Pietenpol-List: 4 inch wider fuselage advice

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

Pietenpol-List: 4 inch wider fuselage advice

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: "DJ Vegh"
Subject: Pietenpol-List: 4 inch wider fuselage adviceHave my fuselage sides done (long fuselage with 6 inches added to the front) and am about to start joining them. Have read all the forum messages related to fuselage widening and plan on making mine 4 inches wider to give me about 24inches inside rear cockpit width. Before I take the big step does anyone know of any problems with this? Other than extra cost and weight?ThanksRick HollandColorado________________________________________________________________________________
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: 4 inch wider fuselage advice

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: At7000ft(at)aol.com
I widened mine 2" at the rear cockpit, 1" at the firewall.My opinion is there is no need to widen the fuse 4" from the rear cockpit allthe way up to the firewall. I'd say go 4" at the rear pit and maybe 2" atfirewall. That still gives you the width you want where you need it (rear pit)but saves a little weight by tapering it up to the front. The front pit wouldbe wider by about 3" or so... still pretty good.Also, consider that the center wing section needs to get widened as well. Thelanding gear has to be taken into consideration as well.DJ VeghN74DVMesa, AZwww.imagedv.com/aircamper ----- Original Message -----
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 15 Msgs - 06/18/04

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By:> ADonJr(at)aol.com
Hi Don,If you look in the archives you can probably find several instances of this discussion.But the short version is - the reason Ash is specified is for its shockabsorption qualities (the same reason Ash is used for ax handles, baseballbats and gymnastics parallel bars). Those planks tend to absorb the shock oflanding loads if your landings are less than perfect. Besides, Ash does notsplit or crack easily. I would not substitute Oak.I found ash available in 1-1/4" thick planks 6' long at a local lumberyard. WhenI asked if it was white ash, they just laughed and said "Ash is ash". I don'tknow if there is a specific lumber known as white ash. I selected pieceswith the grain as tight as I could find, and roughly parallel to the wide facesof the boards. It works nicely and doesn't splinter (another nice characteristicof ash which makes it ideal for tool handles). I don't remember what Ipaid for it but I recall it wasn't cheap, and that it cost more than Oak.If at all possible I would find and use ash for this application. Besides, itis pretty.Jack PhillipsStill painting NX899JP in Raleigh, NC>
matronics
Posts: 81779
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:29 am

> Pietenpol-List: Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 15 Msgs - 06/18/04

Post by matronics »

Original Posted By: WPTCorp(at)aol.com
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Pietenpol-List Digest: 15 Msgs - 06/18/04> > Hey, Fellas! (and gals, too, if any),> I have read everything I have about wood, and except for one comment that> hardwoods are mainly used in block form, I can find nothing about the > selection and use of hardwood. I am particularly wondering about the two piecesof > white ash in the fuselage, between the landing gear fittings. The plans > specify 3/4 X 2" cross members at the floor level. > How do you select the wood for these pieces...quarter sawn, vertical > grain, yadda, yadda, yadda or what? Could you substitute oak? I'd eally > appreciate the help of anyone who has dealt with this problem. Thanks in advance.> Don Cooley> Fairfield, CA> > P.S. Wish I could join you at Brodhead, maybe next year! DC > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Locked