Original Posted By: "Merrill"
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fin offsetEngineers: In the Piet manual, Q&A section, Q asks if the fin should eoffset. A answers yes. 1/2" . (1.59 degrees) As viewed from behind, doI offset to the right or left? My Cessna has no offset. Just a bendabletab. Thanks Leon S.________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: Fin offset
Re: Pietenpol-List: Fin offset
Original Posted By: "Mike Bell"
I'm not awake yet having my first cup. First....which direction does toprop turn. Second....rudder offset in opposite direction to counter theprop. Am I right guys?MerrillMt Dora Fl________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fin offset
I'm not awake yet having my first cup. First....which direction does toprop turn. Second....rudder offset in opposite direction to counter theprop. Am I right guys?MerrillMt Dora Fl________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fin offset
owner-pietenpol-list-server@mat Pietenpol-List:
Original Posted By: "Gary Meadows"
03/13/2001 10:05:09 AMWhat engine? Corvair is reverse of aircraft engines, I don't knowabout Model A.Mike leonstefanhutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan) To: Pietenpol-List(at)matronics.com Sent by: cc: owner-pietenpol-list-server@mat Subject: Pietenpol-List:Fin offset ronics.com 03/13/2001 08:46 AM Please respond to pietenpol-list Stefan)Engineers: In the Piet manual, Q&A section, Q asks if the fin shouldeoffset. A answers yes. 1/2" . (1.59 degrees) As viewed from behind,doI offset to the right or left? My Cessna has no offset. Just abendabletab. Thanks Leon S.________________________________________________________________________________
03/13/2001 10:05:09 AMWhat engine? Corvair is reverse of aircraft engines, I don't knowabout Model A.Mike leonstefanhutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan) To: Pietenpol-List(at)matronics.com Sent by: cc: owner-pietenpol-list-server@mat Subject: Pietenpol-List:Fin offset ronics.com 03/13/2001 08:46 AM Please respond to pietenpol-list Stefan)Engineers: In the Piet manual, Q&A section, Q asks if the fin shouldeoffset. A answers yes. 1/2" . (1.59 degrees) As viewed from behind,doI offset to the right or left? My Cessna has no offset. Just abendabletab. Thanks Leon S.________________________________________________________________________________
Re: Pietenpol-List: Fin offset
Original Posted By: "Gary Meadows"
With an A-65 I think you'd offset the vertical stabilizer leading edge to the left a touch, and with a Corvair, I believe it would be to the right. Remember basic flight training when you have the left turning tendency? You want to counter that with a little offset to try to force it to the right a little. If you offset the vertical stabilizer leading edge to the left it'll force the nose to the right, counter to the left-turning tendency. I imagine it'd be just the opposite with a Corvair. No idea about an A-engine Gary Meadows Spring, TX________________________________________________________________________________
With an A-65 I think you'd offset the vertical stabilizer leading edge to the left a touch, and with a Corvair, I believe it would be to the right. Remember basic flight training when you have the left turning tendency? You want to counter that with a little offset to try to force it to the right a little. If you offset the vertical stabilizer leading edge to the left it'll force the nose to the right, counter to the left-turning tendency. I imagine it'd be just the opposite with a Corvair. No idea about an A-engine Gary Meadows Spring, TX________________________________________________________________________________
Re: Pietenpol-List: Fin offset
Original Posted By: kgardner(at)odu.edu
Subject: Pietenpol-List: A debt of gratitudeWhoever advised me to contact William Rewey on the subject of brakes, I want to give you a big THANK YOU. Received from Bill today a photo and sketch of his brake application and it has quickly solved my braking problem. Thanks Bill.Corky, building brakes in La.________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fin offset
Subject: Pietenpol-List: A debt of gratitudeWhoever advised me to contact William Rewey on the subject of brakes, I want to give you a big THANK YOU. Received from Bill today a photo and sketch of his brake application and it has quickly solved my braking problem. Thanks Bill.Corky, building brakes in La.________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fin offset
Re: Pietenpol-List: Fin offset
Original Posted By: "Gary Meadows"
03/13/2001 02:29:02 PMBOBKA(at)compuserve.com@matronics.com on 03/13/2001 12:39:12 PMPlease respond to pietenpol-list(at)matronics.comSent by: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.comcc:Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fin offsetGary,What Corky is meeaning to say:Where Corky comes from, a Model A is still looked at as a new car (ie youkeep it in the front yard not the back yard and you don't let the chickensnest in them)Kind of like you texas boys and your pickem up truckChris,Heck, down here in Va. (unofficial motto - '400 years of traditionunhindered by progress'), we still think a "T" is a new car (what's a"Model A" anyhoo?).Cheers!Kip GardnerLaboratory Manager, ODUDept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmospheric Sciences4600 Elkhorn AvenueNorfolk, VA 23529(757)683-5654Bumper Sticker of the Week:"Don't Drink and Park - 'Accidents' Cause People"________________________________________________________________________________
03/13/2001 02:29:02 PMBOBKA(at)compuserve.com@matronics.com on 03/13/2001 12:39:12 PMPlease respond to pietenpol-list(at)matronics.comSent by: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.comcc:Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fin offsetGary,What Corky is meeaning to say:Where Corky comes from, a Model A is still looked at as a new car (ie youkeep it in the front yard not the back yard and you don't let the chickensnest in them)Kind of like you texas boys and your pickem up truckChris,Heck, down here in Va. (unofficial motto - '400 years of traditionunhindered by progress'), we still think a "T" is a new car (what's a"Model A" anyhoo?).Cheers!Kip GardnerLaboratory Manager, ODUDept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmospheric Sciences4600 Elkhorn AvenueNorfolk, VA 23529(757)683-5654Bumper Sticker of the Week:"Don't Drink and Park - 'Accidents' Cause People"________________________________________________________________________________
Re: Pietenpol-List: Fin offset
Original Posted By: "Richard Gillespie"
Corky & Chris, Now, I thought the whole idea of trying to crank the car on a date was to get down on lovers lane and NOT be able to crank it! That's why the Model A wouldn't crank - I was turning it the wrong way - OF course I didn't tell HER that! The story there was, well, the Shrader valve was overheated and needed to cool off - takes a couple hours.Now as for the pick-up, that why I always drove a standard. That way I could pop the clutch whenever she got the truck going fast enough! (This part always depended on how she reacted to the valve story!)Yeah, it is a wonder I ever married..... And I still don't know which way an A turns!Gary the Neanderthal________________________________________________________________________________
Corky & Chris, Now, I thought the whole idea of trying to crank the car on a date was to get down on lovers lane and NOT be able to crank it! That's why the Model A wouldn't crank - I was turning it the wrong way - OF course I didn't tell HER that! The story there was, well, the Shrader valve was overheated and needed to cool off - takes a couple hours.Now as for the pick-up, that why I always drove a standard. That way I could pop the clutch whenever she got the truck going fast enough! (This part always depended on how she reacted to the valve story!)Yeah, it is a wonder I ever married..... And I still don't know which way an A turns!Gary the Neanderthal________________________________________________________________________________
Re: Pietenpol-List: A debt of gratitude
Original Posted By: Kirk Huizenga
Corky,If you like Bill's toe brakes, give me your mailing address and I'll sendyou a set already made up according to his plans. I opted for heel brakes.Dick G.Ft. Myers, FL..________________________________________________________________________________Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 15:43:03 -0600
Corky,If you like Bill's toe brakes, give me your mailing address and I'll sendyou a set already made up according to his plans. I opted for heel brakes.Dick G.Ft. Myers, FL..________________________________________________________________________________Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 15:43:03 -0600
Re: Pietenpol-List: Fin offset
Original Posted By: Gary Meadows
Model A turns the same as Continentals and Lycoming. Most engines turnclockwise when viewed from the timing end. ( the Cockpit) The A sits back tofront in a Piet.John Mc----- Original Message -----
Model A turns the same as Continentals and Lycoming. Most engines turnclockwise when viewed from the timing end. ( the Cockpit) The A sits back tofront in a Piet.John Mc----- Original Message -----
Re: Pietenpol-List: Fin offset
Original Posted By: "Leon Stefan"
----- Original Message -----
----- Original Message -----
Re: Pietenpol-List: Fin offset
Original Posted By: K0BLR(at)webtv.net (Ben Ramler)
Concerning the vertical fin offset... Don't you have an option of either building in a fin offset or by building an offset into the motor mount? I thought that the plans detail a thrust angle down and to one side in the mount and leave the vstab true.Joe KrzesSpring, TX________________________________________________________________________________
Concerning the vertical fin offset... Don't you have an option of either building in a fin offset or by building an offset into the motor mount? I thought that the plans detail a thrust angle down and to one side in the mount and leave the vstab true.Joe KrzesSpring, TX________________________________________________________________________________
Re: Pietenpol-List: Fin offset
Original Posted By: Isablcorky(at)aol.com
Joe, I'm pretty sure you're right, and that would be the more elegant, streamline way to do it. I also see folks with trim tabs on their rudders, which would be another way of dealing with the problem, although you'd still need to worry the downward thrust thing. I remember in building R/C models we always angle the firewall down to the right so we could just mount on a straight engine mount. On the brake thing, I think I may use hydraulic heel brakes, with the master cylinders below the floor, and small slots cut thru the floor to move the piston in the brakes.I'd run the brake line down the inside of the gear leg to preserve the antique look.On the fuel tank thing, I'm thinking I may make around 12-14 gallon tank up in the center section with a 3-4 gallon header in the nose. That way, As I burn off fuel, my CG would actually move forward a little as opposed to a nose only tank with the CG moving rearward a lot. Once you burn off all the main tanks fuel, your left then with basically your VFR reserve, so you'd better be on the ground soon. But you still get those few gallons forward (very forward) to help with initial CG. I'm still thinking fiberglass on the main tank.... What think ye on these ideas?Later,Gary________________________________________________________________________________
Joe, I'm pretty sure you're right, and that would be the more elegant, streamline way to do it. I also see folks with trim tabs on their rudders, which would be another way of dealing with the problem, although you'd still need to worry the downward thrust thing. I remember in building R/C models we always angle the firewall down to the right so we could just mount on a straight engine mount. On the brake thing, I think I may use hydraulic heel brakes, with the master cylinders below the floor, and small slots cut thru the floor to move the piston in the brakes.I'd run the brake line down the inside of the gear leg to preserve the antique look.On the fuel tank thing, I'm thinking I may make around 12-14 gallon tank up in the center section with a 3-4 gallon header in the nose. That way, As I burn off fuel, my CG would actually move forward a little as opposed to a nose only tank with the CG moving rearward a lot. Once you burn off all the main tanks fuel, your left then with basically your VFR reserve, so you'd better be on the ground soon. But you still get those few gallons forward (very forward) to help with initial CG. I'm still thinking fiberglass on the main tank.... What think ye on these ideas?Later,Gary________________________________________________________________________________
Re: Pietenpol-List: Fin offset
Original Posted By: "Michael Brusilow"
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fin offsetI thought I was going to go with the brake cyl under the floor until I received drawings for toe brakes from Bill Rewey. If you do go with heels may I suggest that you fab and install BEFORE building the front seat. I was going to have to go in and tear out my seat. One reason I opted for the toes. These brakes have been a big bottleneck but I think I'll be over that climb in a couple of weeks. Also I'm rebuilding my centersection to have a big hinged flop. Hing will be 3 in in rear of rear spar. That SHOULD give me enough room to enter and exit comfortably. Keep in touch.Corky in wet La________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fin offsetI thought I was going to go with the brake cyl under the floor until I received drawings for toe brakes from Bill Rewey. If you do go with heels may I suggest that you fab and install BEFORE building the front seat. I was going to have to go in and tear out my seat. One reason I opted for the toes. These brakes have been a big bottleneck but I think I'll be over that climb in a couple of weeks. Also I'm rebuilding my centersection to have a big hinged flop. Hing will be 3 in in rear of rear spar. That SHOULD give me enough room to enter and exit comfortably. Keep in touch.Corky in wet La________________________________________________________________________________
Re: Pietenpol-List: Fin offset
Original Posted By: Gary Meadows
The idea of setting the engine mount to correct for the thrust andprocession is a good one. I have been curious how Bernard arrived at threedegrees of down thrust. He claimed in the Flying and Gliding manual that theangle aidded the prop getting a good bite on the air in climb. I have alsobeen wondering about the angle of incidence of the wing.The design seems like a natural to experiment with. The engine mount couldbe made adjustable and if the cowling only attached to the mount thrust linechange wouldn't require a cowling rebuild. The parasol wing is easilychanged for incidence.Gary and CorkySome of the older aircraft engines "WW1" were stated in a similar manner.The engine was fueled cold and when ready the pilot cranked like mad on asmall mag that gave a "shower of sparks" to all cylinders at once. Thecylinder in the right position fired off and the engine ran. I have watchedthis procedure and some times the engine kicked back a few revs but gave into the cam and ran the right way around.There ain't much new under the sun!John Mc----- Original Message -----
The idea of setting the engine mount to correct for the thrust andprocession is a good one. I have been curious how Bernard arrived at threedegrees of down thrust. He claimed in the Flying and Gliding manual that theangle aidded the prop getting a good bite on the air in climb. I have alsobeen wondering about the angle of incidence of the wing.The design seems like a natural to experiment with. The engine mount couldbe made adjustable and if the cowling only attached to the mount thrust linechange wouldn't require a cowling rebuild. The parasol wing is easilychanged for incidence.Gary and CorkySome of the older aircraft engines "WW1" were stated in a similar manner.The engine was fueled cold and when ready the pilot cranked like mad on asmall mag that gave a "shower of sparks" to all cylinders at once. Thecylinder in the right position fired off and the engine ran. I have watchedthis procedure and some times the engine kicked back a few revs but gave into the cam and ran the right way around.There ain't much new under the sun!John Mc----- Original Message -----
Re: Pietenpol-List: Fin offset
Original Posted By: John Duprey
Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuselage outline
Original Posted By: "Mike Bell"
In the 1932 Flying and Glider Manual, the max fuselage depth is 25" and the firewall is only 20 3/4" which produces quite a curve for the lower longeron. In the 1933 plans, the depth is 23 3/4" and the firewall is 21 7/8". Which is more commonly built? Is the tighter curve really that much more difficult to set up? And what is the general consensus on which design looks better?Jeff________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuselage outline
In the 1932 Flying and Glider Manual, the max fuselage depth is 25" and the firewall is only 20 3/4" which produces quite a curve for the lower longeron. In the 1933 plans, the depth is 23 3/4" and the firewall is 21 7/8". Which is more commonly built? Is the tighter curve really that much more difficult to set up? And what is the general consensus on which design looks better?Jeff________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuselage outline
Original Posted By: "Rodger & Betty Childs"
03/15/2001 09:25:11 AMDon't forget to consider whether you're building the short or longversion. I'm building the long, but I like the lines of the short alittle better. It's kind-of hard to form an opinion without visitingBrodhead and asking a lot of questions. Alternatively, trace theprofile drawing of the Piet and adjust it out both ways. Redraw ituntil you like it and go with that. You're not going to affect theaerodynamics or structural integrity.Mike________________________________________________________________________________
03/15/2001 09:25:11 AMDon't forget to consider whether you're building the short or longversion. I'm building the long, but I like the lines of the short alittle better. It's kind-of hard to form an opinion without visitingBrodhead and asking a lot of questions. Alternatively, trace theprofile drawing of the Piet and adjust it out both ways. Redraw ituntil you like it and go with that. You're not going to affect theaerodynamics or structural integrity.Mike________________________________________________________________________________
Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuselage outline
Original Posted By: kgardner(at)odu.edu
Jeff,The 1933 plans are what's called "The Improved Pietenpol Air-Camper"Maybe Bernie found it easier to make the lower longeron with less of acurve to ease assembly.Anyway, the 1933 version is what we are building. I'll have to keep myeyes open the next time I see a picture of an "early" Piet to see if thereisany extra curve on the bottom.Rodger ChildsPiet in progress________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuselage outline
Jeff,The 1933 plans are what's called "The Improved Pietenpol Air-Camper"Maybe Bernie found it easier to make the lower longeron with less of acurve to ease assembly.Anyway, the 1933 version is what we are building. I'll have to keep myeyes open the next time I see a picture of an "early" Piet to see if thereisany extra curve on the bottom.Rodger ChildsPiet in progress________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuselage outline
Original Posted By: Christian Bobka
03/15/2001 09:59:32 AMHi Everyone,A couple of related questions:I've heard several people mention widening the fuselage (usually by 2") atdifferent times. What does this do to other dimensions & hardware geometry?I'm small (5'6" & 140 lbs. all wet), but I like the idea of a litte more"elbow room". Also, there was an article in KitPlanes about 3-5 years agoabout a guy in FL who built 1 degree of dihedral into his wing & claimedthe plane was more stable & handled better, which makes basic sense to me(also got rid of the 'droopy wing' look). Anyone have any ideas how youwould go about it with the 3-piece wing? I assume it would at the veryleast involve selective lengthening of struts, but wouldn't wing hardwareorientation need to change a little too?I am beginning to look over my plans with an eye towards some (hopefullymodest) modifications & would appreciate input.Thanks!Kip GardnerLaboratory Manager, ODUDept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmospheric Sciences4600 Elkhorn AvenueNorfolk, VA 23529(757)683-5654Bumper Sticker of the Week:"Don't Drink and Park - 'Accidents' Cause People"________________________________________________________________________________Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 10:06:07 -0500
03/15/2001 09:59:32 AMHi Everyone,A couple of related questions:I've heard several people mention widening the fuselage (usually by 2") atdifferent times. What does this do to other dimensions & hardware geometry?I'm small (5'6" & 140 lbs. all wet), but I like the idea of a litte more"elbow room". Also, there was an article in KitPlanes about 3-5 years agoabout a guy in FL who built 1 degree of dihedral into his wing & claimedthe plane was more stable & handled better, which makes basic sense to me(also got rid of the 'droopy wing' look). Anyone have any ideas how youwould go about it with the 3-piece wing? I assume it would at the veryleast involve selective lengthening of struts, but wouldn't wing hardwareorientation need to change a little too?I am beginning to look over my plans with an eye towards some (hopefullymodest) modifications & would appreciate input.Thanks!Kip GardnerLaboratory Manager, ODUDept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmospheric Sciences4600 Elkhorn AvenueNorfolk, VA 23529(757)683-5654Bumper Sticker of the Week:"Don't Drink and Park - 'Accidents' Cause People"________________________________________________________________________________Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 10:06:07 -0500
Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuselage outline
Original Posted By: kgardner(at)odu.edu
Kip, I've widened my Piet by 2" cause I tried on a GN-1 and it was tight for me, ut I'm very wide. Now I sit in my 2" wider Piet, and it almost feels too wide! I've got plenty of elbow room, and butt room, but if I were your size I'd stick to the normal width. You might make a mockup of the cockpit to prove to yourself how it fits. Going wider also makes you use more than 1/2 sheet of 4'x8' plywood too. Yes also on the fact that when you change a dimension like this, it has a ripple effect throughout the rest of the project. I also lengthened mine in the front of the fuselage, I wanted more plane up front to counter my weight and that has caused the same effect. You'll hear it till your sick, but it really is best to stick to the plans when possible. Well, let's just say there's less thinking involved that way, (and a lot less wasted wood......) On the dihedral, this should make no difference in any of your fittings. Your lift struts will be a tiny bit longer but heck you cut them to fit anyway. You have the center secttion spar carry-through attached to the wing panel in a butt joint with only the bolts at the cabane strut attachment holding them together. All you really have to do is introduce a tiny amount of bevel to the spar or carrythrough here and it'll allow the wing will have clearance to pivot up a little past flat for your dihedral. Remember to plan on installng jury struts. The plans don't call for it, but you need them!Good Luck - Make Sawdust!Gary MeadowsSpring, TX________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuselage outline
Kip, I've widened my Piet by 2" cause I tried on a GN-1 and it was tight for me, ut I'm very wide. Now I sit in my 2" wider Piet, and it almost feels too wide! I've got plenty of elbow room, and butt room, but if I were your size I'd stick to the normal width. You might make a mockup of the cockpit to prove to yourself how it fits. Going wider also makes you use more than 1/2 sheet of 4'x8' plywood too. Yes also on the fact that when you change a dimension like this, it has a ripple effect throughout the rest of the project. I also lengthened mine in the front of the fuselage, I wanted more plane up front to counter my weight and that has caused the same effect. You'll hear it till your sick, but it really is best to stick to the plans when possible. Well, let's just say there's less thinking involved that way, (and a lot less wasted wood......) On the dihedral, this should make no difference in any of your fittings. Your lift struts will be a tiny bit longer but heck you cut them to fit anyway. You have the center secttion spar carry-through attached to the wing panel in a butt joint with only the bolts at the cabane strut attachment holding them together. All you really have to do is introduce a tiny amount of bevel to the spar or carrythrough here and it'll allow the wing will have clearance to pivot up a little past flat for your dihedral. Remember to plan on installng jury struts. The plans don't call for it, but you need them!Good Luck - Make Sawdust!Gary MeadowsSpring, TX________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuselage outline
Original Posted By: "Owen Davies"
03/15/2001 12:31:54 PMGary,Thanks for the advice, just knowing that increasing the width calls forthat much extra material gives me pause, I'll definitely be on a budgetthroughout this project. Also, being a tree hugger, I want to minimizewaste. Likewise the advice re dihedral & jury struts, sounds like not toobig a deal, I'll see when I get there
.regards,KipLaboratory Manager, ODUDept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmospheric Sciences4600 Elkhorn AvenueNorfolk, VA 23529(757)683-5654Bumper Sticker of the Week:"Don't Drink and Park - 'Accidents' Cause People"________________________________________________________________________________
03/15/2001 12:31:54 PMGary,Thanks for the advice, just knowing that increasing the width calls forthat much extra material gives me pause, I'll definitely be on a budgetthroughout this project. Also, being a tree hugger, I want to minimizewaste. Likewise the advice re dihedral & jury struts, sounds like not toobig a deal, I'll see when I get there
.regards,KipLaboratory Manager, ODUDept. of Ocean, Earth & Atmospheric Sciences4600 Elkhorn AvenueNorfolk, VA 23529(757)683-5654Bumper Sticker of the Week:"Don't Drink and Park - 'Accidents' Cause People"________________________________________________________________________________