Original Posted By: Perry
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Am I building the wrong airplane? (Pilot WeightAgain)
Re: Pietenpol-List: Am I building the wrong airplane? (Pilot Weight
Re: Pietenpol-List: Am I building the wrong airplane? (Pilot Weight
Original Posted By: Perry
The farther forward the wieght the lighter it hasto be. What's the absolute farthest? The frontside of the prop. So what about a heavy captype spinner? It shouldn't cause excessivestress on the crank, the prop does enough ofthat all by itself, especially a metal one.Clif ----- Original Message -----
The farther forward the wieght the lighter it hasto be. What's the absolute farthest? The frontside of the prop. So what about a heavy captype spinner? It shouldn't cause excessivestress on the crank, the prop does enough ofthat all by itself, especially a metal one.Clif ----- Original Message -----
Re: Pietenpol-List: Am I building the wrong airplane? (Pilot Weight Again)
Original Posted By:> Matthew
Good point Mike but my fuselage frame is done. Making a longer engine mount is an option but as the article pointed out you get the most lbs per inch change by moving the wing. The way I understand it, the fitting stay in the same spot, it just shifts back and changes the geometry of your struts.RyanSent from my iPhonOn Feb 14, 2013, at 10:57 PM, "Michael McGowan" wrote:> What about moving the engine foward instead of the wing back. If you put the increase in the front most fuselage bay this wouldn't change the wing or landing gear fittings and would give more room in the front cockpit?> > Mike McGowan> Long fuselage Model A fat pilot> ----- Original Message -----
Good point Mike but my fuselage frame is done. Making a longer engine mount is an option but as the article pointed out you get the most lbs per inch change by moving the wing. The way I understand it, the fitting stay in the same spot, it just shifts back and changes the geometry of your struts.RyanSent from my iPhonOn Feb 14, 2013, at 10:57 PM, "Michael McGowan" wrote:> What about moving the engine foward instead of the wing back. If you put the increase in the front most fuselage bay this wouldn't change the wing or landing gear fittings and would give more room in the front cockpit?> > Mike McGowan> Long fuselage Model A fat pilot> ----- Original Message -----
Fw: Pietenpol-List: Am I building the wrong airplane? (Pilot Weight
Original Posted By:> Perry
Subject: Fw: Pietenpol-List: Am I building the wrong airplane? (Pilot WeightAgain)> I don't know if I should blame my Android tablet, or old age for > the way this was typed ????> > > ----- Original Message -----
Subject: Fw: Pietenpol-List: Am I building the wrong airplane? (Pilot WeightAgain)> I don't know if I should blame my Android tablet, or old age for > the way this was typed ????> > > ----- Original Message -----
Fw: Pietenpol-List: Am I building the wrong airplane? (Pilot Weight
Original Posted By: Perry
I don't know if I should blame my Android tablet, or old age for the way this was typed ????----- Original Message -----
I don't know if I should blame my Android tablet, or old age for the way this was typed ????----- Original Message -----
RE: Pietenpol-List: Am I building the wrong airplane? (Pilot Weight Again)
Original Posted By: Michael D Cuy
RyanYou should be fine at 225 as long as you don't build it too heavy. If youwant a rapid climb rate, high speed all while hauling you and another 200+pounder then you might be pushing it. It's still a Pietenpol after all.Plan on moving the wing back up to 6 inches. This moves not only the engineforward but also the weight of the landing gear and fuselage forward. SteveEldredge (220lb)ended up with his wing back 6 inches and flew the heck outof his plane with only an A-65. I don't see why you can't do the same. Ifyou want proof that it is possible read Steve's old webpage I was able todig up:http://web.archive.org/web/200408120336 ... tm#Day_one You can see pictures of Steve's plane here. Let us not forget MikeCuy wasn't so small either. Here are some comments from the archives. After flying in my short fuse aircamper, then trying on the long fuse witha1" width modification, I felt like I was rattling around in the back seat.I am 5'10" 220lbs. Steve E.Date: Sep 18, 2001
RyanYou should be fine at 225 as long as you don't build it too heavy. If youwant a rapid climb rate, high speed all while hauling you and another 200+pounder then you might be pushing it. It's still a Pietenpol after all.Plan on moving the wing back up to 6 inches. This moves not only the engineforward but also the weight of the landing gear and fuselage forward. SteveEldredge (220lb)ended up with his wing back 6 inches and flew the heck outof his plane with only an A-65. I don't see why you can't do the same. Ifyou want proof that it is possible read Steve's old webpage I was able todig up:http://web.archive.org/web/200408120336 ... tm#Day_one You can see pictures of Steve's plane here. Let us not forget MikeCuy wasn't so small either. Here are some comments from the archives. After flying in my short fuse aircamper, then trying on the long fuse witha1" width modification, I felt like I was rattling around in the back seat.I am 5'10" 220lbs. Steve E.Date: Sep 18, 2001