Brodhead Pietenpol Association

Original Posted By: BARNSTMR(at)aol.com
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Lightweight Piet>B and V Dearinger wrote:>>> Apparently it is possible to get under 600 lbs empty with a -8 cont>> , a wood prop, lite cub style gear ,a short fuselage and 1 piece wing.>> 590 lbs. should be possible.>>Bill>I should have no more than 600, for a max gross weight of 992 lbs.>I thought of another way :>Stretched fuselage (for a better tail volume).>Then multiplying all dimensions and thicknesses -except for spar- by .9>Building a box spar with optimized caps :thick at strut fitting and>getting thinner toward fuselege and tips.>Installing a Rotax 912.>What do you think ?>>Could you also tell me about how the Piet stalls ?>Thanks>Claude________________________________________________________________________________

Original Posted By: B and V Dearinger
B and V Dearinger wrote: > Apparently it is possible to get under 600 lbs empty with a -8 cont> , a wood prop, lite cub style gear ,a short fuselage and 1 piece wing. > 590 lbs. should be possible.BillI should have no more than 600, for a max gross weight of 992 lbs.I thought of another way : Stretched fuselage (for a better tail volume).Then multiplying all dimensions and thicknesses -except for spar- by .9 Building a box spar with optimized caps :thick at strut fitting andgetting thinner toward fuselege and tips.Installing a Rotax 912.What do you think ?Could you also tell me about how the Piet stalls ?ThanksClaude________________________________________________________________________________

Original Posted By: claude
Claude That should work.Would make it a Claude Air Camper.Thats why theyare called "experimental".We can do basically anything we want to.Thats whyI am building to the plans. Success in large numbers get my attention.Also Iwant the plane done sooner so I can fly it.Let the experimenters spend theextra time modifying.........Has anyone seen or ridden in the Popular Pietor know the builder?That plane seems to be really lite and perform reallywell with a heavy engine. Bill-----Original Message-----

Original Posted By: TXTdragger(at)aol.com
In a message dated 9/18/99 6:02:40 AM Central Daylight Time, dearinge(at)iocc.com writes:>Bill, I believe the airplane is known as the "Poplar" Piet. (Not popular). Although it does seem to be rather popular among Pietenpol enthusiasts. Perhaps being made of all Poplar wood is part of the reason it is one of the lighter ones.Terry B________________________________________________________________________________

Original Posted By: Replicraft(at)aol.com
B and V Dearinger wrote:> > That should work.Would make it a Claude Air Camper.Bill, you're quibbling If the inch on my rule is 1.0000 in, it's a Pietenpol Air Camper.If it is .9 in, it's a Claude Air Camper.But what if your rule has inches = .9999 in, is it a Bill Air Camper ?More seriously, UL are 992 lbs in Europe, I want to build an UL. The original Piet is given for something like 1050 lbs. So I think it's better to build a slightly downsized Piet with a loadfactor same or higher, than to try to scratch 50 lbs on a full size one.And if there are millions of models "A" or Corvair in junkyards, it'snot this side of the pond...I saw all these beautifull Piets in Oshkosh, but I never had the chance to fly one. So do me a favor : I would like to know HOW it stalls.Thanks ClaudeEAA 596207Zenair 701 F-JCUOa has Thats why they> are called "experimental".We can do basically anything we want to.Thats why> I am building to the plans. Success in large numbers get my attention.Also I> want the plane done sooner so I can fly it.Let the experimenters spend the> extra time modifying.........Has anyone seen or ridden in the Popular Piet> or know the builder?That plane seems to be really lite and perform really> well with a heavy engine. Bill________________________________________________________________________________

Original Posted By: nle97(at)juno.com
Claude, The Pietenpol is less than 700 pounds no matter what you do. Mineis a little over 650 and can carry my 185 pound frame and 300 pounds ofpassenger or cargo. It stalls like any other airplane, except at 30 MPH orless and spins but is easy to recover. It's just and honest airplane thathas a lot of drag.Copinfo(at)ix.Netcom.ComTim CunninghamDes Moines, Iowa (515) 237-1510>I saw all these beautifull Piets in Oshkosh, but I never had the chance to>fly one. So do me a favor : I would like to know HOW it stalls.>Thanks>Claude>EAA 596207>Zenair 701 F-JCUO>>>a has>>Thats why they>> are called "experimental".We can do basically anything we want to.Thatswhy>> I am building to the plans. Success in large numbers get myattention.Also I>> want the plane done sooner so I can fly it.Let the experimenters spendthe>> extra time modifying.........Has anyone seen or ridden in the PopularPiet>> or know the builder?That plane seems to be really lite and perform really>> well with a heavy engine. Bill________________________________________________________________________________

Original Posted By: "David B. Schober"
I know this has been stated many times before, but an inch to Bernard Pietenpolwas more like 15/16 ths. Having seen and flown some of the airplanes he built,hemeasured to the center of the kerf of the blade to get his 1 inch and all otherdimensions.claude wrote:> B and V Dearinger wrote:> >> > That should work.Would make it a Claude Air Camper.>> Bill, you're quibbling > If the inch on my rule is 1.0000 in, it's a Pietenpol Air Camper.> If it is .9 in, it's a Claude Air Camper.> But what if your rule has inches = .9999 in, is it a Bill Air Camper ?>> More seriously, UL are 992 lbs in Europe, I want to build an UL.> The original Piet is given for something like 1050 lbs.> So I think it's better to build a slightly downsized Piet with a load> factor same or higher, than to try to scratch 50 lbs on a full size one.> And if there are millions of models "A" or Corvair in junkyards, it's> not this side of the pond...>> I saw all these beautifull Piets in Oshkosh, but I never had the chance to> fly one. So do me a favor : I would like to know HOW it stalls.> Thanks> Claude> EAA 596207> Zenair 701 F-JCUO>> a has>> Thats why they> > are called "experimental".We can do basically anything we want to.Thats why> > I am building to the plans. Success in large numbers get my attention.AlsoI> > want the plane done sooner so I can fly it.Let the experimenters spend the> > extra time modifying.........Has anyone seen or ridden in the Popular Piet> > or know the builder?That plane seems to be really lite and perform really> > well with a heavy engine. Bill________________________________________________________________________________

Original Posted By: del magsam
Copinfo wrote:> The Pietenpol is less than 700 pounds no matter what you do. Well, I'll try with a light engine. European UL regs require gross weightless than 992 lbs. Because they decided that a "standard" european weighs 170 lbs, and that any plane must carry at least one hour of fuel, an empty weight of 600 lbs seems a good aim.Thanks Tim.Claude________________________________________________________________________________

Original Posted By: Michael Brusilow
On Mon, 20 Sep 1999, claude wrote:> Copinfo wrote:> > > The Pietenpol is less than 700 pounds no matter what you do. Not if you stick a P&W R-985 on the nose ;-)Ken Beanlands B.Eng (Aerospace)Calgary, Alberta, CanadaChristavia MK 1 C-GREN________________________________________________________________________________