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 |
|
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 |
|
Subject: | Finding your own balance on expense vs investment |
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Frustrating day of study |
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Frustrating day of study |
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment |
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 |
|
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 |
|
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: engine failure |
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: engine failure |
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 |
|
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Frustrating day of study |
[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 |
|
[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 |
|
Subject: | Re: new crank costs |
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 |
|
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: BRS in a Piet? |
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Frustrating day of study |
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Frustrating day of study |
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Frustrating day of study |
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Frustrating day of study |
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Frustrating day of study |
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Frustrating day of study |
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment |
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment |
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment |
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 |
|
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment |
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment |
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 |
|
Subject: | New Piet. Builder! |
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment |
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: New Piet. Builder! |
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: New Piet. Builder! |
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment |
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 |
|
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 |
|
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 |
|
Subject: | Bob Parks Cub and Pete Bowers Pietenpol in 1969... |
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 |
|
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: New Piet. Builder! |
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Finding your own balance on expense vs investment |
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: New Piet. Builder! |
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 |
|
Subject: | Longtime listener first time call back again(In new and |
improved Technicolor)
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
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! --
|