Brodhead Pietenpol Association

Original Posted By: Galen Hutcheson
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Tac CablePieters,Have a new 60" tac drive cable. Was too short for my Repiet, needed 72" which I bought. Anyone in need of the 60" is welcome to it for shipping costs.Corky in La________________________________________________________________________________Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 23:36:57 -0800 (PST)

Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Hi Doc,A few thoughts on widening the fuselage. I did that on my Pietenpol, and ifI were to do it over I would still make it wider than plans. I widened mineby 1", making it 25" wide. Mine is the long fuselage version. I'm 6'2" and200 lbs and felt I needed the extra room in the cockpit. I have flown shortfuselage, standard width Piets, and they are just a little too tight for me.There are downsides to widening it, though. They are:1. Weight. Long fuselage Piets tend to be heavier than standrd lengthPiets, most weighing in around 700 to 750 lbs according to Doc Mosher'ssurvey at Brodhead a few years ago. Making it wider adds more weight. Mineweighs 735 lbs, which is a tad over 100 lbs heavier than Mike Cuy's. Itshows in its climb performance.2. Cost. Ol' Bernard knew what he was doing, designing the plane to be aseconomical as possible. the stand width allows a 48" sheet of plywood to beplit lengthwise and make two pieces that will fitthe fuselage. Making itany wider requires two sheets, with lots of waste.3. Complexity. Widening the fuselage means the cabane struts are spacedfurther apart, which requires modification to the wing. One little changesnowballs into several changes, rippling throughout the airframe. As I canrecall, those changes included:a. Making the centersection spar longer (I went ahead and made mine 6"longer to give me more fuel capacity)b. Making the fuselage taller, to keep the proportions with the widerfuselage (not a bad thing - it gives more room in the instrument panel)Again, if I had it to do over, I would still make it wider. Just realizethere are downsides to it, most notably weight. Sure makes it nice on thosecold mornings when I have to wear a heavy leather jacket to fly itcomfortably, though.Jack PhillipsNX899JP -----Original Message-----

Original Posted By: Galen Hutcheson

Original Posted By: BARNSTMR(at)aol.com

Original Posted By: Galen Hutcheson
Doc,I built my Pietenpol with the fuselage 2" wider from the firewall aft to therear instrument panel, and tapered the sides from there to the tailpost .The fuselage length was unchanged from Orrin Hoopman's drawings for the"Improved Air Camper".On the 15th of this month, I shall fly it to commemorate the 34thanniversary of its first flight, weather permitting. Over the years some ofthese flights have been pretty chilly here in Alberta, Canada--and I haveappreciated the ability to wear lots of clothing due to the widened cockpit.It seems the widening of the fuselage has not resulted in much weightincrease. My Piet weighed 630 pounds dry in 1985 after recovering. A C85-8engine and wooden propeller were installed together with an absolute minimumof fixed equipment. Today, it is a little heavier with a C85-12 engine andsome very lightweight seat cushions to ease my old bones--but is stilllighter than several other Piets in our area.If I were to build another (which I won't), I'd go with the widenedfuselage.Cheers,Graham Hansen (Pietenpol CF-AUN)________________________________________________________________________________Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 09:05:26 -0800 (PST)

Original Posted By: Galen Hutcheson