Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Upper Flying Strut Fitting, Possibe Plans Error

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Mon Nov 09, 2009 4:29 pm

Original Posted By: Robert Ray
Dan,Thanks a lot for that link. TimRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 22:28:07 -0500Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Upper Flying Strut Fitting, Possibe Plans Error

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Mon Nov 09, 2009 9:35 pm

Original Posted By: Jeff Boatright

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Tue Nov 10, 2009 12:32 am

Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-lis
Geez! I feel bad for Jeff!!! All he wanted to do was share some wheel landing videos and he gets attacked!! I gotta say, looking at the first 15 seconds, it looks like the prop has a high speed wabbleI=99m surprised that someone hasn=99t asked him why he flies with a wobbly prop. My point is:=C2- How can any of us make a critique of his climb out based on this kind of footage? It looks to me like Jeff handles his Piet just fine.=C2-Gary BootheCool, Ca.PietenpolWW Corvair Conversion, mountedTail done,=C2-Fuselage=C2-on gear(15 ribs down)

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Tue Nov 10, 2009 12:38 am

Original Posted By: Robert Ray
RussellOn the supplemental plans that show the long fuselage there is a redesigned upper strut fitting that put the fitting in line with the pull of the struts. So you are correct in not liking the original fitting geometry. However they both seem to work fine on a Pietenpol.ChrisSacramento, CAWestCoastPiet.com ----- Original Message -----

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:32 pm

Original Posted By: H RULE

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:35 pm

Original Posted By: Ryan Mueller
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Got a new camera

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:57 pm

Original Posted By: Robert Ray
Yep, in engineering terms, what's happening is that the fitting and the strut don't line up, so when you resolve the load in the fitting into parallel and perpendicular components, the perpendicular load creates a bending moment about the centroid of the spar bolts.It's really there. And it really does increase the forces in those bolts.About all we can say is that it's proven to work anyway, and that the plane has, even with that, a reputation for being robust.David Paule ----- Original Message -----

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Tue Nov 10, 2009 3:53 pm

Original Posted By: Jeff Boatright

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Tue Nov 10, 2009 4:20 pm

Original Posted By: H RULE

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Tue Nov 10, 2009 5:32 pm

Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Geez! I feel bad for Jeff!!! All he wanted to do was share some wheellanding videos and he gets attacked!! I gotta say, looking at the first 15seconds, it looks like the prop has a high speed wabble.I'm surprised thatsomeone hasn't asked him why he flies with a wobbly prop. My point is: Howcan any of us make a critique of his climb out based on this kind offootage? It looks to me like Jeff handles his Piet just fine.Gary BootheCool, Ca.PietenpolWW Corvair Conversion, mountedTail done, Fuselage on gear(15 ribs down.) _____

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Tue Nov 10, 2009 6:10 pm

Original Posted By: Jeff Boatright

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Tue Nov 10, 2009 6:22 pm

Original Posted By: Michael Perez

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Tue Nov 10, 2009 7:21 pm

Original Posted By: Dan Yocum

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 1:47 am

Original Posted By: Robert Ray
Seeing as I started this thread I should show what I ended up doing.On both sides of the spar under the fitting I added 1/8-inch Birch plywood plates 12-inches long tapered on both ends to avoid sudden change in spare cross section. I did not weld the two straps together.ChrisSacramento, CAWestCoastPiet.com ________________________________________________________________________________Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 03:26:25 -0500Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Upper Flying Strut Fitting, Possibe Plans Error

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 5:31 am

Original Posted By:

matronics · Post by **matronics** » Fri Apr 28, 2017 9:34 pm

Original Posted By:> "Dan Yocum"
> To: > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Got a new camera> > > Dan, up to a point I agree with you. I think what Harvey is trying to say > is that if you take off at too steep of an angle and your airspeed is low > and the engine quites close to the ground, you don't have time to push your> nose over and build up flying speed before you hit the ground. It's all > quite different than being let off a tow at 200 feet. I've had two friends> die because of steep takeoffs close to the ground. One only killed himself> but the other killed his 4 yr old son, his father-in-law and himself. It > went down in front of his wife and his mother-in-law. He was flying a super> cub (as was the other), had thousands of hours as an Alaskan Fish and Game> pilot and was showing off. As I say, very different than a 200' release > with a glider.> Gene> > ----- Original Message -----

Brodhead Pietenpol Association