are many, many parts to make. I am building with
> wood because I like wood, have the tools and like the end product. It took
> very little time to build the basic fuselage with wood, it's the detail
> stuff that takes time. I was amazed at how quickly it went together. I
> know it would have taken me twice as long to do it in metal with all the
> fishmouthing and fitting. But that's just me. As I've said before, you're
> welcome to come down to Tulare and see my project. You can see how it's
> constructed and you can sit in it to try on the plans built cockpit (or just
> to make airplane noises if you'd rather).
>
> Mike Groah
> Tulare CA
> 559-360-4089 (Cell)
>
> -
>
>
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: | Re: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear |
Well, thanks Gary, but I'm really not much of a welder but I can fuse metal
together with heat most of the time.=C2- I weld well enough to get by wi
th what's required in the Piet.
--- On Sun, 6/14/09, Gary Boothe <gboothe5@comcast.net> wrote:
From: Gary Boothe <gboothe5@comcast.net>
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear
=0A=0A=0A =0A =0A=0A =0A=0A =0A=0A =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AMark, =0A=0A =C2
- =0A=0AThat=99s good advice from Mike, as I understand=0Ahe
=99s quite an accomplished welder. FYI =93 I have a brand new set of
=0Aoxy/acetylene regulators that I will sell to you for $100 (acetylene
=93=0AHarris, oxygen =93 off brand) for both (that=99s about
50% off). =0A=0A =C2- =0A=0A=0A=0AGary Boothe =0A=0ACool, Ca. =0A=0APiet
enpol =0A=0AWW Corvair Conversion =0A=0ATail=0Adone,=C2-Fuselage=C2-on
gear =0A=0A(13 ribs down) =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AFrom
:=0Aowner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com=0A[mailto:owner-pietenpol-lis
t-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael Groah
=0ASent: Sunday, June 14, 2009 8:09=0APM
=0ATo: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
=0ASubject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re:=0Asteel fuselage vs wood/scout gear =0A
=0A=0A=0A =C2- =0A=0A=0A =0A =0A Mark, I think I'd pick whatever method
you=0A prefer.=C2- Either method will take lots of time as there are ma
ny, many=0A parts to make.=C2-=C2- I am building with wood because I l
ike wood, have=0A the tools and like the end product.=C2- It took very l
ittle time to build=0A the basic fuselage with wood, it's the detail stuff
that takes time. =C2- I=0A was amazed at how quickly it went together.
I know it would have taken me=0A twice as long to do it in metal with all
the fishmouthing and fitting.=C2-=0A But that's just me.=C2- As I've s
aid before, you're welcome to come down to=0A Tulare and=0A see my projec
t.=C2- You can see how it's constructed and you can sit in it=0A to try
on the plans built cockpit (or just to make airplane noises if you'd=0A ra
ther).
=0A
=0A Mike Groah
=0A Tulare CA
=0A 559-360-4089 (Cell)=C2-
=0A
=0A - =0A =0A =C2- =0A =0A =0A =0A=0A=0A =C2- =0A=0A =C2- =C2
-http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-Listhttp://forums.matronics
.comhttp://www.matronics.com/contribution =C2- =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A
=0A=0A=0A
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: "Weed whacker comment" |
I heard that exact same question when I was learning to fly...42 years
ago.
----- Original Message ----- From: shad bell
[snip]
What has happened to all the real (tail dragger) pilots in this
crazy world? Seems like the pilots with all the skill don't have the
money, and the "pilots" with all the money don't have any skill, and
think just because there airplane goes fast with a training wheel, that
they are great pilots.
[more snippage]
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear |
Thanks Gary!
I might take you up on that as I decide what I'm going to do. I don't
want to over think it, but I am going back and forth with what to do
as I plan the build...
Thanks again!
Mark
On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 8:29 PM, Gary Boothe<gboothe5@comcast.net> wrote:
> Mark,
>
>
> Thats good advice from Mike, as I understand hes quite an accomplished
> welder. FYI I have a brand new set of oxy/acetylene regulators that I will
> sell to you for $100 (acetylene Harris, oxygen off brand) for both
> (thats about 50% off).
>
>
> Gary Boothe
>
> Cool, Ca.
>
> Pietenpol
>
> WW Corvair Conversion
>
> Tail done,Fuselageon gear
>
> (13 ribs down)
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael
> Groah
> Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2009 8:09 PM
> To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: steel fuselage vs wood/scout gear
>
>
> Mark, I think I'd pick whatever method you prefer. Either method will take
> lots of time as there are many, many parts to make. I am building with
> wood because I like wood, have the tools and like the end product. It took
> very little time to build the basic fuselage with wood, it's the detail
> stuff that takes time. I was amazed at how quickly it went together. I
> know it would have taken me twice as long to do it in metal with all the
> fishmouthing and fitting. But that's just me. As I've said before, you're
> welcome to come down to Tulare and see my project. You can see how it's
> constructed and you can sit in it to try on the plans built cockpit (or just
> to make airplane noises if you'd rather).
>
> Mike Groah
> Tulare CA
> 559-360-4089 (Cell)
>
> -
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
>
> http://forums.matronics.com
>
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
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! --
|