Pietenpol-List: Wing incidence..

[matronics]

Original Posted By: Gary Boothe
If my memory serves me correctly, you fellows have been putting in about 1/4"incidence for the wing. In other words, the front cabanes are about 1/4" tallerthan the rears, right? Please let me know as I am cutting mine today.Thanks,Ray KrauseSkyScoutSent from my iPad________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wing incidence..

[matronics]

Original Posted By: Ray Krause
ace sells a streamline headrest for about 30 bucks . That is what I have on mine and it works great for a seat too. Cheers, GardonerSent from my iPhoneOn Apr 8, 2013, at 9:40 AM, "Douwe Blumberg" wrote:> Looks plenty good to me Mark. I find that I place the palm of my hand just behind the cockpit, especially when leaving, and have seen some guys sit there, but your design would support both nicely. In my opinion> > douwe> > ============================================================================================================================================> ________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Wing incidence..

[matronics]

Original Posted By: "jarheadpilot82"
Corky,I kinda' like the name "Corky's Rib Shack" for the title of your business.Just a thought.--------Semper Fi,Terry HandAthens, GARead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing incidence..

[matronics]

Original Posted By: "C N Campbell"
Gary's memory is correct as far as the plans show. The difference is 1 inch betweenthe front cabanes and the rear cabanas, as shown in the snapshot from theplans, Drawing #6. So, Ray, do you mean an additional 1/4 inch?--------Semper Fi,Terry HandAthens, GARead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ttachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/scre ... __________

[matronics]

Original Posted By: "Ray Krause"
Front 21-1/4 -- Rear 20-1/4 Chuck----- Original Message -----

[matronics]

Original Posted By: "Ray Krause"
The dimentions I just sent are from the bottom bolt centerline to the top bolt centerline. C----- Original Message -----

[matronics]

Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Any idea of the diameter and pitch of the McCauley? Rpm?Brett

[matronics]

Original Posted By: "taildrags"
Thanks everyone. I am working off the SkyScout plans and it says both front andrear cabanes are 21.25". I had not checked the Air Camper plans. My memory toldme that there had been discussion on the length and the front ones were longer.I will go with the 1inch longer in the front... It is easier to go shorterthan longer!Thanks for all the responses.Ray KrauseSkyScoutSent from my iPadOn Apr 8, 2013, at 1:59 PM, "jarheadpilot82" wrote:> > Gary's memory is correct as far as the plans show. The difference is 1 inch betweenthe front cabanes and the rear cabanas, as shown in the snapshot from theplans, Drawing #6. > > So, Ray, do you mean an additional 1/4 inch?> > --------> Semper Fi,> > Terry Hand> Athens, GA> > > > > Read this topic online here:> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 183#398183> > > > > Attachments: > > http://forums.matronics.com//files/scre ... pm_212.png> > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing incidence..

[matronics]

Original Posted By: Michael Perez
OK!I will follow the plans, as I have done on everything else. My memory seemed totell me that there had been some discussion here about more incidence was requiredfor better flying qualities. That is why I asked the group. But if thegeneral opinion is that the plans are the best way to go, that is what I willdo. I actually feel a lot more comfortable doing that!So thanks to all for the speedy responses. I will cut to length today and thenmake the hardware.Has anyone tried ordering chromoly metal from Onlinemetals.com in Seattle? Theyseem easy to work with and have pretty good prices. For me it is only a 2-3dayground UPS shipping. They will do custom cutting into strips for a very lowfee. Sure saves a lot of time.Thanks to all,Ray Krause,SkyScoutSent from my iPadOn Apr 9, 2013, at 5:32 AM, "Bill Church" wrote:> > Ray,> I think most builders are just following the plans. And for the Air Camper,that means the front cabanes are 1" longer than the back. But if the Sky Scoutplans show equal length front and back, it would seem logical to make the cabanesfor the Sky Scout equal in length.> When all else fails, read the instructions.> > Bill C.> > > > > Read this topic online here:> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 231#398231> > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 08:41:16 -0700 (PDT)

[matronics]

Original Posted By: Michael Perez
Ray,I started wondering about your question a bit more, and assumed that there mustbe a structural difference between the Sky Scout and the Air Camper, to accountfor the difference. I don't have a copy of the Sky Scout plans, so I accessedthe Sport Aviation articles online that discuss the Sky Scout, and saw thatthe Sky Scout uses basically the same ribs and mounting bracket arrangementas the Air Camper. And the detail for the cabane struts does show them to bethe same front and rear, yet the draftsman went to the trouble to list the lengthfor the front and back separately (see attachment). It does make one wonderwhether there should be a difference between front and rear. Maybe the answerisn't as cut and dried as it seems.Unfortunately, there aren't so many builders of Sky Scouts to gather empiricalevidence from.Bill C.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ttachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/fgm_ ... ______Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 09:51:07 -0700 (PDT)

[matronics]

Original Posted By: "jarheadpilot82"
Is it EVER as simple as it seems?Incidence is really only in relation to the horiz stab and/or all of this in relationto the "center line" of the fuse.When I splat the gear, it bent up my wing struts, so I built new ones by unbendingthe old ones and measuring them as well as I could (which was clearly somewhatof a swag). Because I wasn't sure if the length of the old ones were "trimmed"to my plane, I just copied them rather than referring to the plans.I also rebuilt the cabane struts (as they were bushed incorrectly) which had tochange them somewhat. It was a rebuild of them rather than a replacement.And then, I replaced one of the brace wires (damage to only that one...) and whoknows if they were all retensioned the same as they were.And then I just flew it... and noticed not one single difference than before. The point is, I'm not sure even an INCH is really noticeable in this genre offlying. I often wonder if all the speed and climb differences we experience are more dueto rigging (or lack thereof) rather than minute differences in props, airfoilsor streamlined fittings. A fuselage not aligned with travel direction presentsLOTS of frontal area, and that's what we're talking about when we changethe incidence of the wing, and then corresponding elevator trim or stab incidencechange. I found on my last cross country (my first alone, so had time to just play andexperiment) I picked up a cool 5mph by holding the ball about 3/4 out to the left,meaning something wasn't rigged just right or the ball indicator a littleoff, something.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing incidence..

[matronics]

Original Posted By: "tools"
Subject: Pietenpol-List: 3 days to rebuild--very impressive That is just an INCREDIBLE amount of work to accomplish in three days, yes Bill. I'm amazed at your productivityMike. That is a VERY impressive rebuild time.I recall the first time I built a set of landing gear legs, it took me about 3 days just to get all the compound angles correctwith lots of cursing because I wasn't smart enough to use two-by-fours to practice on first.My hat is off to you Mike for some incredible rebuild time that you accomplished so much in so little time. Does that includecolor matching paint and all. Amazing.Mike C.Hope you get to enjoy some good flying this spring in Dick's old Piet.Mike Danford wrote: (tools)During a landing accident, I broke BOTH the bottom longerons on my wood fuse Piet. The repair itself, building new landing gear legs (wood gear), scarfing in new longerons, replacing the belly skin, one crossmember and the recovering really only took 3 days.________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing incidence..

[matronics]

Original Posted By: "Douwe Blumberg"
Hey... be nice! I'm rather sensitive... Not sure what they sounded like since all I heard was "Oooooh fudge...",but I didn't say fudge...Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________

[matronics]

Original Posted By: Ray Krause
Thanks, Bill.Those are the plans I have. I also have the Air Camper plans and go back and forthbetween the two. The similarities are intriguing, but different. That iswhy I questioned the incidence matter and I thought I had read something aboutit here. I will stick to the plans and see what happens. But after usingthe plans dimensions, I find I need more incidence, it will require all new cabanes,struts, fittings and cables. IF I go with the added 1", I could alwaysmodify the rest of the materials to accommodate the shorter front cabane. Ohwell, it takes faith to build an airplane!Thanks for your time and research. That is the great part about this forum, youreally care!Sent from my iPadOn Apr 9, 2013, at 9:24 AM, "Bill Church" wrote:> > Ray,> I started wondering about your question a bit more, and assumed that there mustbe a structural difference between the Sky Scout and the Air Camper, to accountfor the difference. I don't have a copy of the Sky Scout plans, so I accessedthe Sport Aviation articles online that discuss the Sky Scout, and saw thatthe Sky Scout uses basically the same ribs and mounting bracket arrangementas the Air Camper. And the detail for the cabane struts does show them to bethe same front and rear, yet the draftsman went to the trouble to list the lengthfor the front and back separately (see attachment). It does make one wonderwhether there should be a difference between front and rear. Maybe the answerisn't as cut and dried as it seems.> Unfortunately, there aren't so many builders of Sky Scouts to gather empiricalevidence from.> > Bill C.> > > > > Read this topic online here:> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 249#398249> > > > > Attachments: > > http://forums.matronics.com//files/fgm_ ... ts_817.jpg> > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________

[matronics]

Original Posted By: Ray Krause
You mean I won't just drop out of the sky if I go with no wing incidence, or withthe 1inch you use with the Air Camper?With my Waiex, I tend to have a heavy left foot. If I relax and am not payingattention, I will be flying along with the ball out about a full ball width. WhenI finally feel it (guess my seat of the pants is dying), I make the correctionby removing my left foot, I pick up another 5MPH! So much for trim.Ray KrauseSkyScoutSent from my iPadOn Apr 9, 2013, at 9:51 AM, "tools" wrote:> > Is it EVER as simple as it seems?> > Incidence is really only in relation to the horiz stab and/or all of this inrelation to the "center line" of the fuse.> > When I splat the gear, it bent up my wing struts, so I built new ones by unbendingthe old ones and measuring them as well as I could (which was clearly somewhatof a swag). Because I wasn't sure if the length of the old ones were "trimmed"to my plane, I just copied them rather than referring to the plans.> > I also rebuilt the cabane struts (as they were bushed incorrectly) which hadto change them somewhat. It was a rebuild of them rather than a replacement.> > And then, I replaced one of the brace wires (damage to only that one...) andwho knows if they were all retensioned the same as they were.> > And then I just flew it... and noticed not one single difference than before.The point is, I'm not sure even an INCH is really noticeable in this genre offlying. > > I often wonder if all the speed and climb differences we experience are moredue to rigging (or lack thereof) rather than minute differences in props, airfoilsor streamlined fittings. A fuselage not aligned with travel direction presentsLOTS of frontal area, and that's what we're talking about when we changethe incidence of the wing, and then corresponding elevator trim or stab incidencechange. > > I found on my last cross country (my first alone, so had time to just play andexperiment) I picked up a cool 5mph by holding the ball about 3/4 out to theleft, meaning something wasn't rigged just right or the ball indicator a littleoff, something.> > > > > Read this topic online here:> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 250#398250> > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________

[matronics]

Original Posted By: Ray Krause
Great point, and thanks.Ray KrauseSent from my iPadOn Apr 9, 2013, at 9:51 AM, "tools" wrote:> > Is it EVER as simple as it seems?> > Incidence is really only in relation to the horiz stab and/or all of this inrelation to the "center line" of the fuse.> > When I splat the gear, it bent up my wing struts, so I built new ones by unbendingthe old ones and measuring them as well as I could (which was clearly somewhatof a swag). Because I wasn't sure if the length of the old ones were "trimmed"to my plane, I just copied them rather than referring to the plans.> > I also rebuilt the cabane struts (as they were bushed incorrectly) which hadto change them somewhat. It was a rebuild of them rather than a replacement.> > And then, I replaced one of the brace wires (damage to only that one...) andwho knows if they were all retensioned the same as they were.> > And then I just flew it... and noticed not one single difference than before.The point is, I'm not sure even an INCH is really noticeable in this genre offlying. > > I often wonder if all the speed and climb differences we experience are moredue to rigging (or lack thereof) rather than minute differences in props, airfoilsor streamlined fittings. A fuselage not aligned with travel direction presentsLOTS of frontal area, and that's what we're talking about when we changethe incidence of the wing, and then corresponding elevator trim or stab incidencechange. > > I found on my last cross country (my first alone, so had time to just play andexperiment) I picked up a cool 5mph by holding the ball about 3/4 out to theleft, meaning something wasn't rigged just right or the ball indicator a littleoff, something.> > > > > Read this topic online here:> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 250#398250> > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________