---------------------------------------------------------- Pietenpol-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Fri 11/12/10: 35 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 03:41 AM - Re: Avionics package (helspersew@aol.com) 2. 03:52 AM - Re: Fuselage Sides (Dangerous Dave) 3. 03:59 AM - Re: Big and Tall Steel Fuselage (Dangerous Dave) 4. 06:05 AM - Re: Fuselage Sides (amsafetyc@aol.com) 5. 07:40 AM - Re: Avionics package (bender) 6. 09:02 AM - Metal question (TOM STINEMETZE) 7. 09:41 AM - Re: Metal question (Michael Perez) 8. 10:40 AM - Re: Metal question (Ryan Mueller) 9. 10:41 AM - airworthiness aplication (skellytown flyer) 10. 10:47 AM - Re: Metal question (Mr. Craig) 11. 11:11 AM - Re: Metal question (TOM STINEMETZE) 12. 11:12 AM - Re: Metal question (TOM STINEMETZE) 13. 01:30 PM - Re: Avionics package (JohnC) 14. 01:51 PM - Re: Metal question (Bill Church) 15. 02:19 PM - Re: Avionics package (bender) 16. 02:27 PM - Re: Fuselage Sides (Bill Church) 17. 02:35 PM - Re: Avionics package (Bill Church) 18. 02:53 PM - Re: Metal question (TOM STINEMETZE) 19. 03:01 PM - Re: airworthiness aplication (skellytown flyer) 20. 03:26 PM - Re: Re: Metal question (Dave Abramson) 21. 03:44 PM - Re: Re: Metal question (Gboothe5) 22. 05:19 PM - metal prop re-pitching (TriScout) 23. 05:52 PM - Re: Big and Tall Steel Fuselage (kevinpurtee) 24. 05:52 PM - Re: Fuselage Sides (Mr. Craig) 25. 05:53 PM - Re: Does life get any better? (kevinpurtee) 26. 05:56 PM - Re: 2 piets at breakfast this morning (kevinpurtee) 27. 05:58 PM - Re: Happy Veteran's Day (kevinpurtee) 28. 06:09 PM - Re: Fuselage Sides2 (jorge lizarraga) 29. 06:17 PM - Re: Big and Tall Steel Fuselage (Mr. Craig) 30. 08:11 PM - Re: Re: Avionics package (Clif Dawson) 31. 09:10 PM - Re: metal prop re-pitching (amsafetyc@aol.com) 32. 09:14 PM - Re: Re: Metal question (amsafetyc@aol.com) 33. 09:16 PM - Re: Re: Metal question (amsafetyc@aol.com) 34. 09:37 PM - Re: Metal question (coxwelljon) 35. 09:39 PM - Re: Re: Avionics package (Gboothe5) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 03:41:21 AM PST US Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Avionics package From: helspersew@aol.com Hi Jeff, Pictures please? I love this stuff. Dan Helsper Poplar Grove, IL. -----Original Message----- From: bender Sent: Thu, Nov 11, 2010 3:25 pm Subject: Pietenpol-List: Avionics package > made some ebay purchases.... scored an altimeter from the 40's nd a tach and an airspeed indicator that were supposed to be for a tiger oth... new in boxes.. the airspeed indicator has a 1931 manufacture date.. they ook really groovy 8 ribs done since nov 1st icked up wood for the longerons today and tore down the A engine.. makin sawdust in louisville eff ead this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=319049#319049 ttachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/gauge_120.jpg -======================== - -= -- 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 2 _____________________________________ Time: 03:52:09 AM PST US Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuselage Sides From: "Dangerous Dave" Howdy,When I built my sides,I went with the 13'5" and after they were put together the fuselage was 13'4 3/8". So 5/8" short.dave -------- Building a Piet Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=319098#319098 ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 03:59:32 AM PST US Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Big and Tall Steel Fuselage From: "Dangerous Dave" If you are big and tall,I'd think about making the rear cockpit longer,like the long fuselage drawings or a bit more.I'm 5-9 built the long fuselage and there isn't much room for my skinny self.dave -------- Building a Piet Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=319099#319099 ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 06:05:41 AM PST US From: "amsafetyc@aol.com" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuselage Sides Mr Craig. I have been remiss in my welcoming you to this rather humble asylum of builders.bumblers.experts and buddies. It is a place comprised of dreamers from all walks of life and disciplines each have learned one basic rule which I will take the liberty of sharing with you. Don't waste your time and energy over thinking it just start building! Its easy to spot the newbie we have all been there. Just build and enjoy the process the fruits of your labors and the adventure of achieving your dream one step at a time John Do not archive this is a lesson many of us have learned and many more will never learn Sent via DROID on Verizon Wireless -----Original message----- From: "Mr. Craig" Sent: Fri, Nov 12, 2010 04:40:39 GMT+00:00 Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fuselage Sides The 1932 Glider Manual shows the fuselage on the Air Camper as being 13' 5" long. When the sides are built flat and then bowed from front to rear, the fuselage will become shorter. How much longer does the upper and lower longerons need to be in order for the overall length to be correct after the sides are bent in? Thanks Craig Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=319079#319079 ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 07:40:37 AM PST US Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Avionics package From: "bender" yup.... it reads in tens of knots... from 20 to 120 on the outer scale then up to 195 on the inner scale as it goes around again..i can't believe these are NOS.. the boxes are even cool jeff Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=319124#319124 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/speed_182.jpg ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 09:02:00 AM PST US From: "TOM STINEMETZE" Subject: Pietenpol-List: Metal question Fellow workers in the field of Piet: I am having trouble finding a source that carries 5/16" steel as required for two small parts of the split landing gear. Everybody has 1/8" or 1/4" or 1/2" but no 5/16" so this must be a communist plot of some kind. Anyway, to the question. Is it at all acceptable to edge weld smaller stock into a piece of the required thickness? The final piece would be 1" x 2" x 5/16" and there would be a single bolt hole in one end. The part gets welded to the axle. All you metal workers out there, please chime in. Tom Stinemetze N328X McPherson, KS. ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 09:41:21 AM PST US From: Michael Perez Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Metal question I do not have the plans with me to look at, so I do not know where on the gear these parts go, nor what stresses they will subject to, however I would bet that edge welding said parts would be OK. Some of the wing strut/landing gear fittings for the wood gear have some edge welding done to them. If you can find larger steel stock, I could machine these two parts for you. Email me off list if interested. ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 10:40:37 AM PST US Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Metal question From: Ryan Mueller Hi Tom, Did you call Dillsburg Aero? Ryan On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 10:59 AM, TOM STINEMETZE wrote: > *Fellow workers in the field of Piet:* > ** > *I am having trouble finding a source that carries 5/16" steel as required > for two small parts of the split landing gear. Everybody has 1/8" or 1/4" > or 1/2" but no 5/16" so this must be a communist plot of some kind. Anyway, > to the question. Is it at all acceptable to edge weld smaller stock into a > piece of the required thickness? The final piece would be 1" x 2" x 5/16" > and there would be a single bolt hole in one end. The part gets welded to > the axle.* > ** > *All you metal workers out there, please chime in.* > ** > *Tom Stinemetze* > *N328X* > *McPherson, KS.* > > * > > ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 10:41:43 AM PST US Subject: Pietenpol-List: airworthiness aplication From: "skellytown flyer" I am in the middle of filling out my form 8130-6 and have some questions I could sure use help with. if anyone has been through this recently and has time for a phone call I would sure appreciate you e-mailing me with your phone number. Raymond. my address is skellflyer1(at)yahoo.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=319139#319139 ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 10:47:35 AM PST US Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Metal question From: "Mr. Craig" Wilco in Wichita, KS is supposed to be getting some in. They have good prices on 4130 steel. http://www.wilcoaircraftparts.com/4130-steel.htm The Yard, also in Wichita may have smaller pieces. http://www.yardstore.com/about.htm or http://www.benemiller.com/aircraft_alloy.htm Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=319142#319142 ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 11:11:48 AM PST US From: "TOM STINEMETZE" Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Metal question Great sources Mr. Mr. Craig. And close to home as well. Stinemetze >>> "Mr. Craig" 11/12/2010 12:45 PM >>> Wilco in Wichita, KS is supposed to be getting some in. They have good prices on 4130 steel. http://www.wilcoaircraftparts.com/4130-steel.htm The Yard, also in Wichita may have smaller pieces. http://www.yardstore.com/about.htm or http://www.benemiller.com/aircraft_alloy.htm ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 11:12:59 AM PST US From: "TOM STINEMETZE" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Metal question Ryan: I forgot about Dillsburg. Thanks! Tom >>> Ryan Mueller 11/12/2010 12:27 PM >>> Hi Tom, Did you call Dillsburg Aero? Ryan ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 01:30:07 PM PST US Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Avionics package From: "JohnC" HeyJeff, that's pretty cool. What kind of wood did you pick up, and where did you get it. Thanks! John in Louisville -------- I just hope when it's my turn to reach up and touch the face of God, I don't poke him in the eye on accident. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=319154#319154 ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 01:51:43 PM PST US Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Metal question From: "Bill Church" Tom, As a rule, edge welding two smaller thicknesses to obtain one thicker finished piece does not equal the strength of a solid piece. The only place the two pieces are joined is at the outside edges, so, in bending, the resulting piece is weaker than a solid piece. This would be like making a sheet of plywood, but only gluing the layers together at the outside edges, with no glue in the middle. Now, if the part will ONLY be loaded in tension (no bending forces), then the two-piece part will be able to carry basically the same load as the solid piece. The piece that you are referring to (see attached images) will be primarily loaded in tension, so you might be all right with two thinner pieces edge-welded together. But a better solution would be to use a solid piece. The title block of Drawing No. 3 calls for 1020 steel, not 4130. So, if you can't find a piece of 5/16" steel locally, I'm sure you could find a piece of 3/8" thick steel. That would provide 20% more strength, and only add one ounce to the total weight of your plane. Alternately, if you can get your hands on a bit of 1/4" thick 4130, that would also work, since that would be stronger than 5/16" thick 1020 steel. Bill C. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=319156#319156 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/lg_175.jpg http://forums.matronics.com//files/lg_lug_158.jpg ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 02:19:26 PM PST US Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Avionics package From: "bender" I got a 15 foot 5/4 by 6 poplar board from boland malhony... and a poplar 1 by 6.. cut them up today Also got another western red cedar board to finish my ribs... i get the cedar in 6' 5/4 by 4 and crazy straight tight grain..like 25 rings per inch...it's pretty wood got an old Wico model c 1128 magneto in the mail today too... cleaned it up, gapped the points and it throws a huge spark it's CCW rotation and has an adjustable impulse coupling jeff Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=319158#319158 ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 02:27:14 PM PST US Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuselage Sides From: "Bill Church" Craig, If you build the sides flat, using the dimensions on the plans, you will find that when you join the sides, and bow them together to meet at the tail, that the overall length will become shorter by "just the right amount". :D While it is normal drafting practice to draw an assembly in its assembled state, and it does appear that the FGM plans do show that, I feel pretty safe in assuming that anyone that has built a plane from those plans built their fuselage sides using the side view as though it was a flat plan. The Pietenpol is built just like a giant model airplane. If you've ever built a stick and tissue model airplane, you will know that you build the fuselage sides flat on top of the plans, and then when you join the sides, your main concern is that the two sides are the same length (whatever that length is), and that they both flex equally (symmetrical). I just checked the "improved" Air Camper plans, and the overall length on the view labeled "layout for side of fuselage" actually is 1/2" longer than the overall length of the finished fuselage. I have built my fuselage basic structure, and joined the sides. But I have not measured the overall finished length. I also do not plan to measure the overall finished length. It doesn't really matter that much. Plus or minus half an inch will not matter on the overall length of the fuselage. Making sure that the fuselage is symmetrical does matter. In short, trying to compensate for the shortening effect is WAAAAY more work than it's worth. How would you decide where to add the extra length? Bill C. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=319159#319159 ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 02:35:22 PM PST US Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Avionics package From: "Bill Church" Since your ASI and Tach were originally destined for a Tiger Moth, maybe you should consider putting a Gipsy Major on the nose... Bill C. do not archive. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=319161#319161 ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 02:53:15 PM PST US From: "TOM STINEMETZE" Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Metal question Bill: Precise and to the point. EXACTLY what I needed to hear. It also occurred to me that multiple pieces of metal welded together on their edges still leaves internal spaces which could corrode from the inside out with no visible sign. I'm going to find some solid metal somewhere. By the way, that is exactly the part that I am concerned with. There will be both tension and compression loads but there should be no bending forces unless one of the gear legs lets go. (Which I have heard can happen to certain nefarious persons named Axel.) Tom Stinemetze N328X >>> "Bill Church" 11/12/2010 3:49 PM >>> Tom, As a rule, edge welding two smaller thicknesses to obtain one thicker finished piece does not equal the strength of a solid piece. The only place the two pieces are joined is at the outside edges, so, in bending, the resulting piece is weaker than a solid piece. This would be like making a sheet of plywood, but only gluing the layers together at the outside edges, with no glue in the middle. Now, if the part will ONLY be loaded in tension (no bending forces), then the two-piece part will be able to carry basically the same load as the solid piece. The piece that you are referring to (see attached images) will be primarily loaded in tension, so you might be all right with two thinner pieces edge-welded together. But a better solution would be to use a solid piece. The title block of Drawing No. 3 calls for 1020 steel, not 4130. So, if you can't find a piece of 5/16" steel locally, I'm sure you could find a piece of 3/8" thick steel. That would provide 20% more strength, and only add one ounce to the total weight of your plane. Alternately, if you can get your hands on a bit of 1/4" thick 4130, that would also work, since that would be stronger than 5/16" thick 1020 steel. Bill C. ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 03:01:05 PM PST US Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: airworthiness aplication From: "skellytown flyer" I got my reply- thanks Ben you were very helpful. maybe I can help you some time. Raymond Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=319167#319167 ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 03:26:57 PM PST US From: "Dave Abramson" Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Metal question HOW ABOUT IF YOU BRAZED THEM TOGETHER??? IT WOULD WICK IN BETWEEN THE 2 PIECES. WOULD BE DAMN STRONG!!! JUST A THOUGHT..... 3 YEAR PIET BUILDER DAVE -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of TOM STINEMETZE Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 2:30 PM To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Metal question Bill: Precise and to the point. EXACTLY what I needed to hear. It also occurred to me that multiple pieces of metal welded together on their edges still leaves internal spaces which could corrode from the inside out with no visible sign. I'm going to find some solid metal somewhere. By the way, that is exactly the part that I am concerned with. There will be both tension and compression loads but there should be no bending forces unless one of the gear legs lets go. (Which I have heard can happen to certain nefarious persons named Axel.) Tom Stinemetze N328X >>> "Bill Church" 11/12/2010 3:49 PM >>> Tom, As a rule, edge welding two smaller thicknesses to obtain one thicker finished piece does not equal the strength of a solid piece. The only place the two pieces are joined is at the outside edges, so, in bending, the resulting piece is weaker than a solid piece. This would be like making a sheet of plywood, but only gluing the layers together at the outside edges, with no glue in the middle. Now, if the part will ONLY be loaded in tension (no bending forces), then the two-piece part will be able to carry basically the same load as the solid piece. The piece that you are referring to (see attached images) will be primarily loaded in tension, so you might be all right with two thinner pieces edge-welded together. But a better solution would be to use a solid piece. The title block of Drawing No. 3 calls for 1020 steel, not 4130. So, if you can't find a piece of 5/16" steel locally, I'm sure you could find a piece of 3/8" thick steel. That would provide 20% more strength, and only add one ounce to the total weight of your plane. Alternately, if you can get your hands on a bit of 1/4" thick 4130, that would also work, since that would be stronger than 5/16" thick 1020 steel. Bill C. ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 03:44:46 PM PST US From: "Gboothe5" Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Metal question Tom, I don't mean to sound argumentative, and you undoubtedly know more about welding than I, but, if you are adverse to sandwiching two pieces of metal by edge welding, how would you address the gear-wing strut fittings? Spar-cabane fittings? Gary Boothe From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of TOM STINEMETZE Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 2:30 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Metal question Bill: Precise and to the point. EXACTLY what I needed to hear. It also occurred to me that multiple pieces of metal welded together on their edges still leaves internal spaces which could corrode from the inside out with no visible sign. I'm going to find some solid metal somewhere. By the way, that is exactly the part that I am concerned with. There will be both tension and compression loads but there should be no bending forces unless one of the gear legs lets go. (Which I have heard can happen to certain nefarious persons named Axel.) Tom Stinemetze N328X >>> "Bill Church" 11/12/2010 3:49 PM >>> Tom, As a rule, edge welding two smaller thicknesses to obtain one thicker finished piece does not equal the strength of a solid piece. The only place the two pieces are joined is at the outside edges, so, in bending, the resulting piece is weaker than a solid piece. This would be like making a sheet of plywood, but only gluing the layers together at the outside edges, with no glue in the middle. Now, if the part will ONLY be loaded in tension (no bending forces), then the two-piece part will be able to carry basically the same load as the solid piece. The piece that you are referring to (see attached images) will be primarily loaded in tension, so you might be all right with two thinner pieces edge-welded together. But a better solution would be to use a solid piece. The title block of Drawing No. 3 calls for 1020 steel, not 4130. So, if you can't find a piece of 5/16" steel locally, I'm sure you could find a piece of 3/8" thick steel. That would provide 20% more strength, and only add one ounce to the total weight of your plane. Alternately, if you can get your hands on a bit of 1/4" thick 4130, that would also work, since that would be stronger than 5/16" thick 1020 steel. Bill C. ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 05:19:07 PM PST US Subject: Pietenpol-List: metal prop re-pitching From: "TriScout" Anyone know a good prop shop that'll repitch a metal prop. I am in Dallas area and googled and made some calls, but no joy. I'd like to know if I can get one repitched(and price)before I plunk down some $$ on one. It doesn't have to be near dallas..Thanks in advance. Larry Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=319175#319175 ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 05:52:07 PM PST US Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Big and Tall Steel Fuselage From: "kevinpurtee" Built the long fuselage per the plans. Didn't fret about dimensions beyond what was listed on the drawings. Glued it together and it appears to fly just fine. I'm 6' and 190 pounds. Flew it, with all my gear, by myself, from Austin, TX to Brodhead/Oshkosh this past summer. for what it's worth -------- Kevin "Axel" Purtee NX899KP Austin/Georgetown, TX Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=319176#319176 ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 05:52:49 PM PST US Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuselage Sides From: "Mr. Craig" Bill Church wrote: > I just checked the "improved" Air Camper plans, and the overall length on the view labeled "layout for side of fuselage" actually is 1/2" longer than the overall length of the finished fuselage. > > ......... > > How would you decide where to add the extra length? > > Bill C. Hi Bill I really just wanted to know how you wood fuselage guys built yours. As you say 1/2" one way or another isn't a big deal. Square and symmetrical are what is important. but, adding a 1/2 or 3/4 or 1" really isn't that hard. :) You asked where to add it and you state the "improved" plans shows it. Obviously you would add it where the designer intended. :) I'm building a steel fuselage. The preferred method is to build a top and bottom, not two sides like you wood guys do. With this method the fuselage will be the correct overall length. The top is flat, so it is rather straight forward to layout. The bottom is curved and one MUST allow for this with lengthened bottom longerons. Ref: Construction of Tubular Steel Fuselages by Vex Aviation http://www.actechbooks.com/products/act134/ Craig Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=319177#319177 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/fuselage_164.gif ________________________________ Message 25 ____________________________________ Time: 05:53:49 PM PST US Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Does life get any better? From: "kevinpurtee" I fly better when I've had a few... (sorry) do not archive -------- Kevin "Axel" Purtee NX899KP Austin/Georgetown, TX Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=319178#319178 ________________________________ Message 26 ____________________________________ Time: 05:56:25 PM PST US Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: 2 piets at breakfast this morning From: "kevinpurtee" Beautiful, Shad! Good Lord willin' Fat Girl and I will get to meet Oscar and Scout tomorrow and will have some similar pics. do not archive -------- Kevin "Axel" Purtee NX899KP Austin/Georgetown, TX Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=319179#319179 ________________________________ Message 27 ____________________________________ Time: 05:58:22 PM PST US Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Happy Veteran's Day From: "kevinpurtee" Best to your son, John. Home for the long weekend from AZ. Get to (hopefully) fly tomorrow! do not archive -------- Kevin "Axel" Purtee NX899KP Austin/Georgetown, TX Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=319180#319180 ________________________________ Message 28 ____________________________________ Time: 06:09:22 PM PST US From: jorge lizarraga Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuselage Sides2 hi guy I have a fucselajo size about 13-5" at plane say but some guy talk a bout longer vercion what size is chort and longer????tanks for all you help and suport=C2- advices, jorge from hanford --- On Fri, 11/12/10, amsafetyc@aol.com wrote: From: amsafetyc@aol.com Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuselage Sides #yiv1230498553 {word-wrap:break-word;background-color:#ffffff;} Mr Craig. I have been remiss in my welcoming you to this rather humble asylum of buil ders.bumblers.experts and buddies. It is a place comprised of dreamers from all walks of life and disciplines each have learned one basic rule which I will take the liberty of sharing with you. Don't waste your time and energy over thinking it just start building! Its easy to spot the newbie we have all been there. Just build and enjoy th e process the fruits of your labors and the adventure of achieving your dre am one step at a time John Do not archive this is a lesson many of us have learned and many more will never learn Sent via DROID on Verizon Wireless -----Original message----- From: "Mr. Craig" Sent: Fri, Nov 12, 2010 04:40:39 GMT+00:00 Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fuselage Sides The 1932 Glider Manual shows the fuselage on the Air Camper as being 13' 5" long. When the sides are built flat and then bowed from front to rear, the fuselage will become shorter. How much longer does the upper and lower lon gerons need to be in order for the overall length to be correct after the s ides are bent in? Thanks Craig Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=319079#319079 =C2=C2=B7=BA~=B0=C3=AD=C2=B2,=C3=9Eg(=93=C5-=C3=93M4 =C3=93G=C3=9Aq=C3=BC=C2=A2=C3=C3=A2z=C2=B9=C3=9E=C3=81=C3=8A.=C2=AE'=C2 =AB=C3=A5y=C2=ABJ=C3i=C2=A2=C2=BBX=C2=A2=C3=C3=8B=C5-=C3=8BlN=C2=AC 2=B0=C3=AD=9E'tg=C2=ADJ=B0=C5=BEa8=C3=81DA=B0=C3=BB lh=C2=BD=C3=A9=BAz=C2=B8=C2=AC=C2=B6=82=AC=C5=BE{=C5=A1=9D =C2=B8=C2=AC=C2=B4[=C2=A7u=C2=A2=C2=B1=C3=C3=82=93'$=C2=A2} =C3-=C2=A8=C5=BE=C3=9A=C3=A2n=C3=ABb=C2=A2yb=C5=BEF=C3=9E=93=C5 =92-=C2=A1=C3=B8=C2=A7v=B9=C2=AD=C5=A1=C5-=C3=9Ei=C2=BA.=C2a=C5 -=C3=8C=C5=BEj=C2=BBz=C2=BA=C3=A2~'=C2=AD=C3=A7=CB=86=EF=BD=C3=87=C2 =A7=C2=B6+=C3=9E'=C3=AD=C2=B2=C5=A1=C3=A8=C2=BE'^v=C3=B2=0A=0A=0A ________________________________ Message 29 ____________________________________ Time: 06:17:36 PM PST US Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Big and Tall Steel Fuselage From: "Mr. Craig" kevinpurtee wrote: > Built the long fuselage per the plans. Didn't fret about dimensions beyond what was listed on the drawings. Glued it together and it appears to fly just fine. I'm 6' and 190 pounds. Flew it, with all my gear, by myself, from Austin, TX to Brodhead/Oshkosh this past summer. > > for what it's worth Thanks for the info Kevin. I'm going with the Model A Ford motor and original size fuselage (possibly modified). From what Andrew Pietenpol told me, the long fuselage/Corvair powered Air Camper is a different beast. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=319182#319182 ________________________________ Message 30 ____________________________________ Time: 08:11:25 PM PST US From: "Clif Dawson" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Avionics package No radiator either! Bonus! Finally! I've overcome my 6 months difficulties getting my website upload function to work and have uploaded a bunch of stuff, two new Piet pages in there! http://clifdawson.ca/ Clif do not archive > > Since your ASI and Tach were originally destined for a Tiger Moth, maybe > you should consider putting a Gipsy Major on the nose... > > Bill C. > > do not archive. ________________________________ Message 31 ____________________________________ Time: 09:10:17 PM PST US From: "amsafetyc@aol.com" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: metal prop re-pitching Sensenich propeller lancaster pa. They.do everything on metal props here in lancaster John Sent via DROID on Verizon Wireless -----Original message----- From: TriScout Sent: Sat, Nov 13, 2010 01:19:31 GMT+00:00 Subject: Pietenpol-List: metal prop re-pitching Anyone know a good prop shop that'll repitch a metal prop. I am in Dallas area and googled and made some calls, but no joy. I'd like to know if I can get one repitched(and price)before I plunk down some $$ on one. It doesn't have to be near dallas..Thanks in advance. Larry Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=319175#319175 ________________________________ Message 32 ____________________________________ Time: 09:14:32 PM PST US From: "amsafetyc@aol.com" Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Metal question Why not use 300 grade stainless ? John Sent via DROID on Verizon Wireless -----Original message----- From: Gboothe5 Sent: Fri, Nov 12, 2010 23:45:07 GMT+00:00 Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Metal question Tom, I don't mean to sound argumentative, and you undoubtedly know more about welding than I, but, if you are adverse to sandwiching two pieces of metal by edge welding, how would you address the gear-wing strut fittings? Spar-cabane fittings? Gary Boothe From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of TOM STINEMETZE Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 2:30 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Metal question Bill: Precise and to the point. EXACTLY what I needed to hear. It also occurred to me that multiple pieces of metal welded together on their edges still leaves internal spaces which could corrode from the inside out with no visible sign. I'm going to find some solid metal somewhere. By the way, that is exactly the part that I am concerned with. There will be both tension and compression loads but there should be no bending forces unless one of the gear legs lets go. (Which I have heard can happen to certain nefarious persons named Axel.) Tom Stinemetze N328X >>> "Bill Church" 11/12/2010 3:49 PM >>> Tom, As a rule, edge welding two smaller thicknesses to obtain one thicker finished piece does not equal the strength of a solid piece. The only place the two pieces are joined is at the outside edges, so, in bending, the resulting piece is weaker than a solid piece. This would be like making a sheet of plywood, but only gluin ________________________________ Message 33 ____________________________________ Time: 09:16:02 PM PST US From: "amsafetyc@aol.com" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Metal question Over thinking the build is highly over rated and unproductive. John Sent via DROID on Verizon Wireless -----Original message----- From: Bill Church Sent: Fri, Nov 12, 2010 21:51:55 GMT+00:00 Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Metal question Tom, As a rule, edge welding two smaller thicknesses to obtain one thicker finished piece does not equal the strength of a solid piece. The only place the two pieces are joined is at the outside edges, so, in bending, the resulting piece is weaker than a solid piece. This would be like making a sheet of plywood, but only gluing the layers together at the outside edges, with no glue in the middle. Now, if the part will ONLY be loaded in tension (no bending forces), then the two-piece part will be able to carry basically the same load as the solid piece. The piece that you are referring to (see attached images) will be primarily loaded in tension, so you might be all right with two thinner pieces edge-welded together. But a better solution would be to use a solid piece. The title block of Drawing No. 3 calls for 1020 steel, not 4130. So, if you can't find a piece of 5/16" steel locally, I'm sure you could find a piece of 3/8" thick steel. That would provide 20% more strength, and only add one ounce to the total weight of your plane. Alternately, if you can get your hands on a bit of 1/4" thick 4130, that would also work, since that would be stronger than 5/16" thick 1020 steel. Bill C. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=319156#319156 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/lg_175.jpg http://forums.matronics.com//files/lg_lug_158.jpg ________________________________ Message 34 ____________________________________ Time: 09:37:52 PM PST US Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Metal question From: "coxwelljon" Tom, If you don't need 4130 for the tabs and can use 1018 which is what I think BP used you might try Speedy Metals http://www.speedymetals.com/c-8213-1018.aspx?pagenum=4. I have ordered from them and got good service fir special shapes in small quantities. -------- Jon Coxwell GN-1 Builder Recycle and preserve the planet Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=319195#319195 ________________________________ Message 35 ____________________________________ Time: 09:39:07 PM PST US From: "Gboothe5" Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Avionics package Clif, You have been busy! Your work continues to appear....well....artistic! Gary Do not archive -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Clif Dawson Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 8:09 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Avionics package No radiator either! Bonus! Finally! I've overcome my 6 months difficulties getting my website upload function to work and have uploaded a bunch of stuff, two new Piet pages in there! http://clifdawson.ca/ Clif do not archive > > Since your ASI and Tach were originally destined for a Tiger Moth, maybe > you should consider putting a Gipsy Major on the nose... > > Bill C. > > do not archive. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.