Pietenpol-List Digest Archive

Thu 03/19/15


Total Messages Posted: 40



Today's Message Index:
----------------------
 
     1. 05:16 AM - Re: Re: Frustrating day of study (Jack Philips)
     2. 06:04 AM - Finding your own balance on expense vs investment (William Wynne)
     3. 06:08 AM - Re: Re: Frustrating day of study (Jack)
     4. 06:10 AM - Re: Re: Frustrating day of study (Gardiner Mason)
     5. 06:17 AM - Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment (William Wynne)
     6. 06:19 AM - engine failure (Douwe Blumberg)
     7. 06:28 AM - Re: engine failure (Gary Boothe)
     8. 06:37 AM - Re: engine failure (William Wynne)
     9. 06:39 AM - Re: engine failure (William Wynne)
    10. 08:13 AM - Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment (Jack Philips)
    11. 08:26 AM - Re: Frustrating day of study (Jeff Boatright)
    12. 08:32 AM - new crank costs  (Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-LME0)[Vantage Partners, LLC])
    13. 09:31 AM - Re: new crank costs (William Wynne)
    14. 09:44 AM - Re: Re: Frustrating day of study (Ben Charvet)
    15. 09:47 AM - Re: BRS in a Piet? (Andy Garrett)
    16. 10:08 AM - Re: Frustrating day of study (William Wynne)
    17. 10:34 AM - Re: Re: Frustrating day of study (Steven Dortch)
    18. 10:40 AM - Re: Frustrating day of study (Andy Garrett)
    19. 11:20 AM - Re: Frustrating day of study (K5YAC)
    20. 11:35 AM - Re: Frustrating day of study (AircamperN11MS)
    21. 11:46 AM - Re: Frustrating day of study (Andy Garrett)
    22. 02:18 PM - Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment (Andy Garrett)
    23. 02:18 PM - Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment (William Wynne)
    24. 02:48 PM - Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment (William Wynne)
    25. 03:09 PM - Jack's new Piet (Douwe Blumberg)
    26. 04:53 PM - Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment (Andy Garrett)
    27. 05:45 PM - Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment (jarheadpilot82)
    28. 06:14 PM - New Piet. Builder! (tonyp51qa)
    29. 06:24 PM - Re: Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment (Steven Dortch)
    30. 06:33 PM - Re: New Piet. Builder! (Steven Dortch)
    31. 06:34 PM - Re: New Piet. Builder! (glenschweizer@yahoo.com)
    32. 06:37 PM - Re: Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment (glenschweizer@yahoo.com)
    33. 06:41 PM - Re: Jack's new Piet (Jack)
    34. 06:48 PM - Re: New Piet. Builder! (Gary Boothe)
    35. 07:00 PM - Bob Parks Cub and Pete Bowers Pietenpol in 1969... (aerocarjake)
    36. 07:11 PM - Re: Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment (Jack)
    37. 07:15 PM - Re: New Piet. Builder! (aviken)
    38. 08:29 PM - Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment (William Wynne)
    39. 09:54 PM - Re: New Piet. Builder! (Michael Groah)
    40. 10:03 PM - Longtime listener first time call back again(In new and improved Technicolor) (benjamin piet)
 
 
 


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
    Time: 05:16:11 AM PST US
    From: "Jack Philips" <jack@bedfordlandings.com>
    Subject: Re: Frustrating day of study
    Even though I=99m not a Corvair guy, I will weigh in on this one. The Corvair was designed to be an automobile engine. It has proven to be adaptable to be used in an aircraft, but one area that is somewhat weak is its crankshaft. An auto engine crankshaft does not encounter the huge gyroscopic loads that a spinning propeller induces. Hence, auto engines typically have crankshaft bearing that are perhaps an inch or two long. Even a low powered aircraft engine like a Continental A65 has a much longer front bearing, as shown below: If you plan to use a Corvair, doesn=99t it just make sense to follow the advice of William Wynne, who has pretty much devoted his life to modifying and studying these engines? Sure, it=99s an experimental aircraft and no one can make you do anything to decrease risk or increase safety, but we would all be remiss if we don=99t at least encourage you to follow the path with the greatest safety. Jack Phillips NX899JP Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael Groah Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2015 9:49 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Frustrating day of study To answer your question I was using a Chevrolet crank that had been magnafluxed, machined and nitrided by the provider recommended by WW. I felt at the time this gave me the best possible non-5th bearing crank. It really sounds like you've already decided not to use a 5th bearing but I really do urge you to reconsider. As Gary mentioned it will be some time before you need that part and you can save up the cash. It took me four and a half years to finish my plane. Lets say you go with the $1100 retrofit 5th bearing as Gary did and you need it in three years. That's only about $30 a month you'll need to save. Leave out the coffee, 32 oz from the mini mart or be the DD instead of having a beer when out with the guys. The sacrafice will be no fun but flying your own Pietenpol without having to worry about the crank will be. _____ From: Andy Garrett <andy_garrett@live.com <mailto:andy_garrett@live.com> > Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2015 4:49 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Frustrating day of study <andy_garrett@live.com <mailto:andy_garrett@live.com> > Mike, your response is appreciated and somewhat expected. It echos much of the published opinion regarding the 5th bearing. Still..., it's the sweeping statements like "should be considered mandatory" that make me cringe. That means that if I make a different choice then I will indeed be 'that guy'. It's hard to dispute a personal experience like yours, though. May I ask what crank you were using when it broke? Who did the work to it? Still, 48 years of success on who knows how many Piets... That makes me feel vindicated in my hesitance if not my ultimate decision. How many Piets are flying with 5th bearings anyway? How many of each type? What issues have they had if any? Malcom, love your response! Your points are spot on about the endless debate over expenditures. I ran into much of that during my boat build. In fact, that is probably working against me here. I went frugal (not cheap) on pretty much everything with that and have had no problems. -------- Andy Garrett 'General Purpose Creative Dude' Haysville, Kansas Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p/www.matronics.com/Navigator?Piete npol-List <http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439564#439564> " target="_blank">http://www.m -Matt Dralle, List Admin.======


    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
    Time: 06:04:59 AM PST US
    Subject: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment
    From: "William Wynne" <WilliamTCA@aol.com>
    Andy, Asking questions is good, it is how you learn. But do stop and think, today you are objecting to a $1050 5th bearing on a Corvair, which will be in operation every single revolution of the crank, but yesterdays question was on multi thousand dollar BRS that hopefully will never be used. Keep working toward a more balanced perspective...... ------------------------------------------------ I spoke with Andrew Pietenpol, BHP's Grandson on the phone for an hour last night. Subject: BHP lived in very hard times, in an area that was known for hard times. Neither he, nor his neighbors was ever prosperus by any national standard, Yet the man had the will to build and fly his creations. Andrew stated that his grandfather was a very, very tough guy who worked so hard he had a heart attack in his 40's. Few of us could fathom the chain of working days in the man's life. Maybe a guy making minimum wage has a much better chance of seeing the world through BHP's eyes. Read my take on Sterling Hayden's famous quote on being able to afford adventure here: http://flycorvair.net/2012/02/03/sterling-hayden-philosophy/ --------------------------------------------------------- Andrew Shared that in 1946-50 it cost about $1,000 to build a Piet. By my guess, that was an astronomical amount of money in post war rural Minnesota, and earning $32K/year now makes one comparatively very wealthy today. ------------------------------------------------------------- Here is my perspective: Aviation costs money. About the least expensive plane I can picture has an all up cost of $10,000. Lets say that you take 8 years to build it, thats $1,250/year or $3 and 42 cents a day. If you smoke or drink coffee, you spend a lot more than this. Dont like to hear about 8 years? Want to change that? Here is the easy way: Do nothing this year, and next year it will be nine years. $20 a day for 3 years is $21,900. For that kind of money you can have many airplanes. Being wealthy isnt the key, getting started is. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Most people who quit, do so because they lost interest or motivation. Very few people actually quit because they ran out of money. It this was the case, the projects for sale would all have every bit of the detailed labor done, but you never see them for sale that way. Thus it is foolish to look for ways to save money, but spend little time figuring out how to stay motivated. Figuring out what "recharges the motivation battery" is much more important than looking for deals For some of us it is hanging out with a guy wearing a sock money hat standing bare chested in the prop blast at 35 degrees. ----------------------------------------------------------------- When I flew my Piet to Brodhead in 2000, I worked as a GA A&P self employed mechanic and made about $12K in a bad year, $15K in a good one. To save money then, I did things like drive a 1986 Chevy truck. Today, 15 years later, I still drive a 1986 Chevy truck. 180 car payments I never made since then has paid for a giant amount of building and flying. -------------------------------------------------------- P F Beck's Piet pictured here: http://flycorvair.net/2013/01/11/pietenpol-review-in-pictures-15-more-corvair-powered-piets/ was built for $6,800 including the electric start Corvair. With a 5th bearing, this is still less than $8K. It has flown more than 250 passengers. It has been the door to Pietenpols for many people, and an inspirational example for cloning: http://flycorvair.net/2013/01/17/nwe-pietenpol-2700-corvair-don-harper-sc/ ---------------------------------------------------------- If your piet has brakes, paint that cost more than $20/gallon, a radio, any kind of an interior, but it does not have a 5th bearing, then IMHO, you are making a value-judgment error. That is just my opinion, but it is based on a lot of observation. Read: http://flycorvair.net/2013/04/20/risk-management-judgement-error-money-in-the-wrong-place/ -------------------------------------------------------------- This story was the #2 most read story on our main site in 2014: http://flycorvair.net/2012/11/17/steel-tube-fuselages-safe-planes-and-250mph-accidents/ Read it and develop some values about where to put your money in your project. (The story is not against any method of construction, it is about how the right answer is situational and personal). ------------------------------------------------------ The comments that most people who are not yet flying a Corvair powered plane make about Piet's not needing 5th bearings are either not valid, or situationally not true, taken out of context. The only Piet motor we have built in 8 years without a 5th bearing is the one for "the last original" Bill Knight decided that it was vitally important that the engine stay externally as a BHP installation. (inside it is all modern stuff) We had a very specially inspected, nitride, low mileage crank prepped for the engine by Moldex Cranks in Detroit. The one that comes in most cores, is not nearly in this good condition. No local crank grinder and prep and NDT a crank like Moldex Read: http://flycorvair.net/2013/01/16/getting-started-in-2013-part-1-crankshaft-process-options/ To come to some conclusion like 'it worked for 45 years, it will work for me today' and then taking the crank to a local machine shop that destroys the radius in the fillets, ignores the critical fact that almost none of the cranks in the early planes were reground. They were original. Regrinding works just like new, but only when it is done by people who make it just like new. If you don't have that, you don't have what the early guys had, and you will not have the same results. ---------------------------------------------------------- VERY IMPORTANT: Isaac Newton didn't invent gravity. He didn't make anything. All he did was observe what was going on, and find a way of speaking articulately of it that allowed people a much better perspective on how things work. Connection: Builders occasionally talk about 'the ww philosophy" as is I invented something that didn't exist before. That isn't factual. In reality, I am just doing a tiny version of what Newton did, which is observe what is happening for a long time, see it though many sets of eyes, and then discuss it in an articulate way that allows builders to form a sharper personal perspective. That is where both this: http://flycorvair.net/2015/01/12/thought-for-the-day-collection/ and this page http://flycorvair.net/2014/01/21/risk-management-reference-page/ come from. -ww. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439584#439584


    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
    Time: 06:08:41 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: Frustrating day of study
    From: Jack <jack@textors.com>
    On the 85 too http://textors.com/IMG_4766_640x427.jpg Other pictures of my C85 build can be seen here http://textors.com/PietProje ct.html Sent from my iPad Jack Textor > On Mar 19, 2015, at 7:15 AM, "Jack Philips" <jack@bedfordlandings.com> wro te: > > Even though I=99m not a Corvair guy, I will weigh in on this one. T he Corvair was designed to be an automobile engine. It has proven to be ada ptable to be used in an aircraft, but one area that is somewhat weak is its c rankshaft. An auto engine crankshaft does not encounter the huge gyroscopic loads that a spinning propeller induces. Hence, auto engines typically hav e crankshaft bearing that are perhaps an inch or two long. Even a low power ed aircraft engine like a Continental A65 has a much longer front bearing, a s shown below: > > <image003.jpg> > > If you plan to use a Corvair, doesn=99t it just make sense to follow the advice of William Wynne, who has pretty much devoted his life to modify ing and studying these engines? Sure, it=99s an experimental aircraft and no one can make you do anything to decrease risk or increase safety, bu t we would all be remiss if we don=99t at least encourage you to follo w the path with the greatest safety. > > Jack Phillips > NX899JP > Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia > > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-li st-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael Groah > Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2015 9:49 PM > To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Frustrating day of study > > To answer your question I was using a Chevrolet crank that had been magnaf luxed, machined and nitrided by the provider recommended by WW. I felt at t he time this gave me the best possible non-5th bearing crank. > > It really sounds like you've already decided not to use a 5th bearing but I really do urge you to reconsider. As Gary mentioned it will be some time b efore you need that part and you can save up the cash. It took me four and a half years to finish my plane. Lets say you go with the $1100 retrofit 5th bearing as Gary did and you need it in three years. That's only about $30 a month you'll need to save. Leave out the coffee, 32 oz from the mini mart o r be the DD instead of having a beer when out with the guys. The sacrafice w ill be no fun but flying your own Pietenpol without having to worry about th e crank will be. > > From: Andy Garrett <andy_garrett@live.com> > To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com > Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2015 4:49 PM > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Frustrating day of study > m> > > Mike, your response is appreciated and somewhat expected. It echos much of the published opinion regarding the 5th bearing. Still..., it's the sweepin g statements like "should be considered mandatory" that make me cringe. That means that if I make a different choice then I will indeed be 'that guy'. I t's hard to dispute a personal experience like yours, though. May I ask what crank you were using when it broke? Who did the work to it? > > Still, 48 years of success on who knows how many Piets... That makes me fe el vindicated in my hesitance if not my ultimate decision. How many Piets ar e flying with 5th bearings anyway? How many of each type? What issues have t hey had if any? > > Malcom, love your response! Your points are spot on about the endless deba te over expenditures. I ran into much of that during my boat build. In fact, that is probably working against me here. I went frugal (not cheap) on pret ty much everything with that and have had no problems. > > -------- > Andy Garrett > 'General Purpose Creative Dude' > Haysville, Kansas > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p/www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pieten pol-List" target="_blank">http://www.m -Matt Dralle, List Ad min.====== > > > > > > > > > > http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List > http://forums.matronics.com > http://www.matronics.com/contribution >


    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
    Time: 06:10:52 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: Frustrating day of study
    From: Gardiner Mason <airlion2@gmail.com>
    Very good explanation Jack and I agree with you. Gardiner. Sent from my iPad > On Mar 19, 2015, at 8:15 AM, "Jack Philips" <jack@bedfordlandings.com> wro te: > > Even though I=99m not a Corvair guy, I will weigh in on this one. T he Corvair was designed to be an automobile engine. It has proven to be ada ptable to be used in an aircraft, but one area that is somewhat weak is its c rankshaft. An auto engine crankshaft does not encounter the huge gyroscopic loads that a spinning propeller induces. Hence, auto engines typically hav e crankshaft bearing that are perhaps an inch or two long. Even a low power ed aircraft engine like a Continental A65 has a much longer front bearing, a s shown below: > > <image003.jpg> > > If you plan to use a Corvair, doesn=99t it just make sense to follow the advice of William Wynne, who has pretty much devoted his life to modify ing and studying these engines? Sure, it=99s an experimental aircraft and no one can make you do anything to decrease risk or increase safety, bu t we would all be remiss if we don=99t at least encourage you to follo w the path with the greatest safety. > > Jack Phillips > NX899JP > Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia > > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-li st-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael Groah > Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2015 9:49 PM > To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Frustrating day of study > > To answer your question I was using a Chevrolet crank that had been magnaf luxed, machined and nitrided by the provider recommended by WW. I felt at t he time this gave me the best possible non-5th bearing crank. > > It really sounds like you've already decided not to use a 5th bearing but I really do urge you to reconsider. As Gary mentioned it will be some time b efore you need that part and you can save up the cash. It took me four and a half years to finish my plane. Lets say you go with the $1100 retrofit 5th bearing as Gary did and you need it in three years. That's only about $30 a month you'll need to save. Leave out the coffee, 32 oz from the mini mart o r be the DD instead of having a beer when out with the guys. The sacrafice w ill be no fun but flying your own Pietenpol without having to worry about th e crank will be. > > From: Andy Garrett <andy_garrett@live.com> > To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com > Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2015 4:49 PM > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Frustrating day of study > m> > > Mike, your response is appreciated and somewhat expected. It echos much of the published opinion regarding the 5th bearing. Still..., it's the sweepin g statements like "should be considered mandatory" that make me cringe. That means that if I make a different choice then I will indeed be 'that guy'. I t's hard to dispute a personal experience like yours, though. May I ask what crank you were using when it broke? Who did the work to it? > > Still, 48 years of success on who knows how many Piets... That makes me fe el vindicated in my hesitance if not my ultimate decision. How many Piets ar e flying with 5th bearings anyway? How many of each type? What issues have t hey had if any? > > Malcom, love your response! Your points are spot on about the endless deba te over expenditures. I ran into much of that during my boat build. In fact, that is probably working against me here. I went frugal (not cheap) on pret ty much everything with that and have had no problems. > > -------- > Andy Garrett > 'General Purpose Creative Dude' > Haysville, Kansas > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p/www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pieten pol-List" target="_blank">http://www.m -Matt Dralle, List Ad min.====== > > > > > > > > > > http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List > http://forums.matronics.com > http://www.matronics.com/contribution >


    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
    Time: 06:17:01 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment
    From: "William Wynne" <WilliamTCA@aol.com>
    Let me tag on this thought: http://flycorvair.net/2014/06/16/thought-for-the-day-the-cost-of-economy/ Doing things the right way usually costs a fair amount of money, but doing them the cheap way always costs a fortune. -ww. ------------------------------- A conspicuous consumer only has the admiration of the envious spectator. A craftsman, an innovator and a champion have the admiration of real aviators. I have not devoted my working life to experimental aviation to chase pointless trends and distractions. I am in aviation to find my place in the timeless truths that any real aviator since 1903 would immediately understand. Charles Lindbergh passed from this earth in 1974 having never seen a glass cockpit. His understanding of the awe inspiring beauty of flight was not diminished by the lack of a little screen to stare at. This is a good way to evaluate the essential from the accessory. -ww. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439589#439589


    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
    Time: 06:19:29 AM PST US
    From: "Douwe Blumberg" <douweblumberg@earthlink.net>
    Subject: engine failure
    Douwe Jack's engine-out story reminded me to ask. What turned out to be the issue which forced down the Piet trying to fly out to Brodhead from CA last year? Never heard much about it, but as always, sharing engine-out details is EXTREMELY helpful as is how they dealt with the landing. If anyone knows details, I'd sure be interested. Douwe


    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
    Time: 06:28:23 AM PST US
    From: Gary Boothe <gboothe5@comcast.net>
    Subject: Re: engine failure
    As I recall, and to be brief, Chinese lifters. Gary Sent from my iPad > On Mar 19, 2015, at 6:20 AM, Douwe Blumberg <douweblumberg@earthlink.net> w rote: > > Douwe > > Jack=99s engine-out story reminded me to ask > > What turned out to be the issue which forced down the Piet trying to fly o ut to Brodhead from CA last year? Never heard much about it, but as always, sharing engine-out details is EXTREMELY helpful as is how they dealt with t he landing. > > If anyone knows details, I=99d sure be interested. > > Douwe > > 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >


    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
    Time: 06:37:24 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: engine failure
    From: "William Wynne" <WilliamTCA@aol.com>
    Dowe, The guys who are partners in the plane drove the rest of the way to Oshkosh, and I spoke with them in person at my booth and looked at all of their photos 3 days after the incident. The issue with the plane was the carb, and it was the same kind of carb that is on your Continental. The plane was flown a 150 mile leg with the engine running progressively worse. It flew all the way to the airport, but the partner/pilot made a tense landing at an unfamiliar paved airport, probably landing down wind. Worked ok, right up to the point the airplane went over on its back. I had seen this plane in person in CA, spoken with the builders, done a W&B on it before it was covered, etc. Two lessons anyone can learn: When I tell someone that their landing gear is way too far back for a plane with brakes, they should listen. I said that to the owner at Brodhead after I weighed it, and it also has the CG too far aft. It would have been easy to fix then. Second, They had 'get there itus' about continuing the flight with existing evidence the carb was not correct. A factor was they had told many people they were going to be at Brodhead, etc, when your plane is not running correctly, STOP and fix it. Dowe, I like to give people the beinift of the doubt, but I suspect you have some angle here because you started a new topic here called "engine failure" about something 9 months old. Something that wasn't an engine failure at all. Can you explain you sudden motivation on this? Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439594#439594


    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
    Time: 06:39:24 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: engine failure
    From: "William Wynne" <WilliamTCA@aol.com>
    Gary, Those guys also broke a Chinese rocker arm on a separate issue, but it didn't cause the engine to quit. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439595#439595


    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
    Time: 08:13:40 AM PST US
    From: "Jack Philips" <jack@bedfordlandings.com>
    Subject: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment
    Andy I agree with William 100% on this. I spared no expense when I built my Pietenpol, using all aircraft grade materials, polyurethane paint (big mistake), a freshly overhauled A65 Continental with brand new Millenium cylinders (the single largest purchase on the entire project), etc. The total was $15,000 of which half was the engine (and half of the engine was those new cylinders). It took me 8 years to build it. I like to tell people I spent on this airplane what a 2 pack a day smoker would have spent on cigarettes in the same time frame. Don't fret over spending money on high risk areas, like spars and crankshafts. Far better to delay the project a few months while you save the money to buy that 5th bearing or that aircraft-grade spruce spar than to rush through it and then worry every time you get bounced around in turbulence. Peace of mind is priceless. 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 William Wynne Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2015 9:05 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment --> <WilliamTCA@aol.com> Andy, Asking questions is good, it is how you learn. But do stop and think, today you are objecting to a $1050 5th bearing on a Corvair, which will be in operation every single revolution of the crank, but yesterdays question was on multi thousand dollar BRS that hopefully will never be used. Keep working toward a more balanced perspective...... ------------------------------------------------ I spoke with Andrew Pietenpol, BHP's Grandson on the phone for an hour last night. Subject: BHP lived in very hard times, in an area that was known for hard times. Neither he, nor his neighbors was ever prosperus by any national standard, Yet the man had the will to build and fly his creations. Andrew stated that his grandfather was a very, very tough guy who worked so hard he had a heart attack in his 40's. Few of us could fathom the chain of working days in the man's life. Maybe a guy making minimum wage has a much better chance of seeing the world through BHP's eyes. Read my take on Sterling Hayden's famous quote on being able to afford adventure here: http://flycorvair.net/2012/02/03/sterling-hayden-philosophy/ --------------------------------------------------------- Andrew Shared that in 1946-50 it cost about $1,000 to build a Piet. By my guess, that was an astronomical amount of money in post war rural Minnesota, and earning $32K/year now makes one comparatively very wealthy today. ------------------------------------------------------------- Here is my perspective: Aviation costs money. About the least expensive plane I can picture has an all up cost of $10,000. Lets say that you take 8 years to build it, thats $1,250/year or $3 and 42 cents a day. If you smoke or drink coffee, you spend a lot more than this. Dont like to hear about 8 years? Want to change that? Here is the easy way: Do nothing this year, and next year it will be nine years. $20 a day for 3 years is $21,900. For that kind of money you can have many airplanes. Being wealthy isnt the key, getting started is. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Most people who quit, do so because they lost interest or motivation. Very few people actually quit because they ran out of money. It this was the case, the projects for sale would all have every bit of the detailed labor done, but you never see them for sale that way. Thus it is foolish to look for ways to save money, but spend little time figuring out how to stay motivated. Figuring out what "recharges the motivation battery" is much more important than looking for deals For some of us it is hanging out with a guy wearing a sock money hat standing bare chested in the prop blast at 35 degrees. ----------------------------------------------------------------- When I flew my Piet to Brodhead in 2000, I worked as a GA A&P self employed mechanic and made about $12K in a bad year, $15K in a good one. To save money then, I did things like drive a 1986 Chevy truck. Today, 15 years later, I still drive a 1986 Chevy truck. 180 car payments I never made since then has paid for a giant amount of building and flying. -------------------------------------------------------- P F Beck's Piet pictured here: http://flycorvair.net/2013/01/11/pietenpol-review-in-pictures-15-more-corvair-powered-piets/ was built for $6,800 including the electric start Corvair. With a 5th bearing, this is still less than $8K. It has flown more than 250 passengers. It has been the door to Pietenpols for many people, and an inspirational example for cloning: http://flycorvair.net/2013/01/17/nwe-pietenpol-2700-corvair-don-harper-sc/ ---------------------------------------------------------- If your piet has brakes, paint that cost more than $20/gallon, a radio, any kind of an interior, but it does not have a 5th bearing, then IMHO, you are making a value-judgment error. That is just my opinion, but it is based on a lot of observation. Read: http://flycorvair.net/2013/04/20/risk-management-judgement-error-money-in-the-wrong-place/ -------------------------------------------------------------- This story was the #2 most read story on our main site in 2014: http://flycorvair.net/2012/11/17/steel-tube-fuselages-safe-planes-and-250mph-accidents/ Read it and develop some values about where to put your money in your project. (The story is not against any method of construction, it is about how the right answer is situational and personal). ------------------------------------------------------ The comments that most people who are not yet flying a Corvair powered plane make about Piet's not needing 5th bearings are either not valid, or situationally not true, taken out of context. The only Piet motor we have built in 8 years without a 5th bearing is the one for "the last original" Bill Knight decided that it was vitally important that the engine stay externally as a BHP installation. (inside it is all modern stuff) We had a very specially inspected, nitride, low mileage crank prepped for the engine by Moldex Cranks in Detroit. The one that comes in most cores, is not nearly in this good condition. No local crank grinder and prep and NDT a crank like Moldex Read: http://flycorvair.net/2013/01/16/getting-started-in-2013-part-1-crankshaft-process-options/ To come to some conclusion like 'it worked for 45 years, it will work for me today' and then taking the crank to a local machine shop that destroys the radius in the fillets, ignores the critical fact that almost ! none of the cranks in the early planes were reground. They were original. Regrinding works just like new, but only when it is done by people who make it just like new. If you don't have that, you don't have what the early guys had, and you will not have the same results. ---------------------------------------------------------- VERY IMPORTANT: Isaac Newton didn't invent gravity. He didn't make anything. All he did was observe what was going on, and find a way of speaking articulately of it that allowed people a much better perspective on how things work. Connection: Builders occasionally talk about 'the ww philosophy" as is I invented something that didn't exist before. That isn't factual. In reality, I am just doing a tiny version of what Newton did, which is observe what is happening for a long time, see it though many sets of eyes, and then discuss it in an articulate way that allows builders to form a sharper personal perspective. That is where both this: http://flycorvair.net/2015/01/12/thought-for-the-day-collection/ and this page http://flycorvair.net/2014/01/21/risk-management-reference-page/ come from. -ww. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439584#439584


    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
    Time: 08:26:24 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: Frustrating day of study
    From: "Jeff Boatright" <jeffboatright@emory.edu>
    [quote="Andy Garrett"]...Still, 48 years of success on who knows how many Piets... Boy, I love being the farside corner who gets in for the late hit...but if you're still willing to put up with the nattering nabobs of negativity, here's one more. You used the phrase "...on who knows how many..." Exactly. The sampling size of ALL airplanes powered by Corvair engines is 1) somewhat unknown and 2) tiny compared to Continental/Lycoming/Rotax (4 cycle). Worse, the number of crank failures in Corvair aircraft use is also unknown. And remember, of the ones we do know of, some (maybe several) did not result in accidents that required reporting. We only know about what may be the tip of an iceberg because someone felt the need to share his experience with his colleagues. Thank goodness. Bottom line: the available data are too meager to find much comfort in anecdotal successes, even if 48 years have gone by. Plus, for what can be confirmed, the percentage of Corvair crank breaks in aviation applications may be way more than the percentage for Continental/Lycoming/Rotax. I was very interested in Corvair conversions for a long time. I bought two used engines. I bought a manual and parts from William. I attended a Corvair College. I began the build, but all the while, I was keeping my eye on reports of crank breaks. I kept mollifying myself that there weren't that many and they seemed to only occur in relatively higher-performance installations. Then they started breaking in pokie planes like Pietenpols and Cub-a-likes. This included engines that, to some degree, followed the William Wynne approach. William and others responded SUPERLATIVELY, in my opinion, not hiding from the problem and vigorously looking for a solution. But for me, all this was prior to the 5th bearing being tested and sold, plus a flying Piet became available, so I gave all my Corvair stuff to a friend who's an A&P and who has lots of experience with experimental aircraft and both certified and experimental engines. Somewhat as an aside, I did not, nor do not, think that the effectiveness of nitriding the crank has been proven. Theoretically it may help, but the sampling size of WW-inspired engines in flying airplanes with nitrided cranks but without 5th bearings is a tiny subset of a subset of a set that itself is small. This long-winded way to say that I agree with the others that the 5th bearing is the way to go. As does William. I'd probably be flying behind a Corvair with a 5th bearing now if that set-up had been available at the time I was tinkering with the build. Regardless of how you proceed, I'm very excited for you. I just spent a half hour yesterday practicing circuits in the Piet. What a great way to usher in Spring! doing it behind a smooth-running Corvair would've made it even better! And now the refs are throwing flags for this late hit. Sorry about that! Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439602#439602


    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
    Time: 08:32:07 AM PST US
    From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-LME0)[Vantage Partners, LLC]" <michael.d.cuy@nasa.gov>
    Subject: new crank costs
    [cid:image001.png@01D06238.0C4A7040]


    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
    Time: 09:31:35 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: new crank costs
    From: "William Wynne" <WilliamTCA@aol.com>
    Mike, The crank you have pictured is a Dan Weseman billet crank for a Corvair. He has produced a few dozen of these, and I have built a number of engines with them, including the first one, which went into Dan's Panther prototype. You can see a picture of Dan, the engine and myself here: http://flycorvair.net/2013/06/24/why-not-the-panther-engine/ We are neighbors at the same small airpark in Florida. The high end price listed includes the CNC billet 5th bearing housing. The Wesemans also process original 8409 GM forged cranks. The cost for one fully prepped with a 5th bearing is about $2300, Thus the billet crank is about a $1,100 upgrade on a first class engine. BTW, both cranks are done by the same shop, they are both outstanding quality. Although the Wesemans sell the crank by itself, they clearly tell every buyer it is to be used with a 5th bearing. The last certified crank we bought was for our neighbors IO-360 Lycoming last year, it was $3,950. Highest price I paid for an aircraft crank, $8,900 for a TSIO-550B Continental that had the VAR crank AD. The Weseman stuff is cheap by some comparisons. -ww. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439607#439607


    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
    Time: 09:44:18 AM PST US
    From: Ben Charvet <bencharvet@gmail.com>
    Subject: Re: Frustrating day of study
    My experience was very similar to Jeff's. When I started building the only Corvairs breaking cranks were on KR's and similar aircraft. Then Shad Bell had a crank break on his Dad's Piet. I ended up selling all my Corvair parts and going with a Continental and never regretted it. This was all before the 5th bearings came available. At the time I couldn't get anyone to insure a Piet with a Corvair. Hopefully this situation has changed by now, but that was my experience around 2008-2009. On a more somber note, while you can build a Pietenpol airframe for very little money, by the time you get it covered and an airworthy engine on it plan to spend in the neighborhood of $12K, about what a used one sells for on Barnstormers. I used locally bought douglas fir and did my finish with latex and still ended up north of that. I hate to be a wet blanket, but after its finished you still need to rent a hangar to store it in. On a positive note, a wooden plans built airplane is still the least expensive way to go, because at least for the airframe you are never spending tons of money at a time. The engine decision can be postponed a few years while you are building. During that time come to Brodhead and watch the Fords, Corvairs, and Continentals fly around the pattern for a comparison. The summer of 2008 I spent two days taking pictures of the 10 or so Pietenpols there and stole lots of ideas. You also get a chance to meet face to face with lots of the folks on this list. Good luck with your build Andy, Ben Charvet NX866BC 250 hrs and still living the dream On 3/19/2015 11:25 AM, Jeff Boatright wrote: > > [quote="Andy Garrett"]...Still, 48 years of success on who knows how many Piets... > > Boy, I love being the farside corner who gets in for the late hit...but if you're still willing to put up with the nattering nabobs of negativity, here's one more. > > You used the phrase "...on who knows how many..." > > Exactly. > > The sampling size of ALL airplanes powered by Corvair engines is 1) somewhat unknown and 2) tiny compared to Continental/Lycoming/Rotax (4 cycle). Worse, the number of crank failures in Corvair aircraft use is also unknown. And remember, of the ones we do know of, some (maybe several) did not result in accidents that required reporting. We only know about what may be the tip of an iceberg because someone felt the need to share his experience with his colleagues. Thank goodness. > > Bottom line: the available data are too meager to find much comfort in anecdotal successes, even if 48 years have gone by. Plus, for what can be confirmed, the percentage of Corvair crank breaks in aviation applications may be way more than the percentage for Continental/Lycoming/Rotax. > > I was very interested in Corvair conversions for a long time. I bought two used engines. I bought a manual and parts from William. I attended a Corvair College. I began the build, but all the while, I was keeping my eye on reports of crank breaks. I kept mollifying myself that there weren't that many and they seemed to only occur in relatively higher-performance installations. > > Then they started breaking in pokie planes like Pietenpols and Cub-a-likes. This included engines that, to some degree, followed the William Wynne approach. William and others responded SUPERLATIVELY, in my opinion, not hiding from the problem and vigorously looking for a solution. > > But for me, all this was prior to the 5th bearing being tested and sold, plus a flying Piet became available, so I gave all my Corvair stuff to a friend who's an A&P and who has lots of experience with experimental aircraft and both certified and experimental engines. > > Somewhat as an aside, I did not, nor do not, think that the effectiveness of nitriding the crank has been proven. Theoretically it may help, but the sampling size of WW-inspired engines in flying airplanes with nitrided cranks but without 5th bearings is a tiny subset of a subset of a set that itself is small. > > This long-winded way to say that I agree with the others that the 5th bearing is the way to go. As does William. I'd probably be flying behind a Corvair with a 5th bearing now if that set-up had been available at the time I was tinkering with the build. > > Regardless of how you proceed, I'm very excited for you. I just spent a half hour yesterday practicing circuits in the Piet. What a great way to usher in Spring! doing it behind a smooth-running Corvair would've made it even better! > > And now the refs are throwing flags for this late hit. Sorry about that! > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439602#439602 > > -- Ben Charvet, PharmD Staff Pharmacist Parrish Medical center


    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
    Time: 09:47:06 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: BRS in a Piet?
    From: "Andy Garrett" <andy_garrett@live.com>
    Thanks for the great responses gang! When I bought my Airbike it had one installed, but that is a lighter aircraft (light-sport, but can be built as an ultralight). They are common on those airframes, and cheaper since they are smaller canopies. That big red handle always gave me a warm and fuzzy. >From a look of the accident reports, none were caused by catastrophic structure failure, and most were far too close to the ground for a chute to be of use. As far as I'm concerned, this idea is 'put to bed'. -------- Andy Garrett 'General Purpose Creative Dude' Haysville, Kansas Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439610#439610


    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
    Time: 10:08:25 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: Frustrating day of study
    From: "William Wynne" <WilliamTCA@aol.com>
    Ben, Corvairs built to our basic layout have been insurable by the EAA's recommended company, Falcon Insurance since 2004. There was a brief period in 2007 where they regrouped and required conversion companies like us to submit documentation on what we do. We passed this with flying colors, and today the insurance rate for a Corvair is the same as an O-200. In the past, Falcon has had high rates for conventional gear planes, and student pilots, and pilots over 75. Most of this has changed. If you would like to see a photo of me meeting with the VP and lead Tech for Falcon insurance at Oshkosh 2004, it is above 5 photos down at this link: http://www.flycorvair.com/osh2004.html There are also a number of Brodhead 2004 photos there, including one of Doc, Mike Cuy and Alex Sloan. Some nice shots from the air. -ww. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439611#439611


    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
    Time: 10:34:03 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: Frustrating day of study
    From: Steven Dortch <steven.d.dortch@gmail.com>
    Ben, All good points. But even at $12,000 you have a "real" airplane vs a marginal two seat heavy ultralight. It also turns pilot heads at airports. Though there is an argument that it is not a chick magnet but rather a "Chuck" magnet. Chuck being the typical airport bum. Middle age or older and all with a war story. You can use the smallest hangar out there or look around and see if you can share with someone. The piet has a fairly small footprint, especially when put on it's nose. I rented for years, and shared and owned a ratty old 1940s hangar. I bought a new hangar for my old Vtail Bonanza and my Piet. The cost of the hangar was about the same as the value of both planes. (my wife never lets me forget that) However, I also store a small trailer, old bedsteads, parts and pieces for my planes, Christmas items and a freezer. It has crappy workbenches, lockers and shelving for storage and I have yet to get my tools properly distributed between the hangar and my garage. I also have various chairs and stools, a cot, a small fridge and microwave, a small propane grill and small charcoal grill, a big old TV with a VCR and lots of old videos, a basketball goal and a good old radio/cd player. When my wife comes out she does small projects and loafs. When my Piet flies we will resume our old habit of treating the hangar as a get away spot. I will then start piddling with the Vtail and getting it ready for an annual. Except for the plane sounds our airport is quiet in a way that we don't get in town. Blue Skies, Steve D


    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
    Time: 10:40:44 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: Frustrating day of study
    From: "Andy Garrett" <andy_garrett@live.com>
    I want to thank everyone for taking the time to compose some great responses. I will offer closure with the following: I'm a process driven guy. I want to know why a thing is being done before I commit to it. I am not one to jump on the bandwagon for the latest and greatest. That's one of the reasons I gravitated toward the Corvair--it was proven. To read that sometime in the late 90s and early 2000s cranks starting breaking in low and slow planes at a rate which required attention by those leading the Corvair effort, is disturbing, but I accept it. I also accept the 5th bearing solution even given the small sample to base a conclusion on. As for having already made up my mind to not use the bearing..., absolutely not. In fact, the inverse is probably more true. I tend to lean toward safest approach first. To be honest, I was hoping someone would make me feel ok about going the route that builders did for so many decades. Thanks for nothin' guys! lol. The purpose of this discussion was to vet the concept publicly from a skeptical point of view. My hope was that respondents would make great efforts to convince me--and so you have. Again, I am process driven, and I am a born skeptic. This method worked for me here, and I'm sure it will work again later, the next time I take issue with, status quo. William Wynne wants me to understand these engines, and now I am one step closer. Thank you all so much. I will build with the 5th bearing. You may have just saved my butt! [Laughing] -------- Andy Garrett 'General Purpose Creative Dude' Haysville, Kansas Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439617#439617


    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
    Time: 11:20:14 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: Frustrating day of study
    From: "K5YAC" <hangar10@cox.net>
    Here is a heavier wet blanket... I passed $12k a couple of years ago and I'm STILL not done. Don't care though... this stuff is just too much fun. Andy... do the 5th bearing. Contrary to what others may say, it doesn't require you to lose your shirt, figuratively or literally. Oh, howdy everybody! :) -------- Mark Chouinard All framed up... working on rigging. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439619#439619


    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
    Time: 11:35:53 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: Frustrating day of study
    From: "AircamperN11MS" <Scott.liefeld@lacity.org>
    This whole thread is why I love this list. A lot of people learn a lot of useful things by the experiences of others and we all get a better chance of surviving this thing called life. Keep it up guys, we're all doing good things here. Happy Landings -------- Scott Liefeld Flying N11MS since March 1972 Steel Tube C-85-12 Wire Wheels Brodhead in 1996 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439620#439620


    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
    Time: 11:46:45 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: Frustrating day of study
    From: "Andy Garrett" <andy_garrett@live.com>
    I agree, this has been a good thread. Very illuminating. As for total cost..., don't care. Still to this day, I have no idea how much I spent building my boat. That wasn't the point then and it isn't now. Yes, I have to be very aware of keeping expenditures down to what I 'need' as I don't have a lot of money, but total cost in dollars after completing the build will pale in comparison to total the feeling of accomplishment. If I just wanted a plane, I'd buy another one. I want to 'create'. Thanks again everybody! -------- Andy Garrett 'General Purpose Creative Dude' Haysville, Kansas Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439622#439622


    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
    Time: 02:18:22 PM PST US
    Subject: Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment
    From: "Andy Garrett" <andy_garrett@live.com>
    Mr Wynne, I think I may often be misunderstood as I attempt wrap my head around all of this. I explained my method of raising the issue on the original thread. I will do so again here. I was always inclined to go with the 5th bearing, but given the relatively short period of time that its been around as compared to the decades that the Corvair has been building a reputation as a good flight engine (when properly converted), I thought it best to approach the debate from the skeptic's point of view--there seems to be a story there that the raw data could help tell. Yes, I was maybe hoping that the debate would be a bit more evenly divided to make it at least a realistic option, but that it was not speaks volumes. In this way, through this discussion, thought was provoked, I have learned, opinions were developed, and the forum did exactly what is here to do. I could not be happier with the exchange or more grateful for the knowledge received. The BRS discussion was similar, but since I had never heard of one being installed on a Piet, a simpler probe was adequate. Please don't think me reckless or foolish. I just have certain 'devices' I use to ferret out the information and passionate opinions that I seek. Yes, I was undecided, and yes, money is and will always be a concern, but in the end, I will typically make the appropriate choice. I just have to 'get there' intellectually, ya know? Even if I suspect something is a bad idea, I will still want to know all the reasons why--proper vetting--covering all bases. Additionally, verbalizing the facts and opinions herein may help others later as well as we add to the volume of researchable material. I am still not convinced that I have 5 or 6 years to save for the part in question as Gary suggests. I am actively searching for engines and got your DVD in the mail yesterday (Thanks!). When motivated, I can do a great deal very quickly, especially when I know what I'm doing. That is the 'know' that you and other are sharing with me now. Given my type of tact (or complete lack there of), you may despise me when we meet (especially after all of these questions). Someone told me of a possible CC in Mexico, MO this year. If that materializes, I look forward to shaking your hand and absorbing as much as you are willing to share. You and many others. Just wait until we get to the 'controls' questions later. [Rolling Eyes] Be patient with me gentlemen. I do like it here. -------- Andy Garrett 'General Purpose Creative Dude' Haysville, Kansas Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439631#439631


    Message 23


  • INDEX
  • Back to Main INDEX
  • PREVIOUS
  • Skip to PREVIOUS Message
  • NEXT
  • Skip to NEXT Message
  • LIST
  • Reply to LIST Regarding this Message
  • SENDER
  • Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message
    Time: 02:18:33 PM PST US
    Subject: Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment
    From: "William Wynne" <WilliamTCA@aol.com>
    You cant really change the cost of planes by more than 25% or 35% even by extreme scrounging and plans building. There is no way to drop the cost by 75%, stuff just costs money at some point. Here is what you do control: What you get out of building and flying. Picture two guys, both spend 4 years, and 2,000 hours building a plane, and 50 hours aloft and 200 studying to get a LSA rating. Its five years into it. If guy A was a super scrounger, bought everything used and spent only $9000 vs guy B who spent $24K for the same plane, buying an overhauled engine and getting all his parts from Aircraft Spruce instead of the flymart, Which builder got the better value? Who won? The correct answer: The guy who actually mastered each skill, learned the whys of every step, didnt just do every task to minimums, but aimed to master it. The guy who sought to know every piece and part of his plane and its correct care, feeding and operation. He aimed higher, did more. He has been changed by the experience, the guy who just did the minimums only accomplished the task, but it wasnt transformative. Real value isnt based just on what it cost, it is far more affected by the other side of the equationwhat did you get out of it? On this point, the majority of builders cheat themselves. -ww Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439632#439632


    Message 24


  • 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
    Time: 02:48:04 PM PST US
    Subject: Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment
    From: "William Wynne" <WilliamTCA@aol.com>
    Andy, I will save time and speak plainly: Unless you have a very serious approach change, your never going to make it in aircraft building. Your Comment: I just have certain 'devices' I use to ferret out the information and passionate opinions that I seek." Is pretty insulting to say the least. I am not here to have people "ferret out" things. I am here to share what I know. The very concept that you honestly think that knowing little or nothing about planes, you can spark an internet discussion between people you have never met, and then on the basis or reading a few hundred words, suddenly you are qualified to evaluate the mechanical integrity, the operational history, the builder issues and details of each option. That my friend, is a total joke. In 25 years I have personally known 500 people who have finished a homebuilt, maybe 180 of them working on a plans built design that was their first plane. They had a common characteristic: They all found 2 or 3 successfully builders of the same design, and followed their lead. They didn't 'vet' or screen these people and evaluate their integrity, because they didn't have the expertise to do so. They just looked at their success, and used it as a pattern. They just correctly assumed that they would learn why these successful builders did what they did along the way. They didn't blindly follow anyone, but they didn't question peoples decisions on subjects they really didn't know anything about yet. I also have met, in person easily more than 10,000 people who told me that they were absolutely personally committed to successfully building their plane, and all of these people failed. They also had a common characteristic: They thought just like you. My experience says that people very rarely change their approach, no matter what they say. Go ahead, take the next 10 years of your spare time and all your extra money and try to prove that you are the 1 in 10,000 guy who is going to make the "start arguments, and evaluate from no experience" process work. Good luck with that. Your life, your choice, your approach. -ww. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439633#439633


    Message 25


  • 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
    Time: 03:09:51 PM PST US
    From: "Douwe Blumberg" <douweblumberg@earthlink.net>
    Subject: Jack's new Piet
    Congratulations Jack on a beautiful bird! Absolutely gorgeous work!! I don't have much to add as you start chasing high temps, except this short list: 1. Could it still be tight? 10 hrs of ground running isn't necessarily a lot on a Ford. How tight is the prop after she's run for a while. 2. A slight pressure relief valve in the rad cap can help keep temps down a few degrees, but not the difference between boiling over and cool. (cant' remember exactly, 2-3lbs maybe?) 3. Timing is right? 4. I didn't notice but be sure you have a steam relief tube from the "front" of the head back to the rad. This can lead to pockets of steam coming up into the system and shooting out the cap every few minutes. 5. I assume the gauge is correct since she was steamin' 6. Water can run a bit cooler than coolant 7. Is there a thermostat? Confirm it works in boiling water I'm sure I'm missing some things, but that's what I remember from when I was working on my Ford. Good luck, send videos of flying days!! Douwe


    Message 26


  • 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
    Time: 04:53:43 PM PST US
    Subject: Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment
    From: "Andy Garrett" <andy_garrett@live.com>
    Andy, I will save time and speak plainly: Unless you have a very serious approach change, your never going to make it in aircraft building. Your Comment: I just have certain 'devices' I use to ferret out the information and passionate opinions that I seek." Is pretty insulting to say the least. As man who writes as passionately as you do, I find this comment incredible. All the same, I apologize. I am not here to have people "ferret out" things. I am here to share what I know. The very concept that you honestly think that knowing little or nothing about planes, you can spark an internet discussion between people you have never met, and then on the basis or reading a few hundred words, suddenly you are qualified to evaluate the mechanical integrity, the operational history, the builder issues and details of each option. That my friend, is a total joke. Yet after reading a few hundred of my words, you have made an assessment of my "mechanical integrity", my "operational history" and decided that public ridicule and embarrassment was the direction to take. You've decided that I am ignorance and declared me unfit with no hope of success. Moreover, you've done it in front of others who obviously admire you, who may have better understood my cultural and education bias and chosen to help me as they could.In 25 years I have personally known 500 people who have finished a homebuilt, maybe 180 of them working on a plans built design that was their first plane. They had a common characteristic: They all found 2 or 3 successfully builders of the same design, and followed their lead. They didn't 'vet' or screen these people and evaluate their integrity, because they didn't have the expertise to do so. They just looked at their success, and used it as a pattern. That is vetting sir. They just correctly assumed that they would learn why these successful builders did what they did along the way. Such an assumption is also a form of vetting. They didn't blindly follow anyone, but they didn't question peoples decisions on subjects they really didn't know anything about yet. How else do we understand a person decision unless we question why it was made--explore the contributing factors?. This is a logical approach. To not do so IS blindly following. Your statement is unclear! at best --contradictory at worst. I also have met, in person easily more than 10,000 people who told me that they were absolutely personally committed to successfully building their plane, and all of these people failed. Failed to do what sir? Fly a plane they completed? I recently met a man in his eighties who had just completed the plane he knew he would never fly. Did he fail? What of those builders with a 20 year old half built aircraft in their garage which reminds them of all the great nights working with their father? Having enjoyed and learned from what they accomplished, did they too fail by your standards? They also had a common characteristic: They thought just like you. Again, a few hundred words, and you know how I think? Presumptuous. My experience says that people very rarely change their approach, no matter what they say. Go ahead, take the next 10 years of your spare time and all your extra money and try to prove that you are the 1 in 10,000 guy who is going to make the "start arguments, and evaluate from no experience" process work. It was not my intention to start an argument. I appologize again Mr. Wynne. Good luck with that. Your life, your choice, your approach. -ww. I am truly sorry for any offense. It was my desire to spend many years here as I worked through and enjoyed my build. Obviously, I will find a different engine platform to build, as you clearly have no patience for my kind. I guess the money I've spent with your company thus far was wasted. I fear that I will also have to become a mere lurker here on the forums, trying to absorb what I can through passive means. Perhaps a few will help me through PMs. You, the leading expert on Corvairs, an authority on Pietenpols, and an ambassador in the homebuilding world have read a couple hundred of my words and passed judgment. I have been weighed, measured, and found wanting..., by you. Where a rational man recognizing his status in this community would have sent me private message to coach me on my approach if he objected, you chose public shaming and humiliation. I find your attitude to be unbecoming a man positioned to influence so many. Mentorship does not seem to suit you on this day. I consider the matter closed. Best to you and yours. -------- Andy Garrett 'General Purpose Creative Dude' Haysville, Kansas Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439635#439635


    Message 27


  • 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
    Time: 05:45:59 PM PST US
    Subject: Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment
    From: "jarheadpilot82" <jarheadpilot82@hotmail.com>
    Andy, Let me keep it simple and ask you two questions. In the 29 days since you joined the forum, other than posting 34 times, have you- 1. Ordered any materials to build something? 2. Built any portion of the aircraft? This is a great forum to ask questions, discuss construction methods, etc. It is not a great place to throw out ideas like putting $5,000 BRS systems in an airplane costing $15,000. You asked about it, and that is fine. But have you asked real meaningful construction questions like spruce vs fir, T88 vs another epoxy, or some question that leads others to believe building a Pietenpol is more than a mere mental exercise. Just get out there and build. Posting does not build your airplane. Building does. -------- Semper Fi, Terry Hand Athens, GA Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439640#439640


    Message 28


  • 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
    Time: 06:14:31 PM PST US
    Subject: New Piet. Builder!
    From: "tonyp51qa" <tonyp51qa@gmail.com>
    Hello everyone in the Pietenpol world. This is Tony and I live in northern Alabama. I received my plans from Andrew on Monday. And I just got my Vertical Stabilizer and Rudder from Aircraft Spruce today.Let the FUN begin!!! Tony tonyp51qa@gmail.com -------- Tony Crawford Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439641#439641


    Message 29


  • 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
    Time: 06:24:04 PM PST US
    Subject: Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment
    From: Steven Dortch <steven.d.dortch@gmail.com>
    Hey Terry, what would be involved in making my Piet a side by side two seater, with nose gear? Ducking and running! Terry is great for prodding you back into the shop. Due to his tirades about my typing and not working, I try to get something, even a little thing done, every day. stay thick skinned and keep building and asking questions. BTW Today I sanded various places go get a really good tight fit. This is where I had to reglue (Epoxy resin really) old joints and glue new wood in on the Horizontal Stab restoration. I will be putting a new "rear horizontal tail spar" on this weekend. I also am going to get some wood tomorrow for the tail "ribs" and install them. Once this is done I can patch my ailerons where I had to take the horns out, fix and weld on one, prime and paint them both and reinstall, then I will cover the Horizontal Stab. I might even get close to painting the ailerons and horizontal and vertical Stabs this weekend, but it looks like 3+ inches of rain Friday and Saturday.Latex is not that picky about humidity, So a reasonably dry Sunday may do. Then on to the next small project. (ARROW storage and display, almost finished.) Now go cut some wood, or buy an engine block, or start making metal parts. Blue Skies, Steve D On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:45 PM, jarheadpilot82 <jarheadpilot82@hotmail.com> wrote: > jarheadpilot82@hotmail.com> > > Andy, > > Let me keep it simple and ask you two questions. In the 29 days since you > joined the forum, other than posting 34 times, have you- > > 1. Ordered any materials to build something? > 2. Built any portion of the aircraft? > > This is a great forum to ask questions, discuss construction methods, etc. > It is not a great place to throw out ideas like putting $5,000 BRS systems > in an airplane costing $15,000. You asked about it, and that is fine. But > have you asked real meaningful construction questions like spruce vs fir, > T88 vs another epoxy, or some question that leads others to believe > building a Pietenpol is more than a mere mental exercise. > > Just get out there and build. Posting does not build your airplane. > Building does. > > -------- > Semper Fi, > > Terry Hand > Athens, GA > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439640#439640 > > -- Blue Skies, Steve D


    Message 30


  • 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
    Time: 06:33:08 PM PST US
    Subject: Re: New Piet. Builder!
    From: Steven Dortch <steven.d.dortch@gmail.com>
    tony, First free advice. Go touch the project at least once every day. Do some thing If at all possible. Even if it is a tiny thing. Blue Skies, Steve D On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 8:14 PM, tonyp51qa <tonyp51qa@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hello everyone in the Pietenpol world. This is Tony and I live in northern > Alabama. I received my plans from Andrew on Monday. And I just got my > Vertical Stabilizer and Rudder from Aircraft Spruce today.Let the FUN > begin!!! > > Tony > > tonyp51qa@gmail.com > > -------- > Tony Crawford > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439641#439641 > > -- Blue Skies, Steve D


    Message 31


  • 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
    Time: 06:34:12 PM PST US
    Subject: Re: New Piet. Builder!
    From: glenschweizer@yahoo.com
    Hey Tony Welcome! Hopefully, you've visited this forum before and realize that it's normally not as contentious as this afternoon. There are decades of experience represented here. Wishing you a great build! Glen Aerial in progress(fuse off bench tail feathers to be glued this weekend) Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 19, 2015, at 6:14 PM, "tonyp51qa" <tonyp51qa@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello everyone in the Pietenpol world. This is Tony and I live in northern Alabama. I received my plans from Andrew on Monday. And I just got my Vertical Stabilizer and Rudder from Aircraft Spruce today.Let the FUN begin!!! > > Tony > > tonyp51qa@gmail.com > > -------- > Tony Crawford > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439641#439641 > > > > > > > > > >


    Message 32


  • 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
    Time: 06:37:04 PM PST US
    Subject: Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment
    From: glenschweizer@yahoo.com
    Three five gallon buckets of sawdust so far! Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 19, 2015, at 6:23 PM, Steven Dortch <steven.d.dortch@gmail.com> wro te: > > Hey Terry, what would be involved in making my Piet a side by side two sea ter, with nose gear? > > Ducking and running! > > Terry is great for prodding you back into the shop. Due to his tirades abo ut my typing and not working, I try to get something, even a little thing do ne, every day. stay thick skinned and keep building and asking questions. > > BTW Today I sanded various places go get a really good tight fit. This is w here I had to reglue (Epoxy resin really) old joints and glue new wood in on the Horizontal Stab restoration. I will be putting a new "rear horizontal t ail spar" on this weekend. I also am going to get some wood tomorrow for the tail "ribs" and install them. Once this is done I can patch my ailerons wh ere I had to take the horns out, fix and weld on one, prime and paint them b oth and reinstall, then I will cover the Horizontal Stab. I might even get c lose to painting the ailerons and horizontal and vertical Stabs this weeken d, but it looks like 3+ inches of rain Friday and Saturday.Latex is not that picky about humidity, So a reasonably dry Sunday may do. Then on to the nex t small project. (ARROW storage and display, almost finished.) > > Now go cut some wood, or buy an engine block, or start making metal parts. > > Blue Skies, > Steve D > >> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:45 PM, jarheadpilot82 <jarheadpilot82@hotmail.c om> wrote: tmail.com> >> >> Andy, >> >> Let me keep it simple and ask you two questions. In the 29 days since you joined the forum, other than posting 34 times, have you- >> >> 1. Ordered any materials to build something? >> 2. Built any portion of the aircraft? >> >> This is a great forum to ask questions, discuss construction methods, etc . It is not a great place to throw out ideas like putting $5,000 BRS systems in an airplane costing $15,000. You asked about it, and that is fine. But h ave you asked real meaningful construction questions like spruce vs fir, T88 vs another epoxy, or some question that leads others to believe building a P ietenpol is more than a mere mental exercise. >> >> Just get out there and build. Posting does not build your airplane. Build ing does. >> >> -------- >> Semper Fi, >> >> Terry Hand >> Athens, GA >> >> >> >> >> Read this topic online here: >> >> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439640#439640 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ========== >> br> enpol-List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Piet enpol-List >> ========== >> FORUMS - >> _blank">http://forums.matronics.com >> ========== >> b Site - >> -Matt Dralle, List Admin. >> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution >> ========== > > > > -- > Blue Skies, > Steve D > > 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >


    Message 33


  • 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
    Time: 06:41:32 PM PST US
    From: Jack <fastnaught@windstream.net>
    Subject: Re: Jack's new Piet
    Douwe, Thanks for the input. Several things you include I haven't checked yet. Another Ford Pieter has suggested about 20 hours to break in. His took about 18 before it settled down. Mine seems pretty loose but maybe not enough. Yo u thoughts? Jack Sent from my iPad > On Mar 19, 2015, at 6:11 PM, Douwe Blumberg <douweblumberg@earthlink.net> w rote: > > Congratulations Jack on a beautiful bird! Absolutely gorgeous work!! > > I don=99t have much to add as you start chasing high temps, except t his short list: > > 1. Could it still be tight? 10 hrs of ground running isn=99t necessarily a lot on a Ford. How tight is the prop after she=99s run for a while. > 2. A slight pressure relief valve in the rad cap can help keep temps down a few degrees, but not the difference between boiling over and cool. ( cant=99 remember exactly, 2-3lbs maybe?) > 3. Timing is right? > 4. I didn=99t notice but be sure you have a steam relief tube f rom the =9Cfront=9D of the head back to the rad. This can lead t o pockets of steam coming up into the system and shooting out the cap every f ew minutes. > 5. I assume the gauge is correct since she was steamin=99 > 6. Water can run a bit cooler than coolant > 7. Is there a thermostat? Confirm it works in boiling water > > I=99m sure I=99m missing some things, but that=99s what I remember from when I was working on my Ford. > > Good luck, send videos of flying days!! > > Douwe > > 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >


    Message 34


  • 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
    Time: 06:48:43 PM PST US
    From: Gary Boothe <gboothe5@comcast.net>
    Subject: Re: New Piet. Builder!
    Happy days!!! Sent from my iPad > On Mar 19, 2015, at 6:14 PM, tonyp51qa <tonyp51qa@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello everyone in the Pietenpol world. This is Tony and I live in northern Alabama. I received my plans from Andrew on Monday. And I just got my Vertical Stabilizer and Rudder from Aircraft Spruce today.Let the FUN begin!!! > > Tony > > tonyp51qa@gmail.com > > -------- > Tony Crawford > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439641#439641 > > > > > > > > > >


    Message 35


  • 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
    Time: 07:00:20 PM PST US
    Subject: Bob Parks Cub and Pete Bowers Pietenpol in 1969...
    From: "aerocarjake" <flight.jake@gmail.com>
    Hello good Piet-Ple, A good friend of mine, Bob Parks recently sent me a couple photos I thought folks might enjoy on this site...... Bob is an amazing aviation artist ( http://www.parkzart.com/ ) (some of his paintings are in the Smithsonian's collection), worked at Boeing for 48 years (I worked with him for the last several of his career), learned to fly Stearmans in WWII, flew airshows as the "flying farmer" routine, and lots more....... (He has a new book out as well: http://www.amazon.com/From-Crystal-High-Speed-Jets/dp/1503105679 ) The Pietenpol in the photos was owned by Pete Bowers who was an amazing aviation historian. Pete had over 200,000 aviation photos in his collection when he passed a few years ago. That photo collection is now part of the Archives at the Museum of Flight in Seattle. Enjoy some simple and basic flying "as shown how to do it right" by two wonderful gentlemen.....!!!! -------- 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=439650#439650 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/1969_pietenpol_2_140.jpg http://forums.matronics.com//files/1969_pietenpol_1_593.jpg


    Message 36


  • 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
    Time: 07:11:05 PM PST US
    From: Jack <fastnaught@windstream.net>
    Subject: Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment
    Andy, Please don't give up. "There are no stupid questions"...you know the rest. I hope we are all here to help each other, whatever our position and to not so easily take offense. Hopefully something that is said positively could inspire others to start to build or continue to build. None of us is too old to learn, nor too experienced to not pick up something from each other. I just flew my plane 2 days ago for the first time. I have a fairly extensive history in aviation but the thrill of that flight ranks up there with my first solo; it was awesome! My hope is that whatever has been said will not deter you from continuing on your journey to hopefully have that same experience. It truly is worth it. I am happy to help in any way that I can, for so many have helped me along my journey. Especially when I thought I was asking the stupid questions. Hang in there, Jack Sent from my iPad > On Mar 19, 2015, at 7:53 PM, Andy Garrett <andy_garrett@live.com> wrote: > > > Andy, > > > > I will save time and speak plainly: Unless you have a very serious approach change, your never going to make it in aircraft building. > > > > Your Comment: I just have certain 'devices' I use to ferret out the information and passionate opinions that I seek." > > Is pretty insulting to say the least. As man who writes as passionately as you do, I find this comment incredible. All the same, I apologize. I am not here to have people "ferret out" things. I am here to share what I know. The very concept that you honestly think that knowing little or nothing about planes, you can spark an internet discussion between people you have never met, and then on the basis or reading a few hundred words, suddenly you are qualified to evaluate the mechanical integrity, the operational history, the builder issues and details of each option. That my friend, is a total joke. Yet after reading a few hundred of my words, you have made an assessment of my "mechanical integrity", my "operational history" and decided that public ridicule and embarrassment was the direction to take. You've decided that I am ignorance and declared me unfit with no hope of success. Moreover, you've done it in front of others who obviously admire you, who may have better under! > stood my cultural and education bias and chosen to help me as they could.In 25 years I have personally known 500 people who have finished a homebuilt, maybe 180 of them working on a plans built design that was their first plane. They had a common characteristic: They all found 2 or 3 successfully builders of the same design, and followed their lead. They didn't 'vet' or screen these people and evaluate their integrity, because they didn't have the expertise to do so. They just looked at their success, and used it as a pattern. That is vetting sir. They just correctly assumed that they would learn why these successful builders did what they did along the way. Such an assumption is also a form of vetting. They didn't blindly follow anyone, but they didn't question peoples decisions on subjects they really didn't know anything about yet. How else do we understand a person decision unless we question why it was made--explore the contributing factors?. This is a logical approach! > . To not do so IS blindly following. Your statement is unclear! > at best > > --contradictory at worst. I also have met, in person easily more than 10,000 people who told me that they were absolutely personally committed to successfully building their plane, and all of these people failed. Failed to do what sir? Fly a plane they completed? I recently met a man in his eighties who had just completed the plane he knew he would never fly. Did he fail? What of those builders with a 20 year old half built aircraft in their garage which reminds them of all the great nights working with their father? Having enjoyed and learned from what they accomplished, did they too fail by your standards? They also had a common characteristic: They thought just like you. Again, a few hundred words, and you know how I think? Presumptuous. > My experience says that people very rarely change their approach, no matter what they say. Go ahead, take the next 10 years of your spare time and all your extra money and try to prove that you are the 1 in 10,000 guy who is going to make the "start arguments, and evaluate from no experience" process work. It was not my intention to start an argument. I appologize again Mr. Wynne. Good luck with that. Your life, your choice, your approach. -ww. > > I am truly sorry for any offense. It was my desire to spend many years here as I worked through and enjoyed my build. Obviously, I will find a different engine platform to build, as you clearly have no patience for my kind. I guess the money I've spent with your company thus far was wasted. I fear that I will also have to become a mere lurker here on the forums, trying to absorb what I can through passive means. Perhaps a few will help me through PMs. > > You, the leading expert on Corvairs, an authority on Pietenpols, and an ambassador in the homebuilding world have read a couple hundred of my words and passed judgment. I have been weighed, measured, and found wanting..., by you. Where a rational man recognizing his status in this community would have sent me private message to coach me on my approach if he objected, you chose public shaming and humiliation. I find your attitude to be unbecoming a man positioned to influence so many. Mentorship does not seem to suit you on this day. > > I consider the matter closed. Best to you and yours. > > -------- > Andy Garrett > 'General Purpose Creative Dude' > Haysville, Kansas > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439635#439635 > > > > > > > > > >


    Message 37


  • 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
    Time: 07:15:10 PM PST US
    Subject: Re: New Piet. Builder!
    From: "aviken" <aviken@windstream.net>
    Hi Tony, Welcome to the forum.. I am a relatively new builder also as I have only been building about 16 months. I hope you enjoy this quest as much as I have. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439652#439652


    Message 38


  • 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
    Time: 08:29:44 PM PST US
    Subject: Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment
    From: "William Wynne" <WilliamTCA@aol.com>
    Jack Fastnaught; Congratulations on finishing and flying you plane In an arena where at least 80% of the people who start do not make it to where you are, you are to be congratulated on the achievement. . You are very correct, there are no bad questions. but there are unproductive and poorly timed ways of asking questions, and questions just looking for conflict/entertainment/distraction, none of which serve the pursuit of learning. . Half of what I know about planes is from books, the other 50% is from listening to and asking questions of people who knew what I did not yet. I have learned from hundreds of aviators like this, Professors, mechanics, CFI's, FAA men, you name it. I like learning more than teaching, I share what I know because the things people taught me came with the unspoken agreement that when the time came, I would share it with the next person. . I started by spending five and a half years at Embry-Riddle. That is a lot of classroom hours. I went to each class with the reasonable assumption that if the professor had been teaching the subject for a decade or to, and had often worked in industry or served in the military before that, that he was plenty qualified. I only asked questions after reading the background work; when I asked a question, it wasn't seeking to find validation of an assumption I brought with me; and it was always asked with the understanding that there was a 99.99% chance it was something I wasn't getting yet and a .001% chance the instructor was wrong. The CFI I learned from got his instructor rating in 1952. I later found out that he had more than 500 students that went on to things like flying the B-2 and being a national aerobatic champion. When he told me to do things in the plane, I did them, knowing that I could ask later, but in all likelihood the answer would become obvious shortly. When I was yet to understand why he wanted something just so, I didn't go find his last season's students and other people at the airport and "ferret out" information, and I sure as shit didn't do that with the assumption that I with 2.0 hours in my log book had discovered something deficient about a guy with 14,000 hours of instruction Jack, I am sure you learned countless things in building your plane that you would wish to share with anyone new. Maybe you have been around planes a long time also, maybe seen some bad days at the airport that no one need repeat. I am sure, as most aviators are, you would want to share that also with anyone who is genuinely listening. Given your accomplishment, when you have some thing to say in response to a question, especially to a new guy, I think the new guy might just listen without the assumption you are wrong or lying. -ww. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439656#439656


    Message 39


  • 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
    Time: 09:54:47 PM PST US
    Subject: Re: New Piet. Builder!
    From: Michael Groah <dskogrover@yahoo.com>
    Welcome Tony! Enjoy the build. Mike Groah Tulare California 414MV Sent from my iPad > On Mar 19, 2015, at 6:14 PM, "tonyp51qa" <tonyp51qa@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello everyone in the Pietenpol world. This is Tony and I live in northern Alabama. I received my plans from Andrew on Monday. And I just got my Vertical Stabilizer and Rudder from Aircraft Spruce today.Let the FUN begin!!! > > Tony > > tonyp51qa@gmail.com > > -------- > Tony Crawford > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439641#439641 > > > > > > > > > >


    Message 40


  • 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
    Time: 10:03:16 PM PST US
    Subject: Longtime listener first time call back again(In new and
    improved Technicolor)
    From: benjamin piet <benjaminpiet528@gmail.com>
    I am the artist firmly known as bluepilot5. My email was hacked (North Korea trying bring me down probably)So now I have a new email dedicated to piet stuff.Thank you all for your o-200 vs corsair answers it was helpful. I look forward to many years of picking your brains and someday people picking mine and joining you crazy open cockpit Piet drivers in sky someday. Beginning builder checklist: Wife=divorced Daughter=to college Dog=sleeps through hammering Beer= cold Beginning builder checklist complete Ready to build Ben




    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
  • 7-Day List Browse
  •   http://www.matronics.com/browse/pietenpol-list
  • Browse Pietenpol-List 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.

    -- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --