Original Posted By: Isablcorky(at)aol.com
To:Subject: Pietenpol-List: Wide body.I was at the fly-in in Brussels last weekend and really enjoyed seeing all thePietenpols. They had a fuselage there for test fitting. I found the cockpit alittle tight in the shoulders - I touched on both sides just below the shoulders.I'm 5'11, 220 lbs. but losing weight won't help the problem. I was comfortablewith one arm outside the fuselage. One of the guys tried to simulate a higher position using cushions and that helpeda little. Question is, has anyone looked at all the implications (includingweight) of building it a little wider?Comments from anyone who has tried itHow much useful extra space do you get in the back hole with the long fuselage?Fly in was great. No Ford A powered units there but there was a Ford escort poweredunit with the front hole covered over. ________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: Wide body.
Pietenpol-List: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "Robert Gow"
To:Subject: Pietenpol-List: Wide body.I was at the fly-in in Brussels last weekend and really enjoyed seeing all thePietenpols. They had a fuselage there for test fitting. I found the cockpita little tight in the shoulders - I touched on both sides just below the shoulders.I'm 5'11, 220 lbs. but losing weight won't help the problem. I was comfortablewith one arm outside the fuselage. One of the guys tried to simulate a higher position using cushions and that helpeda little. Question is, has anyone looked at all the implications (includingweight) of building it a little wider? Comments from anyone who has triedit How much useful extra space do you get in the back hole with the long fuselage?Fly in was great. No Ford A powered units there but there was a Ford escort poweredunit with the front hole covered over. Kenneth M. Heide, BA,CPO,FAAOP ---------------------------------Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news,photos & more. ________________________________________________________________________________
To:Subject: Pietenpol-List: Wide body.I was at the fly-in in Brussels last weekend and really enjoyed seeing all thePietenpols. They had a fuselage there for test fitting. I found the cockpita little tight in the shoulders - I touched on both sides just below the shoulders.I'm 5'11, 220 lbs. but losing weight won't help the problem. I was comfortablewith one arm outside the fuselage. One of the guys tried to simulate a higher position using cushions and that helpeda little. Question is, has anyone looked at all the implications (includingweight) of building it a little wider? Comments from anyone who has triedit How much useful extra space do you get in the back hole with the long fuselage?Fly in was great. No Ford A powered units there but there was a Ford escort poweredunit with the front hole covered over. Kenneth M. Heide, BA,CPO,FAAOP ---------------------------------Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news,photos & more. ________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "walt evans"
I was at the fly-in in Brussels last weekend and really enjoyed seeing allthe Pietenpols. They had a fuselage there for test fitting. I found thecockpit a little tight in the shoulders - I touched on both sides just belowthe shoulders.I'm 5'11, 220 lbs. but losing weight won't help the problem. I wascomfortable with one arm outside the fuselage.One of the guys tried to simulate a higher position using cushions and thathelped a little. Question is, has anyone looked at all the implications(including weight) of building it a little wider? Comments from anyone whohas tried itHow much useful extra space do you get in the back hole with the longfuselage?Fly in was great. No Ford A powered units there but there was a Ford escortpowered unit with the front hole covered over.________________________________________________________________________________Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 18:31:41 -0400
I was at the fly-in in Brussels last weekend and really enjoyed seeing allthe Pietenpols. They had a fuselage there for test fitting. I found thecockpit a little tight in the shoulders - I touched on both sides just belowthe shoulders.I'm 5'11, 220 lbs. but losing weight won't help the problem. I wascomfortable with one arm outside the fuselage.One of the guys tried to simulate a higher position using cushions and thathelped a little. Question is, has anyone looked at all the implications(including weight) of building it a little wider? Comments from anyone whohas tried itHow much useful extra space do you get in the back hole with the longfuselage?Fly in was great. No Ford A powered units there but there was a Ford escortpowered unit with the front hole covered over.________________________________________________________________________________Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 18:31:41 -0400
Re: Pietenpol-List: Cost to build your completed Pietenpol and other
Original Posted By: "Gene & Tammy"
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Cost to build your completed Pietenpol and other questionsIn a message dated 6/18/2007 6:34:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time, waltdak(at)verizon.net writes:The biggie is how the shipping costs add upIs it just me, or is everything from Aircraft Spruce expensive to ship? I ordered 25(?) nut plates and the shipping to SC from GA was to be $7 if I remember correctly. When I inquired why so much, they said because of the weight!So I says exactly how much do they weigh? I forget the exact amount, but it was less than a pound! I think they must get a kick back on shipping or something!Boyce************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Cost to build your completed Pietenpol and other questionsIn a message dated 6/18/2007 6:34:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time, waltdak(at)verizon.net writes:The biggie is how the shipping costs add upIs it just me, or is everything from Aircraft Spruce expensive to ship? I ordered 25(?) nut plates and the shipping to SC from GA was to be $7 if I remember correctly. When I inquired why so much, they said because of the weight!So I says exactly how much do they weigh? I forget the exact amount, but it was less than a pound! I think they must get a kick back on shipping or something!Boyce************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.________________________________________________________________________________
Re: Pietenpol-List: Cost to build your completed Pietenpol and other questions
Original Posted By: "Oscar Zuniga"
Good Post Oscar.Gene----- Original Message -----
Good Post Oscar.Gene----- Original Message -----
Original Posted By: "Robert Gow"
I am building wider, my long fuse is 29 inches overall width. A little bit of asqueeze to join th tail but its holding rather nicely and looking like a realaiplane. Major down side is the plywood usage. What should take an 1 eigth sheetnow takes more which will drive the cost up. For me, I would rather sit incomfort than wear it. Since I am building for me, why not build it for me?JohnSent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry-----Original Message-----
I am building wider, my long fuse is 29 inches overall width. A little bit of asqueeze to join th tail but its holding rather nicely and looking like a realaiplane. Major down side is the plywood usage. What should take an 1 eigth sheetnow takes more which will drive the cost up. For me, I would rather sit incomfort than wear it. Since I am building for me, why not build it for me?JohnSent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry-----Original Message-----
Re: Pietenpol-List: Cost to build your completed Pietenpol and other
Original Posted By: "Oscar Zuniga"
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Cost to build your completed Pietenpol and other questionsBoyce,May I add my frustration on the pricing and shipping. Many years ago I was so utterly disgusted with ASS business practices and services that I went to Wicks where I've bought most of my stuff the last 7 years. Last week I needed some ,032 2024 T- to build a new cowling for the L-3. A 4x12 sheet sells , in the latest catalog, for $118. When I called in my order the sweet lady informs me of a recent price increase to $188 for the same sheet. I had to bitethe bullet and ordered. When it arrived rolled they had allowed themselves an additional $7 for the box and the UPS special charges brought the entire orderto over $ 232. I'm still burning.They will see their dayCorky who still remembers the depression years************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Cost to build your completed Pietenpol and other questionsBoyce,May I add my frustration on the pricing and shipping. Many years ago I was so utterly disgusted with ASS business practices and services that I went to Wicks where I've bought most of my stuff the last 7 years. Last week I needed some ,032 2024 T- to build a new cowling for the L-3. A 4x12 sheet sells , in the latest catalog, for $118. When I called in my order the sweet lady informs me of a recent price increase to $188 for the same sheet. I had to bitethe bullet and ordered. When it arrived rolled they had allowed themselves an additional $7 for the box and the UPS special charges brought the entire orderto over $ 232. I'm still burning.They will see their dayCorky who still remembers the depression years************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.________________________________________________________________________________
RE: Pietenpol-List: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "Scott Schreiber"
To:Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Wide body.John wrote: Major down side is the plywood usage. What should take an 1 eigth sheet now takesmore which will drive the cost up... I am always surprised how much attention is given to the additional cost of theplywood when widening the fuselage. In my opinion, the only real concern would be the additional weight that you'llbe adding. I am going by memory here, but I think Jack Phillips said he figuredthat the extra 1" of width added ten pounds to the weight of his plane - additionalplywood, spruce, fabric, paint, etc. (you can correct that if it's wrong,Jack). But... if you need the extra width, you need it. However, using tenpounds per added inch as a basis, the 29" width would be adding considerableweight to your plane. As for the added plywood cost, all you're talking about is an extra 4' x 4' sheetof 1/4" ply (which AS&S lists on their website today at $71.25 for FinnishBirch Aircraft Ply). To save a few bucks, just use Okoume plywood, (which AS&Slists on their website today at $19.45 for a full 4' x 8' sheet, which wouldallow you to sheet the entire bottom in one piece). Even if you are a scrounger,and your entire plane ends up costing $10,000, an extra $100 for plywood isonly 1% of the total. Not really worth worrying about. My $0.02 (Canadian) ________________________________________________________________________________
To:Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Wide body.John wrote: Major down side is the plywood usage. What should take an 1 eigth sheet now takesmore which will drive the cost up... I am always surprised how much attention is given to the additional cost of theplywood when widening the fuselage. In my opinion, the only real concern would be the additional weight that you'llbe adding. I am going by memory here, but I think Jack Phillips said he figuredthat the extra 1" of width added ten pounds to the weight of his plane - additionalplywood, spruce, fabric, paint, etc. (you can correct that if it's wrong,Jack). But... if you need the extra width, you need it. However, using tenpounds per added inch as a basis, the 29" width would be adding considerableweight to your plane. As for the added plywood cost, all you're talking about is an extra 4' x 4' sheetof 1/4" ply (which AS&S lists on their website today at $71.25 for FinnishBirch Aircraft Ply). To save a few bucks, just use Okoume plywood, (which AS&Slists on their website today at $19.45 for a full 4' x 8' sheet, which wouldallow you to sheet the entire bottom in one piece). Even if you are a scrounger,and your entire plane ends up costing $10,000, an extra $100 for plywood isonly 1% of the total. Not really worth worrying about. My $0.02 (Canadian) ________________________________________________________________________________
RE: Pietenpol-List: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "Bill Church"
RE: Pietenpol-List: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "Phillips, Jack"
RE: Pietenpol-List: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "Steve Eldredge"
RE: Pietenpol-List: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "Bill Church"
Re: Pietenpol-List: Wide body.
Original Posted By: shad bell
I built my Pietenpol with a 26 inch outside width from the firewall aft to the vicinity of the rear instrument panel and tapered the fuselage sides from there to the tailpost. A friend built a Piet from my jigs and made his fuselage 26" wide, also. Neither of us regretted doing so and the extra width is welcome when one needs to wear more clothing in cool weather (not uncommon here in Alberta, Canada). I am about 5' 8" and weigh about 175 lbs sans all the clothing I need to fly open cockpit airplanes. Equipped to go aviating, I probably weigh considerably more than 175 lbs!As far as weight increase is concerned, my Piet weighs 630 lbs. empty with a C85 engine. However, it is a pretty "Spartan" airplane with a minimum of instruments in the rear cockpit only. The seat cushions are rather thin and perhaps weigh 3 lbs. total for both seats. No electrical system and a wooden propeller. A very lightweight tailwheel (caster wheel) and 6.00 - 6 Shinn wheels with mechanical brakes from a Taylorcraft keep the landing gear weight to a minimum. It seems that these weight savings have offset any weight increase from the wider fuselage. And I think I could have cancelled out that weight increase by using lighter fabric than the 3.7 oz. I have on my a/c. The wider fuselage is nice to have and I would do the same thing again if I were to build another Pietenpol.Graham Hansen Pietenpol CF-AUN________________________________________________________________________________Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 07:37:05 -0700 (PDT)
I built my Pietenpol with a 26 inch outside width from the firewall aft to the vicinity of the rear instrument panel and tapered the fuselage sides from there to the tailpost. A friend built a Piet from my jigs and made his fuselage 26" wide, also. Neither of us regretted doing so and the extra width is welcome when one needs to wear more clothing in cool weather (not uncommon here in Alberta, Canada). I am about 5' 8" and weigh about 175 lbs sans all the clothing I need to fly open cockpit airplanes. Equipped to go aviating, I probably weigh considerably more than 175 lbs!As far as weight increase is concerned, my Piet weighs 630 lbs. empty with a C85 engine. However, it is a pretty "Spartan" airplane with a minimum of instruments in the rear cockpit only. The seat cushions are rather thin and perhaps weigh 3 lbs. total for both seats. No electrical system and a wooden propeller. A very lightweight tailwheel (caster wheel) and 6.00 - 6 Shinn wheels with mechanical brakes from a Taylorcraft keep the landing gear weight to a minimum. It seems that these weight savings have offset any weight increase from the wider fuselage. And I think I could have cancelled out that weight increase by using lighter fabric than the 3.7 oz. I have on my a/c. The wider fuselage is nice to have and I would do the same thing again if I were to build another Pietenpol.Graham Hansen Pietenpol CF-AUN________________________________________________________________________________Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 07:37:05 -0700 (PDT)
Re: Pietenpol-List: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "Bill Church"
Bill,I said it was a down side to wide. Making the point to would be builders that whatever you do outside of the prints has a price component. Weight, cost availabilityand budget are just a few of those issues. To compensate for the extra weight penalty, I intend using ac grade aluminium wherepossible to get back the advantage. As so nicely put in the Michael Cuy DVD, its my airplanen so I chose wide glideits by me for me and for the moment I am having fun in the process. I plan to adress other weight penalty issues in other ways. JohnSent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry-----Original Message-----
Bill,I said it was a down side to wide. Making the point to would be builders that whatever you do outside of the prints has a price component. Weight, cost availabilityand budget are just a few of those issues. To compensate for the extra weight penalty, I intend using ac grade aluminium wherepossible to get back the advantage. As so nicely put in the Michael Cuy DVD, its my airplanen so I chose wide glideits by me for me and for the moment I am having fun in the process. I plan to adress other weight penalty issues in other ways. JohnSent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry-----Original Message-----
RE: Pietenpol-List: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "Dick Navratil"
To:Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Wide body.John, The only real point I was trying to make was that the extra financial cost of makingthe fuse wider really is minimal in the overall scheme of things. Now, ifyou are building multiple Air Campers, like Bernard Pietenpol did, then it beginsto have a real impact on costs (it also doesn't hurt to weigh 140 lb orwhatever Mr. Pietenpol weighed). Someone commented once that to build one Pietenpol,you make enough parts for three - the third set is usually the best, andthat's what goes in the plane. As for weight, I have read many, many times that the lighter you can build yourplane, the better. As someone else once said (I'm paraphrasing here), "If you'rethinking about adding something to your plane, throw that item up in the air.If it comes back down, don't add it to your plane." You are absolutely correct that you are the builder, and what you build is up toyou. That's the beauty of experimental aircraft. We all have a duty to researchany changes that we intend to make. Every little change tends to impact onseveral other things. We just need to be careful about the changes. Good luck with the weight savings, and keep having fun. ________________________________________________________________________________
To:Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Wide body.John, The only real point I was trying to make was that the extra financial cost of makingthe fuse wider really is minimal in the overall scheme of things. Now, ifyou are building multiple Air Campers, like Bernard Pietenpol did, then it beginsto have a real impact on costs (it also doesn't hurt to weigh 140 lb orwhatever Mr. Pietenpol weighed). Someone commented once that to build one Pietenpol,you make enough parts for three - the third set is usually the best, andthat's what goes in the plane. As for weight, I have read many, many times that the lighter you can build yourplane, the better. As someone else once said (I'm paraphrasing here), "If you'rethinking about adding something to your plane, throw that item up in the air.If it comes back down, don't add it to your plane." You are absolutely correct that you are the builder, and what you build is up toyou. That's the beauty of experimental aircraft. We all have a duty to researchany changes that we intend to make. Every little change tends to impact onseveral other things. We just need to be careful about the changes. Good luck with the weight savings, and keep having fun. ________________________________________________________________________________
RE: Pietenpol-List: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "Bill Church"
RE: Pietenpol-List: Wide body.
Original Posted By:
RE: Pietenpol-List: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "walt evans"
RE: Pietenpol-List: Wide body.
Original Posted By: shad bell
Re: Pietenpol-List: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "Bill Church"
Bill,The novice builder that I am, I could not agree more with your points and comments.Having never flown or ridden in a Piet, I am amazed at how much I am in love withthe process of the build or the idea that so much enjoyment and I get a greatairplane at the end too. Enjoy the journey of the build and never loose sight of the prize at the end!Thanks again for your insight. JohnSent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry-----Original Message-----
Bill,The novice builder that I am, I could not agree more with your points and comments.Having never flown or ridden in a Piet, I am amazed at how much I am in love withthe process of the build or the idea that so much enjoyment and I get a greatairplane at the end too. Enjoy the journey of the build and never loose sight of the prize at the end!Thanks again for your insight. JohnSent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry-----Original Message-----
Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "kb2qqm"
I finally had a chance to sit down with the plans and plans booklet today for about4 hours. Whoa !I know if I eat one bite at a time no problem. I ordered the original plans, the supplement, history, and the rib print out.I see the original plans have the shorter fuse. The updated supplement has the longer (wood) fuse.and I notice there was (is) a welded version (tube) Why is there such a diffence plans wise for the size of the rear cockpit..length... 25" versus 33 inches. Has anyone build a tube version of the fuselage?I drew out the size of the rear cockpit with chalk on the patio just to see howbig (small) the width of the cockpit is.. It will be a tight fit. I have been reading some of the posts about widening the fuse up to 29 inches.Some of gone up to 26"...some 29". Other than increased weight, what might be some problems with doing that?.. Increasedwing loading...having to change the attach points for the wing. Are mostpeople building the width exactly to plans or is there some wiggle room inthe performance associated with slightly increasing the size. Maybe I will posta note on the other post. thanks for you insight. GregRacine, WIRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
I finally had a chance to sit down with the plans and plans booklet today for about4 hours. Whoa !I know if I eat one bite at a time no problem. I ordered the original plans, the supplement, history, and the rib print out.I see the original plans have the shorter fuse. The updated supplement has the longer (wood) fuse.and I notice there was (is) a welded version (tube) Why is there such a diffence plans wise for the size of the rear cockpit..length... 25" versus 33 inches. Has anyone build a tube version of the fuselage?I drew out the size of the rear cockpit with chalk on the patio just to see howbig (small) the width of the cockpit is.. It will be a tight fit. I have been reading some of the posts about widening the fuse up to 29 inches.Some of gone up to 26"...some 29". Other than increased weight, what might be some problems with doing that?.. Increasedwing loading...having to change the attach points for the wing. Are mostpeople building the width exactly to plans or is there some wiggle room inthe performance associated with slightly increasing the size. Maybe I will posta note on the other post. thanks for you insight. GregRacine, WIRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By: Jeff Boatright
I finally had a chance to sit down with the plans and plans booklet today for about4 hours. Whoa ! I know if I eat one bite at a time no problem. I ordered the original plans, the supplement, history, and the rib print out. I see the original plans have the shorter fuse. The updated supplement has the longer (wood) fuse. and I notice there was (is) a welded version (tube) Why is there such a diffence plans wise for the size of the rear cockpit..length... 25" versus 33 inches. Has anyone build a tube version of the fuselage?I drew out the size of the rear cockpit with chalk on the patio just to see howbig (small) the width of the cockpit is.. It will be a tight fit. I have been reading some of the posts about widening the fuse up to 29 inches.Some of gone up to 26"...some 29". Other than increased weight, what might be some problems with doing that?.. Increasedwing loading...having to change the attach points for the wing. Are mostpeople building the width exactly to plans or is there some wiggle room in theperformance associated with slightly increasing the size. thanks for you insight. Greg Racine, WIRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 22:50:36 -0400
I finally had a chance to sit down with the plans and plans booklet today for about4 hours. Whoa ! I know if I eat one bite at a time no problem. I ordered the original plans, the supplement, history, and the rib print out. I see the original plans have the shorter fuse. The updated supplement has the longer (wood) fuse. and I notice there was (is) a welded version (tube) Why is there such a diffence plans wise for the size of the rear cockpit..length... 25" versus 33 inches. Has anyone build a tube version of the fuselage?I drew out the size of the rear cockpit with chalk on the patio just to see howbig (small) the width of the cockpit is.. It will be a tight fit. I have been reading some of the posts about widening the fuse up to 29 inches.Some of gone up to 26"...some 29". Other than increased weight, what might be some problems with doing that?.. Increasedwing loading...having to change the attach points for the wing. Are mostpeople building the width exactly to plans or is there some wiggle room in theperformance associated with slightly increasing the size. thanks for you insight. Greg Racine, WIRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 22:50:36 -0400
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "Douwe Blumberg"
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.Greg,I am a wide glide at 29" over all 27" inside from rear cockpit fully forward to the firewall. Long fuse design.John RecineNX895BP reserved************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.Greg,I am a wide glide at 29" over all 27" inside from rear cockpit fully forward to the firewall. Long fuse design.John RecineNX895BP reserved************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "Perry Rhoads"
Hi John,glad to know you made yours wider. Other than the width changes. What other changeswill you have to make with the support struts? Do they just attach ata wider point on the center wing section...? I have not begun building yet as I am a newbie.What will you have to change where the wing attaches..anything?Greg..Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Hi John,glad to know you made yours wider. Other than the width changes. What other changeswill you have to make with the support struts? Do they just attach ata wider point on the center wing section...? I have not begun building yet as I am a newbie.What will you have to change where the wing attaches..anything?Greg..Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By:
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.Greg,Although still working on the fues, I can anticipate a wider wing center section and width of cabanes in addition to changes in the landing gear, strutsand metal parts to meet the width at the attachment points. I too am new to the build and am like everyone else learning as I go trying to solve problemsas I am able to anticipate them. Working through issues as I encounter them.I am certain there are many more areas impacted by the decision that are not intuitively obvious to the new builder but will certainly be the cause of much gastric distress as I progress.But I will be making a list of challenges and solutions as I encounter them.John************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.________________________________________________________________________________Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 15:16:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.Greg,Although still working on the fues, I can anticipate a wider wing center section and width of cabanes in addition to changes in the landing gear, strutsand metal parts to meet the width at the attachment points. I too am new to the build and am like everyone else learning as I go trying to solve problemsas I am able to anticipate them. Working through issues as I encounter them.I am certain there are many more areas impacted by the decision that are not intuitively obvious to the new builder but will certainly be the cause of much gastric distress as I progress.But I will be making a list of challenges and solutions as I encounter them.John************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.________________________________________________________________________________Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 15:16:32 -0400
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By: John Egan
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.And That's why its the wide body or the wide glide************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.________________________________________________________________________________Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 13:05:06 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.And That's why its the wide body or the wide glide************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.________________________________________________________________________________Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 13:05:06 -0700 (PDT)
RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By:
RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "Bill Church"
RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "KMHeide, BA, CPO, FAAOP"
RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "Rick Holland"
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "Donald Lane"
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.Ken,Not to be though of as a smart donkey, my first response was the concept of simple math... 24+3=27" interior dimension. 27+1+1=29" outside dimension. The math thing is really not too difficult once you get the hang of it. When you apply the concept to your plans you can build a wide or not so wide body to meet the dimensions of your own wide or not so wide body.Then you get the number that Don Pietenpol gave you with your plans and instructions and that becomes your serial number for your drawings. If you wantyou can get a bit more tricky and incorporate those numbers into your tail number when you reserve it.For example my plan set is 895Reserved tail number: NX 895 BPBP: Bernard PietenpolAll part of the grand plan, as I see it.Johnamateur builderprofessional smart ass************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.Ken,Not to be though of as a smart donkey, my first response was the concept of simple math... 24+3=27" interior dimension. 27+1+1=29" outside dimension. The math thing is really not too difficult once you get the hang of it. When you apply the concept to your plans you can build a wide or not so wide body to meet the dimensions of your own wide or not so wide body.Then you get the number that Don Pietenpol gave you with your plans and instructions and that becomes your serial number for your drawings. If you wantyou can get a bit more tricky and incorporate those numbers into your tail number when you reserve it.For example my plan set is 895Reserved tail number: NX 895 BPBP: Bernard PietenpolAll part of the grand plan, as I see it.Johnamateur builderprofessional smart ass************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.________________________________________________________________________________
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "Skip Gadd"
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.Ken,You are the MAN!John************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.Ken,You are the MAN!John************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "kb2qqm"
My wife, Marci and I will be driving up later on Thurs and camping out.Can't wait to see you guys,Didn't someone once suggest nametags so we can all introduce ourselves??Sounds like a good idea, what do you guys think?Douwe________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
My wife, Marci and I will be driving up later on Thurs and camping out.Can't wait to see you guys,Didn't someone once suggest nametags so we can all introduce ourselves??Sounds like a good idea, what do you guys think?Douwe________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "Rick Holland"
I started studying the plans last night for a couple of hours, trying not to getpsyched out. I thought about making the whole thing just a little wider.Then I got to reading the building guide and the rest of the posts here, and decidedthis morning to build a rear cockpit mockup. So I could see if there wereany fit problems. I fit. But I see how it would be tight squeeze. Maybe I can butter up the cockpit:-)Then I started seeing how making the airplane wider affects so many other things.At first I just started to imagine the fuselage and the extra wood required(weight), then I would have to redesign the center wing section, then the wingstruts, the landing gear. With all the extra weight and design changes, maybea bigger engine. My mind just started to snowball at the changes. So shouldI re-invent the wheel, and re-doo the whole airplane to a wider dimension,and take the weight penalty or should I build it to plans? I think if I redesignit, then I become a test pilot. The other dilema I am facing is the performancehit. What's the airplane going to fly like once it's done? A part of me just loves the look, and the wood, and the vintage feel of the airplane.Another part of me likes the quicknes of the sonex, with the CNC drilled parts that just fit together. Especially for a first time kit. Is there anywhere (anybody) that has an order parts list for the Empenage? Howmuch spruce and Ply?Thanks..GregRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 21:07:31 -0600
I started studying the plans last night for a couple of hours, trying not to getpsyched out. I thought about making the whole thing just a little wider.Then I got to reading the building guide and the rest of the posts here, and decidedthis morning to build a rear cockpit mockup. So I could see if there wereany fit problems. I fit. But I see how it would be tight squeeze. Maybe I can butter up the cockpit:-)Then I started seeing how making the airplane wider affects so many other things.At first I just started to imagine the fuselage and the extra wood required(weight), then I would have to redesign the center wing section, then the wingstruts, the landing gear. With all the extra weight and design changes, maybea bigger engine. My mind just started to snowball at the changes. So shouldI re-invent the wheel, and re-doo the whole airplane to a wider dimension,and take the weight penalty or should I build it to plans? I think if I redesignit, then I become a test pilot. The other dilema I am facing is the performancehit. What's the airplane going to fly like once it's done? A part of me just loves the look, and the wood, and the vintage feel of the airplane.Another part of me likes the quicknes of the sonex, with the CNC drilled parts that just fit together. Especially for a first time kit. Is there anywhere (anybody) that has an order parts list for the Empenage? Howmuch spruce and Ply?Thanks..GregRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 21:07:31 -0600
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "kb2qqm"
I understand that...Pietpenpol about 80% done with 80% to go and RV-7 about 20% done with 80% to go...Take Care,Max Hegler----- Original Message -----
I understand that...Pietpenpol about 80% done with 80% to go and RV-7 about 20% done with 80% to go...Take Care,Max Hegler----- Original Message -----
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "kb2qqm"
Couple of points re mods on plans:1) no matter what, you are a test pilot, even if you build it to exact plans. You built it, you get to test it. Keep that in mind each and every time you do a pre-flight on any airplane.2) Everyone does some sort of mod to their plans and planes, it's just the nature of homebuilding. Some of the best plans for homebuilts were put out by Rutan, and they were still highly modified by the individual builders.3) Making the body a little wider apparently does not have much negative impact on performance, the Questar-Venture looks like an egg at the mid section. It's still one of the fastest homebuilts around.I've often lamented I didn't make the fuselage about 4" wider at the pilot's seat and a tad "egg-shaped" the entire fuselage, had the darn thing completely apart for rewelding the 4130 after the wreck. Shoulda done it. Lot easier than losing 40 lbs.Gordon----- Original Message -----
Couple of points re mods on plans:1) no matter what, you are a test pilot, even if you build it to exact plans. You built it, you get to test it. Keep that in mind each and every time you do a pre-flight on any airplane.2) Everyone does some sort of mod to their plans and planes, it's just the nature of homebuilding. Some of the best plans for homebuilts were put out by Rutan, and they were still highly modified by the individual builders.3) Making the body a little wider apparently does not have much negative impact on performance, the Questar-Venture looks like an egg at the mid section. It's still one of the fastest homebuilts around.I've often lamented I didn't make the fuselage about 4" wider at the pilot's seat and a tad "egg-shaped" the entire fuselage, had the darn thing completely apart for rewelding the 4130 after the wreck. Shoulda done it. Lot easier than losing 40 lbs.Gordon----- Original Message -----
Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By: Tim Verthein
Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of walt evans
I am thinking of an A65-9 to A85-9 for my 701 ( a Raven redrive and G13 are thefall back plan at the moment) . I seem to not find any. The A65 has about thesame torque as a geared 912 and swings a 72 inch prop @ ( from memory here :^)around 44 to 54 inch pitch. But I'd like a starter. I'd agree that the gearsand such would be the problem with the accessory case idea, but what is Brodheadand who is Bill Rewey. Any contact info?ThanksKevin [quote="Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal"]Buy an A65-9 accessory case. Those are prettyrare. They were made for the Mooney Mite, which used the A65 , but with its tricycle gear made hand-propping very uncomfortable and dangerous. Or talkwith Bill Rewey at Brodhead. He's got an ingenious starter on his A-65 poweredPiet. Jack NX899JP
I am thinking of an A65-9 to A85-9 for my 701 ( a Raven redrive and G13 are thefall back plan at the moment) . I seem to not find any. The A65 has about thesame torque as a geared 912 and swings a 72 inch prop @ ( from memory here :^)around 44 to 54 inch pitch. But I'd like a starter. I'd agree that the gearsand such would be the problem with the accessory case idea, but what is Brodheadand who is Bill Rewey. Any contact info?ThanksKevin [quote="Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal"]Buy an A65-9 accessory case. Those are prettyrare. They were made for the Mooney Mite, which used the A65 , but with its tricycle gear made hand-propping very uncomfortable and dangerous. Or talkwith Bill Rewey at Brodhead. He's got an ingenious starter on his A-65 poweredPiet. Jack NX899JP
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By:> owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
There is a guy in Minnesota who made a starter setup for his homebuilt Cub. I can't recall his name but will look it up. It is a bit of a Rube Goldberg setup but seems to work well. There is another one in the works as well that I know of but I can't divulge the source yet. I will check on it to see if he is ready to go public. I think he is even thinking of getting an STC on that one. I know where an A-65-9 is but in the 20 years or so I have been playing with old airplane types it is the only one I have seen. I don't know what a A85-9 is. I think you may mean a C85-12 which has a starter. Those are getting scarce enough (not a lot of good cranks and cams) that an 0-200 would be a good choice.-john-John HofmannVice-President, Information TechnologyThe Rees Group, Inc.2810 Crossroads Drive, Ste 3800Madison, WI 53718Phone: 608.443.2468 ext 150Fax: 608.443.2474Email: jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc.comOn May 28, 2008, at 2:46 PM, kmccune wrote:>> I am thinking of an A65-9 to A85-9 for my 701 ( a Raven redrive and > G13 are the fall back plan at the moment) . I seem to not find any. > The A65 has about the same torque as a geared 912 and swings a 72 > inch prop @ ( from memory here :^) around 44 to 54 inch pitch. But > I'd like a starter. I'd agree that the gears and such would be the > problem with the accessory case idea, but what is Brodhead and who > is Bill Rewey. Any contact info?>>> Thanks>> Kevin>> [quote="Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal"]Buy an A65-9 accessory case. > Those are pretty rare. They were made for the Mooney Mite, which > used the A65 , but with its tricycle gear made hand-propping very > uncomfortable and dangerous.=EF=BD Or talk with Bill Rewey at > Brodhead. He's got an ingenious starter on his A-65 powered Piet.>> Jack> NX899JP>
There is a guy in Minnesota who made a starter setup for his homebuilt Cub. I can't recall his name but will look it up. It is a bit of a Rube Goldberg setup but seems to work well. There is another one in the works as well that I know of but I can't divulge the source yet. I will check on it to see if he is ready to go public. I think he is even thinking of getting an STC on that one. I know where an A-65-9 is but in the 20 years or so I have been playing with old airplane types it is the only one I have seen. I don't know what a A85-9 is. I think you may mean a C85-12 which has a starter. Those are getting scarce enough (not a lot of good cranks and cams) that an 0-200 would be a good choice.-john-John HofmannVice-President, Information TechnologyThe Rees Group, Inc.2810 Crossroads Drive, Ste 3800Madison, WI 53718Phone: 608.443.2468 ext 150Fax: 608.443.2474Email: jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc.comOn May 28, 2008, at 2:46 PM, kmccune wrote:>> I am thinking of an A65-9 to A85-9 for my 701 ( a Raven redrive and > G13 are the fall back plan at the moment) . I seem to not find any. > The A65 has about the same torque as a geared 912 and swings a 72 > inch prop @ ( from memory here :^) around 44 to 54 inch pitch. But > I'd like a starter. I'd agree that the gears and such would be the > problem with the accessory case idea, but what is Brodhead and who > is Bill Rewey. Any contact info?>>> Thanks>> Kevin>> [quote="Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal"]Buy an A65-9 accessory case. > Those are pretty rare. They were made for the Mooney Mite, which > used the A65 , but with its tricycle gear made hand-propping very > uncomfortable and dangerous.=EF=BD Or talk with Bill Rewey at > Brodhead. He's got an ingenious starter on his A-65 powered Piet.>> Jack> NX899JP>
RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "Phillips, Jack"
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By: H RULE
Kevin, Try to find an "Airboat Group". I've been told that they have come up with starter for the A 65.Gene----- Original Message ----- ________________________________________________________________________________Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 17:26:17 -0700 (PDT)
Kevin, Try to find an "Airboat Group". I've been told that they have come up with starter for the A 65.Gene----- Original Message ----- ________________________________________________________________________________Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 17:26:17 -0700 (PDT)
Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "kmccune"
Good looking prop Oscar! I was unaware that culver was a subsidiary of Valley Engineering. I've heard a lot of good things about Gene Smith (I think his sons work with him also). Keep us posted on how it does on your A 75.Gene ________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Good looking prop Oscar! I was unaware that culver was a subsidiary of Valley Engineering. I've heard a lot of good things about Gene Smith (I think his sons work with him also). Keep us posted on how it does on your A 75.Gene ________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "kmccune"
Thanks for the reply, I made a typo... not hard with my typing skills, meant anA75. Not to worry as for time, I have a rudder, H. Stab and an elevator....I'm not flying any time soon! :^( Do you know what the dry weight of an AXX-9, or modified AXX might be? I can pushpast 200lbs but not too far. Thanks KevinCH 701 S/N 7172[quote="jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc."]There is a guy in Minnesota who made a startersetup for his homebuilt Cub. I can't recall his name but will look it up. Itis a bit of a Rube Goldberg setup but seems to work well. There is another onein the works as well that I know of but I can't divulge the source yet. I willcheck on it to see if he is ready to go public. I think he is even thinkingof getting an STC on that one. I know where an A-65-9 is but in the 20 yearsor so I have been playing with old airplane types it is the only one I have seen.I don't know what a A85-9 is. I think you may mean a C85-12 which has a starter.Those are getting scarce enough (not a lot of good cranks and cams) thatan 0-200 would be a good choice.-john- John HofmannVice-President, Information TechnologyThe Rees Group, Inc.2810 Crossroads Drive, Ste 3800Madison, WI 53718Phone: 608.443.2468 ext 150Fax: 608.443.2474Email: jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc.com (jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc.com)On May 28, 2008, at 2:46 PM, kmccune wrote:[quote] > --------Mark Twain: Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things thatyou didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sailaway from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream.Discover.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Thanks for the reply, I made a typo... not hard with my typing skills, meant anA75. Not to worry as for time, I have a rudder, H. Stab and an elevator....I'm not flying any time soon! :^( Do you know what the dry weight of an AXX-9, or modified AXX might be? I can pushpast 200lbs but not too far. Thanks KevinCH 701 S/N 7172[quote="jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc."]There is a guy in Minnesota who made a startersetup for his homebuilt Cub. I can't recall his name but will look it up. Itis a bit of a Rube Goldberg setup but seems to work well. There is another onein the works as well that I know of but I can't divulge the source yet. I willcheck on it to see if he is ready to go public. I think he is even thinkingof getting an STC on that one. I know where an A-65-9 is but in the 20 yearsor so I have been playing with old airplane types it is the only one I have seen.I don't know what a A85-9 is. I think you may mean a C85-12 which has a starter.Those are getting scarce enough (not a lot of good cranks and cams) thatan 0-200 would be a good choice.-john- John HofmannVice-President, Information TechnologyThe Rees Group, Inc.2810 Crossroads Drive, Ste 3800Madison, WI 53718Phone: 608.443.2468 ext 150Fax: 608.443.2474Email: jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc.com (jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc.com)On May 28, 2008, at 2:46 PM, kmccune wrote:[quote] > --------Mark Twain: Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things thatyou didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sailaway from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream.Discover.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Hofmann
Thanks,Guess I'll have to try to look him up at Oshkosh. If you know him , could you emailand ask if I could contact him? I hate to ask, but its better then lookinghim up and then asking 1000 or so questions.ThanksKevinCh 701 S/N 7172[quote="Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal"]Brodhead is the annual Pietenpol / Hatz Biplanefly-in at Brodhead, Wisconsin (C37). It is always the weekend before thatother Wisconsin Fly-in, but will have many more Pietenpols and other interestingtypes than you will likely find at Oshkosh. Bill Rewey is a Pietenpol builderwho has an ancient starter mechanism on the A65 on his Pietenpol. Bill alwaysattends both Brodhead and Oshkosh. His Pietenpol is grey with yellow wingsand Navy markings Jack Phillips NX899JP Raleigh, NC
Thanks,Guess I'll have to try to look him up at Oshkosh. If you know him , could you emailand ask if I could contact him? I hate to ask, but its better then lookinghim up and then asking 1000 or so questions.ThanksKevinCh 701 S/N 7172[quote="Jack.Phillips(at)cardinal"]Brodhead is the annual Pietenpol / Hatz Biplanefly-in at Brodhead, Wisconsin (C37). It is always the weekend before thatother Wisconsin Fly-in, but will have many more Pietenpols and other interestingtypes than you will likely find at Oshkosh. Bill Rewey is a Pietenpol builderwho has an ancient starter mechanism on the A65 on his Pietenpol. Bill alwaysattends both Brodhead and Oshkosh. His Pietenpol is grey with yellow wingsand Navy markings Jack Phillips NX899JP Raleigh, NC
Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "kmccune"
Do you have anymore info as to what group? yahoo group???ThanksKevinCH 701 S/N 7172zharvey(at)bellsouth.net wrote:> Kevin, Try to find an "Airboat Group". I've been told that they have come > up with starter for the A 65.> Gene-----------Mark Twain: Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things thatyou didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sailaway from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream.Discover.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Do you have anymore info as to what group? yahoo group???ThanksKevinCH 701 S/N 7172zharvey(at)bellsouth.net wrote:> Kevin, Try to find an "Airboat Group". I've been told that they have come > up with starter for the A 65.> Gene-----------Mark Twain: Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things thatyou didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sailaway from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream.Discover.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "Gene & Tammy"
And finally...thanks for the help guys, I have no idea were to go for the infoI'm looking for. KevinCH 701 S/N 7172--------Mark Twain: Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things thatyou didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sailaway from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream.Discover.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
And finally...thanks for the help guys, I have no idea were to go for the infoI'm looking for. KevinCH 701 S/N 7172--------Mark Twain: Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things thatyou didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sailaway from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream.Discover.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "kmccune"
Sorry, I really don't have anymore info than that. Have you tried the flybaby site? Harry Fenton has lots of info on the A 65 there.Gene----- Original Message -----
Sorry, I really don't have anymore info than that. Have you tried the flybaby site? Harry Fenton has lots of info on the A 65 there.Gene----- Original Message -----
Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "Dick Navratil"
I have traded emails with Mr Fenton, your right I should ask him. He is the reasonwhy I'm asking you. I will, let you know what answers I find.Kevin--------Mark Twain: Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things thatyou didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sailaway from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream.Discover.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
I have traded emails with Mr Fenton, your right I should ask him. He is the reasonwhy I'm asking you. I will, let you know what answers I find.Kevin--------Mark Twain: Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things thatyou didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sailaway from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream.Discover.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "KMHeide, BA, CPO, FAAOP"
Bill Rewey's phone number is 608-833-5839 Give him a call.He lives in Madison, Wi.he's built two Pietenpols, and one "Ultra Lght" Pietempol.He' been flying his current Piet NX17WR since the early 90's, powered by an A-65 and has made the 1400 mi. trip from Madison to Sun N Fun in Florida four times. He has his Piet at Oshkosh every year and by EAA's invitation it is displayed in the area where all the new LSA's are near the Antique Club House.And as always, he'll have his Piet at Brodhead on Friday and Saturday prior to Oshkosh.Roman Bukolt NX20795On May 28, 2008, at 9:48 PM, kmccune wrote:>> I have traded emails with Mr Fenton, your right I should ask him. > He is the reason why I'm asking you. I will, let you know what > answers I find.>> Kevin>> --------> Mark Twain: Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by > the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw > off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade > winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover.>>> Read this topic online here:>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 21:19:11 -0700 (PDT)
Bill Rewey's phone number is 608-833-5839 Give him a call.He lives in Madison, Wi.he's built two Pietenpols, and one "Ultra Lght" Pietempol.He' been flying his current Piet NX17WR since the early 90's, powered by an A-65 and has made the 1400 mi. trip from Madison to Sun N Fun in Florida four times. He has his Piet at Oshkosh every year and by EAA's invitation it is displayed in the area where all the new LSA's are near the Antique Club House.And as always, he'll have his Piet at Brodhead on Friday and Saturday prior to Oshkosh.Roman Bukolt NX20795On May 28, 2008, at 9:48 PM, kmccune wrote:>> I have traded emails with Mr Fenton, your right I should ask him. > He is the reason why I'm asking you. I will, let you know what > answers I find.>> Kevin>> --------> Mark Twain: Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by > the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw > off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade > winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover.>>> Read this topic online here:>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 21:19:11 -0700 (PDT)
Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Original Posted By: "kmccune"
Jeff, Went to the hanger this morning before work and made a copy of the windshild. Will try to send it off today. The front of the windshild is 10" across and the sides are each bent back about 30 degrees. The great thing about building your own is that you can adjust the measurements anyway you want them but this pattern should help you get started. Also, I misspoke when I said I made mine of plexiglas, I made them out of Lexan.Rick, you asked for measurements but I'm not sure they would be of much help. I cut out a copy of the pattern for you also, if you want it. Let me know.I'm off to workGene________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.
Jeff, Went to the hanger this morning before work and made a copy of the windshild. Will try to send it off today. The front of the windshild is 10" across and the sides are each bent back about 30 degrees. The great thing about building your own is that you can adjust the measurements anyway you want them but this pattern should help you get started. Also, I misspoke when I said I made mine of plexiglas, I made them out of Lexan.Rick, you asked for measurements but I'm not sure they would be of much help. I cut out a copy of the pattern for you also, if you want it. Let me know.I'm off to workGene________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wide body.