Original Posted By: "Gary Boothe"
My friend Jack Reber passed away on January 13. Jack built an Air Camper and a Sky Scout. The Air Camper originally had a Model A on it and was replaced with an A-65 around 1992. Around 2005 he also built a Sky Scout and used the Model A on that one. Both airplanes are up for sale to settle the estate. Jack's nephew Alan is handling the sale. His phone is 317-694-5339 or email cadetmoth2(at)yahoo.com-john-John HofmannVice-President, Information TechnologyThe Rees Group, Inc.2424 American LaneMadison, WI 53704Phone: 608.443.2468 ext 150Fax: 608.443.2474Email: jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc.com________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: Jack Reber
RE: Pietenpol-List: Jack Reber
Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Sorry to hear that, John! I love those louvers.whether they serve a purposeor not!Gary BootheNX308MB
Sorry to hear that, John! I love those louvers.whether they serve a purposeor not!Gary BootheNX308MB
Re: Pietenpol-List: Jack Reber
Original Posted By: Gene Rambo
John I too am sorry for your loss. Interesting cowl just covering the motor mount.Sent from my iPadJack TextorOn Jan 31, 2013, at 10:17 AM, John Hofmann wrote:> My friend Jack Reber passed away on January 13. Jack built an Air Camper and a Sky Scout. The Air Camper originally had a Model A on it and was replaced with an A-65 around 1992. Around 2005 he also built a Sky Scout and used the Model A on that one. Both airplanes are up for sale to settle the estate. Jack's nephew Alan is handling the sale. His phone is 317-694-5339 or email cadetmoth2(at)yahoo.com> > -john-> > John Hofmann> Vice-President, Information Technology> The Rees Group, Inc.> 2424 American Lane> Madison, WI 53704> Phone: 608.443.2468 ext 150> Fax: 608.443.2474> Email: jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc.com> ________________________________________________________________________________
John I too am sorry for your loss. Interesting cowl just covering the motor mount.Sent from my iPadJack TextorOn Jan 31, 2013, at 10:17 AM, John Hofmann wrote:> My friend Jack Reber passed away on January 13. Jack built an Air Camper and a Sky Scout. The Air Camper originally had a Model A on it and was replaced with an A-65 around 1992. Around 2005 he also built a Sky Scout and used the Model A on that one. Both airplanes are up for sale to settle the estate. Jack's nephew Alan is handling the sale. His phone is 317-694-5339 or email cadetmoth2(at)yahoo.com> > -john-> > John Hofmann> Vice-President, Information Technology> The Rees Group, Inc.> 2424 American Lane> Madison, WI 53704> Phone: 608.443.2468 ext 150> Fax: 608.443.2474> Email: jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc.com> ________________________________________________________________________________
RE: Pietenpol-List: Jack Reber
Original Posted By: jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc.com
That airplane is one of a couple that made me want a Pietenpol. It is one of the most beautiful I know of. Any idea what they are asking? It would be an ideal airplane for anyone looking! Gene
That airplane is one of a couple that made me want a Pietenpol. It is one of the most beautiful I know of. Any idea what they are asking? It would be an ideal airplane for anyone looking! Gene
Re: Pietenpol-List: Jack Reber
Original Posted By: "M. Zeke Zechini"
This discussion could go on forever and I promise that this will be my last poston the subject. Heck, delete it right now and move on. Jack, I have a framed,autographed picture of Paul Poberezny with his P-51, "Paul I", on the wallwith photos of my family and best friend, and diploma. I have several handwrittennotes from Paul, thanking me for some pieces of writing that I've done andalso thanking me for my interest in experimental aviation. Nobody can takethose away from me, and Paul "IS" EAA, or at least he's the EAA that I joinedand was a member of for so many years. When others took over, it's as if theytook a beautiful woman and prostituted her like pimps and thieves. It becameall about the money and the sponsorships and big business.Besides all the obvious stuff like the great ideas, articles, cameraderie, buildingassistance, and the superb photography (especially the covers of Sport Aviation),I joined because you could go to an airport or other venue after an EAAevent and there would not only NOT be any trash or graffiti, the place wouldalways be in better shape than before the event. I joined because people inEAA would ALWAYS give more than they took, and would happily help you repair,build, improve, fly, inspect, or anything else. You never had to ask for a toolor a part... somebody handed it to you. Everybody was welcome. Some of thatis still there, obviously. However, the prostitution continues (look at theads in any recent issue of Sport Pilot). They would have gotten more fromme voluntarily, for the reasons that Paul Poberezny believed in and lived, thanthey ever will by putting price tags on everything and trying to sell flyingto people who do not have aviation in their hearts. I have it in my heart, andI won't sell it at any price.Off soapbox now. End of sermon. End of topic for me.--------Oscar ZunigaMedford, ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 powerRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Jack Reber
This discussion could go on forever and I promise that this will be my last poston the subject. Heck, delete it right now and move on. Jack, I have a framed,autographed picture of Paul Poberezny with his P-51, "Paul I", on the wallwith photos of my family and best friend, and diploma. I have several handwrittennotes from Paul, thanking me for some pieces of writing that I've done andalso thanking me for my interest in experimental aviation. Nobody can takethose away from me, and Paul "IS" EAA, or at least he's the EAA that I joinedand was a member of for so many years. When others took over, it's as if theytook a beautiful woman and prostituted her like pimps and thieves. It becameall about the money and the sponsorships and big business.Besides all the obvious stuff like the great ideas, articles, cameraderie, buildingassistance, and the superb photography (especially the covers of Sport Aviation),I joined because you could go to an airport or other venue after an EAAevent and there would not only NOT be any trash or graffiti, the place wouldalways be in better shape than before the event. I joined because people inEAA would ALWAYS give more than they took, and would happily help you repair,build, improve, fly, inspect, or anything else. You never had to ask for a toolor a part... somebody handed it to you. Everybody was welcome. Some of thatis still there, obviously. However, the prostitution continues (look at theads in any recent issue of Sport Pilot). They would have gotten more fromme voluntarily, for the reasons that Paul Poberezny believed in and lived, thanthey ever will by putting price tags on everything and trying to sell flyingto people who do not have aviation in their hearts. I have it in my heart, andI won't sell it at any price.Off soapbox now. End of sermon. End of topic for me.--------Oscar ZunigaMedford, ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 powerRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Jack Reber
Original Posted By:> jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc.com
Gene,It is a beautiful bird. Maybe a little room in White Post for it.Sent from my iPadOn Jan 31, 2013, at 6:48 PM, Gene Rambo wrote:> That airplane is one of a couple that made me want a Pietenpol. It is one of the most beautiful I know of. Any idea what they are asking? It would be an ideal airplane for anyone looking!> > Gene>
Gene,It is a beautiful bird. Maybe a little room in White Post for it.Sent from my iPadOn Jan 31, 2013, at 6:48 PM, Gene Rambo wrote:> That airplane is one of a couple that made me want a Pietenpol. It is one of the most beautiful I know of. Any idea what they are asking? It would be an ideal airplane for anyone looking!> > Gene>
Re: Pietenpol-List: Jack Reber
Original Posted By:> jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc.com
It is a great machine. I wish I had more pictures. I helped a small bit in 91-92 when Jack re-covered it and took off the Model A and took a bunch then but they are probably lost to antiquity. It will make a really great airplane for someone. I will check with Alan to see what the price is on it.John HofmannVice-President, Information TechnologyThe Rees Group, Inc.2424 American LaneMadison, WI 53704Phone: 608.443.2468 ext 150Fax: 608.443.2474Email: jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc.comOn Jan 31, 2013, at 5:48 PM, Gene Rambo wrote:> That airplane is one of a couple that made me want a Pietenpol. It is one of the most beautiful I know of. Any idea what they are asking? It would be an ideal airplane for anyone looking!> > Gene>
It is a great machine. I wish I had more pictures. I helped a small bit in 91-92 when Jack re-covered it and took off the Model A and took a bunch then but they are probably lost to antiquity. It will make a really great airplane for someone. I will check with Alan to see what the price is on it.John HofmannVice-President, Information TechnologyThe Rees Group, Inc.2424 American LaneMadison, WI 53704Phone: 608.443.2468 ext 150Fax: 608.443.2474Email: jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc.comOn Jan 31, 2013, at 5:48 PM, Gene Rambo wrote:> That airplane is one of a couple that made me want a Pietenpol. It is one of the most beautiful I know of. Any idea what they are asking? It would be an ideal airplane for anyone looking!> > Gene>
Original Posted By: "Dick N"
John: it is hard to lose good people, and the beautiful red Piet says a lot aboutyour friend. Unique, a handsome stance, and a classic.By the way, to those who were asking about ideas on pitot tube mounting, the waythe red Piet has it installed is very close to what Scout has, and I think it'squite a common way to do it. Bring the plastic tubing out of the wing tothe rigid pitot, right down the jury strut a little ways, to get it out of disturbedair from the leading edge and well out of the propwash.--------Oscar ZunigaMedford, ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 powerRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
John: it is hard to lose good people, and the beautiful red Piet says a lot aboutyour friend. Unique, a handsome stance, and a classic.By the way, to those who were asking about ideas on pitot tube mounting, the waythe red Piet has it installed is very close to what Scout has, and I think it'squite a common way to do it. Bring the plastic tubing out of the wing tothe rigid pitot, right down the jury strut a little ways, to get it out of disturbedair from the leading edge and well out of the propwash.--------Oscar ZunigaMedford, ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 powerRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Jack Reber
Original Posted By: "taildrags"
Oscar, do you have a picture of your pitot tube mounting arrangement? I would love to see it if you do. Chuck----- Original Message -----
Oscar, do you have a picture of your pitot tube mounting arrangement? I would love to see it if you do. Chuck----- Original Message -----
Pietenpol-List: Re: Comparison test between Pietenpol airfoil and Riblett
Original Posted By: "Bill Church"
"What about the vortex generators? That's a major difference in my opinion. I'dlike to see the same number and type of vortex generators put on the 612 to seeif there's a difference.Also, were the gross weights at take off the same? Maybe I missed that in the text.Great information! Thanks for doing this. Dan -- Dan Yocum" ___________________Dan,Vortex Generators do not necessarily add a constant X percent improvement of allairfoils. Typically, they bring the most improvement to airfoils that have anearlier boundary separation, and thus a more "exciting" stall. That is not tosay VG won't help all airfoils. The manufacturers would sure like you to believethat. But it is not equal. Therefore, putting VG's on a Riblett does notunmuddy the waters, or make for a more apples to apples comparison.In fact, take two Pietenpol airfoils, add VG's to both, but change at what percentageof the chordlne they are placed, and they will give different numbers whenflown for comparison. It is not just the installation of VG's, but the placementas well, and unless two airplanes have them in exactly the same location,and they are at the same gross weight, running the same engine and prop, thenumbers probably will be different. VG's seem to give an improvement. I think a more interesting comparison would betwo separate tests- one comparison of P.F.'s airplane pre-VG and post-VG, andanother testing and comparison of a Riblett wing pre-VG and post-VG. That wouldbe a more accurate testing of the value of VG's, but only a comparison ofPietenpol airfoil to Pietenpol airfoil and Riblett to Riblett.Let me make sure that everyone understands this - I appreciate P.F. and Don's testingand information. They do all of us a service in doing the comparison flying.But, IMHO, it does not answer the Pietenpol vs Riblett debate. And addingVG's to Don's Riblett wing won't necessarily answer it either. If you like thePietenpol airfoil, then by all means, build it. If you like the Riblett, asI do, then build it instead. But don't get too deep into a discussion by usingthese tests as the foundation of your argument on either side.It is an older article, but I have attached a link to a circa 1997 article by MikeBusch on installing VG's. The value of the article is about halfway down thearticle where he gives a short discussion of the theory behind VG's. It mightbe interesting for anyone wanting to know the how's and why's of Vortex Generators.My 2 cents--------Semper Fi,Terry HandAthens, GARead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Comparison test between Pietenpol airfoil and Riblettairfoi
"What about the vortex generators? That's a major difference in my opinion. I'dlike to see the same number and type of vortex generators put on the 612 to seeif there's a difference.Also, were the gross weights at take off the same? Maybe I missed that in the text.Great information! Thanks for doing this. Dan -- Dan Yocum" ___________________Dan,Vortex Generators do not necessarily add a constant X percent improvement of allairfoils. Typically, they bring the most improvement to airfoils that have anearlier boundary separation, and thus a more "exciting" stall. That is not tosay VG won't help all airfoils. The manufacturers would sure like you to believethat. But it is not equal. Therefore, putting VG's on a Riblett does notunmuddy the waters, or make for a more apples to apples comparison.In fact, take two Pietenpol airfoils, add VG's to both, but change at what percentageof the chordlne they are placed, and they will give different numbers whenflown for comparison. It is not just the installation of VG's, but the placementas well, and unless two airplanes have them in exactly the same location,and they are at the same gross weight, running the same engine and prop, thenumbers probably will be different. VG's seem to give an improvement. I think a more interesting comparison would betwo separate tests- one comparison of P.F.'s airplane pre-VG and post-VG, andanother testing and comparison of a Riblett wing pre-VG and post-VG. That wouldbe a more accurate testing of the value of VG's, but only a comparison ofPietenpol airfoil to Pietenpol airfoil and Riblett to Riblett.Let me make sure that everyone understands this - I appreciate P.F. and Don's testingand information. They do all of us a service in doing the comparison flying.But, IMHO, it does not answer the Pietenpol vs Riblett debate. And addingVG's to Don's Riblett wing won't necessarily answer it either. If you like thePietenpol airfoil, then by all means, build it. If you like the Riblett, asI do, then build it instead. But don't get too deep into a discussion by usingthese tests as the foundation of your argument on either side.It is an older article, but I have attached a link to a circa 1997 article by MikeBusch on installing VG's. The value of the article is about halfway down thearticle where he gives a short discussion of the theory behind VG's. It mightbe interesting for anyone wanting to know the how's and why's of Vortex Generators.My 2 cents--------Semper Fi,Terry HandAthens, GARead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Comparison test between Pietenpol airfoil and Riblettairfoi
Original Posted By: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[Vantage Partners, LLC]"
Well, I guess the only real way to do a *true* comparison of the Pietenpol vs Riblettairfoils' performance on a Piet would to be to fly a specific Piet withone airfoil, and then switch the wings and fly it again, on the same day, withthe same engine, under the same atmospheric conditions. That probably ain'tever going to happen.In the absence of this type of a comparison, PF and Don's testing is likely asgood an indicator as we will get. Both aircraft are VERY similar, with almostidentical setups, so that the bulk of the differences in performance can logicallybe attributed to the difference in airfoils/wings. As PF clearly stated,the results so far are preliminary, and subject to change. However, the factthat there were basically insignificant differences in performance between thetwo suggests that changing the airfoil likely is not going to produce the sortof performance improvements that had been implied/hoped for. Or perhaps theonly "improvement" in performance to be achieved by changing to a Riblett airfoilcould be more easily realized by the addition of properly positioned VGs.While the comparison that has been done maybe isn't truly "apples to apples" (dueto the VGs), it is the only real comparison that we have to date, and the preliminaryresults indicate that there likely isn't a whole lot of differencein performance to be had by changing the airfoil. In MY opinion, the test resultsare significant, and should not be discounted simply because one wing hadVGs installed.Once again, many thanks to PF and Don for doing all this work, and sharing it withus.Bill C.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Well, I guess the only real way to do a *true* comparison of the Pietenpol vs Riblettairfoils' performance on a Piet would to be to fly a specific Piet withone airfoil, and then switch the wings and fly it again, on the same day, withthe same engine, under the same atmospheric conditions. That probably ain'tever going to happen.In the absence of this type of a comparison, PF and Don's testing is likely asgood an indicator as we will get. Both aircraft are VERY similar, with almostidentical setups, so that the bulk of the differences in performance can logicallybe attributed to the difference in airfoils/wings. As PF clearly stated,the results so far are preliminary, and subject to change. However, the factthat there were basically insignificant differences in performance between thetwo suggests that changing the airfoil likely is not going to produce the sortof performance improvements that had been implied/hoped for. Or perhaps theonly "improvement" in performance to be achieved by changing to a Riblett airfoilcould be more easily realized by the addition of properly positioned VGs.While the comparison that has been done maybe isn't truly "apples to apples" (dueto the VGs), it is the only real comparison that we have to date, and the preliminaryresults indicate that there likely isn't a whole lot of differencein performance to be had by changing the airfoil. In MY opinion, the test resultsare significant, and should not be discounted simply because one wing hadVGs installed.Once again, many thanks to PF and Don for doing all this work, and sharing it withus.Bill C.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Pietenpol-List: Re: Pietenpol and Riblett performance comparisons
Original Posted By: "tkreiner"
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Pietenpol and Riblett performance comparisonsGood posts on this subject and I think PF said it best in his preliminary report:"Are there going to be any major performance differences in thetwo wings. Based on the first 12-14 flights, I don't think so."In my simple mind I'm thinking if the Riblett indeed does give a better climb ratethan Piet wing it should at least, bare minimum match the climb rate of the Pietenpoleven without vortex generators which it doesn't at least thus far.In cruise vortex generators don't help you so they are not a factor but the Riblett should helpcruise speed and so far from PF's testing the Riblett wing doesn't do any better than thePietenpol wing.I realize that Don Harpers Corvair isn't fully broken in yet and that he and PF arecontinuing to fine tune Don's rigging and ASI indications so there will be further resultsas this comparison goes on but for right now I'm not seeing anything that would makeme want to build a Pietenpol with a Riblett airfoil.I think the speed increase that Lowell Frank felt with his Riblett was real but onlybecause his Riblett wing is 2 feet shorter than a normal Piet wing. Any airfoil willgive you a faster cruise speed if you cut two feet from it.Good discussion and many thanks to PF and Don Harper for this valuable input.Mike C.________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Pietenpol and Riblett performance comparisons
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Pietenpol and Riblett performance comparisonsGood posts on this subject and I think PF said it best in his preliminary report:"Are there going to be any major performance differences in thetwo wings. Based on the first 12-14 flights, I don't think so."In my simple mind I'm thinking if the Riblett indeed does give a better climb ratethan Piet wing it should at least, bare minimum match the climb rate of the Pietenpoleven without vortex generators which it doesn't at least thus far.In cruise vortex generators don't help you so they are not a factor but the Riblett should helpcruise speed and so far from PF's testing the Riblett wing doesn't do any better than thePietenpol wing.I realize that Don Harpers Corvair isn't fully broken in yet and that he and PF arecontinuing to fine tune Don's rigging and ASI indications so there will be further resultsas this comparison goes on but for right now I'm not seeing anything that would makeme want to build a Pietenpol with a Riblett airfoil.I think the speed increase that Lowell Frank felt with his Riblett was real but onlybecause his Riblett wing is 2 feet shorter than a normal Piet wing. Any airfoil willgive you a faster cruise speed if you cut two feet from it.Good discussion and many thanks to PF and Don Harper for this valuable input.Mike C.________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Pietenpol and Riblett performance comparisons
Original Posted By: "Gary Boothe"
Based upon the fuse dimensions alone, the plane with the 612 airfoil has an equivalentsquare foot drag which is roughly 10% higher than P.F's.This is HUGE in terms of additional drag!The reality here is that the "comparison" is apples to oranges. In order to havea true comparison, the 612 wing should be mounted on P.F.'s plane, or viseversa. And then, we're still comparing the an airfoil with vg's to one without them.This is not a way to conduct a true comparison.That said, I'd like to see a REAL comparison.Acquire proper data, and we'd be able to determine quite a bit more about the relativeperformance of the two airfoils.As my Mechanical Design Prof in Engineering school used to say, " fellas, withoutgood data, you're just another swinging D*** with an opinion."[/i]--------Tom KreinerRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Based upon the fuse dimensions alone, the plane with the 612 airfoil has an equivalentsquare foot drag which is roughly 10% higher than P.F's.This is HUGE in terms of additional drag!The reality here is that the "comparison" is apples to oranges. In order to havea true comparison, the 612 wing should be mounted on P.F.'s plane, or viseversa. And then, we're still comparing the an airfoil with vg's to one without them.This is not a way to conduct a true comparison.That said, I'd like to see a REAL comparison.Acquire proper data, and we'd be able to determine quite a bit more about the relativeperformance of the two airfoils.As my Mechanical Design Prof in Engineering school used to say, " fellas, withoutgood data, you're just another swinging D*** with an opinion."[/i]--------Tom KreinerRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Pietenpol-List: Re: Pietenpol and Riblett performance comparisons
Original Posted By: "Bill Church"
I'll bet PF regrets ever offering this info! Did anyone really read hispost?...and his disclaimers? He's too much of a gentleman, but if it were me, my response would be, "Gofind your own two airplanes and do your own tests!"Gary BootheNX308MBRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Pietenpol and Riblett performance comparisons
I'll bet PF regrets ever offering this info! Did anyone really read hispost?...and his disclaimers? He's too much of a gentleman, but if it were me, my response would be, "Gofind your own two airplanes and do your own tests!"Gary BootheNX308MBRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Pietenpol and Riblett performance comparisons
Original Posted By: "Peter W Johnson"
Talk about looking a gift horse in the mouth.The testing that was done is NOT "apples to oranges". They may be slightly differentvarieties of apples, but there really isn't a huge difference between thetwo aircraft. As PF said, if you disagree with anything in the report, do your own tests, andthen share the results with everyone. Otherwise, let's not make demands on anyonewho has offered to share the fruits of their efforts.Bill C.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Talk about looking a gift horse in the mouth.The testing that was done is NOT "apples to oranges". They may be slightly differentvarieties of apples, but there really isn't a huge difference between thetwo aircraft. As PF said, if you disagree with anything in the report, do your own tests, andthen share the results with everyone. Otherwise, let's not make demands on anyonewho has offered to share the fruits of their efforts.Bill C.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Pietenpol and Riblett performance comparisons
Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Hi Guys,I just got an email from Graham in West Australia. Graham built his Pietwith the Riblett Wing and an O-200. UFZ is the Piet I built (and sold) witha standard Piet wing and a Corvair engine.His quote from the email:-"Yesterday I flew in formation with Paul in UFZ & Bert in the Bucker. It was 0630 & flat calm, UFZ amazed me & I was flat out keeping up, thatold Corvair sounded great."I have no comparison of empty weights, flying conditions or anything else.Tends to agree with PF's findings.CheersPeterWonthaggi Australiahttp://repiet.cpc-world.com-----Original Message-----
Hi Guys,I just got an email from Graham in West Australia. Graham built his Pietwith the Riblett Wing and an O-200. UFZ is the Piet I built (and sold) witha standard Piet wing and a Corvair engine.His quote from the email:-"Yesterday I flew in formation with Paul in UFZ & Bert in the Bucker. It was 0630 & flat calm, UFZ amazed me & I was flat out keeping up, thatold Corvair sounded great."I have no comparison of empty weights, flying conditions or anything else.Tends to agree with PF's findings.CheersPeterWonthaggi Australiahttp://repiet.cpc-world.com-----Original Message-----
> Pietenpol-List: Jack Reber
Original Posted By: johnwoods(at)westnet.com.au
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com> > My friend Jack Reber passed away on January 13. Jack built an Air Camper and a Sky Scout. The Air Camper originally had a Model A on it and was replaced with an A-65 around 1992. Around 2005 he also built a Sky Scout and used the Model A on that one. Both airplanes are up for sale to settle the estate. Jack's nephew Alan is handling the sale. His phone is 317-694-5339 or email cadetmoth2(at)yahoo.com> > -john-> > John Hofmann> Vice-President, Information Technology> The Rees Group, Inc.> 2424 American Lane> Madison, WI 53704> Phone: 608.443.2468 ext 150> Fax: 608.443.2474> Email: jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc.com> ________________________________________________________________________________Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2013 10:39:27 +0800 (WST)
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com> > My friend Jack Reber passed away on January 13. Jack built an Air Camper and a Sky Scout. The Air Camper originally had a Model A on it and was replaced with an A-65 around 1992. Around 2005 he also built a Sky Scout and used the Model A on that one. Both airplanes are up for sale to settle the estate. Jack's nephew Alan is handling the sale. His phone is 317-694-5339 or email cadetmoth2(at)yahoo.com> > -john-> > John Hofmann> Vice-President, Information Technology> The Rees Group, Inc.> 2424 American Lane> Madison, WI 53704> Phone: 608.443.2468 ext 150> Fax: 608.443.2474> Email: jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc.com> ________________________________________________________________________________Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2013 10:39:27 +0800 (WST)
Pietenpol-List: Re: Jack Reber
Original Posted By: "taildrags"
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com> > My friend Jack Reber passed away on January 13. Jack built an Air Camper and a Sky Scout. The Air Camper originally had a Model A on it and was replaced with an A-65 around 1992. Around 2005 he also built a Sky Scout and used the Model A on that one. Both airplanes are up for sale to settle the estate. Jack's nephew Alan is handling the sale. His phone is 317-694-5339 or email cadetmoth2(at)yahoo.com> > -john-> > John Hofmann> Vice-President, Information Technology> The Rees Group, Inc.> 2424 American Lane> Madison, WI 53704> Phone: 608.443.2468 ext 150> Fax: 608.443.2474> Email: jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc.com> ________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Jack Reber
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com> > My friend Jack Reber passed away on January 13. Jack built an Air Camper and a Sky Scout. The Air Camper originally had a Model A on it and was replaced with an A-65 around 1992. Around 2005 he also built a Sky Scout and used the Model A on that one. Both airplanes are up for sale to settle the estate. Jack's nephew Alan is handling the sale. His phone is 317-694-5339 or email cadetmoth2(at)yahoo.com> > -john-> > John Hofmann> Vice-President, Information Technology> The Rees Group, Inc.> 2424 American Lane> Madison, WI 53704> Phone: 608.443.2468 ext 150> Fax: 608.443.2474> Email: jhofmann(at)reesgroupinc.com> ________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Jack Reber