Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Thanks, Santiago! I have noticed that extra tube on some pictures, but don'treally understand the geometry that would require it, unless it may takesome load off the brackets, bolted to the fuselage.Gary Boothe Cool, Ca. Pietenpol WW Corvair Conversion, mounted Tail done, Fuselage on gear (18 ribs down.) _____
Pietenpol-List: International Piet
Pietenpol-List: International Piet
Original Posted By: "Gary Boothe"
Just stumbled across this shot of a "Pietenpol Air Camper" from the Czech Republic.I think it more likely started life as a GN-1.http://www.airliners.net/photo/Pietenpo ... 29/L/Funny how some "personal touches" can drastically change the look of this plane.Some of the "special features" this plane has include V-struts, a dorsal fin,squat landing gear, and a clunky cowl. Also, the cockpits look to be stretched.Put these features all together, and the result is YUCK. Well, that's justmy opinion. There are probably some people out there that think this thing looksgood. I think that planes like this one provide a good argument for the recommendationto "stick to the plans".BCRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Just stumbled across this shot of a "Pietenpol Air Camper" from the Czech Republic.I think it more likely started life as a GN-1.http://www.airliners.net/photo/Pietenpo ... 29/L/Funny how some "personal touches" can drastically change the look of this plane.Some of the "special features" this plane has include V-struts, a dorsal fin,squat landing gear, and a clunky cowl. Also, the cockpits look to be stretched.Put these features all together, and the result is YUCK. Well, that's justmy opinion. There are probably some people out there that think this thing looksgood. I think that planes like this one provide a good argument for the recommendationto "stick to the plans".BCRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Re: Pietenpol-List: International Piet
Original Posted By: Pastor Mike Townsley
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: International Piet
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: International Piet
Re: Pietenpol-List: Tailwheel & shimmy
Original Posted By: helspersew(at)aol.com
Pietenpol-List: Re: Tailwheel & shimmy
Original Posted By: "Jack Phillips"
Keep wishing, Dan!Oh, all right... I'll "chime in".I can see how one could think that such a cross member wouldn't be necessary, sincethe forward arms are connected to the fuselage - but those connections atthe fuselage can't really resist twisting. And the tailwheel assembly will definitelybe imparting twisting forces on the fuselage brackets. The geometry ofa tailwheel is different from the skid, in that it's contact point with theground is several inches away from the steel frame, whereas the skid is immediatelybelow the frame. This arrangement provides what is called a moment arm (engineeringterm), and the result is that when the tail of the plane is subjectedto side loads, the tailwheel will try to twist the steel frame. If the tubesare not tied together (other than back where the tailwheel is attached), theindividual tubes will twist. By welding a crossmember between the two arms,the arms are no longer able to twist individually, and the twisting forces willbe transferred directly to the fuselage rather than those tubes and the mountingbrackets. Attached is a shot I found that shows the assembly that Ken Perkinsmakes, and the cross member can clearly be seen.This cross member won't eliminate the twisting of the steel frame, since it's basicallyonly two dimensional, but it will definitely be better than not havingthe cross member.Hope this helps.Bill C. (engineering type)Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ttachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/kp_t ... __________
Keep wishing, Dan!Oh, all right... I'll "chime in".I can see how one could think that such a cross member wouldn't be necessary, sincethe forward arms are connected to the fuselage - but those connections atthe fuselage can't really resist twisting. And the tailwheel assembly will definitelybe imparting twisting forces on the fuselage brackets. The geometry ofa tailwheel is different from the skid, in that it's contact point with theground is several inches away from the steel frame, whereas the skid is immediatelybelow the frame. This arrangement provides what is called a moment arm (engineeringterm), and the result is that when the tail of the plane is subjectedto side loads, the tailwheel will try to twist the steel frame. If the tubesare not tied together (other than back where the tailwheel is attached), theindividual tubes will twist. By welding a crossmember between the two arms,the arms are no longer able to twist individually, and the twisting forces willbe transferred directly to the fuselage rather than those tubes and the mountingbrackets. Attached is a shot I found that shows the assembly that Ken Perkinsmakes, and the cross member can clearly be seen.This cross member won't eliminate the twisting of the steel frame, since it's basicallyonly two dimensional, but it will definitely be better than not havingthe cross member.Hope this helps.Bill C. (engineering type)Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ttachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/kp_t ... __________
RE: Pietenpol-List: Tailwheel & shimmy
Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Having built my tailwheel first without the cross tube and finding thattailwheel steering inputs went mostly into twisting the tailwheel arm ratherthan turning the wheel, I rebuilt it and added the cross tube making theailwheel arm into an "A" shape. That works well. Here is the original one:And here is the improved version:Jack PhillipsNX899JPRaleigh, NC _____
Having built my tailwheel first without the cross tube and finding thattailwheel steering inputs went mostly into twisting the tailwheel arm ratherthan turning the wheel, I rebuilt it and added the cross tube making theailwheel arm into an "A" shape. That works well. Here is the original one:And here is the improved version:Jack PhillipsNX899JPRaleigh, NC _____
Pietenpol-List: Re: Tailwheel & shimmy
Original Posted By: Jeff Boatright
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Tailwheel & shimmy
Original Posted By: helspersew(at)aol.com