Pietenpol-List: Fuse question

An archive of the Matronics Pietenpol Listserve.
Locked
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Fuse question

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: "Dan Loegering"

matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuse question

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By:
DanQ: did you still use the ash cross piece at the firewall? I don't see where thiswould be needed if not using the original wood motor mount for the "A". A: I did not use it and I agree with your reasoning.Q: Second, on the long fuselage plans, what is the dimension on the side view onthe front of the firewall for - I believe it was 11 3/8" down from the top longeron.On the original short fuse plans, this dimension is for the locationof the side stringer and is around 10"... why the difference?A: I have always thought it is for the side stringer. My guess as to why it islower is because the stringer ends near the bottom of the last upright beforethe tail. On the long fuselage, this upright is longer then the short fuselage.Therefore, the stringer needs to be lower in the front. Just install stringerwhere it needs to be to make it level.Q: did you put in the lower cross piece at the front of the firewall and trim itfor the motor mount fittings later, or did you omit this piece until the flooris glued in place?A: I put the floor on but didnt install the cross piece yet. I will install thispiece after the lower engine mount fittings are installed. My firewall istemporarily nailed to the front of the fuselage. I will glue the firewall onafter I get the cross piece installed and the engine on.--------Chris TracyWestCoastPiet.comRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=93003#93003 ________________________________________________________________________________

matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuse question

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By:> "Dan Loegering"
If you are using the Corvair motor mount depicted on the long fuselage plans, theash cross piece supports the engine bearing tubes where they meet the firewall.I don't see why you would need it with the Continental mount. I installedthe lower cross piece at the bottom of the firewall and then cut it out afterthe floor was in place to make room for the lower motor mounts. There maybe an easier way, but I had already done it when I got ready to install my lowermounts....Just one of the things that I would do differently if I had it to do over again.Ben>

matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

RE: Pietenpol-List: Fuse question

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By:> Dan Loegering
Hi DanWith the Cont you don't need the ash . I used 3/4 + 3/4 spruce with 1/8plywood for the firewall and gussets on the inside.No 2 ? On the long fuselage I made it 10" down and parallel with toplongeron.The space between the plywood and the fabric is used to run all the wiring & pluming.No 3? Put the upper & lower cross pieces in as shown but make the motormountslonger to clear the cross pieces.I'am going to be in Fargo on Wednesday landing about 10 AM.Coming up there in a Mn King Air.I built a Wright Flyer a few years ago and we are going to move it up to Bemidji this summer.I want to see how they hung the Wright Flyer at Fargo.Dale Johnson Mlps> [Original Message]

matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Fuse question

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: "Greg Cardinal"
I THOUGHT I had my mind made up on this but I have started having doubts on fuselength. My emp is days from completion and I was planning on starting the fuseshortly after. I have plans for both the long and the short fuse along withthe materials to build either, so that is not a factor. Here is my scenario;It is important to me that my dad be able to fly with me. He is about 6'2 and230 lbs. I am 5'10 180 lbs. My initial thought was long fuse because I was planningon running a cont. A-65. But then i realized my fuel tank is set up tobe placed in the nose. So, I would think I could go with the short and be finewith the added fuel weight that far forward. But the problem with that logicis I will develop an aft CG as my fuel burns. If I do decide to go with the shortwill my dad fit with that fuel tank up there? I need some real world guidancehere I know a few of you have built and flown planes close to this configuration.Any regrets or thoughts you would like to pass along would be appreciated.Thanks,Kyle--------Airspeed, altitude or brains: Two are always needed to successfully complete theflight.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=371455#371455 ________________________________________________________________________________

matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuse question

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: "Kyle85"
Your 6' 2" Dad will not be happy in the front cockpit of a short fuselage Pietenpol, regardless of fuel tank location.I am 5' 11" and had a ride in the short fuselage version. It was a tight fit.Greg CardinalMinneapolis----- Original Message -----

matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

RE: Pietenpol-List: Fuse question

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Kyle,I'm 6' 2" and about 195 lbs. I have the long fuselage, with the fuel in thecentersection. I can just barely manage to get into the front cockpit (rearcockpit is fine) and would not want to sit in it for any extended period.My cabane struts are 2-1/2" longer than plans and even with that it's a bearto fold myself into the front seat.If I were you, I'd build the short fuselage (because it's lighter, andyou'll need all the lightness you can get to haul both of you aloft) and putyour Dad on a diet. He'll thank you for it (as will his Doctor), he'll fitbetter in the airplane, and the plane will perform better.Jack PhillipsNX899JPSmith Mountain Lake, Virginia-----Original Message-----

matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuse question

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: "kevinpurtee"
A pilot told me that all the piets she flew were unstable. She said, If you letgo of the stick they would just fall off one way or the other. Say it aintso!John--------JohnRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=371466#371466 ________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuse question

matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Re: Pietenpols Unstable?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: "kevinpurtee"
Kyle - I have a long fuselage, no tank up front and standard length cabanes. Notyour setup but you may still find the information valuable: I've had peopleclose to your Dad's size up there and, 1) they don't want to stay very long,2) they tear up the airplane getting in and out - the person and the plane cannotexist in the same space at the same time. Extended cabanes would alleviateingress/egress issues a little but it would still be a tight fit.--------Kevin "Axel" PurteeNX899KPAustin/San Marcos, TXRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=371467#371467 ________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Pietenpols Unstable?

matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: "Greg Cardinal"
Perhaps she meant to say that all Piet pilots are unstable? How many has she flown?Here's what I know: if the air is calm my airplane will fly hands off for 20-30seconds. If there are any bumps I have to monitor the airplane much more closely.The nose wants to drop at low speeds, but that has nothing to do with aerodynamicsand everything to do with those big heavy elevators hanging back there beingsubject to gravity. I have the East Texas Trim System in the form of a bungeecord that keeps the nose where it belongs. Here's what I've been told. I'm darn sure no aerodynamics expert so take it forwhat it's worth: if the CG is jacked up, common in a Piet, an airplane can beunstable. The experts can chime in.--------Kevin "Axel" PurteeNX899KPAustin/San Marcos, TXRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=371469#371469 ________________________________________________________________________________

matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Pietenpols Unstable?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: "Kringle"
Only in turbulence. The only time I found it bothersome is when trying to fold a chart. Then I learned to have my charts pepared prior to takeoff to minimize folding them in the air.It is part of the charm.Greg CardinalMinneapolis----- Original Message -----

matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Pietenpols Unstable?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Ryan M
Has anyone ever built a "flying" tail Piet? In my model years I did so with a coupleof Sig Seniors and it worked well.Jack TextorSent from my iPadOn Apr 22, 2012, at 7:15 AM, "kevinpurtee" wrote:> > Perhaps she meant to say that all Piet pilots are unstable? How many has sheflown?> > Here's what I know: if the air is calm my airplane will fly hands off for 20-30seconds. If there are any bumps I have to monitor the airplane much more closely.> > The nose wants to drop at low speeds, but that has nothing to do with aerodynamicsand everything to do with those big heavy elevators hanging back there beingsubject to gravity. I have the East Texas Trim System in the form of a bungeecord that keeps the nose where it belongs. > > Here's what I've been told. I'm darn sure no aerodynamics expert so take itfor what it's worth: if the CG is jacked up, common in a Piet, an airplane canbe unstable. The experts can chime in.> > --------> Kevin "Axel" Purtee> NX899KP> Austin/San Marcos, TX> > > > > Read this topic online here:> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=371469#371469> > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2012 06:09:30 -0700 (PDT)

matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Pietenpols Unstable?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: steve emo
Ill ask her more the next time I see her but it may be several months. She isa retired FAA inspector and has over 100 hours piloting Pietenpols.--------JohnRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=371477#371477 ________________________________________________________________________________Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2012 10:27:45 -0400Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Pietenpols Unstable?

matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Pietenpols Unstable?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: "Kringle"
The stability of the Piet is totally affected by the lack of trim tabs. That needs to be controlled by engine power instead. Or as BHP said, you can stick your arm out to one side or the other and make it turn. Dont try that with a 172.Dick N.----- Original Message -----

matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Re: Pietenpols Unstable?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Ryan M
All flying Piets are stable. What that means is that when disturbed from a steadystate, they tend to return to that state, rather than diverge from it. Ifthe CG is within limits, it's pretty much guaranteed... (barring weird stuff).However, probably due to the reasonably small control surfaces, Piets tend to getbetter pilot reports when flown in the aft region of acceptable CG limits.There, the plane is LESS stable, but still stable. When disturbed from a steadystate, it's pretty slow and not aggressive about returning to that state,also, it takes less force to disturb it. Stability and maneuverability are the mutually exclusive things here. You canonly have one, and how an airplane flies is a compromise between the two. The general inability to remain trimmed and simply fly hands off however is probablywhat's being discussed, rather than stability. A highly stable airplanewill have the ability to stay trimmed up better than one that is not as stable,or more maneuverable. As mentioned, many piets don't even have a way to trimthem, so for hands off flight, you find the airspeed the airplane is trimmedfor. Dicks's NX2RN is a classic example. It's hands off at 2K rpm and a pilotonly. Fly at a higher rpm and it needs some rudder input and it climbs (orneeds constant down stick and will therefore fly faster). At 1900 rpm, theopposite.So the broad sweeping statement that Piets are unstable really suffers from misuseof the term stable. For it's class, it's a relatively maneuverable, lessstable airplane. If you want it more stable, move the CG forward. Then, rigthe plane to fly hands off in the regime you'll be flying in the most.By the way, if the plane was unstable, when it is disturbed from steady state,that movement would continue until something bad happens, like a ground loop,but in the air. All taildraggers are unstable while moving on the ground. Directionalitycan be achieved by overcoming the unstable force either with sufficientrudder authority or tailwheel authority, or brakes, or something. Butthe configuration is unstable. The one caveat is unstable airplanes like F-18's, that have computers keeping themin control. They are maneuvable and have forced stability.ToolsRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=371490#371490 ________________________________________________________________________________Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2012 09:50:54 -0700 (PDT)

matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

om =0ASent: Sunday, April 22, 2012 10:24 AM=0A Pietenpol-List: Re:

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Michael Perez

matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuse question

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: "Kyle85"
Thanks Tim! Looks like I will be making the long one work for me. Just be buildinga class E and G airspace basic VFR airplane with no extra electrical and splitaxle landing gear with spoke wheels. The end product hopefully will be lightenough for us.Kyle--------Airspeed, altitude or brains: Two are always needed to successfully complete theflight.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=371521#371521 ________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Fuse question

matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: "C N Campbell"
Thanks guys! Looks like I am going to build long and as light as I can!-Kyle--------Airspeed, altitude or brains: Two are always needed to successfully complete theflight.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=371522#371522 ________________________________________________________________________________

matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Pietenpols Unstable?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: "kevinpurtee"
Kevin, what do you mean by "jacked up"? C----- Original Message -----

matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Re: Pietenpols Unstable?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: gliderx5(at)comcast.net

matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Re: Pietenpols Unstable?

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: "kevinpurtee"
Chuck, Jacked up is a term that you would hear a lot in the military. It means somethingthat is not correct or blatantly wrong. You will hear drill instructors tellsomeone their uniform is "Jacked Up" if it is wrinkled or items not pinned(orin today's military velcro) in its place. Sorry to cut in, but I am pretty surethat is what he was getting at.Kyle--------Airspeed, altitude or brains: Two are always needed to successfully complete theflight.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=371540#371540 ________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Pietenpols Unstable?

matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Rod Wooller
Too far aft, Chuck.--------Kevin "Axel" PurteeNX899KPAustin/San Marcos, TXRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=371549#371549 ________________________________________________________________________________Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 20:22:49 +1200

matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: John Franklin
My book on the Lycoming O-235 C2C says:Cylinder head Maximum temp 525 F for spark plug thermocouple preferred max 425F continuous. I would think most engines would have similar maximums. I hopemine will be in the 375 area for longevity.--------Jerry Dotson59 Daniel Johnson RdBaker, FL 32531Started building NX510JD July, 2009thru covering and painting, now in final assembly21" wheelsLycoming O-235 C2CJay Anderson CloudCars prop 76 X 44Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=371572#371572 ________________________________________________________________________________Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 05:59:41 -0500 (GMT-05:00)

matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: FW: Corvair CHT

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Rod Wooller
WW says, ".....I would try and keep the motor below 450F peak and 400F cruise......" ----- Original Message -----

matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

> Pietenpol-List: Fuse question

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Jeff Boatright
> To: > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fuse question> > > Okay gang,> > Need a little help here. I am at the point of joining my fuse sides and havea couple of questions. First, for those of you using a continental or anythingother than the model A engines, did you still use the ash cross piece at thefirewall? I don't see where this would be needed if not using the originalwood motor mount for the "A". Second, on the long fuselage plans, what is thedimension on the side view on the front of the firewall for - I believe it was11 3/8" down from the top longeron (not looking at the plans right now...)On the original short fuse plans, this dimension is for the location of the sidestringer and is around 10"... why the difference? And finally, did you putin the lower cross piece at the front of the firewall and trim it for the motormount fittings later, or did you omit this piece until the floor is gluedin place?> > Dan Loegering> Fargo, ND> > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 15:48:23 -0500

matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

> Pietenpol-List: Fuse question

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fuse question>>> Okay gang,>> Need a little help here. I am at the point of joining my fuse sides andhave a couple of questions. First, for those of you using a continental oranything other than the model A engines, did you still use the ash crosspiece at the firewall? I don't see where this would be needed if notusing the original wood motor mount for the "A". Second, on the longfuselage plans, what is the dimension on the side view on the front of thefirewall for - I believe it was 11 3/8" down from the top longeron (notlooking at the plans right now...) On the original short fuse plans, thisdimension is for the location of the side stringer and is around 10"... why the difference? And finally, did you put in the lower cross piece atthe front of the firewall and trim it for the motor mount fittings later,or did you omit this piece until the floor is glued in place?>> Dan Loegering> Fargo, ND>> ________________________________________________________________________________

matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Pietenpol-List: Re: Corvair CHT

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: "Jerry Dotson"
Subject: Corvair CHTPietenpol-List Digest List I have a CHT gauge on my Pietenpol with sensors under the rear spark plugsof each cylinder head.Can anyone tell me the maximum temperature that the Corvair heads should berun at ?Thanks,Rod WoollerZK-PAC ________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Corvair CHT

matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Corvair CHT

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: Hans van der Voort
Subject: Corvair CHT To: Pietenpol-List Digest Server , Pietenpol-List Digest List I have a CHT gauge on my Pietenpol with sensors under the rear spark plugs of each cylinder head. Can anyone tell me the maximum temperature that the Corvair heads should be run at ? Thanks, Rod Wooller ZK-PAC ________________________________________________________________________________Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 07:07:25 -0700 (PDT)

Locked