Original Posted By: "Avill"
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Horn Point Fly-In - Cambridge Maryland May 20-21,2013 UNCLASSIFIED Fill the wings with ping pong balls. Perhaps even the fuselage. (Ducking for cover)STeve DOn 05/09/13, Lion Mason wrote:> > Will a wooden Piet float? Airlion> > Sent from my iPhone> > On May 8, 2013, at 9:50 PM, "Fun2av8" wrote:> > > > > Is anyone planning on going to this Fly-In? It is sponsored by Potomac AntiqueAero Squadron, a chapter of the Antique Airplane Association.> > Flyer is at http://hornpointflyin.info/uploads/PAAS ... r_prf3.pdf> > > > AirNav: http://www.airnav.com/airport/MD18> > - All Grass Runways> > - No Fuel on airport> > - Nearest fuel KCGE (6nm SE)> > - Culpeper to Horn Point> > - - 90 NM > > - - 1h 15m @ 70mph > > - - 7 gals> > - - 11 miles over water> > > > --------> > Jim McWhorter> > N687MB (New Owner)> > Culpeper, VA KCJR> > > > > > > > > > Read this topic online here:> > > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 182#400182> > > > > > > > > > Attachments: > > > > http://forums.matronics.com//files/horn ... 13_183.png> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > UNCLASSIFIED________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: My Days Work
Pietenpol-List: My Days Work
Re: Pietenpol-List: My Days Work
Original Posted By: helspersew(at)aol.com
Well here is my day's work. I figured since money is tight I might as well drawup my ribs. This is a 613.5 for use on a long wing with 1.5" I-beam spars. Iwill probably end up having one of the people I know with a router cut the gussetsand jig to match. We will see if I can get the cap strips cut on a laseror a router. What ever happened to that guy about 2 years ago who was offeringCNC rib kits?Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ttachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/ribl ... ___Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: My Days Work
Well here is my day's work. I figured since money is tight I might as well drawup my ribs. This is a 613.5 for use on a long wing with 1.5" I-beam spars. Iwill probably end up having one of the people I know with a router cut the gussetsand jig to match. We will see if I can get the cap strips cut on a laseror a router. What ever happened to that guy about 2 years ago who was offeringCNC rib kits?Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ttachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/ribl ... ___Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: My Days Work
Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Avill"
Why would you cut the cap strips out on a CNC router or laser. The grain or slopeof the wood would not be correct.--------Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Why would you cut the cap strips out on a CNC router or laser. The grain or slopeof the wood would not be correct.--------Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: Michael Weston
Maybe I used the incorrect terminology, the capstrips would still be bent but 90%of the mitres could be completed.I also neglected to mention the purpose. The mission is hot and high here in Denver.Yeah its been slow.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Maybe I used the incorrect terminology, the capstrips would still be bent but 90%of the mitres could be completed.I also neglected to mention the purpose. The mission is hot and high here in Denver.Yeah its been slow.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Avill"
hi, new here.my name is mike weston I'm building a short fuselage piet here inminneapolis, where the pilot light blew out on spring.anyway.I was unaware ofthe option to use a 1.5" "I"beam spar. where do I obtain a copy of this plan addendum?for that matter I didnt know that there was a long wing option how long?and where? by the way, you guys (and gals) are by far and away the most pleasantand helpful group i have ever come across on the web. keep it up! ________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
hi, new here.my name is mike weston I'm building a short fuselage piet here inminneapolis, where the pilot light blew out on spring.anyway.I was unaware ofthe option to use a 1.5" "I"beam spar. where do I obtain a copy of this plan addendum?for that matter I didnt know that there was a long wing option how long?and where? by the way, you guys (and gals) are by far and away the most pleasantand helpful group i have ever come across on the web. keep it up! ________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "dgaldrich"
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Welcome Michael WestonHi Michael,I made a simple spar that required no routing and was easy to build.You can make the wing longer yes. If building a 3-pce wing make your center section wider or add a foot or two to eachwing panel. It will improve your climb and how much you can lift passenger-wise. You've got Dick Navratil in your areaand he's built two Piets so he should be a good source of info first hand. If you can attend the Piet fly-in at Brodhead, WIyou'll see lots of good things on how people did various aspects of the plane. Each one a little different from the rest. Bringa measuring tape, camera, and notepad:).Michael CuyOhio[cid:image001.jpg(at)01CE4D66.118FC200]________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Welcome Michael WestonHi Michael,I made a simple spar that required no routing and was easy to build.You can make the wing longer yes. If building a 3-pce wing make your center section wider or add a foot or two to eachwing panel. It will improve your climb and how much you can lift passenger-wise. You've got Dick Navratil in your areaand he's built two Piets so he should be a good source of info first hand. If you can attend the Piet fly-in at Brodhead, WIyou'll see lots of good things on how people did various aspects of the plane. Each one a little different from the rest. Bringa measuring tape, camera, and notepad:).Michael CuyOhio[cid:image001.jpg(at)01CE4D66.118FC200]________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: Ken Bickers
MikeThere are a number of Piets in the MSP area and one of the local EAA chapters isbuilding one. Dick Navrotil has built or had a hand in building something like10 of them, lives in St Paul, and is active on this list. You should havea lot of usable advice from them.DaveRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 09:20:24 -0600Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
MikeThere are a number of Piets in the MSP area and one of the local EAA chapters isbuilding one. Dick Navrotil has built or had a hand in building something like10 of them, lives in St Paul, and is active on this list. You should havea lot of usable advice from them.DaveRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 09:20:24 -0600Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "taildrags"
Avill=3BIs there some engineering behind your increasing the spar width to 1.5"? The most important dimension for a spar (bending loads) is the depth. Increasing the width does improve the spar's top and bottom chord performance in tension and compression=2C which helps in bending=2C but the point is=2C others have shown that 3/4" width is adequate for standard Air Camper spars. You might consider using 1" instead of 1.5" for your analysis with the longer wing before locking yourself into doubling the stock spar width.Oscar ZunigaMedford=2C ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 power ________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Avill=3BIs there some engineering behind your increasing the spar width to 1.5"? The most important dimension for a spar (bending loads) is the depth. Increasing the width does improve the spar's top and bottom chord performance in tension and compression=2C which helps in bending=2C but the point is=2C others have shown that 3/4" width is adequate for standard Air Camper spars. You might consider using 1" instead of 1.5" for your analysis with the longer wing before locking yourself into doubling the stock spar width.Oscar ZunigaMedford=2C ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 power ________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Dick N"
Paul;The easy way to figure out what spar configuration you need would be to start withwhat works and then reverse-engineer your way to the configuration that youwant to try. In the case of the stock Piet wing, you could start with the stock1" solid spar and determine the moment that the stock, solid Air Camper sparwas designed to sustain and use that as the number that your proposed substitutespar needs to meet. There are tables for looking up the moment of inertiafor the beam section (Ix), a rectangle being the simplest. With that numberin hand, you could calculate the web and flange dimensions needed for your"alternative" spar, but it gets more complex.The solid wood spar in the original drawings (and the routed 3/4" spar that Mr.Pietenpol later used as well) are Sitka spruce. If you use a different typeof wood, or if you build up a composite I-beam section, the materials used mayhave different yield stress characteristics than Sitka and you've got to accountfor that. If you change the spar depth, the moment of inertia for the sparsection changes, and you have to account for that. If you make the wings longer,the bending moment and other loads change as well... and you have to accountfor that. If you keep the attachment point for the lift struts to the wingspars the same but increase the wing span, the loading on the outboard partsof the wing changes and you have to account for that. Yadda, yadda.The point is, it's not as simple as "if I widen the flange by 1/2", I can increasethe wing span by 18". At least, not if you want to do it right.--------Oscar ZunigaMedford, ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 powerRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Paul;The easy way to figure out what spar configuration you need would be to start withwhat works and then reverse-engineer your way to the configuration that youwant to try. In the case of the stock Piet wing, you could start with the stock1" solid spar and determine the moment that the stock, solid Air Camper sparwas designed to sustain and use that as the number that your proposed substitutespar needs to meet. There are tables for looking up the moment of inertiafor the beam section (Ix), a rectangle being the simplest. With that numberin hand, you could calculate the web and flange dimensions needed for your"alternative" spar, but it gets more complex.The solid wood spar in the original drawings (and the routed 3/4" spar that Mr.Pietenpol later used as well) are Sitka spruce. If you use a different typeof wood, or if you build up a composite I-beam section, the materials used mayhave different yield stress characteristics than Sitka and you've got to accountfor that. If you change the spar depth, the moment of inertia for the sparsection changes, and you have to account for that. If you make the wings longer,the bending moment and other loads change as well... and you have to accountfor that. If you keep the attachment point for the lift struts to the wingspars the same but increase the wing span, the loading on the outboard partsof the wing changes and you have to account for that. Yadda, yadda.The point is, it's not as simple as "if I widen the flange by 1/2", I can increasethe wing span by 18". At least, not if you want to do it right.--------Oscar ZunigaMedford, ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 powerRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Re: Pietenpol-List: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Michael Weston"
What part of Mpls are you in? I am in Arden Hills and would like to stop by for a visit sometime.Dick N.----- Original Message -----
What part of Mpls are you in? I am in Arden Hills and would like to stop by for a visit sometime.Dick N.----- Original Message -----
Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Don Emch"
Avill,i was just looking at your CAD model of your rib, and it appears that you haveraised the level where the bottom surface of the spars will sit. I don't thinkyou want to do that. That will require that your brackets will need to be longer,with increased bending loads. The spars should sit right on top of thebottom capstrip.As for CNC router or laser cut capstrips... one has to ask "why?". These are simple1/4" x 1/2" strips of spruce, easily cut with a small hand saw, or a mitersaw. I rough cut mine a little bit oversized, and then fine tuned with a stationarydisc sander. Worked like a charm.And finally, as Oscar said, every change affects many other things that need tobe accounted for. Be careful to make sure you cover all your bases before proceedingwith significant changes.Bill C.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Avill,i was just looking at your CAD model of your rib, and it appears that you haveraised the level where the bottom surface of the spars will sit. I don't thinkyou want to do that. That will require that your brackets will need to be longer,with increased bending loads. The spars should sit right on top of thebottom capstrip.As for CNC router or laser cut capstrips... one has to ask "why?". These are simple1/4" x 1/2" strips of spruce, easily cut with a small hand saw, or a mitersaw. I rough cut mine a little bit oversized, and then fine tuned with a stationarydisc sander. Worked like a charm.And finally, as Oscar said, every change affects many other things that need tobe accounted for. Be careful to make sure you cover all your bases before proceedingwith significant changes.Bill C.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[Vantage Partners, LLC]"
Remember, Mr. Pietenpol used a 1" routed spar and that is shown in the Pietenpolfamily plans. Later, in the '60's he used a laminated 3/4" spar with no routing.Laminated correctly this would be stronger than a solid 3/4" spar whichhe never used. Others however have used this. There's very little differencein price between 3/4" and 1" and routing is very simple.Don EmchNX899DERead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Remember, Mr. Pietenpol used a 1" routed spar and that is shown in the Pietenpolfamily plans. Later, in the '60's he used a laminated 3/4" spar with no routing.Laminated correctly this would be stronger than a solid 3/4" spar whichhe never used. Others however have used this. There's very little differencein price between 3/4" and 1" and routing is very simple.Don EmchNX899DERead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Re: Pietenpol-List: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Michael Weston"
Mike,Minneapolis / St. Paul has a very active Pietenpol following. Active Pietenpol flyers include Dick Navratil, Bob Poore, Larry White and myself. Several active build projects are in the immediate area also.Call me at 612 721-6235, we'll get you connected.Greg CardinalMinneapolis----- Original Message -----
Mike,Minneapolis / St. Paul has a very active Pietenpol following. Active Pietenpol flyers include Dick Navratil, Bob Poore, Larry White and myself. Several active build projects are in the immediate area also.Call me at 612 721-6235, we'll get you connected.Greg CardinalMinneapolis----- Original Message -----
Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Clif Dawson"
Bill Church wrote:> Avill,> i was just looking at your CAD model of your rib, and it appears that you haveraised the level where the bottom surface of the spars will sit. I don't thinkyou want to do that. That will require that your brackets will need to belonger, with increased bending loads. The spars should sit right on top of thebottom capstrip.> As for CNC router or laser cut capstrips... one has to ask "why?". These aresimple 1/4" x 1/2" strips of spruce, easily cut with a small hand saw, or a mitersaw. I rough cut mine a little bit oversized, and then fine tuned with astationary disc sander. Worked like a charm.> And finally, as Oscar said, every change affects many other things that needto be accounted for. Be careful to make sure you cover all your bases beforeproceeding with significant changes.> > Bill C.Bill,Thank you for your input. I will reduce the distance from the capstrips to thespar on the next revision.Everyone else, I will put in more time and see if the 1" built up spar works withthe extra height.Ken,How does next Friday sound?Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Bill Church wrote:> Avill,> i was just looking at your CAD model of your rib, and it appears that you haveraised the level where the bottom surface of the spars will sit. I don't thinkyou want to do that. That will require that your brackets will need to belonger, with increased bending loads. The spars should sit right on top of thebottom capstrip.> As for CNC router or laser cut capstrips... one has to ask "why?". These aresimple 1/4" x 1/2" strips of spruce, easily cut with a small hand saw, or a mitersaw. I rough cut mine a little bit oversized, and then fine tuned with astationary disc sander. Worked like a charm.> And finally, as Oscar said, every change affects many other things that needto be accounted for. Be careful to make sure you cover all your bases beforeproceeding with significant changes.> > Bill C.Bill,Thank you for your input. I will reduce the distance from the capstrips to thespar on the next revision.Everyone else, I will put in more time and see if the 1" built up spar works withthe extra height.Ken,How does next Friday sound?Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: Kip and Beth Gardner
Hi Guys:Welcome to the 613.5 club! Yes, I am building that airfoil as well. I know recenttesting has been done on the different rib styles, but I'm going for the true"Experimental" route and using the GA-30-613.5 (as Mr. Riblett corrected mewhen I asked his advice between the "612 and the 613.5" for my fat all up weight).I do have plans drawn out if you want them. I don't "Publish" them as I want noliability for their use. I drew them to the actual plots published, and usedthe same size capstrip as the piet airfoil. I also did SEVERAL iterations of them,and punched out the jig on a CNC router I had. I also drew out the gussetsto be laser cut. At one point, during one of my more and more frequent job lay offs, I had thoughtthat I might kit the various airfoil jigs and parts (including a 'stick' cuttingjig that would fit on a table saw and allow you to cut all of the internalparts accurately, with the right length, and angle to just POP into place andglue... made one and it works well, but not cost effective to make and ship).The jig I finalized used 1/4" dowels as bracing as it was easier to punch outon a CNC router. It is "dead to nuts" accurate to the original .dat point fileon the airfoil plot. So, here's my take as a heretic of the "Riblett following":Listen to Oscar (aka Taildrags) in his analysis of the spar. It is height, notspar width that will make the biggest strength difference. The true strength isin the top and bottom of the spar which carry the compression and tension loads,and the height between the 2 that makes the spar stronger, not the width.(OK: that's a readers digest summary, perhaps you engineers will wince (Oscar!).The Riblett spar slots are deeper (taller) at their respective positions on theplot. Taller equals more spar height (depth) if you choose to make the spar fillthe entire rib (top to bottom) with a spar (I do and I will). So (Oscar, correctmy simple engineering mind if I am incorrect, but I'm not), the distancebetween the top and bottom of the spar can increase, allowing for a strongerwing spar for an extended length wing (as I plan.... I know HERESY!). For therecord: I have allowed for the changes in wing length by taking advantage ofa taller spar with 1" depth- routed for lightening- and moving the strut connectionto the spar out one wing bay to allow for the added stress of 2 additionalbays per side... and yes, I designed the vertical tail and stab/elevator tothe proper size to compensate for the additional wing area and fuse nose extensionby 2").In theory, the Riblett design could add additional lift and allow to carry heavierloads. I plan to go for the full 1320 lb weight limit on my Piet with theadditional strength changes to the design.So, hope that helps!MarkRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Hi Guys:Welcome to the 613.5 club! Yes, I am building that airfoil as well. I know recenttesting has been done on the different rib styles, but I'm going for the true"Experimental" route and using the GA-30-613.5 (as Mr. Riblett corrected mewhen I asked his advice between the "612 and the 613.5" for my fat all up weight).I do have plans drawn out if you want them. I don't "Publish" them as I want noliability for their use. I drew them to the actual plots published, and usedthe same size capstrip as the piet airfoil. I also did SEVERAL iterations of them,and punched out the jig on a CNC router I had. I also drew out the gussetsto be laser cut. At one point, during one of my more and more frequent job lay offs, I had thoughtthat I might kit the various airfoil jigs and parts (including a 'stick' cuttingjig that would fit on a table saw and allow you to cut all of the internalparts accurately, with the right length, and angle to just POP into place andglue... made one and it works well, but not cost effective to make and ship).The jig I finalized used 1/4" dowels as bracing as it was easier to punch outon a CNC router. It is "dead to nuts" accurate to the original .dat point fileon the airfoil plot. So, here's my take as a heretic of the "Riblett following":Listen to Oscar (aka Taildrags) in his analysis of the spar. It is height, notspar width that will make the biggest strength difference. The true strength isin the top and bottom of the spar which carry the compression and tension loads,and the height between the 2 that makes the spar stronger, not the width.(OK: that's a readers digest summary, perhaps you engineers will wince (Oscar!).The Riblett spar slots are deeper (taller) at their respective positions on theplot. Taller equals more spar height (depth) if you choose to make the spar fillthe entire rib (top to bottom) with a spar (I do and I will). So (Oscar, correctmy simple engineering mind if I am incorrect, but I'm not), the distancebetween the top and bottom of the spar can increase, allowing for a strongerwing spar for an extended length wing (as I plan.... I know HERESY!). For therecord: I have allowed for the changes in wing length by taking advantage ofa taller spar with 1" depth- routed for lightening- and moving the strut connectionto the spar out one wing bay to allow for the added stress of 2 additionalbays per side... and yes, I designed the vertical tail and stab/elevator tothe proper size to compensate for the additional wing area and fuse nose extensionby 2").In theory, the Riblett design could add additional lift and allow to carry heavierloads. I plan to go for the full 1320 lb weight limit on my Piet with theadditional strength changes to the design.So, hope that helps!MarkRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Not endorsing the Riblett airfoils, but I have seen Mark's rib jib...it's athing of beauty!!Gary BootheNX308MB-----Original Message-----
Not endorsing the Riblett airfoils, but I have seen Mark's rib jib...it's athing of beauty!!Gary BootheNX308MB-----Original Message-----
Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "taildrags"
Boy, I'll bet you get answers that are all over the map on this one. It's reallygoing to depend on where and when you expect to have to use the extinguisher,and on what type of fire. My guess is that if you have a fire while in theair, you won't be in any position to handle the extinguisher while flying theplane, but the alternative isn't pretty either. On the ground, you will havea better chance of properly applying the extinguisher while shutting down theengine and fuel supply.The three common classes fires (for purposes of extinguishers) are A, B, and C.Class A are ordinary combustibles such as wood, paper, fabric, etc. Class Bare flammable and combustible liquids. Class C are electrical fires. Most householdor light commercial portable extinguishers are either dry chemical typesrated for A-B-C, or CO2, rated for B or C. There are pros and cons to each.The dry chemical types, as Kip mentioned, may be the best choice but be awarethat they do leave a residue and it will require cleanup or you can get corrosionfrom the residue. The CO2 extinguishers leave no residue, but don't workwell when you may have wood and fabric on fire. CO2 will almost certainlyget blown out of your cockpit if you're in flight or have the engine runningwhen you try to use it.Too many variables, and no cure-all. The other problem is that there isn't muchroom in a Piet cockpit to carry an extinguisher of any size, so you really onlyget one short shot at putting out a fire with a small extinguisher. If youwant to sacrifice one, set up a mock fire with spruce, fabric, or avgas andtry a small A-B-C extinguisher on it to see if it's worth the effort to carryin the cockpit.--------Oscar ZunigaMedford, ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 powerRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Boy, I'll bet you get answers that are all over the map on this one. It's reallygoing to depend on where and when you expect to have to use the extinguisher,and on what type of fire. My guess is that if you have a fire while in theair, you won't be in any position to handle the extinguisher while flying theplane, but the alternative isn't pretty either. On the ground, you will havea better chance of properly applying the extinguisher while shutting down theengine and fuel supply.The three common classes fires (for purposes of extinguishers) are A, B, and C.Class A are ordinary combustibles such as wood, paper, fabric, etc. Class Bare flammable and combustible liquids. Class C are electrical fires. Most householdor light commercial portable extinguishers are either dry chemical typesrated for A-B-C, or CO2, rated for B or C. There are pros and cons to each.The dry chemical types, as Kip mentioned, may be the best choice but be awarethat they do leave a residue and it will require cleanup or you can get corrosionfrom the residue. The CO2 extinguishers leave no residue, but don't workwell when you may have wood and fabric on fire. CO2 will almost certainlyget blown out of your cockpit if you're in flight or have the engine runningwhen you try to use it.Too many variables, and no cure-all. The other problem is that there isn't muchroom in a Piet cockpit to carry an extinguisher of any size, so you really onlyget one short shot at putting out a fire with a small extinguisher. If youwant to sacrifice one, set up a mock fire with spruce, fabric, or avgas andtry a small A-B-C extinguisher on it to see if it's worth the effort to carryin the cockpit.--------Oscar ZunigaMedford, ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 powerRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: Isablcorky(at)aol.com
Mark; I think your Reader's Digest version states things very clearly. And yes,in theory a taller spar should be able to resist a greater bending load (lift,in the case of a cantilevered airplane wing), which should enable you to increasethe span or the wing loading.With that said, I will reiterate what others have pointed out: the chain is onlyas strong as its weakest link. You can strengthen one link or several links,but then the failure point moves elsewhere and you have to make sure you checkall the links. One thing affects another, and another. You need to checkthe lift struts, the strut attach hardware and fittings, maybe the internal wingbay bracing, who knows what else.--------Oscar ZunigaMedford, ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 powerRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Mark; I think your Reader's Digest version states things very clearly. And yes,in theory a taller spar should be able to resist a greater bending load (lift,in the case of a cantilevered airplane wing), which should enable you to increasethe span or the wing loading.With that said, I will reiterate what others have pointed out: the chain is onlyas strong as its weakest link. You can strengthen one link or several links,but then the failure point moves elsewhere and you have to make sure you checkall the links. One thing affects another, and another. You need to checkthe lift struts, the strut attach hardware and fittings, maybe the internal wingbay bracing, who knows what else.--------Oscar ZunigaMedford, ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 powerRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Mark Roberts"
Now it's fixed!Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ttachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/1368 ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Now it's fixed!Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ttachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/1368 ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Avill"
Mark: so, if I'm seeing the photos correctly, you've routered channels or groovesinto some of the framing members to shave off a little weight? I don't thinkI've ever seen that done. Interesting.--------Oscar ZunigaMedford, ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 powerRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Mark: so, if I'm seeing the photos correctly, you've routered channels or groovesinto some of the framing members to shave off a little weight? I don't thinkI've ever seen that done. Interesting.--------Oscar ZunigaMedford, ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 powerRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Mark Roberts"
Folks,I have finally had some time to run the studies on these spars. These tests weredone in Solidworks, utilizing Sitka spruce specifications from Matweb.com. Thetest jig would have looked like a 13.5' spar held in a fixture at both ends.The spar would have then been subjected to 2668.5 Newtons of force( or a 1500LBGW aircraft) evenly distributed along its length. Solidworks generates a"Safety Factor" based on these calculations. The higher the safety factor thebetter. You will see that there is a spike in performance with an increase inspar width. Sorry folks. Please let me know if there are any configurations thatyou would like to see measured against the stock 1" spar.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ttachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/sitk ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Folks,I have finally had some time to run the studies on these spars. These tests weredone in Solidworks, utilizing Sitka spruce specifications from Matweb.com. Thetest jig would have looked like a 13.5' spar held in a fixture at both ends.The spar would have then been subjected to 2668.5 Newtons of force( or a 1500LBGW aircraft) evenly distributed along its length. Solidworks generates a"Safety Factor" based on these calculations. The higher the safety factor thebetter. You will see that there is a spike in performance with an increase inspar width. Sorry folks. Please let me know if there are any configurations thatyou would like to see measured against the stock 1" spar.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ttachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/sitk ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Gary Boothe"
VERY cool data Avill!I once sold SolidWorks as a local sales rep for the company that had the rightsto this area. In fact, my one notable sale was to sell the first copy the MontereyBay Research Institute bought to design and make parts for the deep oceanresearch vessels you see on shows on the discovery channel. Bob Ballards boatwas tied up there that day, although he wasn't there. So I know and respect SolidWorks! Interesting findings.I will grab the dimensions off the spar size I plan to make and send you the sizes.I would covet your feedback regarding spar strength on a taller spar. I wouldthink a 1" taller spar routed down to a 1/2" center might show a strongersafety margin. If I build to a higher safety factor than the original spar specs,perhaps that would allow my wife to enjoy the flights more :-)Of course, all of these numbers are speculation in the legal sense... No engineeringdata, actual or implied, is being given for the sake of actually buildingan airplane so, no one can sue!To quote Bart Simpson: "I didn't do it, No body saw me do it, you can't prove anything!"Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
VERY cool data Avill!I once sold SolidWorks as a local sales rep for the company that had the rightsto this area. In fact, my one notable sale was to sell the first copy the MontereyBay Research Institute bought to design and make parts for the deep oceanresearch vessels you see on shows on the discovery channel. Bob Ballards boatwas tied up there that day, although he wasn't there. So I know and respect SolidWorks! Interesting findings.I will grab the dimensions off the spar size I plan to make and send you the sizes.I would covet your feedback regarding spar strength on a taller spar. I wouldthink a 1" taller spar routed down to a 1/2" center might show a strongersafety margin. If I build to a higher safety factor than the original spar specs,perhaps that would allow my wife to enjoy the flights more :-)Of course, all of these numbers are speculation in the legal sense... No engineeringdata, actual or implied, is being given for the sake of actually buildingan airplane so, no one can sue!To quote Bart Simpson: "I didn't do it, No body saw me do it, you can't prove anything!"Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Are you saying that, as designed, the 1" or 3/4" spar is not strong enough? Gary BootheNX308MB-----Original Message-----
Are you saying that, as designed, the 1" or 3/4" spar is not strong enough? Gary BootheNX308MB-----Original Message-----
> Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By:> mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com
I dont think I have ever seen the Load factors for the stock wing (1933) and published gross weight=2C does anyone know what they might be? > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
I dont think I have ever seen the Load factors for the stock wing (1933) and published gross weight=2C does anyone know what they might be? > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Avill"
How about a 3/4 inch wide spar 4-1/2 inches high? Anyway to get those figures?----- Original Message -----
How about a 3/4 inch wide spar 4-1/2 inches high? Anyway to get those figures?----- Original Message -----
Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Mark Roberts"
Not on the home stretch by any means but I did spend a few hours in the shop cuttingthe notch in my leading edge for the plywood.--------John FrancisRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ttachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc0 ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Not on the home stretch by any means but I did spend a few hours in the shop cuttingthe notch in my leading edge for the plywood.--------John FrancisRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ttachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc0 ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Avill"
My computer wouldn't let me into that attachment.>From what you're saying though, just to be clear,I take it that the beam was secured at each ENDand free in the middle. If that's so your data ispretty much useless for a wing spar. There aretwo things here. One is that our spars are securedat ONE end and somewhere near the middle, anentirely different kettle of fish. The other is thelift distribution across the wing is not the samefrom root to tip. Due to the way the air behavesthe outer section sees a lot less force than theinner. This translates into the same distributionof force on each spar.Here is a graphic of force distribution on our hersheybar wing, root at left;Clif----- Original Message -----
My computer wouldn't let me into that attachment.>From what you're saying though, just to be clear,I take it that the beam was secured at each ENDand free in the middle. If that's so your data ispretty much useless for a wing spar. There aretwo things here. One is that our spars are securedat ONE end and somewhere near the middle, anentirely different kettle of fish. The other is thelift distribution across the wing is not the samefrom root to tip. Due to the way the air behavesthe outer section sees a lot less force than theinner. This translates into the same distributionof force on each spar.Here is a graphic of force distribution on our hersheybar wing, root at left;Clif----- Original Message -----
RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: soar561(at)hotmail.com
I ment at gross weight. Sorry
I ment at gross weight. Sorry
Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Mark Roberts"
Not in the home stretch here either, but I got mine up on wheels this weekend.--------Mark ChouinardWings, Center Section and Empannage and Fuse framed up - Working on Landing GearRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ttachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/2483 ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Not in the home stretch here either, but I got mine up on wheels this weekend.--------Mark ChouinardWings, Center Section and Empannage and Fuse framed up - Working on Landing GearRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ttachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/2483 ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Mark Roberts"
MarkI for one think you guys talking about all of these changes are a bit nuts. The Pietenpol flys just fine according to plans dont change anything except to maybe recline the pilots seat just a bit and you will have a great plane.Dick N.----- Original Message -----
MarkI for one think you guys talking about all of these changes are a bit nuts. The Pietenpol flys just fine according to plans dont change anything except to maybe recline the pilots seat just a bit and you will have a great plane.Dick N.----- Original Message -----
Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Avill"
Yes Dick, You are correct!The Piet flys very well and is a great design, the main reason I chose it as mylife time project......for a person that can fit in it, and if you live where the density altituderemains low enough to get decent performance from it.I am making changes that will fit MY body, MY weight and is not necessarily designingchanges for anyone else to follow. But in the spirit of Experimental Aviation,and the desire to discuss ideas that may benefit me or anyone else thatmay follow looking for performance changes for a larger guy (not just FAT butmy body shape/style is of the Big AND Tall size) I offer the questions and thediscussion.So, you are right: build it to plans and you will have a great Piet. Make changesto the basic design as needed for your personalized project and you will havea plane that is yours, and still has the flavor of the piet. Mine will be the"rob" flavored "piet".MarkRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Yes Dick, You are correct!The Piet flys very well and is a great design, the main reason I chose it as mylife time project......for a person that can fit in it, and if you live where the density altituderemains low enough to get decent performance from it.I am making changes that will fit MY body, MY weight and is not necessarily designingchanges for anyone else to follow. But in the spirit of Experimental Aviation,and the desire to discuss ideas that may benefit me or anyone else thatmay follow looking for performance changes for a larger guy (not just FAT butmy body shape/style is of the Big AND Tall size) I offer the questions and thediscussion.So, you are right: build it to plans and you will have a great Piet. Make changesto the basic design as needed for your personalized project and you will havea plane that is yours, and still has the flavor of the piet. Mine will be the"rob" flavored "piet".MarkRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Dick N"
Dick,No one will argue with you that the Air Camper flies just fine. I am amazed andin awe that it will fly well with a model A motor. Most of us also realize thatchanging this design can be a detriment.I want an airplane that is cost effective to operate, but will allow me to enjoyan evening flight with my wife even when the density altitude here might bepushing 8-9000. This thread isnt about trashing Mr. Pietenpols design. It is aboutusing the tools that are available to us regular folks, in order to makea safer airplane. I absolutely would not consider getting into a model A Pietat my home airport. It would not be a safe thing to do at this altitude. I wouldalso never encourage anyone operating at a sea level airport to lengthen theirwings, modify their spar, or change rib design. I wanted to share somethingfun here but maybe the EXPIREMENAL aspect of this community has been lost thanksto the talented hand of Dick VanGrunsven. I am sure that people thought thatMr. Pietenpol was a crazy man at the time for designing and flying his ownaircraft.I have learned some very good points from this thread which I do appreciate. Ifully intend to continue down the path I have laid out with some minor tweaks.I am happy to report that I have lined up an engine core that I will be pickingup next week.I hope the naysayers didnt use T-88I will work on the spar tonight for you folks.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Dick,No one will argue with you that the Air Camper flies just fine. I am amazed andin awe that it will fly well with a model A motor. Most of us also realize thatchanging this design can be a detriment.I want an airplane that is cost effective to operate, but will allow me to enjoyan evening flight with my wife even when the density altitude here might bepushing 8-9000. This thread isnt about trashing Mr. Pietenpols design. It is aboutusing the tools that are available to us regular folks, in order to makea safer airplane. I absolutely would not consider getting into a model A Pietat my home airport. It would not be a safe thing to do at this altitude. I wouldalso never encourage anyone operating at a sea level airport to lengthen theirwings, modify their spar, or change rib design. I wanted to share somethingfun here but maybe the EXPIREMENAL aspect of this community has been lost thanksto the talented hand of Dick VanGrunsven. I am sure that people thought thatMr. Pietenpol was a crazy man at the time for designing and flying his ownaircraft.I have learned some very good points from this thread which I do appreciate. Ifully intend to continue down the path I have laid out with some minor tweaks.I am happy to report that I have lined up an engine core that I will be pickingup next week.I hope the naysayers didnt use T-88I will work on the spar tonight for you folks.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Mark Roberts"
MarkYou are right about several things you said, but this discussion has gone from making the spar wider , the depth of the ribs deeper to changing the compression struts that is what I find completely crazy.Most people thought I was out of my mind when I built my Piet, so be it, mine flys just fine.If in the end yours flys good I will apoligize to you at Brodhead.Dick N----- Original Message -----
MarkYou are right about several things you said, but this discussion has gone from making the spar wider , the depth of the ribs deeper to changing the compression struts that is what I find completely crazy.Most people thought I was out of my mind when I built my Piet, so be it, mine flys just fine.If in the end yours flys good I will apoligize to you at Brodhead.Dick N----- Original Message -----
Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Mark Roberts"
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work UNCLASSIFIED Back to the old performance envelope thing. With any basically good design, youhave a mixture of Cost, Speed, load. takeoff landing roll, and range. Costis one factor that can improve or decrease all of the others. So for $XXXX youget speed, load, TO/L, and range. Put more range (gas) into a Piet and it doesntwant to take off as quick or carry 2 full size pax. Make it faster with abigger engine and you lose range. Modify it for STOL and you usually loose somespeed. There are some "freebies" such as basic aerodynamic work (perhaps we should turnthe LoPresti Speed merchants loose on a piet), Some "free" horsepower upgradesand You can put an extra tank in, there is little impact when it is empty.If I had the cash I could put $10,000 worth of speed mods on my Vtail bonanza andit would be 30 MPH faster (+10 Mph here, +5 there, +....) However, most peopleget about a total of 3 to 5 MPH out of all these mods. I keep my Vtail basically stock and will do the same on my Piet. Sure If I am rebuildingsomething I may make it a little better, but My goal is to fly low andslow. Blue Skies,Steve DUNCLASSIFIED________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work UNCLASSIFIED Back to the old performance envelope thing. With any basically good design, youhave a mixture of Cost, Speed, load. takeoff landing roll, and range. Costis one factor that can improve or decrease all of the others. So for $XXXX youget speed, load, TO/L, and range. Put more range (gas) into a Piet and it doesntwant to take off as quick or carry 2 full size pax. Make it faster with abigger engine and you lose range. Modify it for STOL and you usually loose somespeed. There are some "freebies" such as basic aerodynamic work (perhaps we should turnthe LoPresti Speed merchants loose on a piet), Some "free" horsepower upgradesand You can put an extra tank in, there is little impact when it is empty.If I had the cash I could put $10,000 worth of speed mods on my Vtail bonanza andit would be 30 MPH faster (+10 Mph here, +5 there, +....) However, most peopleget about a total of 3 to 5 MPH out of all these mods. I keep my Vtail basically stock and will do the same on my Piet. Sure If I am rebuildingsomething I may make it a little better, but My goal is to fly low andslow. Blue Skies,Steve DUNCLASSIFIED________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Billy McCaskill"
Craig, if you or someone you know is involved with ammunition reloading, they probablyhave a vibratory tumbler that they use for cleaning/polishing the brasscartridge cases prior to reloading them. Toss your brass turnbuckles into thetumbler for 4-5 hours, and go work on something else while the tumbler doesit's thing. When you take them out, they will be as bright and shiny as whenthey were new, without any manual labor involved. I routinely throw nuts, bolts, small fittings, etc into my tumbler for cleaningup so I don't have to spend hours cleaning them by hand. Of course, I also usemy tumbler for cleaning cartridge cases too, but that's a topic for an entirelydifferent forum.--------Billy McCaskillBaker, LAtail section almost done, starting on ribs soonRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Craig, if you or someone you know is involved with ammunition reloading, they probablyhave a vibratory tumbler that they use for cleaning/polishing the brasscartridge cases prior to reloading them. Toss your brass turnbuckles into thetumbler for 4-5 hours, and go work on something else while the tumbler doesit's thing. When you take them out, they will be as bright and shiny as whenthey were new, without any manual labor involved. I routinely throw nuts, bolts, small fittings, etc into my tumbler for cleaningup so I don't have to spend hours cleaning them by hand. Of course, I also usemy tumbler for cleaning cartridge cases too, but that's a topic for an entirelydifferent forum.--------Billy McCaskillBaker, LAtail section almost done, starting on ribs soonRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: Craig Aho
I personally enjoy seeing alternative ideas being discussed and put into use forthose times when "build it to the plans" just will not suffice for whateverreason. This IS experimental aviation, after all. The first guy to build a gliderand jump off a sand dune was obviously delusional at the thought that hemight actually FLY! The first guy to build an airplane out of aluminum probablycaught a lot of flak for his idea too. Imagine the blasphemy of using anythingother than broomsticks and bed sheets to build an airplane! And the firstguy to decide to use fiberglass and composites probably was thought to be alunatic by the aluminum airplane guys who believe that fiberglass was just forboats and Corvettes. And the first guy to use a Model A engine, or even thedreaded Corvair engine, why he must have been a total idiot to think that carengines could make an airplane fly!Without some imagination and the guts to try new ideas, we'd still just be watchingthe birds fly and wondering how they do it. When I resume building my Piet,I will be building it as close to the plans as possible simply because I don'thave any NEED to change things. I live near sea level, I'm average height(5'9"), and only weigh 135 lbs. I fit well into a regular sized Piet, and don'tneed to re-engineer anything to make the plane suit me. I plan to add 2"to the cabanes as a matter of convenience, and I plan to use a Corvair engine.But both of these ideas are tried and proven, and in common use. But for thosewho need to make mor drastic changes out of necessity or practicality, byall means do so. And please share what you have done, because your idea mightjust be the solution to someone else's problem.--------Billy McCaskillBaker, LAtail section almost done, starting on ribs soonRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
I personally enjoy seeing alternative ideas being discussed and put into use forthose times when "build it to the plans" just will not suffice for whateverreason. This IS experimental aviation, after all. The first guy to build a gliderand jump off a sand dune was obviously delusional at the thought that hemight actually FLY! The first guy to build an airplane out of aluminum probablycaught a lot of flak for his idea too. Imagine the blasphemy of using anythingother than broomsticks and bed sheets to build an airplane! And the firstguy to decide to use fiberglass and composites probably was thought to be alunatic by the aluminum airplane guys who believe that fiberglass was just forboats and Corvettes. And the first guy to use a Model A engine, or even thedreaded Corvair engine, why he must have been a total idiot to think that carengines could make an airplane fly!Without some imagination and the guts to try new ideas, we'd still just be watchingthe birds fly and wondering how they do it. When I resume building my Piet,I will be building it as close to the plans as possible simply because I don'thave any NEED to change things. I live near sea level, I'm average height(5'9"), and only weigh 135 lbs. I fit well into a regular sized Piet, and don'tneed to re-engineer anything to make the plane suit me. I plan to add 2"to the cabanes as a matter of convenience, and I plan to use a Corvair engine.But both of these ideas are tried and proven, and in common use. But for thosewho need to make mor drastic changes out of necessity or practicality, byall means do so. And please share what you have done, because your idea mightjust be the solution to someone else's problem.--------Billy McCaskillBaker, LAtail section almost done, starting on ribs soonRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: Lion Mason
Awesome Mothers Day!!!Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Awesome Mothers Day!!!Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Chris Rusch"
Just get a bigger motor Sent from my iPhoneOn May 13, 2013, at 11:59 AM, "Avill" wrote:> > Dick,> > No one will argue with you that the Air Camper flies just fine. I am amazed andin awe that it will fly well with a model A motor. Most of us also realizethat changing this design can be a detriment.> > I want an airplane that is cost effective to operate, but will allow me to enjoyan evening flight with my wife even when the density altitude here might bepushing 8-9000. This thread isnt about trashing Mr. Pietenpols design. It isabout using the tools that are available to us regular folks, in order to makea safer airplane. I absolutely would not consider getting into a model A Pietat my home airport. It would not be a safe thing to do at this altitude. I wouldalso never encourage anyone operating at a sea level airport to lengthentheir wings, modify their spar, or change rib design. I wanted to share somethingfun here but maybe the EXPIREMENAL aspect of this community has been lostthanks to the talented hand of Dick VanGrunsven. I am sure that people thoughtthat Mr. Pietenpol was a crazy man at the time for designing and flying his ownaircraft.> > I have learned some very good points from this thread which I do appreciate.I fully intend to continue down the path I have laid out with some minor tweaks.I am happy to report that I have lined up an engine core that I will be pickingup next week.> > I hope the naysayers didnt use T-88> > I will work on the spar tonight for you folks.> > > > > Read this topic online here:> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 514#400514> > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Just get a bigger motor Sent from my iPhoneOn May 13, 2013, at 11:59 AM, "Avill" wrote:> > Dick,> > No one will argue with you that the Air Camper flies just fine. I am amazed andin awe that it will fly well with a model A motor. Most of us also realizethat changing this design can be a detriment.> > I want an airplane that is cost effective to operate, but will allow me to enjoyan evening flight with my wife even when the density altitude here might bepushing 8-9000. This thread isnt about trashing Mr. Pietenpols design. It isabout using the tools that are available to us regular folks, in order to makea safer airplane. I absolutely would not consider getting into a model A Pietat my home airport. It would not be a safe thing to do at this altitude. I wouldalso never encourage anyone operating at a sea level airport to lengthentheir wings, modify their spar, or change rib design. I wanted to share somethingfun here but maybe the EXPIREMENAL aspect of this community has been lostthanks to the talented hand of Dick VanGrunsven. I am sure that people thoughtthat Mr. Pietenpol was a crazy man at the time for designing and flying his ownaircraft.> > I have learned some very good points from this thread which I do appreciate.I fully intend to continue down the path I have laid out with some minor tweaks.I am happy to report that I have lined up an engine core that I will be pickingup next week.> > I hope the naysayers didnt use T-88> > I will work on the spar tonight for you folks.> > > > > Read this topic online here:> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 514#400514> > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Dortch, Steven D MAJ MIL USA NGB"
I normally stay away from these debates, but I am on Billys side here, I love EXPERIMENTALaviation. I also really enjoy looking at plans for other aircraftjust to see someones elses take on similar design areas. Keep the ideas coming,its interesting.Billy McCaskill wrote:> I personally enjoy seeing alternative ideas being discussed and put into usefor those times when "build it to the plans" just will not suffice for whateverreason. This IS experimental aviation, after all. The first guy to build aglider and jump off a sand dune was obviously delusional at the thought that hemight actually FLY! The first guy to build an airplane out of aluminum probablycaught a lot of flak for his idea too. Imagine the blasphemy of using anythingother than broomsticks and bed sheets to build an airplane! And the firstguy to decide to use fiberglass and composites probably was thought to bea lunatic by the aluminum airplane guys who believe that fiberglass was just forboats and Corvettes. And the first guy to use a Model A engine, or even thedreaded Corvair engine, why he must have been a total idiot to think that carengines could make an airplane fly!> > Without some imagination and the guts to try new ideas, we'd still just be watchingthe birds fly and wondering how they do it. When I resume building myPiet, I will be building it as close to the plans as possible simply because Idon't have any NEED to change things. I live near sea level, I'm average height(5'9"), and only weigh 135 lbs. I fit well into a regular sized Piet, anddon't need to re-engineer anything to make the plane suit me. I plan to add2" to the cabanes as a matter of convenience, and I plan to use a Corvair engine.But both of these ideas are tried and proven, and in common use. But forthose who need to make mor drastic changes out of necessity or practicality,by all means do so. And please share what you have done, because your idea mightjust be the solution to someone else's problem.--------NX321LRFully AssembledTail assembly and ailerons covered and painted.Wings covered and primed, one paintedMitsubishi PoweredRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
I normally stay away from these debates, but I am on Billys side here, I love EXPERIMENTALaviation. I also really enjoy looking at plans for other aircraftjust to see someones elses take on similar design areas. Keep the ideas coming,its interesting.Billy McCaskill wrote:> I personally enjoy seeing alternative ideas being discussed and put into usefor those times when "build it to the plans" just will not suffice for whateverreason. This IS experimental aviation, after all. The first guy to build aglider and jump off a sand dune was obviously delusional at the thought that hemight actually FLY! The first guy to build an airplane out of aluminum probablycaught a lot of flak for his idea too. Imagine the blasphemy of using anythingother than broomsticks and bed sheets to build an airplane! And the firstguy to decide to use fiberglass and composites probably was thought to bea lunatic by the aluminum airplane guys who believe that fiberglass was just forboats and Corvettes. And the first guy to use a Model A engine, or even thedreaded Corvair engine, why he must have been a total idiot to think that carengines could make an airplane fly!> > Without some imagination and the guts to try new ideas, we'd still just be watchingthe birds fly and wondering how they do it. When I resume building myPiet, I will be building it as close to the plans as possible simply because Idon't have any NEED to change things. I live near sea level, I'm average height(5'9"), and only weigh 135 lbs. I fit well into a regular sized Piet, anddon't need to re-engineer anything to make the plane suit me. I plan to add2" to the cabanes as a matter of convenience, and I plan to use a Corvair engine.But both of these ideas are tried and proven, and in common use. But forthose who need to make mor drastic changes out of necessity or practicality,by all means do so. And please share what you have done, because your idea mightjust be the solution to someone else's problem.--------NX321LRFully AssembledTail assembly and ailerons covered and painted.Wings covered and primed, one paintedMitsubishi PoweredRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Billy McCaskill"
I hate to say it, but the guy who used the Corvair on the Pietenpol first, was Beranrd Pietenpol.Dick N.----- Original Message -----
I hate to say it, but the guy who used the Corvair on the Pietenpol first, was Beranrd Pietenpol.Dick N.----- Original Message -----
Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: Craig Aho
My point precisely, Dick. Bernard wasn't afraid to try new ideas in his pursuitof experimental aviation. Where would we be if Bernard chose to listen to thosewho probably thought he was out of his mind for trying to build his own airplaneAND use a car engine to do so? We wouldn't still be building Pietenpols80 years later...--------Billy McCaskillBaker, LAtail section almost done, starting on ribs soonRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
My point precisely, Dick. Bernard wasn't afraid to try new ideas in his pursuitof experimental aviation. Where would we be if Bernard chose to listen to thosewho probably thought he was out of his mind for trying to build his own airplaneAND use a car engine to do so? We wouldn't still be building Pietenpols80 years later...--------Billy McCaskillBaker, LAtail section almost done, starting on ribs soonRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Original Posted By: "Jack Phillips"
Folks,I have run the simulations on the 3/4" spar and added them to the attached sheet.Mark,I have PM'd your resultsRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ttachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/sitk ... __________
Folks,I have run the simulations on the 3/4" spar and added them to the attached sheet.Mark,I have PM'd your resultsRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ttachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/sitk ... __________
Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Mark Roberts"
Jack,As long as you don't ask what's in it, and what the casing is traditionally madeof.--------Semper Fi,Terry HandAthens, GARead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Jack,As long as you don't ask what's in it, and what the casing is traditionally madeof.--------Semper Fi,Terry HandAthens, GARead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: Craig Aho
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work UNCLASSIFIEDMark "For the record, I have lost about 15 pounds over the last year, but my bonesand basic body type ain't changing much even with another 30."For the record, I have also started on this modification on my Piet. I am usingthe book "Eat this, Not that!" as a beginning guideline along with time walking,biking and some calestenics. This modification will do more to give me a greaterpassenger capacity than just about any that I can make. It will also improvethe aft CG problem. I should be able to increase my load carrying capabilityby 20 pounds over time. Blue Skies,Steve DUNCLASSIFIED________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work UNCLASSIFIEDMark "For the record, I have lost about 15 pounds over the last year, but my bonesand basic body type ain't changing much even with another 30."For the record, I have also started on this modification on my Piet. I am usingthe book "Eat this, Not that!" as a beginning guideline along with time walking,biking and some calestenics. This modification will do more to give me a greaterpassenger capacity than just about any that I can make. It will also improvethe aft CG problem. I should be able to increase my load carrying capabilityby 20 pounds over time. Blue Skies,Steve DUNCLASSIFIED________________________________________________________________________________
Re: Pietenpol-List: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Dave Abramson"
I would simply like to applaud the even handed calm nature of this entire debate.i have been flamed for simply asking questions that there should be easy answersto like, has anybody actually weighed a model A engine since 1932? yep 244lbscomplete W/magneto I've heard. anyway,you guys are doing a heck of a jobpreserving the spirit of EAA E for experimental. we live in a time with a wealthof choices in new materials that mr pietenpol would recognize as the amazingbounty that it is. revel in it. we live in the best country in the world.keep building. ________________________________________________________________________________
I would simply like to applaud the even handed calm nature of this entire debate.i have been flamed for simply asking questions that there should be easy answersto like, has anybody actually weighed a model A engine since 1932? yep 244lbscomplete W/magneto I've heard. anyway,you guys are doing a heck of a jobpreserving the spirit of EAA E for experimental. we live in a time with a wealthof choices in new materials that mr pietenpol would recognize as the amazingbounty that it is. revel in it. we live in the best country in the world.keep building. ________________________________________________________________________________
Original Posted By: "Clif Dawson"
You are right in that this group is one of the most considerate and fun bunch toassociate with.I make no bones about the fact my planned mods are UNPROVEN and are, at best, amodification to fit my fat and overly large hiney.I have made some educated guesses about stuff, backed by formulas and info i havefound in EAA books about aircraft design, so I (read that Me, myself and onlymyself) am comfortable with the strength and design changes I am making tothe plane.I agree with Dick on this: IF it flys better, then I can say they were "Improvements".If not, then I hope they are not "degradations" and can still be flownat least as well as the original Piet.So, I appreciate this group more than ever, as I trudge the road of happy building.MarkRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
You are right in that this group is one of the most considerate and fun bunch toassociate with.I make no bones about the fact my planned mods are UNPROVEN and are, at best, amodification to fit my fat and overly large hiney.I have made some educated guesses about stuff, backed by formulas and info i havefound in EAA books about aircraft design, so I (read that Me, myself and onlymyself) am comfortable with the strength and design changes I am making tothe plane.I agree with Dick on this: IF it flys better, then I can say they were "Improvements".If not, then I hope they are not "degradations" and can still be flownat least as well as the original Piet.So, I appreciate this group more than ever, as I trudge the road of happy building.MarkRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "taildrags"
Gardiner,I will call you tomorrow to discuss. I am working on it.--------Semper Fi,Terry HandAthens, GARead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Gardiner,I will call you tomorrow to discuss. I am working on it.--------Semper Fi,Terry HandAthens, GARead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Mark Roberts"
The ELT on Scout is installed on a scrap piece of aluminum sheet that is mountedbetween the lower longerons in the space behind the pilot's seat. Roughlythe same space as the walking beam for the elevators. That sheet serves as theground plane for the ELT whip antenna as well as the VHF COMM bent whip forthe handheld. Corky originally installed the ELT on the floorboard up betweenthe passenger's rudder pedals, but it got dislodged in the nose-over and ratherthan put it back up there, I followed recommendations in Uncle Tony Bingelis'books (and elsewhere) and tried to locate it in the tailcone area where itwould better survive a crash. [Gulp... did I just use that word?]My ELT is the old useless 121.5Mhz style that gets me a sign-off at inspectiontime but may not do much else in a real crash. I'm not so sure I want to be locatedif I'm ever in a real crash though, since I may find myself in a race withDr. Alzheimer one day and I don't want him or the family to find me.(Wait. What day is today?)--------Oscar ZunigaMedford, ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 powerRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
The ELT on Scout is installed on a scrap piece of aluminum sheet that is mountedbetween the lower longerons in the space behind the pilot's seat. Roughlythe same space as the walking beam for the elevators. That sheet serves as theground plane for the ELT whip antenna as well as the VHF COMM bent whip forthe handheld. Corky originally installed the ELT on the floorboard up betweenthe passenger's rudder pedals, but it got dislodged in the nose-over and ratherthan put it back up there, I followed recommendations in Uncle Tony Bingelis'books (and elsewhere) and tried to locate it in the tailcone area where itwould better survive a crash. [Gulp... did I just use that word?]My ELT is the old useless 121.5Mhz style that gets me a sign-off at inspectiontime but may not do much else in a real crash. I'm not so sure I want to be locatedif I'm ever in a real crash though, since I may find myself in a race withDr. Alzheimer one day and I don't want him or the family to find me.(Wait. What day is today?)--------Oscar ZunigaMedford, ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 powerRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Original Posted By: "Bill Church"
Hey pieters,Just wanted to check in with all of our Texas guys and hope they are all OK.Please check in with the group. Does anyone need anything?Scott Liefeld--------Scott LiefeldFlying N11MS since March 1972Steel TubeC-85-12Wire WheelsBrodhead in 1996Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work
Hey pieters,Just wanted to check in with all of our Texas guys and hope they are all OK.Please check in with the group. Does anyone need anything?Scott Liefeld--------Scott LiefeldFlying N11MS since March 1972Steel TubeC-85-12Wire WheelsBrodhead in 1996Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: My Days Work