Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:15 AM - Re: Re: Spins (dog67@aol.com)
2. 04:44 AM - Re: Re: Spins (Dan Yocum)
3. 04:59 AM - Re: Engine out (Don Emch)
4. 05:09 AM - Re: Spins (Bill Church)
5. 05:09 AM - Re: Spins (Bill Church)
6. 08:00 AM - Re: Engine out (Ozarkflyer)
7. 08:18 AM - Re: Re: Engine out (Ken Bickers)
8. 08:34 AM - A65-8 Run Up (TriScout)
9. 08:42 AM - Re: Re: Engine out (Dan Yocum)
10. 08:42 AM - Re: A65-8 Run Up (899PM)
11. 08:54 AM - Re: Re: Engine out (Jack Phillips)
12. 09:02 AM - Re: Re: A65-8 Run Up (Jack Phillips)
13. 09:28 AM - Re: A65-8 Run Up (steve@wotelectronics.com)
14. 11:09 AM - Re: Re: Engine out (mark lee)
15. 11:43 AM - Re: Re: Engine out (Dan Yocum)
16. 11:44 AM - Re: Re: Engine out (Dan Yocum)
17. 11:53 AM - Re: Wash Out (Mild Bill)
18. 11:53 AM - A65 spark plugs (Dan Yocum)
19. 12:14 PM - Re: Piet vs. GN-1 (Mild Bill)
20. 12:20 PM - Re: A65 spark plugs (steve@wotelectronics.com)
21. 01:01 PM - EAA Forums - off topic (K5YAC)
22. 05:59 PM - Re: A65 spark plugs (Jack Phillips)
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 |
|
What if you spin a corvair?
-----Original Message-----
From: GliderMike <glidermikeg@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tue, Aug 9, 2011 10:36 pm
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Spins
I am beginning to think I should never have brought up the subject of spins
. It
eems spins are more controversial than Corvairs.
o not archive
--------
OMEBUILDER
ill WORK for Spruce
ong flights, smooth air, and soft landings,
liderMike, aka Mike Glasgow
ead this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349092#349092
-= - 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
-
-========================
-= - List Contribution Web Site -
-= Thank you for your generous support!
-= -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-========================
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 |
|
With what airfoil? Riblett or FC-10? Is the plane built with T-88 or Goril
la Glue? Are there milk jugs in the wings?
oh, do not archive anything from the peanut gallery over here.
--
Dan Yocum
yocum137@gmail.com
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
On Aug 10, 2011, at 2:11 AM, dog67@aol.com wrote:
> What if you spin a corvair?
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: GliderMike <glidermikeg@yahoo.com>
> To: pietenpol-list <pietenpol-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Tue, Aug 9, 2011 10:36 pm
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Spins
>
>
> I am beginning to think I should never have brought up the subject of spin
s. It
> seems spins are more controversial than Corvairs.
> do not archive
>
> --------
> HOMEBUILDER
> Will WORK for Spruce
> Long flights, smooth air, and soft landings,
> GliderMike, aka Mike Glasgow
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349092#349092
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> " target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
> p://forums.matronics.com
> blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> ______________________________________________________________________
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 |
|
Dan, those are 8.50 x 6. I think your Piet needs those too. I've thought about
putting together a set for mine and just switching back and forth between tall
tires and really cool hayfield 8.5 x 6's whenever the mood strikes.
Don Emch
NX899DE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349100#349100
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 |
|
As a note of interest, Chet Peek writes in his excellent book "The Pietenpol Story"
of an incident involving BHP and spins. From this story, it sounds like spins
had been performed in Air Campers before, but in one instance, with BHP in
the front seat, and a heavier pilot in the rear, they got into a flat spin,
and barely recovered. A cautionary tale. Probably best to just avoid spins with
the Air Camper.
Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349101#349101
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/pietenpolstoryp60_110.pdf
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 |
|
As a note of interest, Chet Peek writes in his excellent book "The Pietenpol Story"
of an incident involving BHP and spins. From this story, it sounds like spins
had been performed in Air Campers before, but in one instance, with BHP in
the front seat, and a heavier pilot in the rear, they got into a flat spin,
and barely recovered. A cautionary tale. Probably best to just avoid spins with
the Air Camper.
Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349102#349102
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/pietenpolstoryp60_110.pdf
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 |
|
Thanks for all of the great input and personal experiences. I'm just trying to
find out things others have experienced and hoping to have enough sense to check
for those obvious things that could cause a problem. Even the not-so-obvious
things. My experience has been limited to C-150/52, C-172 and C-182 so you can
see my curiosity regarding other types of ac and engines. I have no experience
with tail-draggers or stick controls but hopefully that issue will be resolved
within the next couple of months.
The value of practicing engine out procedures seems to be in-valuable but my experience
is that it is never practiced during a BFR. Even through 3 CFI's who
have given me the BFR, so I just do it on my own.
Larry Ragan
Mountain View, AR
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349114#349114
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 |
|
Larry, in my experience CFIs are generally happy to integrate specific
training requests into BFRs. Explain why you want to emphasize engine
outs and I'll bet the CFI will be delighted to "surprise" you with a
number of different situations. My best, Ken
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Ozarkflyer <lragan@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks for all of the great input and personal experiences. I'm just trying to
find out things others have experienced and hoping to have enough sense to check
for those obvious things that could cause a problem. Even the not-so-obvious
things. My experience has been limited to C-150/52, C-172 and C-182 so you
can see my curiosity regarding other types of ac and engines. I have no experience
with tail-draggers or stick controls but hopefully that issue will be resolved
within the next couple of months.
>
> The value of practicing engine out procedures seems to be in-valuable but my
experience is that it is never practiced during a BFR. Even through 3 CFI's who
have given me the BFR, so I just do it on my own.
>
>
> Larry Ragan
> Mountain View, AR
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349114#349114
>
>
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 |
|
Ran the engine yesterday prior to DAR arrival to start the Annual. Only got 1900
RPM at firewall thrust (full throttle). Hmm.. there's a 2300RPM redline. I'm
running a Sensi W72CK-42 prop. He (DAR) said that's about right for static runup.
It was 41 deg C at the time. Does that concur w/youguys?.. Thx in advance..
Ler
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349121#349121
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 |
|
All,
I've said it before and I'll say it again - getting my glider rating was
one of the best things ever I ever did and made me a much better pilot
over all.
Talk about the ultimate engine out experience. Every time you pull the
tow release knob you are committed to land exactly one time. And the
winner is the one who can stay aloft the longest, glide the farthest,
and spot land that sucker exactly on a dime.
That is all. As you were.
Dan
On 08/10/2011 09:58 AM, Ozarkflyer wrote:
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Ozarkflyer"<lragan@hotmail.com>
>
> Thanks for all of the great input and personal experiences. I'm just trying to
find out things others have experienced and hoping to have enough sense to check
for those obvious things that could cause a problem. Even the not-so-obvious
things. My experience has been limited to C-150/52, C-172 and C-182 so you
can see my curiosity regarding other types of ac and engines. I have no experience
with tail-draggers or stick controls but hopefully that issue will be resolved
within the next couple of months.
>
> The value of practicing engine out procedures seems to be in-valuable but my
experience is that it is never practiced during a BFR. Even through 3 CFI's who
have given me the BFR, so I just do it on my own.
>
>
> Larry Ragan
> Mountain View, AR
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349114#349114
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> ______________________________________________________________________
--
Dan Yocum
Fermilab 630.840.6509
yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
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: A65-8 Run Up |
I think you should be seeing about 2100 static with that prop. Carb heat?
--------
PAPA MIKE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349122#349122
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 |
|
Hi Larry,
Outstanding that you practice engine out procedures on your own! Just
don=92t
get too low before adding the power back in. As a CFI, I make sure that
I
cover engine out procedures on every BFR I do. I usually pick a field
that
is not readily visible to the pilot, then have him/her do a maneuver (I
actually prefer to pull the throttle while they are doing "clearing
turns"
prior to beginning a maneuver so it takes a few seconds to wrap their
head
around the fact that they just lost the engine). It doesn't matter if
they
find the field that I had chosen, as long as a) they choose a field
suitable
to land in and, b) they set up a glide that will actually make the
field.
Once the glide is established I'll put the power back in, without ever
letting them get lower than about 500' AGL. Then we=92ll discuss the
likely
results. I remember one pilot at Smith Mountain Lake that chose a field
and
remembered the wind direction and set up his landing into the wind.
Unfortunately, the terrain around the lake is fairly mountainous and his
choice to land into the wind (which was only blowing about 5 knots)
meant he
was landing downhill and heading for the water. He realized his mistake
but
too late to make it to another field. Had this been a real forced
landing,
he would have been swimming. If he had chosen to land uphill, it would
have
been a very easy landing to make, even if it was downwind.
It's good practice (and helps pass the time on a long cross-country) to
constantly be looking for fields where you can make a successful forced
landing, and keep that field in mind until you find another one further
ahead, then start looking again. Understand that in a Pietenpol, the
glide
ratio is not very good (actually, it is similar to that of the Space
Shuttle, which is awful), so your radius of search is pretty small. The
good news is it doesn't take a very big field to put a Pietenpol down
in,
but you might have to take it out by truck.
I've never had a total power failure, but I have had two forced landings
due
to partial power failures. Both were preventable. The first was in a
J-3
Cub in Tennessee many years ago. The local A&P had pulled the spark
plugs
to clean them (we had been having magneto problems that summer) and
forgot
to torque one of them. The plug blew out while I was on a
cross-country,
and the engine would only maintain about 1200 RPM - not enough to keep
it in
the air. I was over Interstate 40 but didn't want to land on the busy
highway and remembered a pasture about a mile back. I made a safe
landing
in the pasture and found the plug still hanging on the harness. After
borrowing a 7/8" deep socket from the farmer I re-installed the plug and
flew the plane out of the pasture and back home.
The second was with my Pietenpol, after I had inserted some stainless
steel
wool in the carb heat muffs to increase heat transfer. I did some
fairly
extensive ground testing and verified (I thought) the wool was secure,
and
then flew it for several hours, checking it after each flight. Then I
flew
a photo mission on a cold (29=B0 F) morning over a lake just west of
Raleigh,
NC. I was having trouble keeping up with the Aviat Husky photo plane
and
was picking up carburetor ice. I pulled on full carburetor heat and
continued flying at full throttle to keep up with the Husky. Just as we
finished the shoot, the wool came loose and was immediately sucked into
the
carburetor (obviously, my testing should have been done at full
throttle,
and cruise speeds). The RPM dropped to about 1200 and I immediately
went to
best glide speed, which on my plane is 55 mph. I was 800=92 AGL and the
VSI
said I was coming down at 400 fpm. I was over a forest but heading for
the
closest airfield, which was about 4 miles away. As I came over US
Highway
64 I was at 200=92 and still well over a mile from the strip so I opted
to
land on the highway. As I set up to land, I realized a pickup truck was
right where I needed to be, so I had to pull the nose up and let him get
in
front of me. Then, to keep from stalling I nosed down and literally
flew it
into the ground, hitting fairly hard and bouncing. I recovered from the
bounce and landed it 3-point and was congratulating myself for having
survived when the right wing started to drop. Full left aileron and
full
left rudder weren=92t enough to keep it on the road and it went off into
the
ditch on the right and groundlooped. Only after it stopped did I
realize
the axle had broken when I first hit and I was trailing the right wheel
by
the brakeline. Only time I=92ve ever put a scratch on an airplane.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Ozarkflyer
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 10:59 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Engine out
Thanks for all of the great input and personal experiences. I'm just
trying
to find out things others have experienced and hoping to have enough
sense
to check for those obvious things that could cause a problem. Even the
not-so-obvious things. My experience has been limited to C-150/52, C-172
and
C-182 so you can see my curiosity regarding other types of ac and
engines. I
have no experience with tail-draggers or stick controls but hopefully
that
issue will be resolved within the next couple of months.
The value of practicing engine out procedures seems to be in-valuable
but my
experience is that it is never practiced during a BFR. Even through 3
CFI's
who have given me the BFR, so I just do it on my own.
Larry Ragan
Mountain View, AR
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349114#349114
Message 12
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: A65-8 Run Up |
I agree. Until I got my Coudcars prop, I had a Sensenich W72CK40 prop and
got 2150 RPM static. On climbout it also got about 2150.
You might check your throttle linkage and make sure it is allowing the
throttle to go to wide open.
On the other hand, those old tachometers can sometimes be inaccurate. If
you know someone with an optical tach have them see what your engine is
actually doing. It might be getting much more than 1900.
Check out Harry Fenton's website. He is pretty much the Guru of the small
Continentals. http://www.bowersflybaby.com/tech/fenton.htm
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of 899PM
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 11:40 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: A65-8 Run Up
I think you should be seeing about 2100 static with that prop. Carb heat?
--------
PAPA MIKE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349122#349122
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: A65-8 Run Up |
That sounds really low, even with carb heat on. At that RPM, you are
making far less than rated power. I thought mechanical tachs tend to
indicate a little low with some age, can't remember for sure. As
someone said, borrow an optical tach to check it.
My A-75 turns about 2,500RPM static. It is very much a climb A-75
prop. With a little more coarse prop it still turned about 2,425RPM.
Granted an A-75 should turn more than an A-65 due to the smaller prop,
but it shouldn't be 600RPM more.
Check the continental manual, it may specify a minimum static RPM. I
know newer manuals or POHs specify this, I can't remember if the -65
does or not. Here is a link to the overhaul manual on my website:
http://www.wotelectronics.com/airplane/Continental%20A-65/Overhaul%20Manual%20-%20A65_75.pdf
Steve Ruse
Norman, OK
On Wed, 10 Aug 2011 08:32:06 -0700, TriScout wrote:
> <apfelcyber@yahoo.com>
>
> Ran the engine yesterday prior to DAR arrival to start the Annual.
> Only got 1900 RPM at firewall thrust (full throttle). Hmm.. there's a
> 2300RPM redline. I'm running a Sensi W72CK-42 prop. He (DAR) said
> that's about right for static runup. It was 41 deg C at the time.
> Does
> that concur w/youguys?.. Thx in advance..
>
> Ler
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349121#349121
>
>
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 |
|
Jack thanks for sharing your experiences with us. At a future point that ma
y
be soon or later I'll be looking for a relevant CFI. You may be able to hel
p
in that dept.Or you may be able to tell me where to find what I need.My
personal timeline is a bit up in the air but the resources are coming along
very well.One thing I would like covered more,is getting the proper flight
training.Maybe not all the time, as this is a builders networking site.But
the subject is very important and I'm sure that I'm not alone.
do not archive
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 8:51 AM, Jack Phillips <pietflyr@bellsouth.net>wrot
e:
> ** ** ** ** **
>
> Hi Larry,****
>
> ** **
>
> Outstanding that you practice engine out procedures on your own! Just
> don=92t get too low before adding the power back in. As a CFI, I make su
re
> that I cover engine out procedures on every BFR I do. I usually pick a
> field that is not readily visible to the pilot, then have him/her do a
> maneuver (I actually prefer to pull the throttle while they are doing
> "clearing turns" prior to beginning a maneuver so it takes a few seconds
to
> wrap their head around the fact that they just lost the engine). It does
n't
> matter if they find the field that I had chosen, as long as a) they choos
e a
> field suitable to land in and, b) they set up a glide that will actually
> make the field. Once the glide is established I'll put the power back in
,
> without ever letting them get lower than about 500' AGL. Then we=92ll di
scuss
> the likely results. I remember one pilot at ****Smith** **Mountain** **
> Lake**** that chose a field and remembered the wind direction and set up
> his landing into the wind. Unfortunately, the terrain around the lake is
> fairly mountainous and his choice to land into the wind (which was only
> blowing about 5 knots) meant he was landing downhill and heading for the
> water. He realized his mistake but too late to make it to another field.
> Had this been a real forced landing, he would have been swimming. If he
had
> chosen to land uphill, it would have been a very easy landing to make, ev
en
> if it was downwind.****
>
> ** **
>
> It's good practice (and helps pass the time on a long cross-country) to
> constantly be looking for fields where you can make a successful forced
> landing, and keep that field in mind until you find another one further
> ahead, then start looking again. Understand that in a Pietenpol, the gli
de
> ratio is not very good (actually, it is similar to that of the Space
> Shuttle, which is awful), so your radius of search is pretty small. The
> good news is it doesn't take a very big field to put a Pietenpol down in,
> but you might have to take it out by truck.****
>
> ** **
>
> I've never had a total power failure, but I have had two forced landings
> due to partial power failures. Both were preventable. The first was in
a
> J-3 Cub in ****Tennessee**** many years ago. The local A&P had pulled th
e
> spark plugs to clean them (we had been having magneto problems that summe
r)
> and forgot to torque one of them. The plug blew out while I was on a
> cross-country, and the engine would only maintain about 1200 RPM - not
> enough to keep it in the air. I was over Interstate 40 but didn't want t
o
> land on the busy highway and remembered a pasture about a mile back. I m
ade
> a safe landing in the pasture and found the plug still hanging on the
> harness. After borrowing a 7/8" deep socket from the farmer I re-install
ed
> the plug and flew the plane out of the pasture and back home.****
>
> ** **
>
> The second was with my Pietenpol, after I had inserted some stainless ste
el
> wool in the carb heat muffs to increase heat transfer. I did some fairly
> extensive ground testing and verified (I thought) the wool was secure, an
d
> then flew it for several hours, checking it after each flight. Then I fl
ew
> a photo mission on a cold (29=B0 F) morning over a lake just west of ****
> Raleigh**, **NC****. I was having trouble keeping up with the Aviat Husk
y
> photo plane and was picking up carburetor ice. I pulled on full carburet
or
> heat and continued flying at full throttle to keep up with the Husky. Ju
st
> as we finished the shoot, the wool came loose and was immediately sucked
> into the carburetor (obviously, my testing should have been done at full
> throttle, and cruise speeds). The RPM dropped to about 1200 and I
> immediately went to best glide speed, which on my plane is 55 mph. I was
> 800=92 AGL and the VSI said I was coming down at 400 fpm. I was over a f
orest
> but heading for the closest airfield, which was about 4 miles away. As I
> came over US Highway 64 I was at 200=92 and still well over a mile from t
he
> strip so I opted to land on the highway. As I set up to land, I realized
a
> pickup truck was right where I needed to be, so I had to pull the nose up
> and let him get in front of me. Then, to keep from stalling I nosed down
> and literally flew it into the ground, hitting fairly hard and bouncing.
I
> recovered from the bounce and landed it 3-point and was congratulating
> myself for having survived when the right wing started to drop. Full lef
t
> aileron and full left rudder weren=92t enough to keep it on the road and
it
> went off into the ditch on the right and groundlooped. Only after it
> stopped did I realize the axle had broken when I first hit and I was
> trailing the right wheel by the brakeline. Only time I=92ve ever put a
> scratch on an airplane.****
>
> ** **
>
> Jack Phillips****
>
> NX899JP****
>
> ****Smith Mountain Lake**, **Virginia********
>
> ** **
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:
> owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ozarkflyer
> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 10:59 AM
> To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Engine out
>
> ** **
>
*
> *
>
> ** **
>
> Thanks for all of the great input and personal experiences. I'm just tryi
ng
> to find out things others have experienced and hoping to have enough sens
e
> to check for those obvious things that could cause a problem. Even the
> not-so-obvious things. My experience has been limited to C-150/52, C-172
and
> C-182 so you can see my curiosity regarding other types of ac and engines
. I
> have no experience with tail-draggers or stick controls but hopefully tha
t
> issue will be resolved within the next couple of months.****
>
> ** **
>
> The value of practicing engine out procedures seems to be in-valuable but
> my experience is that it is never practiced during a BFR. Even through 3
> CFI's who have given me the BFR, so I just do it on my own.****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> Larry Ragan****
>
> ****Mountain View**, **AR********
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> Read this topic online here:****
>
> ** **
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349114#349114****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *
>
===========
>
===========
===========
===========
>
> *
>
>
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 |
|
On 08/10/2011 01:06 PM, mark lee wrote:
> Jack thanks for sharing your experiences with us. At a future point that
> may be soon or later I'll be looking for a relevant CFI. You may be able
> to help in that dept.Or you may be able to tell me where to find what I
National Institute of Flight Instructors:
http://www.nafi.org/
Get one with TW experience, but some don't list that in their
endorsements, so just ask.
--
Dan Yocum
Fermilab 630.840.6509
yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
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 |
|
On 08/10/2011 06:57 AM, Don Emch wrote:
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Don Emch"<EmchAir@aol.com>
>
> Dan, those are 8.50 x 6. I think your Piet needs those too. I've thought about
putting together a set for mine and just switching back and forth between
tall tires and really cool hayfield 8.5 x 6's whenever the mood strikes.
My 8.00x4 Cub tires are pretty good, but those 8.50x6 look like I could
get into (and out of) a bunch more bean, corn, or hay fields.
Thanks!
Dan
--
Dan Yocum
Fermilab 630.840.6509
yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
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 |
|
Does a Pietenpol really need any wash-out for purposes of taming the stalling characteristics?
Hershey bar wings that have no wash-out have a stall that starts
at the root and progresses toward the tips anyway. I've been trying various
thought experiments involving dihedral vs. no dihedral and don't see how the
basic stall behavior of a wing with no wash-out would be affected either way.
(Unless perhaps there is large angle of cross flow, but didn't our flight instructors
constantly harangue us about the desirability, even the absolute necessity,
of keeping the ball centered?)
Well, a little bit of wash-out will make an already manageable stall behavior even
more pleasant. With wash-out beginning at the inboard end of the aileron,
you wouldn't need more than 1 deg or so at the tip (trailing edge up 1" at tip),
which would conveniently reduce the induced drag a little at climbing angle
of attack.
Yes, reducing the angle of attack toward the tips to implement the wash-out will
reduce the total wing lift slightly at the same angle of attack at the wing
root. However, the average reduction in angle of attack from the inboard end of
the aileron to the tip will be 1/2 deg and, since the aileron takes up a little
less than half the semispan, the net effect would be to require increasing
the wing incidence at the root by a little less than 1/4 deg. This is something
a builder starting from scratch may want to consider, but it's not too critical
because compensation can be made by adjusting the angle of the horizontal
stabilizer or changing the angle of the elevator (nice to have a trim tab in
the latter case).
There have been a number of airplanes with wing incidence adjustable in flight.
The ultimate was George Spratt's Control Wing, which has an airfoil with a positive
pitching moment, which allows the wing to pivot freely around a spanwise
hinge axis to accommodate changes in the relative wind. If you fly into a sharp-edged
updraft, the wing simply noses down on its own to maintain a constant
angle of attack. Since the wing has a lot less rotational inertia than the entire
airframe (fuselage, tail, and rigidly attached wing) and doesn't have to
wait for the horizontal tail to enter the gust, the g loads in turbulence are
reduced by about 75%.
http://speleotrove.com/wings/controlwing_plans.html
Hmmm..... That site's link to http://www.georgespratt.org/ kept timing out on me. Hopefully some or all of the links at this archive site will produce results:
http://web.archive.org/web/20090524180813/http://www.georgespratt.org/
--------
Bill Frank
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349140#349140
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 |
|
I had the condition inspection done on N8031 the other day. Almost felt
my wallet jump out of my back pocket when the left rear cylinder
wouldn't initially hold more than 30lbs of pressure, but after whacking
the valves with a rubber mallet and wiggling the prop back and forth a
little it came up to 70lbs. The engine was cold - I should have run her
a little to loosen up the rings. Live an' learn.
My A&P/IA says I should get 4 new bottom plugs. I've got Auburn 185T-8
plugs almost all the way around, but Auburn was sold to Champion a while
back so I probably won't be able to find those, again (maybe at Fresno
Air Parts...).
Does any other Continental pilot have any suggestions on what I should
get, instead?
Thanks!
Dan
--
Dan Yocum
Fermilab 630.840.6509
yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
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: Piet vs. GN-1 |
SteveR wrote:
> I have a GN-1, built (finished) in 1983. It has about 700 hours total time on
it, about 400 of those are mine. I've also flow "true" Piets, and they fly nearly
identical. My wing does have negative camber, and to me is visually identical
to the Piet wing.
>
> The wing is much higher than the Piet, which makes getting in and out much easier.
However, I wonder if this doesn't slow my plane down due to the elevator
being trimmed down to counteract the up-pitching moment from the wing's drag
being so far above the cg & thrustline (in addition to the up-pitching moment
of the wing itself).
Well, just playing devil's advocate here, but....
If your wing has negative camber, which I take to mean undercamber, then its pitching
moment is about the same as the infamous FC-10's, namely, a walloping big
dose of negative pitching moment. Since this means that the wing by itself
wants to pitch the whole airplane nose down, the increased nose up moment from
the higher placed wing may provide a better "counterbalance" to the wing's pitching
moment, thereby reducing the amount of downward lift required from the
horizontal tail to balance things out, thereby reducing the induced drag from
the horizontal tail, thereby....
INCREASING the cruising speed of your GN-1 !!!
By a tenth of a mile per hour or so. :D
--------
Bill Frank
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349143#349143
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: A65 spark plugs |
I use the REM-37BY projected nose plugs in my A-75. When I bought them
about 3 years ago they were Autolite/Unison and about $15 each.
Autolite stopped production and Tempest took over. Now they are about
$23. Champion's version is nearly $30.
The 37BY was made specifically for the C-152 with the O-235 I believe.
The projected nose design is to prevent lead fouling. It also results
in I believe about a 3%-5% increase in horsepower...I forget where I
read that. I thought those were both good things so that is what I am
using. I believe these are recommended for the O-320 and O-360 also.
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/eppages/temptestplugs8.php
Steve Ruse
Norman, OK
On Wed, 10 Aug 2011 13:50:59 -0500, Dan Yocum wrote:
>
> I had the condition inspection done on N8031 the other day. Almost
> felt my wallet jump out of my back pocket when the left rear cylinder
> wouldn't initially hold more than 30lbs of pressure, but after
> whacking the valves with a rubber mallet and wiggling the prop back
> and forth a little it came up to 70lbs. The engine was cold - I
> should have run her a little to loosen up the rings. Live an' learn.
>
> My A&P/IA says I should get 4 new bottom plugs. I've got Auburn
> 185T-8 plugs almost all the way around, but Auburn was sold to
> Champion a while back so I probably won't be able to find those,
> again
> (maybe at Fresno Air Parts...).
>
> Does any other Continental pilot have any suggestions on what I
> should get, instead?
>
> Thanks!
> Dan
>
> --
> Dan Yocum
> Fermilab 630.840.6509
> yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
> "I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
>
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: | EAA Forums - off topic |
I'm sure that many of you are already aware of this, but just in case the Pietenpol
mailing list isn't enough to entertain you through the day... the new EAA
Forums are finally up and running. Yes, it's true, they finally $#!tcanned the
Oshkosh365 forum and fired up a Vbulletin powered forum. Big improvement.
Anyhow... they were supposed to lite it up after Oshkosh, but it looks like it
went live in mid-July. There were ~400 members signed on yesterday... today there
are over 800. Hopefully it will be an active community for those that want
to share ideas and organize events.
www.eaaforums.org
Do not archive
--------
Mark Chouinard
Wings, Center Section and Empannage framed up - Working on Fuselage
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349147#349147
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 |
|
I'm slowly replacing the Unison plugs in my A65 with Champions. The
Champions cost more but seem to last much longer and resist fouling better.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
steve@wotelectronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 3:18 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: A65 spark plugs
I use the REM-37BY projected nose plugs in my A-75. When I bought them
about 3 years ago they were Autolite/Unison and about $15 each.
Autolite stopped production and Tempest took over. Now they are about
$23. Champion's version is nearly $30.
The 37BY was made specifically for the C-152 with the O-235 I believe.
The projected nose design is to prevent lead fouling. It also results
in I believe about a 3%-5% increase in horsepower...I forget where I
read that. I thought those were both good things so that is what I am
using. I believe these are recommended for the O-320 and O-360 also.
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/eppages/temptestplugs8.php
Steve Ruse
Norman, OK
On Wed, 10 Aug 2011 13:50:59 -0500, Dan Yocum wrote:
>
> I had the condition inspection done on N8031 the other day. Almost
> felt my wallet jump out of my back pocket when the left rear cylinder
> wouldn't initially hold more than 30lbs of pressure, but after
> whacking the valves with a rubber mallet and wiggling the prop back
> and forth a little it came up to 70lbs. The engine was cold - I
> should have run her a little to loosen up the rings. Live an' learn.
>
> My A&P/IA says I should get 4 new bottom plugs. I've got Auburn
> 185T-8 plugs almost all the way around, but Auburn was sold to
> Champion a while back so I probably won't be able to find those,
> again
> (maybe at Fresno Air Parts...).
>
> Does any other Continental pilot have any suggestions on what I
> should get, instead?
>
> Thanks!
> Dan
>
> --
> Dan Yocum
> Fermilab 630.840.6509
> yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
> "I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
>
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! --
|