Original Posted By: mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net (Michael Brusilow)
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Brodhead Weight & Ballance studyI am re-printing this e-mail from a few years ago:Subj: Pietenpol weight and balance (http://members.aol.com/gmaclaren/wbDate: 9/7/99 8:46:41 AM Central Daylight Time
Pietenpol-List: Brodhead Weight & Ballance study
Re: Pietenpol-List: Brodhead Weight & Ballance study
Original Posted By:
----- Original Message -----
----- Original Message -----
RE: Pietenpol-List: Brodhead Weight & Ballance study
Original Posted By: John_Duprey(at)vmed.org
Yet there are those current Piets whose empty weight is remarkably close toBHP's 630. Mike Cuy's weighs in at 632. Corky's new bird is very close aswell (I don't remember the actual weight - I remember being alarmed whenCorky's bathroom scales indicated a weight under 600 lbs and I was afraid hehad forgotten his wings). Mine is still a work in progress and was headingfor a weight around 630 until I learned that Raleigh is going to Class Bairspace and I decided to add an electrical system and some avionics. Nowit looks like mine will be around 665. That stuff does add up.I think as someone mentioned before, BHP used wood somewhat under thespecified dimensions, measuring to the outside of the saw kerf so 1" x 1"lumber was actually 7/8" x 7/8". If I built another one I would do the samething. Tailwheels and brakes add a lot. So does modern epoxy varnish andcovering materials. Note that very few of the original Pietenpols from the'30's survive today, and those that do have had extensive rebuilds. Iwonder what the weight was of the "Last Original" Pietenpol built with theCorvair engine.I think the key is to really watch the weight of every single item youinstall. I have suggested to Wicks and Aircraft Spruce and Specialty thatthey should include the actual weight of every item in their catalog. OftenI would decide between two different items based solely on weight.Jack -----Original Message-----I find it interesting that the average empty weight of these 8 Piets is713.625 pounds. Kinda seems to me that all the weight difference betweenthe 630 pounds that Mr Pietenpol posted as the empty weight for his planeshas been added to by brakes, tailwheel maybe electrical, seat cushions,little things that "make it stronger", little extras that "really don't addany weight" etc. of our modern builders. Today we are using other woods, firfor instance that weighs about 25% more than spruce, putting on heavierfinishes, using more finish to protect the wooden airframe and it all addsup. Believe me, I know cause I've been there!________________________________________________________________________________
Yet there are those current Piets whose empty weight is remarkably close toBHP's 630. Mike Cuy's weighs in at 632. Corky's new bird is very close aswell (I don't remember the actual weight - I remember being alarmed whenCorky's bathroom scales indicated a weight under 600 lbs and I was afraid hehad forgotten his wings). Mine is still a work in progress and was headingfor a weight around 630 until I learned that Raleigh is going to Class Bairspace and I decided to add an electrical system and some avionics. Nowit looks like mine will be around 665. That stuff does add up.I think as someone mentioned before, BHP used wood somewhat under thespecified dimensions, measuring to the outside of the saw kerf so 1" x 1"lumber was actually 7/8" x 7/8". If I built another one I would do the samething. Tailwheels and brakes add a lot. So does modern epoxy varnish andcovering materials. Note that very few of the original Pietenpols from the'30's survive today, and those that do have had extensive rebuilds. Iwonder what the weight was of the "Last Original" Pietenpol built with theCorvair engine.I think the key is to really watch the weight of every single item youinstall. I have suggested to Wicks and Aircraft Spruce and Specialty thatthey should include the actual weight of every item in their catalog. OftenI would decide between two different items based solely on weight.Jack -----Original Message-----I find it interesting that the average empty weight of these 8 Piets is713.625 pounds. Kinda seems to me that all the weight difference betweenthe 630 pounds that Mr Pietenpol posted as the empty weight for his planeshas been added to by brakes, tailwheel maybe electrical, seat cushions,little things that "make it stronger", little extras that "really don't addany weight" etc. of our modern builders. Today we are using other woods, firfor instance that weighs about 25% more than spruce, putting on heavierfinishes, using more finish to protect the wooden airframe and it all addsup. Believe me, I know cause I've been there!________________________________________________________________________________
RE: Pietenpol-List: Brodhead Weight & Ballance study
Original Posted By: clif [mailto:cdawson5854(at)shaw.ca]
Is that edge of wood to center (= 15/16") or center of cut to center of cut(= 7/8")? I don't remember seeing that reference--does anyone rememberwhere it came from? You also wonder just which pieces he measured thatway--for the longerons it seems pretty reasonable, but the spars are drawnat 1 inch true dimension, and the rib caps would be getting pretty light.As far as plans go, I (sort of) agree. I might even buy them if I hadn'talready finished most of my woodwork. In any case, a set of redrawn planswouldn't be "the" Air Camper, it would just be the "2002 plans" as opposedto the "1927 plans" or the "1934 plans". Nobody is going to risk theliability of showing the #7 wood screws holding on the tail, and as we allknow, without those, it can't be a "real" Pietenpol!Gene Hubbardin San Diego trying to figure out how to stuff a C75 into a narrow cowling.-----Original Message-----
Is that edge of wood to center (= 15/16") or center of cut to center of cut(= 7/8")? I don't remember seeing that reference--does anyone rememberwhere it came from? You also wonder just which pieces he measured thatway--for the longerons it seems pretty reasonable, but the spars are drawnat 1 inch true dimension, and the rib caps would be getting pretty light.As far as plans go, I (sort of) agree. I might even buy them if I hadn'talready finished most of my woodwork. In any case, a set of redrawn planswouldn't be "the" Air Camper, it would just be the "2002 plans" as opposedto the "1927 plans" or the "1934 plans". Nobody is going to risk theliability of showing the #7 wood screws holding on the tail, and as we allknow, without those, it can't be a "real" Pietenpol!Gene Hubbardin San Diego trying to figure out how to stuff a C75 into a narrow cowling.-----Original Message-----
RE: Pietenpol-List: Brodhead Weight & Ballance study
Original Posted By: Kip & Beth Gardner
Pietenpol-List: Brodhead Weight & Ballance study
Original Posted By:> mb-albany(at)worldnet.att.net (Michael Brusilow)