Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 08:50 AM - Real world gross wt/useful load (Skagit)
2. 09:07 AM - Re: This came in the mail (aerocarjake)
3. 09:18 AM - Re: Real world gross wt/useful load (Perry Rhoads)
4. 10:39 AM - Re: Real world gross wt/useful load (Bill Church)
5. 11:11 AM - Re: Re: Real world gross wt/useful load (Dortch, Steven D MAJ NG NG NGB)
6. 11:30 AM - Re: Real world gross wt/useful load (Skagit)
7. 11:31 AM - Re: first flight (aerocarjake)
8. 11:41 AM - Re: Re: Real world gross wt/useful load (Dortch, Steven D MAJ NG NG NGB)
9. 12:51 PM - Re: Real world gross wt/useful load (Bill Church)
10. 02:35 PM - Re: Re: Real world gross wt/useful load (Jack Phillips)
11. 04:07 PM - Lightweight vs medium dacron... (Jim Markle)
12. 04:42 PM - Re: Lightweight vs medium dacron... (airlion)
13. 05:43 PM - Re: Lightweight vs medium dacron... (Ryan Mueller)
14. 06:47 PM - Re: Lightweight vs medium dacron.chiffon is nice too (AMsafetyC@aol.com)
15. 06:49 PM - Re: Lightweight vs medium dacron... (Dave Millikan)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Real world gross wt/useful load |
Hi all-
Doing due diligence on Piet's in preparation for a fall construction start.
I'm seeing a lot of useful loads of 450 lbs. or so, most using the C-65. That's
me, full fuel and...my 10 year old.
I'm thinking about doing a 100 HP Corvair, long fuse, brakes, starter, normal instrumentation.
Any way to reasonably predict useful load? I'd like to get to
530 lbs so I can take another adult pax with full fuel...any chance?
Home runway is 9000' X 150' paved but I will be hitting grass strips. :D
Rob
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=370371#370371
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: This came in the mail |
Wonderful.... And a wood plaque no less.....!
--------
Jake Schultz - curator,
Newport Way Air Museum (OK, it's just my home)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=370373#370373
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Real world gross wt/useful load |
Rob,
My Piet weighs 655 lbs. I weigh 230(sometimes more), and I have taken a 210
lb. passenger for a ride on a 2800' DA day. No problems at all. A-65, 690'
field elevation.
Perry Rhoads
N12939
----- Original Message -----
From: "Skagit" <ratkowskis@msn.com>
Sent: Monday, April 09, 2012 10:50 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Real world gross wt/useful load
>
> Hi all-
>
> Doing due diligence on Piet's in preparation for a fall construction
> start.
>
> I'm seeing a lot of useful loads of 450 lbs. or so, most using the C-65.
> That's me, full fuel and...my 10 year old.
>
> I'm thinking about doing a 100 HP Corvair, long fuse, brakes, starter,
> normal instrumentation. Any way to reasonably predict useful load? I'd
> like to get to 530 lbs so I can take another adult pax with full
> fuel...any chance?
>
> Home runway is 9000' X 150' paved but I will be hitting grass strips. :D
>
> Rob
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=370371#370371
>
>
>
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Real world gross wt/useful load |
Rob,
The most effective way to maximize the load-carrying capacity of a Piet is to build
it as lightly as possible. If you can keep the empty weight down to 600 lbs
or less, even with a 65HP Continental, your passenger carrying capacity will
most likely be restricted to those that can get themselves into the front seat
(but also depending on the size of the pilot, of course). If you build a heavy
aircraft, you can compensate somewhat by adding more power, but the aircraft
may not perform so well, due to being heavier. The only other real option is
to reduce the weight of the pilot/passenger.
Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=370380#370380
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Real world gross wt/useful load |
I will take some flak for this but the second best way to maximize the load carrying
capability is to lose fat! I lost 30 lbs and my wife lost 15. That is 45
lbs of useful load! Now I have gained 15 back but she has lost 5 more. So we
are still able to carry 35 more pounds than last year!
My experience is that after 40 years old, exercise is important and helps lose
weight and maintain health, but it is much less effective than it was before I
was 40. The best way to lose weight is Diet, Diet , Diet Diet. Eat a lot of protein,
good veggies and cut calories. Eat 5 or 6 smaller meals per day if possible.
Breakfast like a king. Lunch like a Prince and Supper like a pauper. I
eat a big egg substitute and turkey sausage breakfast, a mid morning snack, a
good sized lunch, an afternoon snack, a good but light supper and a snack before
bed. The snacks are usually cliff or protein bars. Before bed I have a protein
drink.
Eating colorful helps. I eat good food, but cut way down on bread and other high
carb foods. I eat some fat, but nothing high in fat. Lots of vitimins and minerals.
LOTs and Lots of protein.
Remember the LSA max weight is 1320. I am sure that none of you would go over that,
the plane will explode into flames.
Y'all be careful out there.
Blue Skies,
Steve D
True confessions, My real weaknesses are Icecream, Chips and salsa (Salsa is Good,
Chips are bad!) BBQ (meat is Good, Sugary sauce is bad.) and fat laden sausage.
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Church <billspiet@sympatico.ca>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Real world gross wt/useful load
>
> Rob,
>
> The most effective way to maximize the load-carrying capacity of a Piet is to
build it as lightly as possible. If you can keep the empty weight
> down to 600 lbs or less, even with a 65HP Continental, your
> passenger carrying capacity will most likely be restricted to those
> that can get themselves into the front seat (but also depending on
> the size of the pilot, of course). If you build a heavy aircraft,
> you can compensate somewhat by adding more power, but the aircraft
> may not perform so well, due to being heavier. The only other real
> option is to reduce the weight of the pilot/passenger.
>
> Bill C.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=370380#370380
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Real world gross wt/useful load |
Hey Steve, I'm with ya buddy. I could stand to lose 25 or so and, you're right,
it doesn't get any easier as I get older. Gone are the days of losing 30 pounds
in 3 months...
This may be a subject for a new thread, but what are the easiest ways to trim down
the weight on the Piet?
Rob
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=370384#370384
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: first flight |
Congratulations...! VERY cool......!
do not archive
--------
Jake Schultz - curator,
Newport Way Air Museum (OK, it's just my home)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=370386#370386
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Real world gross wt/useful load |
How about Ping Pong balls?
Ducking and running!
Steve D
----- Original Message -----
From: Skagit <ratkowskis@msn.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Real world gross wt/useful load
>
> Hey Steve, I'm with ya buddy. I could stand to lose 25 or so and, you're right,
it doesn't get any easier as I get older. Gone are the
> days of losing 30 pounds in 3 months...
>
> This may be a subject for a new thread, but what are the easiest
> ways to trim down the weight on the Piet?
>
> Rob
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=370384#370384
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Real world gross wt/useful load |
I think ping pong balls are very low in carbs.
BC
do not archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=370393#370393
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: Real world gross wt/useful load |
Easiest way to trim down the weight of a Piet is to get a smaller pilot.
But seriously, the easiest way to trim weight is to build it to the plans,
and avoid the following items which I added to mine and regret (most of
them)
1. Use the split axle "Cub Style" (I don't like that term since it
pre-dated the Cub by several years) gear with small, light wheels. I have
wire wheels and a straight axle on mine and they add probably 20 lbs over
the split axle gear. I like the look of the wire wheels, but that look
comes with a price that I can't carry passengers out of short fields on hot
days
2. Build the short fuselage and don't add any extra width to it. I'm 6' 2"
and 200 lbs, so I naturally built the long fuselage, and added an inch to
its width. Probably added another 20 lbs, with the extra spruce, plywood,
fabric and paint. Totally unnecesary. I have flown Mike Cuy's Piet with
its short fuselage and fit in it just fine. And I flew Ryan Mueller's/John
Hofmann's Pietenpol from Tennessee to Brodhead fitting in it just fine (and
by the way, it is the archetype of what I was saying earlier - build it to
the plans just like that Pietenpol, N502R, which John calls
"Five-Oh-Two-Rocket").
3. Use the lightweight grade of dacron fabric, at least for the tail and
fuselage. I would use it for the entire airplane. Not only is the fabric
itself lighter, but it takes less PolyBrush or dope or whatever system you
are using to fill the weave. Would probably save at least 10 lbs.
4. DO NOT USE POLYURETHANE PAINT. It looks nice, but it is expensive, very
difficult to repair (and yes, if you own your plane long enough you will
need to repair the fabric at some point), and it is VERY heavy. Because it
is difficult to apply, I ended up with several coats on the fuselage. I
weighed my plane before covering and after painting and was appalled to find
that in the covering and painting process it gained 65 lbs. Most of that
was paint.
5. Don't add a radio or a transponder or a battery or any of those
"improvements", but if you always fly with a handheld radio, figure it into
your empty weight.
Mine weighs 745 lbs empty, so it weighs about 110 lbs more than I had
estimated when I was building it. As was stated before, if you can keep the
weight down to around 600 - 650 lbs, you will have a fine flying airplane.
Mine flies well, but its climb is not spectacular. I have to cross the Blue
Ridge Mountains and the Allegheny Mountains each year on the way to Brodhead
and there have been times that I've been struggling to get over a 5,000'
ridge climbing at max rate of climb and losing altitude in a downdraft. Not
fun.
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 Skagit
Sent: Monday, April 09, 2012 2:29 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Real world gross wt/useful load
Hey Steve, I'm with ya buddy. I could stand to lose 25 or so and, you're
right, it doesn't get any easier as I get older. Gone are the days of
losing 30 pounds in 3 months...
This may be a subject for a new thread, but what are the easiest ways to
trim down the weight on the Piet?
Rob
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=370384#370384
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Lightweight vs medium dacron... |
Would it make sense to use lightweight everywhere (which is what I am using) but
beef up the fuse bottom a bit by covering it with medium weight? I keep imagining
landing in a field with sticks and stuff sticking up through the bottom
of that lightweight covering.
Would it actually be more "puncture proof" than the light weight material? (I'm
thinking not...)
Jim in Pryor....
>3. Use the lightweight grade of dacron fabric, at least for the tail and
>fuselage. I would use it for the entire airplane. Not only is the fabric
>itself lighter, but it takes less PolyBrush or dope or whatever system you
>are using to fill the weave. Would probably save at least 10 lbs.
>
>
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: Lightweight vs medium dacron... |
I used the light weight fabric thruout and you would be amazed at how strong it
is under two coats of latex. And that is what I am am going to do on my
rebuild. I am almost ready to cover my two new wings. Also I have aluminium
panels on the bottom of fuse for access.
My tail feathers are covered. Hopefully everything will be ready to fly for
Brodhead. If not then I will drive. Cheers, Gardiner Mason
----- Original Message ----
From: Jim Markle <jim_markle@mindspring.com>
Sent: Mon, April 9, 2012 7:06:45 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Lightweight vs medium dacron...
Would it make sense to use lightweight everywhere (which is what I am using) but
beef up the fuse bottom a bit by covering it with medium weight? I keep
imagining landing in a field with sticks and stuff sticking up through the
bottom of that lightweight covering.
Would it actually be more "puncture proof" than the light weight material? (I'm
thinking not...)
Jim in Pryor....
>3. Use the lightweight grade of dacron fabric, at least for the tail and
>fuselage. I would use it for the entire airplane. Not only is the fabric
>itself lighter, but it takes less PolyBrush or dope or whatever system you
>are using to fill the weave. Would probably save at least 10 lbs.
>
>
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: Lightweight vs medium dacron... |
Simple solution....avoid runways ridden with pungee sticks...you should be
fine... :)
Ryan
do not archive
On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Jim Markle <jim_markle@mindspring.com>wrote:
> jim_markle@mindspring.com>
>
> Would it make sense to use lightweight everywhere (which is what I am
> using) but beef up the fuse bottom a bit by covering it with medium weight?
> I keep imagining landing in a field with sticks and stuff sticking up
> through the bottom of that lightweight covering.
>
> Would it actually be more "puncture proof" than the light weight material?
> (I'm thinking not...)
>
> Jim in Pryor....
>
>
> >3. Use the lightweight grade of dacron fabric, at least for the tail and
> >fuselage. I would use it for the entire airplane. Not only is the fabric
> >itself lighter, but it takes less PolyBrush or dope or whatever system you
> >are using to fill the weave. Would probably save at least 10 lbs.
> >
> >
>
>
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Lightweight vs medium dacron.chiffon is nice too |
I am thinking Jim, the Pink Chiffon with a clutch and flats is all the
fashion statement you need to make. We've all see the legs, not much to right
home about so a Tee length would be the most revealing anyone will be able
to handle. Dacron wrinkles too easily and by the end of the evening you'll
look like you slept in that dress plus the heavier weight will only make you
perspire more and will really show in your under garments. Naturally
cotton is the choice as it breaths with you and much cooler even in the hot sun
so not as much a potential to end up with those hard to get out
perspiration stains.
I think the pink chiffon flats and a clutch bag, consider accessorizing
with peals, simple, cute and not over done. You will be everyone's choice for
a dance partner at the Brodhead cotillion this year, you'll be surprised
just how quickly you dance card will fill in a simple pink outfit. You are
sure to be a hit at the fishboil formal!
Pink Chiffon, says yes to me! This will be our secret, the word gets out
and everyone will want to copy your look. We know how those kind of people
are. remember less is more simple and understated is perfection walking
Do not Archive
John
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Lightweight vs medium dacron... |
I have a Starduster Too covered with Stits 90X
its no longer made, but I've had no problems.
Dave
--- On Tue, 4/10/12, Ryan Mueller <rmueller23@gmail.com> wrote:
From: Ryan Mueller <rmueller23@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Lightweight vs medium dacron...
Simple solution....avoid runways ridden with pungee sticks...you should be
fine... -:)
Ryan
do not archive
On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Jim Markle <jim_markle@mindspring.com> wrot
e:
>
Would it make sense to use lightweight everywhere (which is what I am using
) but beef up the fuse bottom a bit by covering it with medium weight? -I
keep imagining landing in a field with sticks and stuff sticking up throug
h the bottom of that lightweight covering.
Would it actually be more "puncture proof" than the light weight material?
-(I'm thinking not...)
Jim in Pryor....
>3. -Use the lightweight grade of dacron fabric, at least for the tail an
d
>fuselage. -I would use it for the entire airplane. -Not only is the fa
bric
>itself lighter, but it takes less PolyBrush or dope or whatever system you
>are using to fill the weave. -Would probably save at least 10 lbs.
>
>
st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
http://forums.matronics.com
le, List Admin.
="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|