Brodhead Pietenpol Association

Original Posted By: Oscar Zuniga
The issue of wing dihedral has come up almost every year at Brodhead andOshkosh forums--a little bit adds stability but the more you add the moreair "spills" off the ends of the wings and you lose lift efficiency.Bernie supposedly set his piets up with the wings flat when sitting on theground--then when in the air with the weight of fuselage hanging down, thewings would naturally flex just a tad giving a bit of dihedral and, viola,stability!Mac in Oregon-----Original Message-----

Original Posted By: "Joe Krzes"
Doug wrote:>I would have a hard time believing that either way would have>any effect on the flying characteristics of this plane.Well, history would agree with you, and I think Don Pietenpol's notes say that BHP tried adding dihedral and didn't find it worthwhile. Hundreds of builders over the years would agree with you too.The purpose is to make the plane more stable or "self-righting", with the mass of the fuselage "hanging" between the two lifting surfaces, or the lift vectors acting slightly toward the center axis of the airplane and counter to gravity so that the plane would tend to fly wings-level. But however all the engineering and vector stuff works, the intent of adding dihedral is to make the plane more stable. However, the intent of me making the comment is to get in a little ribbing on Mike ;o)Oscar ZunigaMedford, Oregonmailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.comwebsite at http://www.flysquirrel.net________________________________________________________________________________

Original Posted By: "Warren D. Shoun"

Original Posted By: Larry Nelson
I'm in the process of rebuilding N-1033B, wrecked a couple years ago. Wings arenot BH's design, they're off of an Aeronca, no evidence of dihedral except forpossible adjustments to lift struts. For you old timer purest, zippin' aroundwith Model A's, did Bernie put any dihedral in his original wing design. Did later design mods have anything other than a straight wing. Lastly, what'sthe actual vs published stall speed on original designs.Gordon Bowen________________________________________________________________________________Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 19:19:11 -0700 (PDT)

Original Posted By: Larry Nelson
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Question re: wing dihedralIn a message dated 9/19/04 8:11:03 PM Central Daylight Time, gbowen(at)ptialaska.net writes:>Gordon,I'm not exactly an old timer (I'm still under 50 yrs old), but I can tell you that Bernard did not put any dihedral in the original wing, or any mods. The plans clearly call out a straight wing. I believe he may have put just a very tiny little bit of dihedral in the wing, just to avoid the optical illusion- drooped wing tip look of a straight wing...but not for dihedral effect. Youhave to really eyeball the wing to see it. I don't believe there is a published stall speed, but the plans do call out 'Landing Speed - 40 mph.' Actualstall speeds are slightly different for each ship...weight and rigging being the determining factor, but usually about 30 to 35 mph. At such a high angle of attack of the original airfoil, there is a LOT of induced drag, and it slowsdown very quickly. It's like a big ol' parachute. On the other hand, it has a LOT of lift, as long as you don't surpass the 'Critical Angle of Attack'.Chuck G.p.s. Does N1033B have a Model A engine ?How old is an Old Timer ?________________________________________________________________________________Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 07:18:13 -0700 (PDT)

Original Posted By: Michael D Cuy

Original Posted By:
Chuck,Thanks for your help. I've looked at a bunch of pictures of Piets, and itwas impossible to tell if the dihedral was put into the wings or just slightadjustments to the lift struts. Ole Timers- are fully qualified at any age,if purest at heart, wood, rag, model A. The guy I got this plane from wasthe second owner, so he wasn't a purest or a builder, but he did fly thebird over 1000 hours before going into a corn field in Missouri. He told mehe had flown to Brodhead one time and was kinda looked at funny because theplane is metal tube fuselage, Aeronca wings, and Conti C-85 engine. I'mgoing to stick with an 0-200 or smaller engine since the last one got badlydamaged. Seems someone forgot to secure one of the nuts holding on aconnecting rod, therefore threw the piston, wrecked the plane. Once againthanks for your help.Gordon----- Original Message -----

Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Terry,Under my rear (airplane) seat, I keep my ELT, portable tie downs,oil, spare batteries (for the radio & gps) and a few other smallitems.The rear seat is on a removable piece of wood and fits over two plastic trays that contain the above items.Mike KingGN-177MKDallas-----Original Message-----

Original Posted By: "Sayre, William G"