Original Posted By: BARNSTMR(at)aol.com
For what it's worth, my Continental-powered Pietenpol fuselageis built according to the "Improved " plans drawn by Hoopmanwith two changes:1. Front bay is extended six inches to accomodate the lighter Continental engine (Recommended by BHP himself). This gives more leg room in the front cockpit and allows a front fuselage fuel tank of a decent size to be installed.2. Fuselage from firewall to rear cockpit is two inches wider than the plans dimension. This is a worthwhile change when the weather turns cool and more clothing is necessary.I used an eight inch long Aeronca 7AC / 11AC engine mountwhich adapted well to the wider fuselage without any modifying.The wing is moved back about three inches for correct CG lo-cation. I have used an A65, and currently have a C85 installed.The fuselage could be lengthened at the cockpits to accomodatetaller people (perhaps this is addressed by the plans for the longfuselage---which I have not examined). A friend says that a lot ofthese old airplanes were designed "when midgets ruled the earth".Having flown four different Pietenpols, all with Continentals and thelonger nose, I find them to be a bit unstable in yaw. Perhaps a longeraft fuselage would correct this. The original Ford-powered version pos-sibly is OK with its shorter nose (sheer speculation on my part). Hasanyone out there been able to compare the Ford and Continental air-planes regarding directional stability?Cheers,GrahamFor what it's worth, myContinental-poweredPietenpol fuselageis built according to theImproved plans drawn by Hoopmanwith two changes:1. Front bay is extended six inchestoaccomodate the lighter Continentalengine(Recommended by BHP himself). This gives more legroom in thefront cockpit and allows a front fuselage fueltank of adecent size to be installed.2. Fuselage from firewall to rearcockpit is twoinches wider than the plans dimension.This is aworthwhile change when the weather turns cool andmoreclothing is necessary.I used an eight inch long Aeronca7AC / 11ACengine mountwhich adapted well to the widerfuselage withoutany modifying.The wing is moved back about threeinches forcorrect CG lo-cation. I have used an A65, andcurrently have aC85 installed.The fuselage could be lengthened atthe cockpitsto accomodatetaller people (perhaps this isaddressed by theplans for the longfuselage---which I have notexamined). A friendsays that a lot ofthese old airplanes were designedwhenmidgets ruled the earth.Having flown four differentPietenpols, all withContinentals and thelonger nose, I find them to be a bit unstable inyaw. Perhapsa longeraft fuselage would correct this. The originalFord-poweredversion pos-sibly is OK with its shorter nose (sheer speculationon mypart). Hasanyone out there been able to compare the Ford andContinentalair-planes regarding directional stability?Cheers,Graham________________________________________________________________________________