Pietenpol-List: travel limits for control surfaces

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 8:37 am

Original Posted By: "Jack Phillips"
Subject: Pietenpol-List: travel limits for control surfacesI know this topic had bee approached in the past in some degree, however I do not remember that it answered this question relative to control surface travel.How much travel in inches and or degrees or both from neutral position is the maximum amount aileron up and down elevator and rudder travel before the surfaces becomes in effective or loss of authority. I am looking for the optimum setting travel distances for each or the movable surfaces assuming neutral is equal to zero deflection at its horizontaland vertical plane?I am looking at some operating changes in the controls and am interested in achieving maximum authority and response before achieving a point of diminishing return.Does anyone have those figures, estimates, SWAGs or ideas on the subject?ThanksJohn________________________________________________________________________________

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 8:43 am

Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Well, the ailerons are generally ineffective at any position. I find thateven though I have stops on the stick travel for aileron deflection, mythighs make the actual stop in flight. As for elevator travel, I believe Iused +/- 25 degrees, which is more than you'll ever need in flight. I setthe rudder stops to make sure it would never hit the elevators, and again itis way more than you need in flight.Jack PhillipsNX899JPRaleigh, NC _____

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 9:01 am

Original Posted By: Tim Willis

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 9:24 am

Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
No, don't add more aileron surface. The best thing to do is seal the gaps(I used piano hinges, which give a good hinge with automatically sealedgaps). Roll rate on a Pietenpol with sealed aileron gaps is somewherearound 45 degrees per second - worse if the gaps aren't sealed. About onpar with a Piper J-3 Cub.By the time the stick reaches your thighs, the ailerons have pretty muchreached the point of maximum effectiveness (or minimum ineffectivesness).Roll rate is my only real complaint about Pietenpol handling, and as I said,it is consistent with other planes of that era. I've got some time in a1934 Fairchild 22, with FULL SPAN ailerons and its roll rate is no better -possibly worse than the Pietenpol. It does make it interesting when flyingin a gusty crosswind - sometimes the plane simply can't respond fast enough,even with the stick slammed against the stop.Jack PhillipsNX899JPRaleigh, NC-----Original Message-----

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 9:33 am

Original Posted By: Steve Ruse

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 9:40 am

Original Posted By: Tim Willis

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 9:41 am

Original Posted By: kyle ray
Russell,Doing an archive search from ten years ago (1999) the below was found. Is this the same project and test you started back then? Also found a reference to sending poor Mike Cuy money for his videotape. I talked to Mike last Friday and found out he has been waiting at his mailbox for your check since July, 1999. Please send him money so he can go in the house before winter.Match: #21Message: #4678

Brodhead Pietenpol Association