Original Posted By: Jim Boyer
Pietenpol-List: July 5th...New Milestone
RE: Pietenpol-List: July 5th...New Milestone
Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Congratulations, Michael! You've taken the first step into a larger world.Jack PhillipsNX899JPSmith Mountain Lake, Virginia _____
Congratulations, Michael! You've taken the first step into a larger world.Jack PhillipsNX899JPSmith Mountain Lake, Virginia _____
Pietenpol-List: Re: July 5th...New Milestone
Original Posted By: "john francis"
Builders,I have been an light aircraft mechanic in Florida for a long time. One of inspectiontasks that is occasionally done is looking over a single engine plane beforeit flies to the Bahamas. The gap from West Palm to West End is 56 miles,and smart pilots, particularly those renting, get another set of eyes on the planebefore they stick their family in it. When given 30 minutes to evaluate acertified engine's condition on the ramp, my focus is on the Mags and the Carb,as there two are the most likely sources of taking a swim. A slightly low compressioncylinder is not the same trouble as a failed mag on a 95 degree daywith four people in a C-172. If the Mags and the carb are working perfectly,odds of other trouble are quite low. The slightest hint of issue from either isa good reason to delay the trip. .The exact same logic applies to Experimentals, and I can make a statistical casethat flying the 40 hours on a new homebuilt, even one with a certified engine,is greater risk that flying for a week in the Bahamas. If a neighbor chosean A-65 Continental for his newly built Pietenpol, I wouldn't be concerned thatthe basic engine had 800 hrs. on it. If it has consistent oil pressure. it isnot likely to throw a rod, but I would advise him to stack the deck in his favorand make absolutely sure that he had a perfect Carb and Mags on it, as theyare the likely source of any issue.When looking at the O-320 headed to the islands, I look at the logs to make surethat the last people who touched the mags and carb were in a repair station,or the factory. After visual inspection for leaks and security, I run the engineto full power and try to make it misbehave with the throttle and mixture.A critical test is full static power and slightly leaning must show an rpm increase.Carb heat must work, and cutting off the fuel and letting it idle mustcause a 25-50 rpm rise before it quits. Engine must idle as solid as a rock. Turnthe prop and feel for low compression and listen for impulses to click atthe same time. The 1/2" nuts holding the mags are checked for torque. Hands onmags to make sure they are secure. Leads traced to look for cuts, every 3/4 nutchecked. Engine is started and the key is messed with to make sure a worn switchwill not short. The run up is performed with the engine heat soaked, becausemags have trouble when they are hot, not cold. Zero tolerance outside oflimits on mag drop. The goal is to find the circumstances in which it misbehaves,not to show that it runs ok. Any discrepancy on mags or Carb, even one thatis hard to quantify, is cause for the delay of the trip. If I bring any issueto the pilots attention and he responds with a variation on "It will be alright"I never fly with him nor work for him again. I am not a cat, I don't have9 lives..If a newly finished home built has a used certified engine on it, and the builderis having trouble starting it, odds are the trouble is with the Mags or thecarb. If it is stored in a reasonably dry place, a piston in a bore can happilywait 20 years to be re-stared, but the points in mags don't like this and carbsdon't like fuel, especially auto fuel evaporating from them. (The sole commonexception to the mags-carb rule is the camshafts on Lycomings left to sitoften corrode and if the engine is run without correcting this the grind thelobes off in a few hours and pump the metal through the oil system.) A homebuilderis allowed to fix his own carb and mags if they need attention, and thereare manuals and parts lists on the net, but I can make a case that this isn'talways smart..Looking at the carb: aircraft carbs are deceptively simple, and they look far easier to rebuild than a four barrel. Here is the hidden issue: Many carbs on engines for home builts are 60 years old and have had long periods of inactivity, previous owners mix and match parts, and people who like to drill out jets. A skilled guy in a FAA fuel system repair station can spot all of these, but a homebuilder is likely blind to them. I like aircraft carbs, and I teach people to use them after sending them to a professional. Maybe 3 of 10 NAS3's or MA3's sold at fly marts have mix and match parts inside. Hard starting is not the worst thing about poorly tuned carbs. First, a carb that is set too lean or has a malfunctioning enrichment circuit will damage the engine in flight. Second, ones that don't run smooth will often quit at idle. Put this on a hand prop plane and combine it with the fact that many pilots don't fly every pattern power off, and the new homebuilt ends up 100 yards short of the runway threshold. For more info on carbs, look at this link: http://flycorvair.net/2013/12/03/carbur ... ce-page/.I do not trust mags that have no logs, were repaired by amateurs, or have had adecade with no inspection of any kind. My neighbor owned a Mag test bench thatcould run all brands and evaluate them with proper loads on the leads, a toolyou find in a Mag repair station. He just sold it on Ebay and got $4,000 forit. If it was actually possible to properly evaluate, repair, overhaul and testaircraft mags without this tool, then it would not be possible to sell it for$4,000. It is legal for a homebuilder to 'repair' his own mags, but no rationalperson who make the argument that a first time amateur without the test devicecould do as good a job as a professional with the correct equipment..Now lets think about a new Pietenpol getting ready for it's first flight: Planeis built by a nice guy, but planes are a hobby, not a career. A tech counselorlooked at it, but that man's experience was building one RV-6A, and all his"looks good" offered was a false sense of security. It passes the FAA exam, witha DAR that charges $400 but didn't even ask to see it run. The plane is outof rig, but no one knows this yet. The low time pilot's time in type is two tripsaround the pattern at Brodhead. He got 3 hours of tail wheel in a Cessna170, (a plane that could land itself) but he was not allowed to solo it. The pilothas never flown anything that has the short glide ratio of a Piet. At hislast Biennial the CFI allowed him to drag the 152 in with power and plop it downon the runway. He is nervous enough even without the video cameras, but thereis a growing group of spectators adding pressure. Under these conditions,does it sound smart that he is also flying the first aircraft carb that he hasever 'rebuilt'?.A small continental is an easy engine to troubleshoot if you are trained on them.This training can come in many forms, but the most effective is learning themin person, from someone who knows them. Theoretically you could learn to flyby reading a book, but everyone understands that in person flight training works.I only make the same point with maintenance, that instruction is best, personto person. On a relative scale, making one run that is reluctant to startis very easy compared to doing an airworthy job overhauling a carb or a magwithout specific tools or training. Everyone is entitled to their own opinionabout this, but what ever difference in opinion is, the wager riding on the opinionis the same, the whole value of the plane and the lives of the people init. Place your bet carefully.I like Continentals, and have a lot of time flying behind them. Their primary qualityis reliability. This well earned reputation was made seven decades ago,when homebuilding was still illegal in the US. The Continental reputation wasbuilt on relatively new engines, installed at factories, and maintained by trained,licensed A&E mechanics, in a era where people had longer attention spans.Seventy years later, anyone expecting that the same reputation magically livesin the metal is deluding themselves. To get the same results, you have toget as close to the original format as possible. But the issue is that the partscan be old, the details of the installation on a homebuilt can be weak, andthe guy working on the carb may have never built one before. Is the issue beginningto make some sense?To even get close to the original reliability, One must spend some money on parts,the used parts must have a history and be within limits, and critical itemslike mags and the carb should be done or at least checked by a repair station.You can choose to do otherwise, but it is not possible to then argue that youcan expect the full reputation for reliability. Anyone who thinks that youcan have the reliability of a certified motor when you buy one that is advertisedas no logs or experimental only is mistaken. You dont get to have it bothways. Continentals reputation was not built on engines made of junk and spraypainted. If the engine was just as reliable with out of spec parts, then theywouldnt be out of spec would they?.There are always people who argue that they have to have a reliable certified engineand that they will not fly auto engines. Then the first thing they do isgo out and look for the cheapest collection of parts bolted together that aremasquerading as a certified engine, made of out of spec parts. That behaviorisnt rational, but people who are compulsively cheap often are satisfied withthe illusion of reliability instead of the real thing. Want to know who isntfooled by this? Our old friends Physics, Chemistry and Gravity. If the FAA considersthe engine un-airworthy in a certified plane, it is just as un-airworthyin an experimental one. Physics, Chemistry and Gravity dont care if the planewas built in a factory or your garage. An engine built of out of spec partsdoesnt magically become airworthy when it is bolted on an experimental..I am an Embry-Riddle trained A&P with 24 years of continuous work on light aircraft.I am qualified to work on virtualy any part in GA planes, but that doesn'tmean I am reluctant to hire other mechanics with greater experience and bettertooling. When the right mag had excessive drop on the C-85 in my wife's Taylorcraft,I could have replaced the cracked coil myself, but instead I took bothmags to a repair station and waited while they were overhauled. In the last10 years we have finished several homebuilts, and I could have overhauled eachof the carbs myself, but I elected to send them all to a certified repair station.The difference between 'fixed' and 'Yellow tagged' is often hundreds ofdollars. It sounds like a lot of money until you have lived through to planecrashes and attended a few funerals. 90% of the people reading this make moremoney than I do, and 95% have less experience with aircraft engines. If thosepeople are trying to save money by fixing a mag or a carb themselves, when Iwould send the same part out, they should rethink that plan.My known specialty is training amateurs to build aircraft engines for experimentalaircraft. It doesn't matter that the hardware is mostly Chevrolet and notContinental, It isn't about metal, it is about the capacity of builders to learn,and I am not speaking of turning wrenches, I am speaking of learning to makegood decisions in a very unforgiving environment. No one has to agree withmy perspective, but I have been doing this for long enough, with enough homebuildersthat it is worth considering carefully. Homebuilding, including buildingengines, can be done with reasonably low risk, but only when the builder makesgood decisions. -wwRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: July 5th...New Milestone
Builders,I have been an light aircraft mechanic in Florida for a long time. One of inspectiontasks that is occasionally done is looking over a single engine plane beforeit flies to the Bahamas. The gap from West Palm to West End is 56 miles,and smart pilots, particularly those renting, get another set of eyes on the planebefore they stick their family in it. When given 30 minutes to evaluate acertified engine's condition on the ramp, my focus is on the Mags and the Carb,as there two are the most likely sources of taking a swim. A slightly low compressioncylinder is not the same trouble as a failed mag on a 95 degree daywith four people in a C-172. If the Mags and the carb are working perfectly,odds of other trouble are quite low. The slightest hint of issue from either isa good reason to delay the trip. .The exact same logic applies to Experimentals, and I can make a statistical casethat flying the 40 hours on a new homebuilt, even one with a certified engine,is greater risk that flying for a week in the Bahamas. If a neighbor chosean A-65 Continental for his newly built Pietenpol, I wouldn't be concerned thatthe basic engine had 800 hrs. on it. If it has consistent oil pressure. it isnot likely to throw a rod, but I would advise him to stack the deck in his favorand make absolutely sure that he had a perfect Carb and Mags on it, as theyare the likely source of any issue.When looking at the O-320 headed to the islands, I look at the logs to make surethat the last people who touched the mags and carb were in a repair station,or the factory. After visual inspection for leaks and security, I run the engineto full power and try to make it misbehave with the throttle and mixture.A critical test is full static power and slightly leaning must show an rpm increase.Carb heat must work, and cutting off the fuel and letting it idle mustcause a 25-50 rpm rise before it quits. Engine must idle as solid as a rock. Turnthe prop and feel for low compression and listen for impulses to click atthe same time. The 1/2" nuts holding the mags are checked for torque. Hands onmags to make sure they are secure. Leads traced to look for cuts, every 3/4 nutchecked. Engine is started and the key is messed with to make sure a worn switchwill not short. The run up is performed with the engine heat soaked, becausemags have trouble when they are hot, not cold. Zero tolerance outside oflimits on mag drop. The goal is to find the circumstances in which it misbehaves,not to show that it runs ok. Any discrepancy on mags or Carb, even one thatis hard to quantify, is cause for the delay of the trip. If I bring any issueto the pilots attention and he responds with a variation on "It will be alright"I never fly with him nor work for him again. I am not a cat, I don't have9 lives..If a newly finished home built has a used certified engine on it, and the builderis having trouble starting it, odds are the trouble is with the Mags or thecarb. If it is stored in a reasonably dry place, a piston in a bore can happilywait 20 years to be re-stared, but the points in mags don't like this and carbsdon't like fuel, especially auto fuel evaporating from them. (The sole commonexception to the mags-carb rule is the camshafts on Lycomings left to sitoften corrode and if the engine is run without correcting this the grind thelobes off in a few hours and pump the metal through the oil system.) A homebuilderis allowed to fix his own carb and mags if they need attention, and thereare manuals and parts lists on the net, but I can make a case that this isn'talways smart..Looking at the carb: aircraft carbs are deceptively simple, and they look far easier to rebuild than a four barrel. Here is the hidden issue: Many carbs on engines for home builts are 60 years old and have had long periods of inactivity, previous owners mix and match parts, and people who like to drill out jets. A skilled guy in a FAA fuel system repair station can spot all of these, but a homebuilder is likely blind to them. I like aircraft carbs, and I teach people to use them after sending them to a professional. Maybe 3 of 10 NAS3's or MA3's sold at fly marts have mix and match parts inside. Hard starting is not the worst thing about poorly tuned carbs. First, a carb that is set too lean or has a malfunctioning enrichment circuit will damage the engine in flight. Second, ones that don't run smooth will often quit at idle. Put this on a hand prop plane and combine it with the fact that many pilots don't fly every pattern power off, and the new homebuilt ends up 100 yards short of the runway threshold. For more info on carbs, look at this link: http://flycorvair.net/2013/12/03/carbur ... ce-page/.I do not trust mags that have no logs, were repaired by amateurs, or have had adecade with no inspection of any kind. My neighbor owned a Mag test bench thatcould run all brands and evaluate them with proper loads on the leads, a toolyou find in a Mag repair station. He just sold it on Ebay and got $4,000 forit. If it was actually possible to properly evaluate, repair, overhaul and testaircraft mags without this tool, then it would not be possible to sell it for$4,000. It is legal for a homebuilder to 'repair' his own mags, but no rationalperson who make the argument that a first time amateur without the test devicecould do as good a job as a professional with the correct equipment..Now lets think about a new Pietenpol getting ready for it's first flight: Planeis built by a nice guy, but planes are a hobby, not a career. A tech counselorlooked at it, but that man's experience was building one RV-6A, and all his"looks good" offered was a false sense of security. It passes the FAA exam, witha DAR that charges $400 but didn't even ask to see it run. The plane is outof rig, but no one knows this yet. The low time pilot's time in type is two tripsaround the pattern at Brodhead. He got 3 hours of tail wheel in a Cessna170, (a plane that could land itself) but he was not allowed to solo it. The pilothas never flown anything that has the short glide ratio of a Piet. At hislast Biennial the CFI allowed him to drag the 152 in with power and plop it downon the runway. He is nervous enough even without the video cameras, but thereis a growing group of spectators adding pressure. Under these conditions,does it sound smart that he is also flying the first aircraft carb that he hasever 'rebuilt'?.A small continental is an easy engine to troubleshoot if you are trained on them.This training can come in many forms, but the most effective is learning themin person, from someone who knows them. Theoretically you could learn to flyby reading a book, but everyone understands that in person flight training works.I only make the same point with maintenance, that instruction is best, personto person. On a relative scale, making one run that is reluctant to startis very easy compared to doing an airworthy job overhauling a carb or a magwithout specific tools or training. Everyone is entitled to their own opinionabout this, but what ever difference in opinion is, the wager riding on the opinionis the same, the whole value of the plane and the lives of the people init. Place your bet carefully.I like Continentals, and have a lot of time flying behind them. Their primary qualityis reliability. This well earned reputation was made seven decades ago,when homebuilding was still illegal in the US. The Continental reputation wasbuilt on relatively new engines, installed at factories, and maintained by trained,licensed A&E mechanics, in a era where people had longer attention spans.Seventy years later, anyone expecting that the same reputation magically livesin the metal is deluding themselves. To get the same results, you have toget as close to the original format as possible. But the issue is that the partscan be old, the details of the installation on a homebuilt can be weak, andthe guy working on the carb may have never built one before. Is the issue beginningto make some sense?To even get close to the original reliability, One must spend some money on parts,the used parts must have a history and be within limits, and critical itemslike mags and the carb should be done or at least checked by a repair station.You can choose to do otherwise, but it is not possible to then argue that youcan expect the full reputation for reliability. Anyone who thinks that youcan have the reliability of a certified motor when you buy one that is advertisedas no logs or experimental only is mistaken. You dont get to have it bothways. Continentals reputation was not built on engines made of junk and spraypainted. If the engine was just as reliable with out of spec parts, then theywouldnt be out of spec would they?.There are always people who argue that they have to have a reliable certified engineand that they will not fly auto engines. Then the first thing they do isgo out and look for the cheapest collection of parts bolted together that aremasquerading as a certified engine, made of out of spec parts. That behaviorisnt rational, but people who are compulsively cheap often are satisfied withthe illusion of reliability instead of the real thing. Want to know who isntfooled by this? Our old friends Physics, Chemistry and Gravity. If the FAA considersthe engine un-airworthy in a certified plane, it is just as un-airworthyin an experimental one. Physics, Chemistry and Gravity dont care if the planewas built in a factory or your garage. An engine built of out of spec partsdoesnt magically become airworthy when it is bolted on an experimental..I am an Embry-Riddle trained A&P with 24 years of continuous work on light aircraft.I am qualified to work on virtualy any part in GA planes, but that doesn'tmean I am reluctant to hire other mechanics with greater experience and bettertooling. When the right mag had excessive drop on the C-85 in my wife's Taylorcraft,I could have replaced the cracked coil myself, but instead I took bothmags to a repair station and waited while they were overhauled. In the last10 years we have finished several homebuilts, and I could have overhauled eachof the carbs myself, but I elected to send them all to a certified repair station.The difference between 'fixed' and 'Yellow tagged' is often hundreds ofdollars. It sounds like a lot of money until you have lived through to planecrashes and attended a few funerals. 90% of the people reading this make moremoney than I do, and 95% have less experience with aircraft engines. If thosepeople are trying to save money by fixing a mag or a carb themselves, when Iwould send the same part out, they should rethink that plan.My known specialty is training amateurs to build aircraft engines for experimentalaircraft. It doesn't matter that the hardware is mostly Chevrolet and notContinental, It isn't about metal, it is about the capacity of builders to learn,and I am not speaking of turning wrenches, I am speaking of learning to makegood decisions in a very unforgiving environment. No one has to agree withmy perspective, but I have been doing this for long enough, with enough homebuildersthat it is worth considering carefully. Homebuilding, including buildingengines, can be done with reasonably low risk, but only when the builder makesgood decisions. -wwRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: July 5th...New Milestone
Original Posted By: "Douwe Blumberg"
Congratulations Michael! Youll fly with more confidence now knowing that guy inthe right seat isnt really needed.John--------John FrancisRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Congratulations Michael! Youll fly with more confidence now knowing that guy inthe right seat isnt really needed.John--------John FrancisRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Re: Pietenpol-List: July 5th...New Milestone
Original Posted By: Steven Dortch
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: July 5th...New Milestone
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: July 5th...New Milestone
Pietenpol-List: Re: July 5th...New Milestone
Original Posted By: "AircamperN11MS"
Mike,Congratulations isn't enough. Good job. Now you need to decide whether you wantto cheat gravity by yourself or build. Tough decision considering we only have24 hours in a day. Keep plugging away. Happy landings,--------Scott LiefeldFlying N11MS since March 1972Steel TubeC-85-12Wire WheelsBrodhead in 1996Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: July 5th...New Milestone
Mike,Congratulations isn't enough. Good job. Now you need to decide whether you wantto cheat gravity by yourself or build. Tough decision considering we only have24 hours in a day. Keep plugging away. Happy landings,--------Scott LiefeldFlying N11MS since March 1972Steel TubeC-85-12Wire WheelsBrodhead in 1996Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: July 5th...New Milestone
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: July 5th...New Milestone
Original Posted By: Michael Perez
RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Engine Starts/Runs
Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-lis
Great pic..... Mike! Congrats!!BrianSLC-UT
Great pic..... Mike! Congrats!!BrianSLC-UT
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Engine Starts/Runs
Original Posted By: Michael Perez
RE: Pietenpol-List: Fuel Float...Doesn't
Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
What is your wire made of? I found that a steel wire requires a vry largecork to support it. I made my wire out of aluminum, and just melted a ballon the end with my oxy-acetylene torch and painted it balze orange. Icoated the cork and the paint on the ball with epoxy varnish. After 10years it hasn't sunk yet.Here's a picture that shows my fuel gage as seen from the rear cockpit:Jack PhillipsNX899JPSmith Mountain Lake, Virginia _____
What is your wire made of? I found that a steel wire requires a vry largecork to support it. I made my wire out of aluminum, and just melted a ballon the end with my oxy-acetylene torch and painted it balze orange. Icoated the cork and the paint on the ball with epoxy varnish. After 10years it hasn't sunk yet.Here's a picture that shows my fuel gage as seen from the rear cockpit:Jack PhillipsNX899JPSmith Mountain Lake, Virginia _____
Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuel Float...Doesn't
Original Posted By: Michael Perez
Cork is pretty rough and porous. Not sure coating it helps. It's nigh near inevitablethat there's gaps in coverage UNLESS you really coat it thickly withepoxy, which'll make it a lot heavier and even less able to support weight.Is the cork you bought designed to hold an indicator UP out of the fuel (as ina nose tank), or hang DOWN (as into a transparent sump in a wing tank) into fuel?The latter can be smaller.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 07:36:08 -0700
Cork is pretty rough and porous. Not sure coating it helps. It's nigh near inevitablethat there's gaps in coverage UNLESS you really coat it thickly withepoxy, which'll make it a lot heavier and even less able to support weight.Is the cork you bought designed to hold an indicator UP out of the fuel (as ina nose tank), or hang DOWN (as into a transparent sump in a wing tank) into fuel?The latter can be smaller.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 07:36:08 -0700
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: July 5th...New Milestone
Original Posted By: Steven Dortch
Congratulations on your solo and engine run Mike P.If the cork is dipped in shellac, allowed to dry one day between coats, and given 2-3 coats it will be impervious to avgas formany years but will not be impervious for auto fuel that contains ethanol.Mike C.Ohio________________________________________________________________________________Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 09:48:06 -0500Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: July 5th...New Milestone
Congratulations on your solo and engine run Mike P.If the cork is dipped in shellac, allowed to dry one day between coats, and given 2-3 coats it will be impervious to avgas formany years but will not be impervious for auto fuel that contains ethanol.Mike C.Ohio________________________________________________________________________________Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 09:48:06 -0500Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: July 5th...New Milestone
Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel Float...Doesn't
Original Posted By: Michael Perez
Re: Pietenpol-List: cork sealant that works
Original Posted By: Michael Perez
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: July 5th...New Milestone
Original Posted By: Ryan Mueller
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: July 5th...New Milestone
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: July 5th...New Milestone
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: July 5th...New Milestone
Original Posted By: Steven Dortch
I assume because of how you asked, you're interested in a plans built plane. ThePiet plans are complete without ENDLESS errors and omissions. It's the reasonI decided to go this way, WHILE my dad was building a Hatz and kept gettingfrustrated with how vague the plans were.Like mentioned, they are not perfect. However, probably as much as ANY plans builddesign, there are countless examples, usually one pretty close to where everyou live, to go eyeball in person which makes a world of difference.About the best source of little detail specifics, would be your own camera at Brodhead.In the absence of that, westcoastpiet is an excellent picture resource.Asking here and of course contacting a piet owner/builder directly. The plans aren't good enough to build a kit full of parts, and then assemble theminto a plane, so you'll have to study them and build as you go. They certainlyare good enough to estimate accurately how much of whatever material you'llneed it you want to buy all at once. Also, there's TONS of VERY usable "quick build kits" out there in the form of abandonedprojects or unflyable ones that need restoring or used as a collectionof parts.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 15:15:26 -0500Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: July 5th...New Milestone
I assume because of how you asked, you're interested in a plans built plane. ThePiet plans are complete without ENDLESS errors and omissions. It's the reasonI decided to go this way, WHILE my dad was building a Hatz and kept gettingfrustrated with how vague the plans were.Like mentioned, they are not perfect. However, probably as much as ANY plans builddesign, there are countless examples, usually one pretty close to where everyou live, to go eyeball in person which makes a world of difference.About the best source of little detail specifics, would be your own camera at Brodhead.In the absence of that, westcoastpiet is an excellent picture resource.Asking here and of course contacting a piet owner/builder directly. The plans aren't good enough to build a kit full of parts, and then assemble theminto a plane, so you'll have to study them and build as you go. They certainlyare good enough to estimate accurately how much of whatever material you'llneed it you want to buy all at once. Also, there's TONS of VERY usable "quick build kits" out there in the form of abandonedprojects or unflyable ones that need restoring or used as a collectionof parts.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 15:15:26 -0500Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: July 5th...New Milestone
RE: Pietenpol-List: Fuel Float...Doesn't
Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Open these 2 attachments. We used #30 size corks.BarryNX973BP
Open these 2 attachments. We used #30 size corks.BarryNX973BP