Brodhead Pietenpol Association

Original Posted By: clawler
Steve Eldredge wrote:> > John Kahn wrote:> > > A comment was made the other night about the Piet's spinning> > characteristics (negative). Anybody on the list spun their airplane> > and> > lived to tell the tale?> >> > john> >> > Bombardier Inc.> > Not yet, but I can tell you I have never flown a better slipping> airplane. You can tell when you are slipping because the airstream> gets> around the windshield and hits you in the face.(Awesome!)> > BTW what was the negative spinning comment?Hmm, I have not even tried a stall in mine yet. A 15,000 hour pilottook it up and said it dropped a wing severely and took a fewhundred feet to straiten it out - I believe that was power on.He recommended several thousand feet altitude before stall training for someone unfamiliar with the aircraft. My CG is at the aft most limit but I still would not expect J-3 type characteristics from any Piet!My logbook shows loops and rolls from previous owners butI'm content with a nice pasture jumper and I'll leave the more intense maneuvers to airplanes designed for that purpose...Fly SafeKevinAustin, TX.________________________________________________________________________________

Original Posted By: Jim Wright
A comment was made the other night about the Piet's spinningcharacteristics (negative). Anybody on the list spun their airplane and lived to tell the tale?johnBombardier Inc.________________________________________________________________________________

Original Posted By: Steve Eldredge
John Kahn wrote:> A comment was made the other night about the Piet's spinning> characteristics (negative). Anybody on the list spun their airplane> and> lived to tell the tale?>> john>> Bombardier Inc.Not yet, but I can tell you I have never flown a better slippingairplane. You can tell when you are slipping because the airstream getsaround the windshield and hits you in the face.(Awesome!)BTW what was the negative spinning comment?Stevee________________________________________________________________________________

Original Posted By: jkahn(at)picasso.dehavilland.ca (John Kahn)
An engineer I was talking to was just recounting a story of a friendof his that had a Peit years ago who went and spun it and it took a long time to recover. I had read previously that the airplane spunquite nicely, so maybe the particular airplane had CG problems or something.One thing I remember from an Oshkosh forum a couple of years ago wasa recommendation to build in about 3 degrees of washout into the wingduring the covering process to make the stall characteristics much morebenign (the wing has a reputation for wanting to let go all at once ina stall, which would also aggravate the spin tendency). With washout thestall became very docile.johnk________________________________________________________________________________

Original Posted By:> Kevin McDonald
> From Steve(at)byu.edu Tue Jan 6 13:45:29 1998> Date: Sun, 14 Sep 1997 04:02:16 -0500

Original Posted By: "womenfly2"
Always use Marvel Mystery Oil before you attempt to spin your Pietenpol, andmake sure your handheld has enough range to clear the area by using a properground plane.Douwe________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: spins

Original Posted By: Gerry Holland
Why would you want a Pietenpol if you have a Cub? Fly the Cub!--------Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: spins

Original Posted By: "Bill Church"
thanks jack, paulRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: spins

Original Posted By: "Bill Church"
Terry,I think Ryan's comment was in regards to sand bag testing a wing rib to the pointof destruction, as opposed to the discussion about spins.There was a lively and fairly entertaining discussion about this same topic (ribtesting) a few years ago - that's where the reference to tractor weights comesfrom. There may have also been an elephant involved.The Pietenpol wing rib is a robust little structure. I don't think anyone has toworry about the ribs failing (if properly constructed).I'm not sure what knowledge would be gained from testing a rib to the point ofdestruction.Bill C.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: spins

Original Posted By: Ryan M
Terry,If you just want to confirm the soundness of your construction abilities, why don'tyou just glue up a simple "T" made up of 2 pieces of 1/4" x 1/2" Sitka (orwhatever wood you are building with), and gussets the same as you will use onyour ribs. Allow the glue to fully cure, and then do a destructive test on that.Put it in a vise, and squeeze until it cracks. If the wood fails, you're"good to go". If the glue joints fail, you have reason to be concerned, sinceit's either your methods, or the adhesive that would be the reason for the gluejoint to be the cause of failure.It's just that there's quite a bit of work involved in building an actual rib,and then you'd have to devise some sort of apparatus to hold and support the rib,and a method to distribute the weight, and acquire a bunch of sandbags, andon and on... so that, in the end, you'll be able to say that your rib supported"X" pounds (under the specific conditions that you tested it) before failing.Bill C.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 15:31:17 -0700 (PDT)

Original Posted By: airlion
Gardiner,Getting back to your original question... The answer is YES, someone (not me) hasspun a Pietenpol. I recall reading a story in Chet Peek's book "The PietenpolStory" about a flight that BHP took, that was very nearly his last. As Irecall, BHP was in the front seat, and a larger gentleman was in the pilot's seat,and the guy wanted to see how the plane would spin, so BHP threw it intoa spin, but found that the extra weight in the rear wouldn't allow him to exitthe spin. The stick travel was limited by hitting the panel, and BHP eventuallyended up forcing the stick far to one side to get under the panel, in orderto get the additional forward travel, and managed to exit the spin, just inthe nick of time.If I have the time, I'll see if I can find the story.While it isn't recommended, from what I've read, I believe that spinning and loopingoccurred fairly frequently in the "old days". But then, so did crashes.Bill C.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 18:49:24 -0700 (PDT)

Original Posted By: "Bill Church"
Gardiner,My FAA guy told me I did not have to do another inspection after my rebuild,EVEN with a new engine, he said just log what I did. You should be fine togo fly.On the adhesive question for leather, I love that yellow weatherstripadhesive glue you can guy at auto parts stores. Permetax and 3M make themand they stick like gangbusters and stay flexible over time.Douwe________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: spins

Original Posted By: "Douwe Blumberg"
Okay, I found the story in Chet Peek's great book "The Pietenpol Story", whichcan be ordered from Chet here:http://www.threepeakspub.com/or you can also get it from Aircraft Spruce:http://www.aircraftspruce.ca/catalog/bv ... y.phpScary stuff."Golly", indeed.Bill C.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ttachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/spin ... __________

Original Posted By: "899PM"
Here's an idea,With so many of us sharing, I realized that I'm unfamiliar with what mostpeople are building (IF they're building.) so.How 'bout we all send in what we're building (Pietenpol, I know) like whatengine, gear, wood or steel fuse, long or short fuse, how long into it andmaybe how long to go? and additions/changes of note that we might findinteresting and colors would be fun if you're not too secretive about suchvital information.I'll start.Short fuselageContinental C-90 with starterTwo piece wingWood strutsBumped up "tiger moth" type center section tank"Jenny" gear"faux" doped/aged translucent linen finish with a beautiful "baby poop"green trim and "Re-PIET" huge across the wing and down each fuse side.Aiming to be done in two or three months.Marvel Mystery Oil in fuel, pre-mixed-sloshed, pre-warmed and perfumed!Douwe________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: put your cards on the table Gents and Ladies!

Original Posted By: "tools"
Started in 1997 with plans purchase from Don Pietenpol.Sold in divorce at "on the gear" stage.Purchased back by V2.0 wife for wedding gift.Short fuse all SitkaWestern red cedar ribs. Stock airfoil.Offset "flop" for entry.lengthened cabanes 2".26" wide 27" deep in rear pit lofted to "print"at tailpost and firewall.Model A(60hp)Sensenich 76-42 wood prop.3-pc wing(33 1/2' span)aluminum fuel tank in center sectionsplit gear21" wheels with Faux "Bendix" style wheel covers.aluminum struts(to be wrapped and doped)Ceconite and dope finish.Wings finished and ready for pre-cover assembly this month.Goal to have in the air before Christmas.--------PAPA MIKERead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: post-rebuild inspection and adhesive question

Original Posted By: "TOM STINEMETZE"
Hey Douwe,Quick question about new engine. New type of engine, or same type, but new? ToolsRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 08:47:43 -0500

Original Posted By: "bender"
V2.0 Wife seems a good un!Started in 1997 with plans purchase from Don Pietenpol.Sold in divorce at "on the gear" stage.Purchased back by V2.0 wife for wedding gift.RegardsGerry________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: put your cards on the table Gents and Ladies!

Original Posted By: "Mark Stanley"
1932 F&G manualwood gearA engine21" HD spoke wheelswings and horizontal creamy tanfuselage green so dark that it looks blackchainsaw built prop....thanks for the info Danjeff faithNX1929FRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________

Original Posted By: Douwe Blumberg
Hi Douwe,That sounds like a good idea. So to encourage anyone who=99s building, like mine, is =98rather slow=99, I will be the first of the =98slowbies=99 to post my, errr =98progress.Started: 2004Plans form Don PietenpolWing ribs all done =93 made from douglas firFin & rudder woodwork done =93 mixed douglas fir and spruceStabilizer & elevators startedHinges for both (abaove) from Vi KaplerHope to finish and fly sometime before I kick the bucketMark StanleyJapan

Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
1937 Pietenpol Aircamper, NX308MBStarted March of '08Will probably fly this summerLong Fuselage - 3 pc wingTurtle decks raised 1.5", but cabanes held to plansCorvairMostly PoplarWood gear w/21" Harley Sportster wheels and tires, barely functional go-cartbrakesALL Hickory struts"Tiger Moth" 16 gallon fuel tankLatex paintGary BootheNX308MB

Original Posted By: "tools"
I did it all...started nov 1st of 2010.I tried to keep things simple...and lightthe aluminum radiator and head weight savings make up for the alternator and batteryand the distributor with 2 coils is no more than a mag i would bet..one piece wing....3/4" douglas fir spar...poplar fuselage..aluminum strutstail skid..no wheel.. 4 1/2" band brakes..transponder/encoder and a flightline 760 radio...its tiny..i didn't use turnbuckles in places i could get away with making cables to fit..then giving them a twist like all over the tail.jeffRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: spins

Original Posted By: Michael Perez
The only heartburn I have is what you experienced... not sure I'd be happy withsomeone spinning my plane without asking or talking about it first...BUT, it IS good to know that at least one modern Piet apparantly spins reasonablynormally. Of course, do any of us know what a "normal" spin is? The guysI flew with in the navy who had the "spin qualification" (we would throw a T-2Buckeye into ALL SORTS of fun departures, spins [upright and inverted]) had allsorts of things to say about EACH plane that was in the spin program (extralapbelts, and they were all bent, flew weird), and of course they were all t-2s,built by the same company.I'm not worried about the stresses involved, just whether or not it just pops outof a spin like other airplanes I've spun would. Of course, I've only spunplanes that were well known for decent spinning characteristics. So one thatmight take really proper application of anti spin, could spell disaster.I flew s-3s in the Navy. That's a plane that WON'T spin, unless you hold the spincontrols in (rudder is too big). Of course, do you know what the proceduresfor getting out of a spin are, for that plane? You guessed it, spin controlsfor the OTHER direction (only to be the same as all the other planes in thefleet, just plane stupid). We used to practice a departure, post stall gyration(what we called it because it technically wasn't a spin) and recovery. Aswith ALL jets in the Navy (at that time, it's changed somewhat since) if youdidn't recover by 10K' agl, you eject. There have been TWO s-3s that couldn'trecover by 10k' agl and they both ejected (one was a pretty good friend). Ironically,BOTH incidents were EYE WITNESSED by another plane in the operatingarea and BOTH saw the plane recover from the spin (er, post stall gyration) afterthe pilot was gone... The point is, it's pretty easy to be freaked out by something, anything differentthan what you're used to, even if you're trained pretty well. Even if you'regood at recovering a well mannered spinner, you may not be good at recoveringan ill mannered spinner, which could spell disaster.I'm pretty sure this group is far to the right of conservative (no political connotation,I promise!) , but still, just seems worth repeating. By the way, I was the Aviation Safety Officer in my last squadron. And while I'mnot your typical "safety nazi", I do believe discussions like this help keepawareness at a good level. I would say that if you have training in recovering less than really stable planesfrom spins, and you're confident (and not over populated terrain), then gofor it. Otherwise, proceed with due caution!Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 06:25:38 -0800 (PST)

Original Posted By: "Don Emch"
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: flying in the Navy> > I was wondering whether or not he was going to admit going to that "little schoolin Annapolis." [Wink]> > --------> Semper Fi,> > Terry Hand> Athens, GA> > > > > Read this topic online here:> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 166#387166> > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: spins

Original Posted By: "jarheadpilot82"
I was wondering whether or not he was going to admit going to that "little schoolin Annapolis." [Wink]--------Semper Fi,Terry HandAthens, GARead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: spins

Original Posted By: Dan Yocum
Mike (Perez, not Tools),I spent almost 5 years at my current employer in the Training Department and havemultiple thousands of hours in simulators. The one thing that I learned holdstrue in multi-million dollar 757 and 767 simulators (and should hold true insimulation software) is this- just because the simulator does something a certainway, does not guarantee that the actual aircraft will do the same. The simulatoris probably 95-96% like the airplane but every once in a while it justdid not respond the same way. Software can't replicate everything. There isjust not enough code to be able to do it perfectly.I am still building and learning much about Pietenpols, so my construction knowledgeis small, but growing. But what I do have, though, is a lot of experiencein aircraft simulation. I just did not want you to think that the airplanemay necessarily respond in the same way a simulator does, especially in a maneuvernot normally flown, such as spins.--------Semper Fi,Terry HandAthens, GARead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2012 13:42:15 -0600

Original Posted By: Dan Yocum

Original Posted By: "Don Emch"
Hey Douwe,There is something comforting about knowing your plane was spin tested. I believeTy (very nice black and red) from Brodhead spins his on a somewhat regularbasis. At least he told me he did.If you don't mind me asking, do you know where the CG might have been for the spin?It would be interesting to know. An very experienced test pilot once flewmine, after saying that they were just going to taxi it, and it had only about2-3 gallons in the nose tank. With his weight it actually had a CG at 37%of the chord and he said it flew fine.Don EmchNX899DERead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: spins

Original Posted By: Jeffery Hammer
Just to add on to the last post, before anyone gets excited. I have not and absolutelywill not fly my airplane with the CG beyond the 30% limit. In fact Ihave never had it beyond about 26%. Just wanted to put that out there.... Theflight I mentioned in the previous post was umm... inadvertant, ha, accordingto the pilot.Don EmchNX899DERead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 16:56:56 -0500Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: flying in the Navy

Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
I've flown it, and found little correlation between the simulator and thereal thing. So much of flying a Pietenpol is done by feel, which thesimulator simply cannot replicate. It doesn't do a very good job ofsimilating the way the whole airplane vibrates and just feels "tense" whenflying at speeds above 80 mph, nor of how quiet it gets at speeds below 55,and how the stick shudders with one or two sharp buffets just before thestall. The one thing it does reasonably well is replicate the view from thecockpit.Jack PhillipsNX899JPSmith Mountain Lake, Virginia _____

Original Posted By: Ryan Mueller
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: spins

Original Posted By: Michael Perez

Original Posted By: "jarheadpilot82"
Never known anyone to get sick in a sim or really feel all that woozy. However,they're pretty good at inducing vertigo. For me, the worst is flying formationat night in the clouds, or "under the bag" during the day (as shadows don'tcorrelate with anything and screw me up bad).However, the most realistic "feeling" sim I was ever in didn't move AT ALL. Itwas the prototype T-45 simulator, which had HUGE, REALLY realistic visuals anda seat that would squeeze your butt. It wouldn't bother you while you werein it, but the walk FROM the sim was flatly dangerous. They had a bunch of falls so had it really padded up by the time I got a chancein it. It gave you "sea legs" in an hour (after being on a ship for a few days,you tend to sense the motion of the ship when in small rooms ashore for aday or two afterwards).Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: spins

Original Posted By: Michael Perez
Mike,In my almost 5 years of instructing in sims I never had any pilots complain ofmotion sickness in the simulator. Not to say, that no pilot has ever gotten sickin one. I just never saw it.I found that in the 757/767 sims (especially the Class D - which simulate nightand day conditions and in which a check ride and subsequent type rating can becompleted) flew very much like the airplane, and the visual cues really mademe forget I was flying a simulator. I would not say I thought that I was flyingthe actual airplane. Rather, I never thought, "Wow! This simulator flies likethe airplane." I just in my mind thought, "I am flying" as opposed to "I aminputting by way of the flight controls, commanded movement to hydraulic servosthrough software that replicate the motion of the actual aircraft." You aretoo busy flying single engine or some other catastrophic failure to think thatway.YMMV.--------Semper Fi,Terry HandAthens, GARead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 06:35:41 -0800 (PST)

Original Posted By: "jarheadpilot82"
HI Dan,It is a big fish type scale. I found it online for cheap, I dont have a picturehere at work, but i will take one tonight and post it up.--------NX321LRFully AssembledTail assembly and ailerons covered and painted.Wings to be covered next.Mitsubishi PoweredRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: spins

Original Posted By: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[Vantage Partners, LLC]"
Tools is sort of right. You fly the sim somewhat differently than you do the plane.But if you can fly the sim, you can definitely fly the plane. The sim isharder.Example - if you fly a VOR or LDA approach that is not aligned with the runway,when you break out, you have to obviously align your self to the runway. In anairplane that involves use of the ailerons and coordinated use of the rudder.In a sim, it is a pure rudder maneuver. Simulators do not like aileron inputdown low. You can quickly get yourself into what feels like a Dutch roll. Thebetter technique is to kick the rudder in and slew the runway picture aroundto the nose. You would never do a pure rudder turn down low and slow and riska skidded turn stall. But all the sim software knows is that you are slowing thepicture. Just one example of what Tools is talking about.I know that we are falling into the realm of hangar flying and out of the realmof Pietenpol building. If anyone wants to email me or PM me about this topic,I am happy to continue the discussion. Just not in this forum. Got to get backto building.--------Semper Fi,Terry HandAthens, GARead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________

Original Posted By: Ken Bickers
Subject: Pietenpol-List: real lifeOf the several Piets I have flown, no two fly alike. Similar yes but not the same. They don't stall quite the same either. Some givenotice, others don't before a stall. The amount of dihedral, (or none) the accuracy of the rigging and wing washout (or no washout), engine type, fuselage length,metal or wood prop, aileron gap sealing effectiveness and CG all make them unique. Even if you go from one J-3 to another you'll find that one may fly and stall much more nicely than another.It sure is nice to wind these guys up though just by asking "so you flew in the Navy?" Bill Rewey flew in the Navy too. TBM's and F4-U Corsairs but you'd have to actually corner himfor him to talk about it.Mike C.________________________________________________________________________________Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 11:33:10 -0700Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: real life

Original Posted By: Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[Vantage Partners, LLC]
So did I, Mike. Flew Helldivers and subsequently Hell cats off the USS Hancock in WW2. And I don't mind talking about it. At CC#21, John Franklin cornered me and kept me up until almost midnight talking about carrier flying -- The REAL straight deck carrier flying. I don't think I would go for that bolter stuff. Man, when the LSO gave me a "cut" that was it. You either landed safely, went into the barrier, or went over the side. C ----- Original Message -----

Original Posted By: "John Francis"
I been asked offline to supply plans for my wing rotator, so here is a drawingfor the stands.I will get together a sketch for the mount that attaches the inboard mount to therotator.....For the outboard side, i drilled a 9/32 hole In the center of the end bow. Therotator part is a 3/8-16 bolt 2.5" long with a 1/4-20 hole tapped in the head.There i screwed in a 1/4-20 bolt about 3" long with the head cut off. I screwedit into the tapped hole until bottomed out then cut the head off. this studwill then go into the end bow hole and just freely rotate. be careful to checkevery now and then that the wing is not slipping off the stud. This is not mydesign, it was shown by someone on the forum a couple years ago.....--------NX321LRFully AssembledTail assembly and ailerons covered and painted.Wings to be covered next.Mitsubishi PoweredRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ttachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/wing ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing Rotator sketch

Original Posted By: Ken Bickers
Chris,Could you post some close up photos of the assembly? A picture goes a long waywith me.John--------John FrancisRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 13:38:59 -0700Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wing Rotator sketch

Original Posted By: "taildrags"
Very interesting topic. I think we all need to go out and spin our Pietenpol'sand GN-1's ASAP....so we can all compare notes...p.s. I got high during an emergency in the DC-10 sim back in '95 ... sideslippedit in, like you would in a Stearman or an Aeronca. I was half expecting theinstructor to say something, but he seemed to accept it, given the fact that wewere on fire. Not so realistic on the visuals in that old machine, but it gotthe job done. I agree that simulators are not quite like the real machine. Theyare really "procedures trainers".Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: real life

Original Posted By: helspersew(at)aol.com
Ken: the numbers that you've quoted will work just fine. There are Piets flyingwith essentially NO washout or dihedral (dead-flat, dead-straight wing). Thereare others that are rigged as the Pietenpol family's notes suggest (if youdon't have the Pietenpol family's plans and notes, buy them), and there are othersthat are rigged somewhere inbetween or beyond. I have only flown one Piet-Scout- so I can't offer comparisons. Scout has a dihedral of roughly 3" fromwing root to wing tip and essentially NO washout.About the dihedral, classical aerodynamics textbooks will tell you that a littledihedral goes a long way towards providing stability in roll. Since I've neverflown a Piet with zero dihedral, I can't confirm the validity of that statement,but if you search the archives you'll find that people have said that theydon't find that zero dihedral leads to instability or divergence in roll.I think my airplane has a bit too much, but that's based on aesthetics... I preferthe look of a straight line leading edge from wingtip to wingtip.About the washout, the intent is to have the wing stall progressively from rootto tip so that the airplane doesn't fall off on a wing in a stall. My airplanehas no apparent washout and it doesn't ever seem to want to fall off to oneside or the other in a stall. Still, it is quite easy to dial in washout ona Piet wing if it's set up with conventional threaded forks on the lower endsof the lift struts. If you pick a consistent spot on the wing to check the angleof incidence and then use a standard "angle finder" mounted to a lath or pieceof wood that you hold up to the bottom of the wing between the spars, youcan set whatever amount of washout you want by screwing the strut attachmentforks in or out as desired. Set the angle finder at the wing root, then out atthe last rib, and the difference is your washout angle. Easier with two orthree people and some patience ;o) Oh, and make sure the wing strut X-brace wiresare loose or slack when you're doing this... they only get tightened afteryou're done monkeying around with the adjustments.--------Oscar ZunigaMedford, ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 powerRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: real life

Original Posted By: taildrags
My Piet wing is a Hershey bar, flat as a board, no dihedral or wash-anything. Flies fine and stall is gentle.Dan HelsperPuryear, TN-----Original Message-----

Original Posted By: "jarheadpilot82"
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: flying in the Navy> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com>>> >> > I was wondering whether or not he was going to admit going to that> "little school in Annapolis." [Wink]> >> > --------> > Semper Fi,> >> > Terry Hand> > Athens, GA> >> >> >> >> > Read this topic online here:> >> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 166#387166> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: spins