Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:27 AM - Bolting horizontal stab to fuselage longerons ()
2. 01:51 AM - Re: Bolting horizontal stab to fuselage longerons (Clif Dawson)
3. 02:46 AM - Re: Bolting horizontal stab to fuselage longerons (gcardinal)
4. 04:12 AM - Re: Bolting horizontal stab to fuselage longerons (helspersew@aol.com)
5. 04:24 AM - Re: Bolting horizontal stab to fuselage longerons (Jack Phillips)
6. 07:29 AM - Re: Control stops/pulley guards (Gene Rambo)
7. 09:04 AM - ELSA registration (Dortch, Steven D MAJ NG NG NGB)
8. 09:44 AM - Re: Re: Bolts and stress anal-isis (Gene Rambo)
9. 12:50 PM - Re: Re: Bolts and stress anal-isis (mike)
10. 12:55 PM - Re: ELSA registration (Don Emch)
11. 01:41 PM - Re: Bolting horizontal stab to fuselage longerons (Michael Perez)
12. 01:57 PM - Re: ELSA registration (Jason Holmes)
13. 02:01 PM - Re: ELSA registration ()
14. 02:53 PM - Re: Re: Bolts and stress anal-isis (Tim Willis)
15. 02:54 PM - Re: ELSA registration (bryan green)
16. 02:55 PM - Re: Re: ELSA registration (bryan green)
17. 04:05 PM - Re: Re: Bolts and stress anal-isis (Michael Perez)
18. 04:54 PM - Re: Bolting horizontal stab to fuselage longerons (Gene Rambo)
19. 04:55 PM - Re: Re: ELSA registration (Gene & Tammy)
20. 06:30 PM - Re: Bolting horizontal stab to fuselage longerons (Wayne Bressler)
21. 07:04 PM - Re: Bolting horizontal stab to fuselage longerons (Gene Rambo)
22. 07:12 PM - Re: Bolting horizontal stab to fuselage longerons (Ben Charvet)
23. 07:41 PM - Re: Re: ELSA registration (Ryan Mueller)
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: | Bolting horizontal stab to fuselage longerons |
I am curious if there is a consensus on how to bolt a Piet horizontal stabilizer
to the fuselage longerons?
Do most builders use a fiber lock nut to secure the bolt? If so, how is access
achieved below the stab after the fuselage is covered to place and tighten the
nut and washer? Is it through an inspection plate (or two) in the fabric covering
under the stab?
Or, is a nut plate used? But if a nut plate is used, how is the nut plate attached
to the longeron? Is it riveted to an aluminum or steel plate which in turn
is attached to the longeron? If so, how is that plate/nut plate assembly fastened
to the longeron? Wood screws? Through bolted?
Or is the consensus to use blind nuts? If so, how does one safety the bolt from
backing out?
Or, is there some other method?
While on the topic, is the horizontal stab bolted to the fuselage with two bolts
at the leading edge of the stab, or with two bolts through the center beam of
the stab, or with four bolts through both locations?
Paul Siegel
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Bolting horizontal stab to fuselage longerons |
It appears I have been remiss. I didn't document that area.
I put a crosspiece under the leading edge and a 1/8" ply plate
below that crossing under both longerons. That has two
10-32 nut plates, the hardware kind with the three little spikes
in it, just inboard of the longerons. Two AN-3 bolts go down
into those from the top. That way no holes in the longerons and
no problem with it closed in.
Also remember that the Man himself simply used two tiny wood
screws for this job and none of his fell out of the sky.
Clif
> I am curious if there is a consensus on how to bolt a Piet horizontal
> stabilizer to the fuselage longerons?
Paul Siegel
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: Bolting horizontal stab to fuselage longerons |
On NX18235 a piece of .090 steel spans the underside of the longerons in
this area. Nutplates to anchor the stabilizer are attached to the steel.
This also acts as the anchor point, via cables in the turtledeck, for the
pilot's shoulder straps.
Greg C.
----- Original Message -----
From: <psiegel@fuse.net>
Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 2:24 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Bolting horizontal stab to fuselage longerons
>
> I am curious if there is a consensus on how to bolt a Piet horizontal
> stabilizer to the fuselage longerons?
>
> Do most builders use a fiber lock nut to secure the bolt? If so, how is
> access achieved below the stab after the fuselage is covered to place and
> tighten the nut and washer? Is it through an inspection plate (or two) in
> the fabric covering under the stab?
>
> Or, is a nut plate used? But if a nut plate is used, how is the nut plate
> attached to the longeron? Is it riveted to an aluminum or steel plate
> which in turn is attached to the longeron? If so, how is that plate/nut
> plate assembly fastened to the longeron? Wood screws? Through bolted?
>
> Or is the consensus to use blind nuts? If so, how does one safety the
> bolt from backing out?
>
> Or, is there some other method?
>
> While on the topic, is the horizontal stab bolted to the fuselage with two
> bolts at the leading edge of the stab, or with two bolts through the
> center beam of the stab, or with four bolts through both locations?
>
> Paul Siegel
>
>
>
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: Bolting horizontal stab to fuselage longerons |
I used nutplates, and used tiny screws to attach them to the underside of
the longeron. Works great. No need for access hole or inspection hole.
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
-----Original Message-----
From: psiegel@fuse.net
Sent: Sat, Dec 19, 2009 2:24 am
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Bolting horizontal stab to fuselage longerons
I am curious if there is a consensus on how to bolt a Piet horizontal stab
ilizer
o the fuselage longerons?
Do most builders use a fiber lock nut to secure the bolt? If so, how is
access
chieved below the stab after the fuselage is covered to place and tighten
the
ut and washer? Is it through an inspection plate (or two) in the fabric
overing under the stab?
Or, is a nut plate used? But if a nut plate is used, how is the nut plate
ttached to the longeron? Is it riveted to an aluminum or steel plate whic
h in
urn is attached to the longeron? If so, how is that plate/nut plate assem
bly
astened to the longeron? Wood screws? Through bolted?
Or is the consensus to use blind nuts? If so, how does one safety the bol
t from
acking out?
Or, is there some other method?
While on the topic, is the horizontal stab bolted to the fuselage with two
bolts
t the leading edge of the stab, or with two bolts through the center beam
of
he stab, or with four bolts through both locations?
Paul Siegel
========================
===========
-
-= -- Please Support Your Lists This Month --
-= (And Get Some AWESOME FREE Gifts!)
-
-= November is the Annual List Fund Raiser. Click on
-= the Contribution link below to find out more about
-= this year's Terrific Free Incentive Gifts provided
-= by:
-= * AeroElectric www.aeroelectric.com
-= * The Builder's Bookstore www.buildersbooks.com
-= * HomebuiltHELP www.homebuilthelp.com
-
-= List Contribution Web Site:
-
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-
-= Thank you for your generous support!
-
-= -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
-
-========================
========================
===========
-= - The Pietenpol-List Email Forum -
-= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse
-= the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription,
-= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
-= Photoshare, and much much more:
-
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
-
-========================
========================
===========
-= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
-= Same great content also available via the Web Forums!
-
-= --> http://forums.matronics.com
-
-========================
========================
===========
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: | Bolting horizontal stab to fuselage longerons |
I did the same as Dan. Works just fine, and with a nutplate you have the
option of "shimming" the horizontal stabilizer with washers to change the
incidence.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh, NC
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
helspersew@aol.com
Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 7:12 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Bolting horizontal stab to fuselage longerons
I used nutplates, and used tiny screws to attach them to the underside of
the longeron. Works great. No need for access hole or inspection hole.
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
-----Original Message-----
From: psiegel@fuse.net
Sent: Sat, Dec 19, 2009 2:24 am
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Bolting horizontal stab to fuselage longerons
I am curious if there is a consensus on how to bolt a Piet horizontal
stabilizer
to the fuselage longerons?
Do most builders use a fiber lock nut to secure the bolt? If so, how is
access
achieved below the stab after the fuselage is covered to place and tighten
the
nut and washer? Is it through an inspection plate (or two) in the fabric
covering under the stab?
Or, is a nut plate used? But if a nut plate is used, how is the nut plate
attached to the longeron? Is it riveted to an aluminum or steel plate which
in
turn is attached to the longeron? If so, how is that plate/nut plate
assembly
fastened to the longeron? Wood screws? Through bolted?
Or is the consensus to use blind nuts? If so, how does one safety the bolt
from
backing out?
Or, is there some other method?
While on the topic, is the horizontal stab bolted to the fuselage with two
bolts
at the leading edge of the stab, or with two bolts through the center beam
of
the stab, or with four bolts through both locations?
Paul Siegel
===================================
=_blank>www.aeroelectric.com
m/" target=_blank>www.buildersbooks.com
=_blank>www.homebuilthelp.com
_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
===================================
t" target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
===================================
tp://forums.matronics.com
===================================
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: Control stops/pulley guards |
unless you have the old style pulleys with bronze bushings in them, you
do not lubricate pulleys during inspections. Most have sealed bearings.
I have seen way more problems caused by over lubrication, which
attracts dirt and causes wear than under lubrication.
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: Jack Phillips<mailto:pietflyr@bellsouth.net>
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com<mailto:pietenpol-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Friday, December 18, 2009 11:48 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Control stops/pulley guards
Ben, the FAA inspector (from the FSDO - not a DAR) that inspected mine
did
not say a word about control stops (I have them) but did want to see
that I
had pulley guards on every pulley. I consider them essential,
particularly
on a Pietenpol, because the geometry of the control system is such
that when
one cable on a control surface is tight, the other generally goes
slack
somewhere in its travel (this is especially true of the elevator
cables).
Any time a cable can go slack, it can slip off its pulley.
Hopefully, having the Piet covered won't be too much of a problem.
Generally anywhere you have a pulley there needs to be an inspection
hole
anyway, so the pulleys can be lubricated during the annual condition
inspection. In many cases, you can make a very simple guard that
picks up
the pulley axle bolt and then has some other feature to hold it in
position,
as shown below:
Some of my pulley guards are nothing more than a cotter pin through
two
holes in the pulley brackets. They don't need to be elaborate, but
they
need to be there, and they need to ENSURE that the cable cannot get
off the
pulley and wedge between the pulley and the bracket. That could make
for a
very ugly situation.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh, NC
-----Original Message-----
From:
owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com<mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-ser
ver@matronics.com>
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ben
Charvet
Sent: Friday, December 18, 2009 10:09 AM
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com<mailto:pietenpol-list@matronics.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Control stops/pulley guards
<bcharvet@bellsouth.net<mailto:bcharvet@bellsouth.net>>
I didn't have any stops in my Piet, but I started this thread because
someone said the FAA inspector wanted to see them...
I'm not sure they are necessary either, but I don't want to blow my
inspection for something this easy to correct.
Anybody want to talk about cable/pulley guards? I dont have any of
those either (yet) and my Piet is all covered
Ben Charvet
Gary Boothe wrote:
<gboothe5@comcast.net<mailto:gboothe5@comcast.net>>
>
> An idea worth pursuing....although I'm not convinced that control
stops
are
> necessary.
>
>
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: | ELSA registration |
My cousin just bought a Avid flyer. From all reports he got a great little plane.
He intends on getting his Sport Pilot rating.
The FAA lists it simply as experimental, not as ELSA. by all the definitions it
could fit in the LSA category. Does he need to get this reregistered as an ELSA
or does he simply fly it within the LSA guidelines?
Blue Skies,
Steve D
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: Bolts and stress anal-isis |
Allright, I post things on here from time to time and sometimes get
criticism, most times get ignored, but occasionally get listened to. I
do not know everyone's background on here, some of us are A&P's, don't
know how many IA's, some are engineers, and some have experience
building/maintaining other aircraft. I'll just say that I have been
doing this long enough that I deserve to at least be listened to.
There are several threads going right now that I would like to express a
couple of suggestions abput, but the statement below scares the hell out
of me. So, starting with that one, I think that the logic behind this
statement leads to a spiral to the bottom. If you make every decision
based on the relative strength of the part in question being compared to
the strength of what it is connected to, you will end up with an
airplane made out of paper. I can certainly see an instance where the
stainless steel bolt holding the tail brace wires could fail after hours
of vibration (which those wires absolutely do to the fitting/bolt) long
before the wood would fail. No tail brace wires, tail folds, you're
dead. I stand by my earlier statement that I am not aware of any
certified aircraft that uses stainless hardware in a structural
application. Yes, there are some exotic materials used in engines,
particularly jets, and there may be some in specific military
applications, but not in certificated general aviation aircraft. Years
ago, we had to fight tooth and nail with the FAA to even get them to
allow stainless hardware replacements in cowling/inspection panels,
which is the norm today.
There is a lot of discussion regarding control stops. I personally do
not think the aircraft needs them. There were a lot of aircraft from
this era that did not have them, and they do not appear in the plans.
That said, I do not question anyone who wishes to install them, it is
not a bad idea. I do get concerned, however, with any limitation to
control travel that includes some mechanical blockage in the control
system other than at one end of the system, either the control surface
or at the stick/rudder bar. Next to a total structural failure, the
next worse thing that could happen to an aircraft is a control jam,
particularly in the elevator system. I would ask any of you to
seriously reconsider a physical limitation in the middle of the system,
it is typically not allowed. I would also suggest that it be on one end
or the other of the system, not at both ends which, again, is not the
norm.
The last most recent discussion is over wooden control sticks. They can
be beautiful, there is nothing necessarily wrong with them, but we
should consider a couple of things with the Piet. Because of the design
of the system, the bottom of the stick below the cable attachments is a
real structural part of the control system. Wood is fine for structural
use (I.e. the rest of the airplane) but only if the piece is sufficient
size. A 1" diameter piece of wood would probably not be strong enough
in this location, it should be much larger. Also consider that the bolt
at the cable attachments would be rotating, a definite no-no in wood.
It appears that someone has made a steel bottom and put a wooden stick
in above that. That may be fine, but is would be a huge stress at the
junction point. I know of at least one friend who was killed when a
wooden control stick broke off (Waco) and I would not like to have
another.
Feel free to flame at will, but please at least consider the above
suggestions. So much of this airplane lends itself to personalization
and/or experimentation, but there are some areas that are tried and
proven and should not be altered without serious consideration.
Gene Rambo
(ducking for cover)
----- Original Message -----
From: vahowdy@aol.com<mailto:vahowdy@aol.com>
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com<mailto:pietenpol-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Friday, December 18, 2009 9:47 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Bolts and stress anal-isis
I think all this talk about the strength of SS is much to do about
nothing. The wood in the tail will fail well before even grade 3 bolt
will fail. Bolt two 1 by's together, strand one and pull on the other.
See what fails first.
Howdy
www.aeroelectric.com<http://www.aeroelectric.com/>
www.buildersbooks.com<http://www.buildersbooks.com/>
www.homebuilthelp.com<http://www.homebuilthelp.com/>
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 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: Bolts and stress anal-isis |
Gene,
All of the concerns you've expressed are, in my opinion, dead on.
Especially those concerning the control system. Thanks for braving the
flames.
Mike Hardaway
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gene Rambo
Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 9:14 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Bolts and stress anal-isis
Allright, I post things on here from time to time and sometimes get
criticism, most times get ignored, but occasionally get listened to. I do
not know everyone's background on here, some of us are A&P's, don't know how
many IA's, some are engineers, and some have experience building/maintaining
other aircraft. I'll just say that I have been doing this long enough that
I deserve to at least be listened to.
There are several threads going right now that I would like to express a
couple of suggestions abput, but the statement below scares the hell out of
me. So, starting with that one, I think that the logic behind this
statement leads to a spiral to the bottom. If you make every decision based
on the relative strength of the part in question being compared to the
strength of what it is connected to, you will end up with an airplane made
out of paper. I can certainly see an instance where the stainless steel
bolt holding the tail brace wires could fail after hours of vibration (which
those wires absolutely do to the fitting/bolt) long before the wood would
fail. No tail brace wires, tail folds, you're dead. I stand by my earlier
statement that I am not aware of any certified aircraft that uses stainless
hardware in a structural application. Yes, there are some exotic materials
used in engines, particularly jets, and there may be some in specific
military applications, but not in certificated general aviation aircraft.
Years ago, we had to fight tooth and nail with the FAA to even get them to
allow stainless hardware replacements in cowling/inspection panels, which is
the norm today.
There is a lot of discussion regarding control stops. I personally do not
think the aircraft needs them. There were a lot of aircraft from this era
that did not have them, and they do not appear in the plans. That said, I
do not question anyone who wishes to install them, it is not a bad idea. I
do get concerned, however, with any limitation to control travel that
includes some mechanical blockage in the control system other than at one
end of the system, either the control surface or at the stick/rudder bar.
Next to a total structural failure, the next worse thing that could happen
to an aircraft is a control jam, particularly in the elevator system. I
would ask any of you to seriously reconsider a physical limitation in the
middle of the system, it is typically not allowed. I would also suggest
that it be on one end or the other of the system, not at both ends which,
again, is not the norm.
The last most recent discussion is over wooden control sticks. They can be
beautiful, there is nothing necessarily wrong with them, but we should
consider a couple of things with the Piet. Because of the design of the
system, the bottom of the stick below the cable attachments is a real
structural part of the control system. Wood is fine for structural use
(I.e. the rest of the airplane) but only if the piece is sufficient size. A
1" diameter piece of wood would probably not be strong enough in this
location, it should be much larger. Also consider that the bolt at the
cable attachments would be rotating, a definite no-no in wood. It appears
that someone has made a steel bottom and put a wooden stick in above that.
That may be fine, but is would be a huge stress at the junction point. I
know of at least one friend who was killed when a wooden control stick broke
off (Waco) and I would not like to have another.
Feel free to flame at will, but please at least consider the above
suggestions. So much of this airplane lends itself to personalization
and/or experimentation, but there are some areas that are tried and proven
and should not be altered without serious consideration.
Gene Rambo
(ducking for cover)
----- Original Message -----
From: vahowdy@aol.com
Sent: Friday, December 18, 2009 9:47 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Bolts and stress anal-isis
I think all this talk about the strength of SS is much to do about
nothing. The wood in the tail will fail well before even grade 3 bolt will
fail. Bolt two 1 by's together, strand one and pull on the other. See what
fails first.
Howdy
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: ELSA registration |
My Piet is just registered as Experimental. Right now I just fly it within the
Sport Pilot guidelines. Which really means I just fly it without a medical versus
flying it with a medical. I really don't know of any advantages to trying
to get the Avid registered as an ELSA. Anyone else know of any benefits?
Don Emch
NX899DE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=278155#278155
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: Bolting horizontal stab to fuselage longerons |
I am working on the same deal now with installing the tail. (Temporarily)
-
The plans show the leading edge held in place with wood screws.- I plan o
n using those round, 3 pronged nut plate things someone else mentioned and
go through the longeron.
-
Next back is the main beam. I added a 1" X 3/4" spruce cross brace here so
that I can bolt through the metal fitting that holds the rudder in place, t
hrough the horiz. stab. and then through the added cross brace into the sam
e 3 prong nut plates.
-
Last is the trailing edge. Here you bolt through the metal fittings attachi
ng the rudder, through the horiz.stab., through the bottom metal fittings a
nd then a nut. These metal fittings on the bottom bolt through the tail pos
t.- These are through bolts as well going from one metal fitting, through
the tail post, through the other metal fitting and then a nut.
-
-
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: | ELSA registration |
With an ELSA registration, any LSA repairman can work on the plane. As an
experimental, the original builder can work on the plane. I believe it only
takes a three day course to be an LSA repairman.
To answer your original question, he can just fly it within the LSA
guidelines.
My 2 cents,
Jason Holmes
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dortch,
Steven D MAJ NG NG NGB
Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 11:42 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: ELSA registration
<steven.d.dortch@us.army.mil>
My cousin just bought a Avid flyer. From all reports he got a great little
plane. He intends on getting his Sport Pilot rating.
The FAA lists it simply as experimental, not as ELSA. by all the definitions
it could fit in the LSA category. Does he need to get this reregistered as
an ELSA or does he simply fly it within the LSA guidelines?
Blue Skies,
Steve D
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: | Re: ELSA registration |
My understanding is that it is registered as an experimental not ELSA there was
a recent article about that I saw somewhere. Maybe try the Kitplanes or EAA websites.
Rodney Hall
---- "Dortch wrote:
>
>
> My cousin just bought a Avid flyer. From all reports he got a great little plane.
He intends on getting his Sport Pilot rating.
>
> The FAA lists it simply as experimental, not as ELSA. by all the definitions
it could fit in the LSA category. Does he need to get this reregistered as an
ELSA or does he simply fly it within the LSA guidelines?
>
> Blue Skies,
> Steve D
>
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: Bolts and stress anal-isis |
Good post, Gene-- lots of thought, and all good advice.
Tim in central TX
do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: Gene Rambo
Sent: Dec 19, 2009 11:13 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Bolts and stress anal-isis
Allright, I post things on here from time to time and sometimes get criticism,
most times get ignored, but occasionally get listened to. I do not know everyone's
background on here, some of us are A&P's, don't know how many IA's, some
are engineers, and some have experience building/maintaining other aircraft.
I'll just say that I have been doing this long enough that I deserve to at least
be listened to.
There are several threads going right now that I would like to express a couple
of suggestions abput, but the statement below scares the hell out of me. So,
starting with that one, I think that the logic behind this statement leads to
a spiral to the bottom. If you make every decision based on the relative strength
of the part in question being compared to the strength of what it is connected
to, you will end up with an airplane made out of paper. I can certainly
see an instance where the stainless steel bolt holding the tail brace wires
could fail after hours of vibration (which those wires absolutely do to the fitting/bolt)
long before the wood would fail. No tail brace wires, tail folds,
you're dead. I stand by my earlier statement that I am not aware of any certified
aircraft that uses stainless hardware in a structural application. Yes,
there are some exotic materials used in engines, particularly jets, and there
may be some in specific military applications, but not in certificated general
aviation aircraft. Years ago, we had to fight tooth and nail with the FAA to
even get them to allow stainless hardware replacements in cowling/inspection
panels, which is the norm today.
There is a lot of discussion regarding control stops. I personally do not think
the aircraft needs them. There were a lot of aircraft from this era that did
not have them, and they do not appear in the plans. That said, I do not question
anyone who wishes to install them, it is not a bad idea. I do get concerned,
however, with any limitation to control travel that includes some mechanical
blockage in the control system other than at one end of the system, either
the control surface or at the stick/rudder bar. Next to a total structural
failure, the next worse thing that could happen to an aircraft is a control jam,
particularly in the elevator system. I would ask any of you to seriously reconsider
a physical limitation in the middle of the system, it is typically not
allowed. I would also suggest that it be on one end or the other of the system,
not at both ends which, again, is not the norm.
The last most recent discussion is over wooden control sticks. They can be beautiful,
there is nothing necessarily wrong with them, but we should consider a
couple of things with the Piet. Because of the design of the system, the bottom
of the stick below the cable attachments is a real structural part of the
control system. Wood is fine for structural use (I.e. the rest of the airplane)
but only if the piece is sufficient size. A 1" diameter piece of wood would
probably not be strong enough in this location, it should be much larger. Also
consider that the bolt at the cable attachments would be rotating, a definite
no-no in wood. It appears that someone has made a steel bottom and put a
wooden stick in above that. That may be fine, but is would be a huge stress at
the junction point. I know of at least one friend who was killed when a wooden
control stick broke off (Waco) and I would not like to have another.
Feel free to flame at will, but please at least consider the above suggestions.
So much of this airplane lends itself to personalization and/or experimentation,
but there are some areas that are tried and proven and should not be altered
without serious consideration.
Gene Rambo
(ducking for cover)
----- Original Message -----
From: vahowdy@aol.com
Sent: Friday, December 18, 2009 9:47 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Bolts and stress anal-isis
I think all this talk about the strength of SS is much to do about nothing.
The wood in the tail will fail well before even grade 3 bolt will fail. Bolt
two 1 by's together, strand one and pull on the other. See what fails first.
Howdy
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: ELSA registration |
Just fly it.
Bryan Green
Elgin SC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dortch, Steven D MAJ NG NG NGB" <steven.d.dortch@us.army.mil>
Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 11:41 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: ELSA registration
> <steven.d.dortch@us.army.mil>
>
>
> My cousin just bought a Avid flyer. From all reports he got a great little
> plane. He intends on getting his Sport Pilot rating.
>
> The FAA lists it simply as experimental, not as ELSA. by all the
> definitions it could fit in the LSA category. Does he need to get this
> reregistered as an ELSA or does he simply fly it within the LSA
> guidelines?
>
> Blue Skies,
> Steve D
>
>
>
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: ELSA registration |
The only advantage would be that you could sign off your own annual after
taking the 3 day class.
Bryan Green
Elgin SC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir@aol.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 3:55 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: ELSA registration
>
> My Piet is just registered as Experimental. Right now I just fly it
> within the Sport Pilot guidelines. Which really means I just fly it
> without a medical versus flying it with a medical. I really don't know of
> any advantages to trying to get the Avid registered as an ELSA. Anyone
> else know of any benefits?
>
> Don Emch
> NX899DE
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=278155#278155
>
>
>
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: Bolts and stress anal-isis |
Gene, I for one appreciate you comments.
-
-
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: Bolting horizontal stab to fuselage longerons |
at the real risk of ruining what has been a positive response to my
earlier tirade, I would like to make one observation about the below,
although not nearly as strong as my earlier opinions. I was planning on
using the three-pronged nut plates until a friend (who owns an aircraft
restoration business and whose opinion I value greatly) pointed out to
me one day, he said "look at those prongs, wood is composed of long
fibers and when those prongs bite in, they probably cut a good 1/4 of
the fibers in the location" The more I thought about it, I think he is
right. Most of the prongs I have seen are at least 1/4 inch tall, so in
a 1" longeron, we may be reducing the strength at that location by as
much as 1/4. I have decided not to use them, although I still wish I
could. I am just throwing out the observation for everyone's
consideration. (by the way, he has the same objection to using staples
on gussets, but I am NOT going there!!)
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Perez<mailto:speedbrake@sbcglobal.net>
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com<mailto:pietenpol-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 4:04 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Bolting horizontal stab to fuselage
longerons
I am working on the same deal now with installing the tail.
(Temporarily)
The plans show the leading edge held in place with wood screws.
I plan on using those round, 3 pronged nut plate things someone else
mentioned and go through the longeron.
Next back is the main beam. I added a 1" X 3/4" spruce cross
brace here so that I can bolt through the metal fitting that holds the
rudder in place, through the horiz. stab. and then through the added
cross brace into the same 3 prong nut plates.
Last is the trailing edge. Here you bolt through the metal
fittings attaching the rudder, through the horiz.stab., through the
bottom metal fittings and then a nut. These metal fittings on the bottom
bolt through the tail post. These are through bolts as well going from
one metal fitting, through the tail post, through the other metal
fitting and then a nut.
www.aeroelectric.com<http://www.aeroelectric.com/>
www.buildersbooks.com<http://www.buildersbooks.com/>
www.homebuilthelp.com<http://www.homebuilthelp.com/>
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 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: ELSA registration |
Don, there are no benefits that I see. Even if you didn't build your
experimental you can still do all the work on it yourself. You just need a
"Conditional Inspection" performed by any A & P, every year. The up side is
that an Experimental is much easier to sell than a ELSA. By the way, The
Avid is a wonderful airplane.
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir@aol.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 2:55 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: ELSA registration
>
> My Piet is just registered as Experimental. Right now I just fly it
> within the Sport Pilot guidelines. Which really means I just fly it
> without a medical versus flying it with a medical. I really don't know of
> any advantages to trying to get the Avid registered as an ELSA. Anyone
> else know of any benefits?
>
> Don Emch
> NX899DE
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=278155#278155
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
08:33:00
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: Bolting horizontal stab to fuselage longerons |
Gene,
Would it be possible to add a spacer block for the blind nut to sink
into, thus preventing damage to the structural member? This may or
may not be feasible due to physical space limitations, but it may be
with considering. Worst case scenario, you'd have to use a slightly
longer bolt.
I'm not saying this is a good idea. I've never done this. It's just
a suggestion. I'm not an engineer, an A&P, IA, or DAR. I just have
ideas sometimes.
Wayne Bressler Jr.
Taildraggers, Inc.
taildraggersinc.com
Sent from the phone that made the Blackberry obsolete.
On Dec 19, 2009, at 6:51 PM, "Gene Rambo" <generambo@msn.com> wrote:
> at the real risk of ruining what has been a positive response to my
> earlier tirade, I would like to make one observation about the
> below, although not nearly as strong as my earlier opinions. I was
> planning on using the three-pronged nut plates until a friend (who
> owns an aircraft restoration business and whose opinion I value
> greatly) pointed out to me one day, he said "look at those prongs,
> wood is composed of long fibers and when those prongs bite in, they
> probably cut a good 1/4 of the fibers in the location" The more I
> thought about it, I think he is right. Most of the prongs I have
> seen are at least 1/4 inch tall, so in a 1" longeron, we may be
> reducing the strength at that location by as much as 1/4. I have
> decided not to use them, although I still wish I could. I am just
> throwing out the observation for everyone's consideration. (by the
> way, he has the same objection to using staples on gussets, but I am
> NOT going there!!)
>
> Gene
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: Bolting horizontal stab to fuselage longerons |
sure, that would be a great alternative. Like I said, I only offered
the observation for consideration. Another reason I am not using the
pronged nutplates is that when I drilled the bolts through the main spar
and longerons, the hole comes out behind a gusset very close to a joint,
so I cannot get to the back side to back-drill for the nutplate (which
is a larger diameter than the bolt size)
not that anyone else might want to do this, but my plan is to drill a
large hole in the outboard gusset (3/4 or so) and because the fabric is
tight against the side of the fuselage in that area, just glueing the
fabric to the gusset and then cutting out the hole. Than I can use one
of those round pronged hole covers (or even a small aluminum cover and
screws) to hide the hole. That way, I can put nuts on after the
fuselage is covered.
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: Wayne Bressler<mailto:wayne@taildraggersinc.com>
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com<mailto:pietenpol-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 9:28 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Bolting horizontal stab to fuselage
longerons
Gene,
Would it be possible to add a spacer block for the blind nut to sink
into, thus preventing damage to the structural member? This may or may
not be feasible due to physical space limitations, but it may be with
considering. Worst case scenario, you'd have to use a slightly longer
bolt.
I'm not saying this is a good idea. I've never done this. It's just
a suggestion. I'm not an engineer, an A&P, IA, or DAR. I just have
ideas sometimes.
Wayne Bressler Jr.
Taildraggers, Inc.
taildraggersinc.com<http://taildraggersinc.com/>
Sent from the phone that made the Blackberry obsolete.
On Dec 19, 2009, at 6:51 PM, "Gene Rambo"
<generambo@msn.com<mailto:generambo@msn.com>> wrote:
at the real risk of ruining what has been a positive response to my
earlier tirade, I would like to make one observation about the below,
although not nearly as strong as my earlier opinions. I was planning on
using the three-pronged nut plates until a friend (who owns an aircraft
restoration business and whose opinion I value greatly) pointed out to
me one day, he said "look at those prongs, wood is composed of long
fibers and when those prongs bite in, they probably cut a good 1/4 of
the fibers in the location" The more I thought about it, I think he is
right. Most of the prongs I have seen are at least 1/4 inch tall, so in
a 1" longeron, we may be reducing the strength at that location by as
much as 1/4. I have decided not to use them, although I still wish I
could. I am just throwing out the observation for everyone's
consideration. (by the way, he has the same objection to using staples
on gussets, but I am NOT going there!!)
Gene
www.aeroelectric.com<http://www.aeroelectric.com/>
www.buildersbooks.com<http://www.buildersbooks.com/>
www.homebuilthelp.com<http://www.homebuilthelp.com/>
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 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: Bolting horizontal stab to fuselage longerons |
All I did was put an inspection cover on the side of the fuselage. Then
you can use regular AN nuts, bolts, and large washers. Simplicity!
Ben Charvet
Gene Rambo wrote:
> sure, that would be a great alternative. Like I said, I only offered
> the observation for consideration. Another reason I am not using the
> pronged nutplates is that when I drilled the bolts through the main
> spar and longerons, the hole comes out behind a gusset very close to a
> joint, so I cannot get to the back side to back-drill for the nutplate
> (which is a larger diameter than the bolt size)
>
> not that anyone else might want to do this, but my plan is to drill a
> large hole in the outboard gusset (3/4 or so) and because the fabric
> is tight against the side of the fuselage in that area, just glueing
> the fabric to the gusset and then cutting out the hole. Than I can
> use one of those round pronged hole covers (or even a small aluminum
> cover and screws) to hide the hole. That way, I can put nuts on after
> the fuselage is covered.
>
> Gene
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Wayne Bressler <mailto:wayne@taildraggersinc.com>
> *To:* pietenpol-list@matronics.com
> <mailto:pietenpol-list@matronics.com>
> *Sent:* Saturday, December 19, 2009 9:28 PM
> *Subject:* Re: Pietenpol-List: Bolting horizontal stab to fuselage
> longerons
>
> Gene,
>
> Would it be possible to add a spacer block for the blind nut to
> sink into, thus preventing damage to the structural member? This
> may or may not be feasible due to physical space limitations, but
> it may be with considering. Worst case scenario, you'd have to
> use a slightly longer bolt.
>
> I'm not saying this is a good idea. I've never done this. It's
> just a suggestion. I'm not an engineer, an A&P, IA, or DAR. I
> just have ideas sometimes.
>
> Wayne Bressler Jr.
> Taildraggers, Inc.
> taildraggersinc.com <http://taildraggersinc.com>
>
> Sent from the phone that made the Blackberry obsolete.
>
> On Dec 19, 2009, at 6:51 PM, "Gene Rambo" <generambo@msn.com
> <mailto:generambo@msn.com>> wrote:
>
>> at the real risk of ruining what has been a positive response to
>> my earlier tirade, I would like to make one observation about the
>> below, although not nearly as strong as my earlier opinions. I
>> was planning on using the three-pronged nut plates until a friend
>> (who owns an aircraft restoration business and whose opinion I
>> value greatly) pointed out to me one day, he said "look at those
>> prongs, wood is composed of long fibers and when those prongs
>> bite in, they probably cut a good 1/4 of the fibers in the
>> location" The more I thought about it, I think he is right.
>> Most of the prongs I have seen are at least 1/4 inch tall, so in
>> a 1" longeron, we may be reducing the strength at that location
>> by as much as 1/4. I have decided not to use them, although I
>> still wish I could. I am just throwing out the observation for
>> everyone's consideration. (by the way, he has the same objection
>> to using staples on gussets, but I am NOT going there!!)
>>
>> Gene
> *
>
> href="http://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com
> title=http://www.buildersbooks.com/ href="http://www.buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com
> href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp.com
> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/ctitle=http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
> *
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: ELSA registration |
It would seem to be a bit of a moot point either way, if the Avid has
actually been registered as an Experimental aircraft. Here's a Q&A from
sportpilot.org:
Question: Can an Experimental Amateur Built and N-Numbered airplane be
downgraded to ELSA (IE Challenger II Long Wing)?
Answer: No, the certification of the aircraft must remain as is. A sport
pilot is allowed to fly any aircraft that meets the definition of a
light-sport aircraft regardless of what category the aircraft is
certificated in, so there's no need to change the certification of the
Challenger you refer to.
As Jason pointed out, he can fly it as an LSA. Again, per sportpilot.org:
Question: Can I fly an Experimental Amateur-Built (homebuilt) aircraft as a
sport pilot?
Answer: Yes, as long as the aircraft meets the definition of a light-sport
aircraft. (Ref: 14 CFR Part 1.1)
Ryan
On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 3:11 PM, bryan green <lgreen1@sc.rr.com> wrote:
>
> The only advantage would be that you could sign off your own annual after
> taking the 3 day class.
> Bryan Green
> Elgin SC
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Don Emch" <EmchAir@aol.com>
>
> To: <pietenpol-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 3:55 PM
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: ELSA registration
>
>
>>
>> My Piet is just registered as Experimental. Right now I just fly it
>> within the Sport Pilot guidelines. Which really means I just fly it without
>> a medical versus flying it with a medical. I really don't know of any
>> advantages to trying to get the Avid registered as an ELSA. Anyone else
>> know of any benefits?
>>
>> Don Emch
>> NX899DE
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=278155#278155
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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! --
|