---------------------------------------------------------- Pietenpol-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Sat 12/19/09: 23 ---------------------------------------------------------- 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 _____________________________________ Time: 12:27:38 AM PST US From: 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 2 _____________________________________ Time: 01:51:06 AM PST US From: "Clif Dawson" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: 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 _____________________________________ Time: 02:46:30 AM PST US From: "gcardinal" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: 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: 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 _____________________________________ Time: 04:12:33 AM PST US Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Bolting horizontal stab to fuselage longerons From: helspersew@aol.com 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 _____________________________________ Time: 04:24:18 AM PST US From: "Jack Phillips" Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: 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 _____________________________________ Time: 07:29:24 AM PST US From: "Gene Rambo" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: 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 To: 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-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ben Charvet Sent: Friday, December 18, 2009 10:09 AM To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com Subject: Pietenpol-List: Control stops/pulley guards > 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: > > > An idea worth pursuing....although I'm not convinced that control stops are > necessary. > > ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 09:04:43 AM PST US From: "Dortch, Steven D MAJ NG NG NGB" Subject: Pietenpol-List: 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 _____________________________________ Time: 09:44:27 AM PST US From: "Gene Rambo" 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 To: 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 www.buildersbooks.com www.homebuilthelp.com http://www.matronics.com/contribution http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 12:50:09 PM PST US From: "mike" Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: 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 ____________________________________ Time: 12:55:58 PM PST US Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: ELSA registration From: "Don Emch" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 01:41:59 PM PST US From: Michael Perez 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 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 ____________________________________ Time: 01:57:48 PM PST US From: "Jason Holmes" Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: 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 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 ____________________________________ Time: 02:01:52 PM PST US From: Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: 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 ____________________________________ Time: 02:53:36 PM PST US From: Tim Willis Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: 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 ____________________________________ Time: 02:54:34 PM PST US From: "bryan green" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: ELSA registration Just fly it. Bryan Green Elgin SC ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dortch, Steven D MAJ NG NG NGB" Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 11:41 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: 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 16 ____________________________________ Time: 02:55:10 PM PST US From: "bryan green" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: 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" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 04:05:31 PM PST US From: Michael Perez Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Bolts and stress anal-isis Gene, I for one appreciate you comments. - - ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 04:54:43 PM PST US From: "Gene Rambo" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: 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 To: 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 www.buildersbooks.com www.homebuilthelp.com http://www.matronics.com/contribution http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 04:55:08 PM PST US From: "Gene & Tammy" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: 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" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 06:30:09 PM PST US From: Wayne Bressler 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 Sent from the phone that made the Blackberry obsolete. On Dec 19, 2009, at 6:51 PM, "Gene Rambo" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 07:04:24 PM PST US From: "Gene Rambo" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: 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 To: 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 Sent from the phone that made the Blackberry obsolete. On Dec 19, 2009, at 6:51 PM, "Gene Rambo" > 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 www.buildersbooks.com www.homebuilthelp.com http://www.matronics.com/contribution http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 07:12:33 PM PST US From: Ben Charvet Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: 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 > *To:* 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 > > Sent from the phone that made the Blackberry obsolete. > > On Dec 19, 2009, at 6:51 PM, "Gene Rambo" > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 07:41:49 PM PST US Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: ELSA registration From: Ryan Mueller 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 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" > > To: > 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 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message pietenpol-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/Pietenpol-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/pietenpol-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/pietenpol-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.