Original Posted By: Greg Cardinal
Like Steve I'm nearing the end of my Piet project--need to cover my onepiece wing and make a cowl/airscoop for Escort Engine. I'm currentlyinterested in a Pober Pixie or Christavia as a next project. I'd beinterested in buying plans--bargain price, of course--if you knowsomeone who has some they'd like to get rid of. Bill ________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: Plans
Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans
Original Posted By: Bobby White
>Like Steve I'm nearing the end of my Piet project--need to cover my one>piece wing and make a cowl/airscoop for Escort Engine. I'm currently>interested in a Pober Pixie or Christavia as a next project. I'd be>interested in buying plans--bargain price, of course--if you know>someone who has some they'd like to get rid of. Bill >>Hey WilliamTell us more about you escort engine conversion, or how about more info fromyou guys out there in Piet land about other power plants other than themodel a,continental or corvair. Raven has a neat setup for the Geo engines(except for the price)any one ever used one? thanks________________________________________________________________________________
>Like Steve I'm nearing the end of my Piet project--need to cover my one>piece wing and make a cowl/airscoop for Escort Engine. I'm currently>interested in a Pober Pixie or Christavia as a next project. I'd be>interested in buying plans--bargain price, of course--if you know>someone who has some they'd like to get rid of. Bill >>Hey WilliamTell us more about you escort engine conversion, or how about more info fromyou guys out there in Piet land about other power plants other than themodel a,continental or corvair. Raven has a neat setup for the Geo engines(except for the price)any one ever used one? thanks________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans
Original Posted By:> William Conway
Hi, Bill,I am getting to the point where I am looking for an engine. Got anycomments that you would like to share on using the Escort engine? Such asease, support, reduction gear, power etc? I am not having much lucksnagging a Continental 65 or corvair.Thanks, -=Ian=-
Hi, Bill,I am getting to the point where I am looking for an engine. Got anycomments that you would like to share on using the Escort engine? Such asease, support, reduction gear, power etc? I am not having much lucksnagging a Continental 65 or corvair.Thanks, -=Ian=-
Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans
Original Posted By:> > William Conway
Ian Holland wrote:> > Hi, Bill,> I am getting to the point where I am looking for an engine. Got any> comments that you would like to share on using the Escort engine? Such as> ease, support, reduction gear, power etc? I am not having much luck> snagging a Continental 65 or corvair.> Thanks, -=Ian=-> > ----------
Ian Holland wrote:> > Hi, Bill,> I am getting to the point where I am looking for an engine. Got any> comments that you would like to share on using the Escort engine? Such as> ease, support, reduction gear, power etc? I am not having much luck> snagging a Continental 65 or corvair.> Thanks, -=Ian=-> > ----------
Pietenpol-List: Plans
Original Posted By: Roger Hanson
I'm making a trade for some Pietenpol plans which should be here in a fewdays. ....still not committed (probably should be). .....have been enjoying sitting here on the side and gathering builderinfo from the group, and have recently reserved vacation time to attendBroadhead.Bobby ________________________________________________________________________________
I'm making a trade for some Pietenpol plans which should be here in a fewdays. ....still not committed (probably should be). .....have been enjoying sitting here on the side and gathering builderinfo from the group, and have recently reserved vacation time to attendBroadhead.Bobby ________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: Plans
Original Posted By: Michael D Cuy
Going through some old model magazine's I found Walt Clark's 1/2 scalePietenpol. Does anyone out there have an address and price for theplans as I would like to add it to my collection !I looked on Grants web site for the info but the pages I wanted to lookat seem only available to AOL customers !--Check out Crusader Toys @http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/_______ ... __________
Going through some old model magazine's I found Walt Clark's 1/2 scalePietenpol. Does anyone out there have an address and price for theplans as I would like to add it to my collection !I looked on Grants web site for the info but the pages I wanted to lookat seem only available to AOL customers !--Check out Crusader Toys @http://www.thegrid.net/crusader/_______ ... __________
Pietenpol-List: RE: Plans
Original Posted By:>> Lassetter, Russell B (Russell)[SMTP:rbl1(at)lucent.com]
Subject: Pietenpol-List: RE: Plans>I meant it as a tip that helps me work through these problems.>Definitely not as an insult - if that's how you took it please except myapology.>>Bill Sayre>> ----------
Subject: Pietenpol-List: RE: Plans>I meant it as a tip that helps me work through these problems.>Definitely not as an insult - if that's how you took it please except myapology.>>Bill Sayre>> ----------
Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans
Original Posted By: "Mc Farland, James JH SCC"
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans>I agree- many times I saw what I thought were mistakes on the plans. But>when I studied further, I found that there was always a reason for them- it>was my mistake, not Bernard's. A few times I built to what I thought, only>to have to go back and redo according to the "mistake" in the plans. I bet>I have more time in studying the plans than I do building! Plus it is fun>to study the plans when the time I have to actually work is too short. The>pieces do all seem to fit together.>>Al Swanson>>>Be very careful what you refer to as 'mistakes' in the original plans.Just>>because you don't understand something the first time through does notmean>>it is a mistake. Those plans are amazingly accurate for their>>circumstances.>>>>JMG>>-----Original Message----->>>>________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans>I agree- many times I saw what I thought were mistakes on the plans. But>when I studied further, I found that there was always a reason for them- it>was my mistake, not Bernard's. A few times I built to what I thought, only>to have to go back and redo according to the "mistake" in the plans. I bet>I have more time in studying the plans than I do building! Plus it is fun>to study the plans when the time I have to actually work is too short. The>pieces do all seem to fit together.>>Al Swanson>>>Be very careful what you refer to as 'mistakes' in the original plans.Just>>because you don't understand something the first time through does notmean>>it is a mistake. Those plans are amazingly accurate for their>>circumstances.>>>>JMG>>-----Original Message----->>>>________________________________________________________________________________
>> Re: Plans
Original Posted By: TXTdragger(at)aol.com
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans>I would also be more than glad to help out. I have AutoCAD at home and>could redraw if people are interested. I have just started to look at the>plans, and have found a few mistakes, but the more I ask, the more people>are coming up with too. Keep in touch.>>Tom>-----Original Message----->From: Earl Myers >To: Pietenpol Discussion >Date: Friday, August 13, 1999 11:36 AM>Subject: Re: Plans>>>>Randall;>> What Warren said here is MORE than correct! Do all the metal fittings>>cockpit forward on graph paper first as there is no room for the nuts/>>wrenches as described. Ref the plan errors, in those days, Orrin Hoopman>was>>like 18 years old and had to scramble to get those drawings done for an>>article in MECHANICS ILLUSTRATED or something like that. No time to>>proofread I guess. The Scout just faded into history untill recently when>>all of a sudden there are 15 or more being built. They, the plans, do need>>updated but I don't know how that will be accomplished. The errors aren't>so>>much dangerous as frustrating. The bottom of the fuselage curve being the>>most noticeable. After that, I checked everything first with a calculator>>starting with the overalls and working backwards . A little Kentucky>Windage>>and there was a Scout built to the "plans"....remember Kentucky Windage,>>that was a lot of the engineering principle used back then especially on>the>>Model T Fords and others of that era. Moving the truss pieces around a bit>>here and there shouldn't be a problem as this critter is well over built.>It>>will be up to us users to collect the boo boo's, compile them and offer an>>addendum somewhere on one of the websites. That is the best thing I knowto>>do, If you compile all this, I would be glad to help. I have a second set>of>>drawings with several notations marked on them. The most frustrating was>>having all the metal fittings done ahead of time then not being able touse>>some of them as the bolts go right thru wood edgewise and so forth or>having>>to make extra cover plates to glue over the new "gouges" or whatever. Just>>be patient and you will get thru it as I did without TOO much $@#$% !!>>Earl Myers>>-----Original Message----->>From: Warren Shoun >>To: Pietenpol Discussion >>Date: Friday, August 13, 1999 11:45 AM>>Subject: Re: Plans>>>>>>>Hi Randall,>>> Feedback: We build these things at least 3 times: Once in our head,>>once>>>with the plans and one or more times in our hands.>>> I have found it very valuable to re-draw each part, even quickly,with>>a>>>steel rule on a tablet on the shop work bench. This has saved me many>>small>>>problems at a stage prior to making sawdust or metal filings. Still have>a>>>long way to go, but the two main areas you will find, have to do with the>>>airfoil on the plans, and the distance allowed for tool access to bolt>>heads on>>>the fittings.>>> In reading the archives here, you will also find that many folksraise>>the>>>Cabane struts 1-2" and adjust the seat back angle for entry and flying>>comfort.>>>>>> Kind'a reminds me of the old chemistry teacher giving me an English>>lesson>>>when I used the excuse that I assumed I had the right bottle for my>>>experiment...ASSUME = makes an ASS of U & ME. Don't assume>>anything....check>>>it for accuracy, fit and usefulness to you and your project.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans>I would also be more than glad to help out. I have AutoCAD at home and>could redraw if people are interested. I have just started to look at the>plans, and have found a few mistakes, but the more I ask, the more people>are coming up with too. Keep in touch.>>Tom>-----Original Message----->From: Earl Myers >To: Pietenpol Discussion >Date: Friday, August 13, 1999 11:36 AM>Subject: Re: Plans>>>>Randall;>> What Warren said here is MORE than correct! Do all the metal fittings>>cockpit forward on graph paper first as there is no room for the nuts/>>wrenches as described. Ref the plan errors, in those days, Orrin Hoopman>was>>like 18 years old and had to scramble to get those drawings done for an>>article in MECHANICS ILLUSTRATED or something like that. No time to>>proofread I guess. The Scout just faded into history untill recently when>>all of a sudden there are 15 or more being built. They, the plans, do need>>updated but I don't know how that will be accomplished. The errors aren't>so>>much dangerous as frustrating. The bottom of the fuselage curve being the>>most noticeable. After that, I checked everything first with a calculator>>starting with the overalls and working backwards . A little Kentucky>Windage>>and there was a Scout built to the "plans"....remember Kentucky Windage,>>that was a lot of the engineering principle used back then especially on>the>>Model T Fords and others of that era. Moving the truss pieces around a bit>>here and there shouldn't be a problem as this critter is well over built.>It>>will be up to us users to collect the boo boo's, compile them and offer an>>addendum somewhere on one of the websites. That is the best thing I knowto>>do, If you compile all this, I would be glad to help. I have a second set>of>>drawings with several notations marked on them. The most frustrating was>>having all the metal fittings done ahead of time then not being able touse>>some of them as the bolts go right thru wood edgewise and so forth or>having>>to make extra cover plates to glue over the new "gouges" or whatever. Just>>be patient and you will get thru it as I did without TOO much $@#$% !!>>Earl Myers>>-----Original Message----->>From: Warren Shoun >>To: Pietenpol Discussion >>Date: Friday, August 13, 1999 11:45 AM>>Subject: Re: Plans>>>>>>>Hi Randall,>>> Feedback: We build these things at least 3 times: Once in our head,>>once>>>with the plans and one or more times in our hands.>>> I have found it very valuable to re-draw each part, even quickly,with>>a>>>steel rule on a tablet on the shop work bench. This has saved me many>>small>>>problems at a stage prior to making sawdust or metal filings. Still have>a>>>long way to go, but the two main areas you will find, have to do with the>>>airfoil on the plans, and the distance allowed for tool access to bolt>>heads on>>>the fittings.>>> In reading the archives here, you will also find that many folksraise>>the>>>Cabane struts 1-2" and adjust the seat back angle for entry and flying>>comfort.>>>>>> Kind'a reminds me of the old chemistry teacher giving me an English>>lesson>>>when I used the excuse that I assumed I had the right bottle for my>>>experiment...ASSUME = makes an ASS of U & ME. Don't assume>>anything....check>>>it for accuracy, fit and usefulness to you and your project.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: Plans
Original Posted By: leonstefanhutks(at)webtv.net (Leon Stefan)
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Plans>Has anyone ever produced a CAD rending of the Pietenpol plans? As a>potential Piet builder who has purchased plans from Don Pietenpol, and a>list subscriber, I have learned that there may be several inconsistencies,>slightly inaccurate dimensions, and vauge areas that often frustrate a Piet>builder. It might be an interesting exercise to build a Piet and>incorporate your findings into a detailed set of CAD plans that a Piet>builder can rely on with confidence. Opinions? Feedback? Best regards,>Randall Reihing>Randall Reihing>University of Toledo>College of Engineering>MIME Department>419-530-8244>FAX: 419-530-8206>E-Mail: rreihing(at)eng.utoledo.edu>________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Plans>Has anyone ever produced a CAD rending of the Pietenpol plans? As a>potential Piet builder who has purchased plans from Don Pietenpol, and a>list subscriber, I have learned that there may be several inconsistencies,>slightly inaccurate dimensions, and vauge areas that often frustrate a Piet>builder. It might be an interesting exercise to build a Piet and>incorporate your findings into a detailed set of CAD plans that a Piet>builder can rely on with confidence. Opinions? Feedback? Best regards,>Randall Reihing>Randall Reihing>University of Toledo>College of Engineering>MIME Department>419-530-8244>FAX: 419-530-8206>E-Mail: rreihing(at)eng.utoledo.edu>________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: RE: Plans
Original Posted By: nle97(at)juno.com
Subject: Pietenpol-List: RE: Plans>Randall,>>I posted a CAD document a week or so ago that was a start toward what you>describe. Except, I am building the Sky Scout so I have my hands full with>it's misprints and omissions etc.>>I plan to work on a document this weekend that lists the problems that I>have encountered thus far--only as they relate to dimensional andstructural>problems. For example, the total length of the fuselage is shown but ifthe>individual spacing between uprights is added up--a completely different>length is arrived at. For clarification, a person has to delve into past>issues of the BPAN etc. Needless to say, this type of thing is very>frustrating and possibly dangerous.>>I have no doubt that the airplane as built by Mr. Pietenpol has very little>room for improvement. However, since I was not there when he built it I>must follow the plans that he provided. Since these plans are known tohave>mistakes then it is left up to me to make structurally sound decisionsalong>the way. This is a scarry thought since I am not an aeronautical engineer.>>I have both the Flying and Glider Manuals and original plans (Sky Scout)>purchased from Don Pietenpol. I have found no differences between the two.>>Recently someone asked why these plans had not been updated in their 70year>history. The reply was that a better airplane can not be built by changing>the plans.>>I don't think that the person wanted redesigned plans--only ones where the>mistakes had been corrected.>>________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Pietenpol-List: RE: Plans>Randall,>>I posted a CAD document a week or so ago that was a start toward what you>describe. Except, I am building the Sky Scout so I have my hands full with>it's misprints and omissions etc.>>I plan to work on a document this weekend that lists the problems that I>have encountered thus far--only as they relate to dimensional andstructural>problems. For example, the total length of the fuselage is shown but ifthe>individual spacing between uprights is added up--a completely different>length is arrived at. For clarification, a person has to delve into past>issues of the BPAN etc. Needless to say, this type of thing is very>frustrating and possibly dangerous.>>I have no doubt that the airplane as built by Mr. Pietenpol has very little>room for improvement. However, since I was not there when he built it I>must follow the plans that he provided. Since these plans are known tohave>mistakes then it is left up to me to make structurally sound decisionsalong>the way. This is a scarry thought since I am not an aeronautical engineer.>>I have both the Flying and Glider Manuals and original plans (Sky Scout)>purchased from Don Pietenpol. I have found no differences between the two.>>Recently someone asked why these plans had not been updated in their 70year>history. The reply was that a better airplane can not be built by changing>the plans.>>I don't think that the person wanted redesigned plans--only ones where the>mistakes had been corrected.>>________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: RE: Plans
Original Posted By: tmbrant
Subject: Pietenpol-List: RE: Plans>Randall,>>I posted a CAD document a week or so ago that was a start toward what you>describe. Except, I am building the Sky Scout so I have my hands full with>it's misprints and omissions etc.>>I plan to work on a document this weekend that lists the problems that I>have encountered thus far--only as they relate to dimensional andstructural>problems. For example, the total length of the fuselage is shown but ifthe>individual spacing between uprights is added up--a completely different>length is arrived at. For clarification, a person has to delve into past>issues of the BPAN etc. Needless to say, this type of thing is very>frustrating and possibly dangerous.>>I have no doubt that the airplane as built by Mr. Pietenpol has very little>room for improvement. However, since I was not there when he built it I>must follow the plans that he provided. Since these plans are known tohave>mistakes then it is left up to me to make structurally sound decisionsalong>the way. This is a scarry thought since I am not an aeronautical engineer.>>I have both the Flying and Glider Manuals and original plans (Sky Scout)>purchased from Don Pietenpol. I have found no differences between the two.>>Recently someone asked why these plans had not been updated in their 70year>history. The reply was that a better airplane can not be built by changing>the plans.>>I don't think that the person wanted redesigned plans--only ones where the>mistakes had been corrected.>>________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Pietenpol-List: RE: Plans>Randall,>>I posted a CAD document a week or so ago that was a start toward what you>describe. Except, I am building the Sky Scout so I have my hands full with>it's misprints and omissions etc.>>I plan to work on a document this weekend that lists the problems that I>have encountered thus far--only as they relate to dimensional andstructural>problems. For example, the total length of the fuselage is shown but ifthe>individual spacing between uprights is added up--a completely different>length is arrived at. For clarification, a person has to delve into past>issues of the BPAN etc. Needless to say, this type of thing is very>frustrating and possibly dangerous.>>I have no doubt that the airplane as built by Mr. Pietenpol has very little>room for improvement. However, since I was not there when he built it I>must follow the plans that he provided. Since these plans are known tohave>mistakes then it is left up to me to make structurally sound decisionsalong>the way. This is a scarry thought since I am not an aeronautical engineer.>>I have both the Flying and Glider Manuals and original plans (Sky Scout)>purchased from Don Pietenpol. I have found no differences between the two.>>Recently someone asked why these plans had not been updated in their 70year>history. The reply was that a better airplane can not be built by changing>the plans.>>I don't think that the person wanted redesigned plans--only ones where the>mistakes had been corrected.>>________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: Plans
Original Posted By: "Lassetter, Russell B (Russell)"
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Plans>Has anyone ever produced a CAD rending of the Pietenpol plans? As a>potential Piet builder who has purchased plans from Don Pietenpol, and a>list subscriber, I have learned that there may be several inconsistencies,>slightly inaccurate dimensions, and vauge areas that often frustrate a Piet>builder. It might be an interesting exercise to build a Piet and>incorporate your findings into a detailed set of CAD plans that a Piet>builder can rely on with confidence. Opinions? Feedback? Best regards,>Randall Reihing>Randall Reihing>University of Toledo>College of Engineering>MIME Department>419-530-8244>FAX: 419-530-8206>E-Mail: rreihing(at)eng.utoledo.edu>>________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Plans>Has anyone ever produced a CAD rending of the Pietenpol plans? As a>potential Piet builder who has purchased plans from Don Pietenpol, and a>list subscriber, I have learned that there may be several inconsistencies,>slightly inaccurate dimensions, and vauge areas that often frustrate a Piet>builder. It might be an interesting exercise to build a Piet and>incorporate your findings into a detailed set of CAD plans that a Piet>builder can rely on with confidence. Opinions? Feedback? Best regards,>Randall Reihing>Randall Reihing>University of Toledo>College of Engineering>MIME Department>419-530-8244>FAX: 419-530-8206>E-Mail: rreihing(at)eng.utoledo.edu>>________________________________________________________________________________
> Re: Plans
Original Posted By: tmbrant
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans>Randall;> What Warren said here is MORE than correct! Do all the metal fittings>cockpit forward on graph paper first as there is no room for the nuts/>wrenches as described. Ref the plan errors, in those days, Orrin Hoopmanwas>like 18 years old and had to scramble to get those drawings done for an>article in MECHANICS ILLUSTRATED or something like that. No time to>proofread I guess. The Scout just faded into history untill recently when>all of a sudden there are 15 or more being built. They, the plans, do need>updated but I don't know how that will be accomplished. The errors aren'tso>much dangerous as frustrating. The bottom of the fuselage curve being the>most noticeable. After that, I checked everything first with a calculator>starting with the overalls and working backwards . A little KentuckyWindage>and there was a Scout built to the "plans"....remember Kentucky Windage,>that was a lot of the engineering principle used back then especially onthe>Model T Fords and others of that era. Moving the truss pieces around a bit>here and there shouldn't be a problem as this critter is well over built.It>will be up to us users to collect the boo boo's, compile them and offer an>addendum somewhere on one of the websites. That is the best thing I know to>do, If you compile all this, I would be glad to help. I have a second setof>drawings with several notations marked on them. The most frustrating was>having all the metal fittings done ahead of time then not being able to use>some of them as the bolts go right thru wood edgewise and so forth orhaving>to make extra cover plates to glue over the new "gouges" or whatever. Just>be patient and you will get thru it as I did without TOO much $@#$% !!>Earl Myers>-----Original Message----->From: Warren Shoun >To: Pietenpol Discussion >Date: Friday, August 13, 1999 11:45 AM>Subject: Re: Plans>>>>Hi Randall,>> Feedback: We build these things at least 3 times: Once in our head,>once>>with the plans and one or more times in our hands.>> I have found it very valuable to re-draw each part, even quickly, with>a>>steel rule on a tablet on the shop work bench. This has saved me many>small>>problems at a stage prior to making sawdust or metal filings. Still havea>>long way to go, but the two main areas you will find, have to do with the>>airfoil on the plans, and the distance allowed for tool access to bolt>heads on>>the fittings.>> In reading the archives here, you will also find that many folks raise>the>>Cabane struts 1-2" and adjust the seat back angle for entry and flying>comfort.>>>> Kind'a reminds me of the old chemistry teacher giving me an English>lesson>>when I used the excuse that I assumed I had the right bottle for my>>experiment...ASSUME = makes an ASS of U & ME. Don't assume>anything....check>>it for accuracy, fit and usefulness to you and your project.>>>>>>>>________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans>Randall;> What Warren said here is MORE than correct! Do all the metal fittings>cockpit forward on graph paper first as there is no room for the nuts/>wrenches as described. Ref the plan errors, in those days, Orrin Hoopmanwas>like 18 years old and had to scramble to get those drawings done for an>article in MECHANICS ILLUSTRATED or something like that. No time to>proofread I guess. The Scout just faded into history untill recently when>all of a sudden there are 15 or more being built. They, the plans, do need>updated but I don't know how that will be accomplished. The errors aren'tso>much dangerous as frustrating. The bottom of the fuselage curve being the>most noticeable. After that, I checked everything first with a calculator>starting with the overalls and working backwards . A little KentuckyWindage>and there was a Scout built to the "plans"....remember Kentucky Windage,>that was a lot of the engineering principle used back then especially onthe>Model T Fords and others of that era. Moving the truss pieces around a bit>here and there shouldn't be a problem as this critter is well over built.It>will be up to us users to collect the boo boo's, compile them and offer an>addendum somewhere on one of the websites. That is the best thing I know to>do, If you compile all this, I would be glad to help. I have a second setof>drawings with several notations marked on them. The most frustrating was>having all the metal fittings done ahead of time then not being able to use>some of them as the bolts go right thru wood edgewise and so forth orhaving>to make extra cover plates to glue over the new "gouges" or whatever. Just>be patient and you will get thru it as I did without TOO much $@#$% !!>Earl Myers>-----Original Message----->From: Warren Shoun >To: Pietenpol Discussion >Date: Friday, August 13, 1999 11:45 AM>Subject: Re: Plans>>>>Hi Randall,>> Feedback: We build these things at least 3 times: Once in our head,>once>>with the plans and one or more times in our hands.>> I have found it very valuable to re-draw each part, even quickly, with>a>>steel rule on a tablet on the shop work bench. This has saved me many>small>>problems at a stage prior to making sawdust or metal filings. Still havea>>long way to go, but the two main areas you will find, have to do with the>>airfoil on the plans, and the distance allowed for tool access to bolt>heads on>>the fittings.>> In reading the archives here, you will also find that many folks raise>the>>Cabane struts 1-2" and adjust the seat back angle for entry and flying>comfort.>>>> Kind'a reminds me of the old chemistry teacher giving me an English>lesson>>when I used the excuse that I assumed I had the right bottle for my>>experiment...ASSUME = makes an ASS of U & ME. Don't assume>anything....check>>it for accuracy, fit and usefulness to you and your project.>>>>>>>>________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans
Original Posted By: Earl Myers
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans>Hi Randall,> Feedback: We build these things at least 3 times: Once in our head,once>with the plans and one or more times in our hands.> I have found it very valuable to re-draw each part, even quickly, witha>steel rule on a tablet on the shop work bench. This has saved me manysmall>problems at a stage prior to making sawdust or metal filings. Still have a>long way to go, but the two main areas you will find, have to do with the>airfoil on the plans, and the distance allowed for tool access to boltheads on>the fittings.> In reading the archives here, you will also find that many folks raisethe>Cabane struts 1-2" and adjust the seat back angle for entry and flyingcomfort.>> Kind'a reminds me of the old chemistry teacher giving me an Englishlesson>when I used the excuse that I assumed I had the right bottle for my>experiment...ASSUME = makes an ASS of U & ME. Don't assumeanything....check>it for accuracy, fit and usefulness to you and your project.>>________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans>Hi Randall,> Feedback: We build these things at least 3 times: Once in our head,once>with the plans and one or more times in our hands.> I have found it very valuable to re-draw each part, even quickly, witha>steel rule on a tablet on the shop work bench. This has saved me manysmall>problems at a stage prior to making sawdust or metal filings. Still have a>long way to go, but the two main areas you will find, have to do with the>airfoil on the plans, and the distance allowed for tool access to boltheads on>the fittings.> In reading the archives here, you will also find that many folks raisethe>Cabane struts 1-2" and adjust the seat back angle for entry and flyingcomfort.>> Kind'a reminds me of the old chemistry teacher giving me an Englishlesson>when I used the excuse that I assumed I had the right bottle for my>experiment...ASSUME = makes an ASS of U & ME. Don't assumeanything....check>it for accuracy, fit and usefulness to you and your project.>>________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans
Original Posted By: Warren Shoun
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans>Hi Randall,> Feedback: We build these things at least 3 times: Once in our head,once>with the plans and one or more times in our hands.Actually FOUR!One in our head...One with the plans...The FIRST one with our hands ( the one that we build wrong)....THEN the one that works :)Bert________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans>Hi Randall,> Feedback: We build these things at least 3 times: Once in our head,once>with the plans and one or more times in our hands.Actually FOUR!One in our head...One with the plans...The FIRST one with our hands ( the one that we build wrong)....THEN the one that works :)Bert________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: RE: Plans
Original Posted By: Warren Shoun
Randall,I posted a CAD document a week or so ago that was a start toward what youdescribe. Except, I am building the Sky Scout so I have my hands full withit's misprints and omissions etc.I plan to work on a document this weekend that lists the problems that Ihave encountered thus far--only as they relate to dimensional and structuralproblems. For example, the total length of the fuselage is shown but if theindividual spacing between uprights is added up--a completely differentlength is arrived at. For clarification, a person has to delve into pastissues of the BPAN etc. Needless to say, this type of thing is veryfrustrating and possibly dangerous.I have no doubt that the airplane as built by Mr. Pietenpol has very littleroom for improvement. However, since I was not there when he built it Imust follow the plans that he provided. Since these plans are known to havemistakes then it is left up to me to make structurally sound decisions alongthe way. This is a scarry thought since I am not an aeronautical engineer.I have both the Flying and Glider Manuals and original plans (Sky Scout)purchased from Don Pietenpol. I have found no differences between the two.Recently someone asked why these plans had not been updated in their 70 yearhistory. The reply was that a better airplane can not be built by changingthe plans.I don't think that the person wanted redesigned plans--only ones where themistakes had been corrected.________________________________________________________________________________
Randall,I posted a CAD document a week or so ago that was a start toward what youdescribe. Except, I am building the Sky Scout so I have my hands full withit's misprints and omissions etc.I plan to work on a document this weekend that lists the problems that Ihave encountered thus far--only as they relate to dimensional and structuralproblems. For example, the total length of the fuselage is shown but if theindividual spacing between uprights is added up--a completely differentlength is arrived at. For clarification, a person has to delve into pastissues of the BPAN etc. Needless to say, this type of thing is veryfrustrating and possibly dangerous.I have no doubt that the airplane as built by Mr. Pietenpol has very littleroom for improvement. However, since I was not there when he built it Imust follow the plans that he provided. Since these plans are known to havemistakes then it is left up to me to make structurally sound decisions alongthe way. This is a scarry thought since I am not an aeronautical engineer.I have both the Flying and Glider Manuals and original plans (Sky Scout)purchased from Don Pietenpol. I have found no differences between the two.Recently someone asked why these plans had not been updated in their 70 yearhistory. The reply was that a better airplane can not be built by changingthe plans.I don't think that the person wanted redesigned plans--only ones where themistakes had been corrected.________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans
Original Posted By: ArkiesAir(at)aol.com
Hi Randall, Feedback: We build these things at least 3 times: Once in our head, oncewith the plans and one or more times in our hands. I have found it very valuable to re-draw each part, even quickly, with asteel rule on a tablet on the shop work bench. This has saved me many smallproblems at a stage prior to making sawdust or metal filings. Still have along way to go, but the two main areas you will find, have to do with theairfoil on the plans, and the distance allowed for tool access to bolt heads onthe fittings. In reading the archives here, you will also find that many folks raise theCabane struts 1-2" and adjust the seat back angle for entry and flying comfort. Kind'a reminds me of the old chemistry teacher giving me an English lessonwhen I used the excuse that I assumed I had the right bottle for myexperiment...ASSUME = makes an ASS of U & ME. Don't assume anything....checkit for accuracy, fit and usefulness to you and your project.________________________________________________________________________________
Hi Randall, Feedback: We build these things at least 3 times: Once in our head, oncewith the plans and one or more times in our hands. I have found it very valuable to re-draw each part, even quickly, with asteel rule on a tablet on the shop work bench. This has saved me many smallproblems at a stage prior to making sawdust or metal filings. Still have along way to go, but the two main areas you will find, have to do with theairfoil on the plans, and the distance allowed for tool access to bolt heads onthe fittings. In reading the archives here, you will also find that many folks raise theCabane struts 1-2" and adjust the seat back angle for entry and flying comfort. Kind'a reminds me of the old chemistry teacher giving me an English lessonwhen I used the excuse that I assumed I had the right bottle for myexperiment...ASSUME = makes an ASS of U & ME. Don't assume anything....checkit for accuracy, fit and usefulness to you and your project.________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: RE: Plans
Original Posted By: Earl Myers
When I start thinking like this, I remind myself that farm kids from the 1930'sbuilt these ships successfully.> ----------> I plan to work on a document this weekend that lists the problems that I> have encountered thus far--only as they relate to dimensional and structural> problems. For example, the total length of the fuselage is shown but if the> individual spacing between uprights is added up--a completely different> length is arrived at. For clarification, a person has to delve into past> issues of the BPAN etc. Needless to say, this type of thing is very> frustrating and possibly dangerous.> This is a scarry thought since I am not an aeronautical engineer.> > ________________________________________________________________________________
When I start thinking like this, I remind myself that farm kids from the 1930'sbuilt these ships successfully.> ----------> I plan to work on a document this weekend that lists the problems that I> have encountered thus far--only as they relate to dimensional and structural> problems. For example, the total length of the fuselage is shown but if the> individual spacing between uprights is added up--a completely different> length is arrived at. For clarification, a person has to delve into past> issues of the BPAN etc. Needless to say, this type of thing is very> frustrating and possibly dangerous.> This is a scarry thought since I am not an aeronautical engineer.> > ________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans
Original Posted By: Warren Shoun
Randall; What Warren said here is MORE than correct! Do all the metal fittingscockpit forward on graph paper first as there is no room for the nuts/wrenches as described. Ref the plan errors, in those days, Orrin Hoopman waslike 18 years old and had to scramble to get those drawings done for anarticle in MECHANICS ILLUSTRATED or something like that. No time toproofread I guess. The Scout just faded into history untill recently whenall of a sudden there are 15 or more being built. They, the plans, do needupdated but I don't know how that will be accomplished. The errors aren't somuch dangerous as frustrating. The bottom of the fuselage curve being themost noticeable. After that, I checked everything first with a calculatorstarting with the overalls and working backwards . A little Kentucky Windageand there was a Scout built to the "plans"....remember Kentucky Windage,that was a lot of the engineering principle used back then especially on theModel T Fords and others of that era. Moving the truss pieces around a bithere and there shouldn't be a problem as this critter is well over built. Itwill be up to us users to collect the boo boo's, compile them and offer anaddendum somewhere on one of the websites. That is the best thing I know todo, If you compile all this, I would be glad to help. I have a second set ofdrawings with several notations marked on them. The most frustrating washaving all the metal fittings done ahead of time then not being able to usesome of them as the bolts go right thru wood edgewise and so forth or havingto make extra cover plates to glue over the new "gouges" or whatever. Justbe patient and you will get thru it as I did without TOO much $@#$% !!Earl Myers-----Original Message-----
Randall; What Warren said here is MORE than correct! Do all the metal fittingscockpit forward on graph paper first as there is no room for the nuts/wrenches as described. Ref the plan errors, in those days, Orrin Hoopman waslike 18 years old and had to scramble to get those drawings done for anarticle in MECHANICS ILLUSTRATED or something like that. No time toproofread I guess. The Scout just faded into history untill recently whenall of a sudden there are 15 or more being built. They, the plans, do needupdated but I don't know how that will be accomplished. The errors aren't somuch dangerous as frustrating. The bottom of the fuselage curve being themost noticeable. After that, I checked everything first with a calculatorstarting with the overalls and working backwards . A little Kentucky Windageand there was a Scout built to the "plans"....remember Kentucky Windage,that was a lot of the engineering principle used back then especially on theModel T Fords and others of that era. Moving the truss pieces around a bithere and there shouldn't be a problem as this critter is well over built. Itwill be up to us users to collect the boo boo's, compile them and offer anaddendum somewhere on one of the websites. That is the best thing I know todo, If you compile all this, I would be glad to help. I have a second set ofdrawings with several notations marked on them. The most frustrating washaving all the metal fittings done ahead of time then not being able to usesome of them as the bolts go right thru wood edgewise and so forth or havingto make extra cover plates to glue over the new "gouges" or whatever. Justbe patient and you will get thru it as I did without TOO much $@#$% !!Earl Myers-----Original Message-----
Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans
Original Posted By: Randall Reihing
There is a fella in UK starting to do just that, I think. His name is LeoPonding....? he is on this list. No one to my knowledge has COMPLETED thiseffort yet....go for it!Earl Myers-----Original Message-----
There is a fella in UK starting to do just that, I think. His name is LeoPonding....? he is on this list. No one to my knowledge has COMPLETED thiseffort yet....go for it!Earl Myers-----Original Message-----
Pietenpol-List: RE: Plans
Original Posted By:> Sayre, William G[SMTP:William.Sayre(at)PSS.Boeing.com]
I admit that I'm not that bright so I'll leave you guys alone.> ----------
I admit that I'm not that bright so I'll leave you guys alone.> ----------
Pietenpol-List: Plans
Original Posted By: "Lassetter, Russell B (Russell)"
Has anyone ever produced a CAD rending of the Pietenpol plans? As apotential Piet builder who has purchased plans from Don Pietenpol, and alist subscriber, I have learned that there may be several inconsistencies,slightly inaccurate dimensions, and vauge areas that often frustrate a Pietbuilder. It might be an interesting exercise to build a Piet andincorporate your findings into a detailed set of CAD plans that a Pietbuilder can rely on with confidence. Opinions? Feedback? Best regards,Randall Reihing Randall ReihingUniversity of ToledoCollege of EngineeringMIME Department419-530-8244FAX: 419-530-8206E-Mail: rreihing(at)eng.utoledo.edu________________________________________________________________________________
Has anyone ever produced a CAD rending of the Pietenpol plans? As apotential Piet builder who has purchased plans from Don Pietenpol, and alist subscriber, I have learned that there may be several inconsistencies,slightly inaccurate dimensions, and vauge areas that often frustrate a Pietbuilder. It might be an interesting exercise to build a Piet andincorporate your findings into a detailed set of CAD plans that a Pietbuilder can rely on with confidence. Opinions? Feedback? Best regards,Randall Reihing Randall ReihingUniversity of ToledoCollege of EngineeringMIME Department419-530-8244FAX: 419-530-8206E-Mail: rreihing(at)eng.utoledo.edu________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: RE: Plans
Original Posted By:> Lassetter, Russell B (Russell)[SMTP:rbl1(at)lucent.com]
I meant it as a tip that helps me work through these problems.Definitely not as an insult - if that's how you took it please except my apology.Bill Sayre> ----------
I meant it as a tip that helps me work through these problems.Definitely not as an insult - if that's how you took it please except my apology.Bill Sayre> ----------
Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans
Original Posted By: Sayre, William G
SAME HERE-Earl Myers-----Original Message-----
SAME HERE-Earl Myers-----Original Message-----
Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans
Original Posted By: Lassetter, Russell B (Russell)
Be very careful what you refer to as 'mistakes' in the original plans. Justbecause you don't understand something the first time through does not meanit is a mistake. Those plans are amazingly accurate for theircircumstances.JMG-----Original Message-----
Be very careful what you refer to as 'mistakes' in the original plans. Justbecause you don't understand something the first time through does not meanit is a mistake. Those plans are amazingly accurate for theircircumstances.JMG-----Original Message-----
Pietenpol-List: RE: Plans
Original Posted By:> John Greenlee[SMTP:jgreenlee(at)morgan.net]
I would be very interested in a list of "mistakes" (or maybe a nicer way to putit is more details/clarifications). The following is some things I have observed:1. Ash brace cross struts. Are they 1 inch thick or 3/4 inch. The drawing showsboth at different locations.2. The plans (as purchased from Don Pietenpol) do not show a width dimension wherethe longerons converge at the aft most point. I looked at the Flying Manualand it said 1 1/8 inch.3. When using the longer fuselage and using a corvair engine, how is the firewallarea constructed. I plan to build in the box structure as I think it willprovide needed stiffeness in that area.I'm sure there are other items that need better explanation. As they arise I wouldlike to be able to send them to a central forum and then if necessary addthem to the "list". This would reduce a lot of frustration and duplicate questionsfor present and future Piet builders. Bart D ConradBoeing Field ServiceDC-9/MD-80/DC-10 & 737 Heavy MtcPhone: 713-640-5882/713-324-4192Fax: 713-640-5891Pager: 713-318-1625> ----------
I would be very interested in a list of "mistakes" (or maybe a nicer way to putit is more details/clarifications). The following is some things I have observed:1. Ash brace cross struts. Are they 1 inch thick or 3/4 inch. The drawing showsboth at different locations.2. The plans (as purchased from Don Pietenpol) do not show a width dimension wherethe longerons converge at the aft most point. I looked at the Flying Manualand it said 1 1/8 inch.3. When using the longer fuselage and using a corvair engine, how is the firewallarea constructed. I plan to build in the box structure as I think it willprovide needed stiffeness in that area.I'm sure there are other items that need better explanation. As they arise I wouldlike to be able to send them to a central forum and then if necessary addthem to the "list". This would reduce a lot of frustration and duplicate questionsfor present and future Piet builders. Bart D ConradBoeing Field ServiceDC-9/MD-80/DC-10 & 737 Heavy MtcPhone: 713-640-5882/713-324-4192Fax: 713-640-5891Pager: 713-318-1625> ----------
Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans
Original Posted By: "d.sevold"
I agree- many times I saw what I thought were mistakes on the plans. Butwhen I studied further, I found that there was always a reason for them- itwas my mistake, not Bernard's. A few times I built to what I thought, onlyto have to go back and redo according to the "mistake" in the plans. I betI have more time in studying the plans than I do building! Plus it is funto study the plans when the time I have to actually work is too short. Thepieces do all seem to fit together.Al Swanson>Be very careful what you refer to as 'mistakes' in the original plans. Just>because you don't understand something the first time through does not mean>it is a mistake. Those plans are amazingly accurate for their>circumstances.>>JMG>-----Original Message----->________________________________________________________________________________
I agree- many times I saw what I thought were mistakes on the plans. Butwhen I studied further, I found that there was always a reason for them- itwas my mistake, not Bernard's. A few times I built to what I thought, onlyto have to go back and redo according to the "mistake" in the plans. I betI have more time in studying the plans than I do building! Plus it is funto study the plans when the time I have to actually work is too short. Thepieces do all seem to fit together.Al Swanson>Be very careful what you refer to as 'mistakes' in the original plans. Just>because you don't understand something the first time through does not mean>it is a mistake. Those plans are amazingly accurate for their>circumstances.>>JMG>-----Original Message----->________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans
Original Posted By: Lassetter, Russell B (Russell)
>I don't think that the person wanted redesigned plans--only ones where the>mistakes had been corrected.Amen... People are too affraid that the thing is getting redesigned.Corrections is all that need to be made.-----Original Message-----
>I don't think that the person wanted redesigned plans--only ones where the>mistakes had been corrected.Amen... People are too affraid that the thing is getting redesigned.Corrections is all that need to be made.-----Original Message-----
Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans
Original Posted By: Earl Myers
I would also be more than glad to help out. I have AutoCAD at home andcould redraw if people are interested. I have just started to look at theplans, and have found a few mistakes, but the more I ask, the more peopleare coming up with too. Keep in touch.Tom-----Original Message-----
I would also be more than glad to help out. I have AutoCAD at home andcould redraw if people are interested. I have just started to look at theplans, and have found a few mistakes, but the more I ask, the more peopleare coming up with too. Keep in touch.Tom-----Original Message-----
Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans
Original Posted By: Randall Reihing
I absolutely agree. If enough interest is shown, I will draw it up.Tom-----Original Message-----
I absolutely agree. If enough interest is shown, I will draw it up.Tom-----Original Message-----
Pietenpol-List: My plan interpretation mistake:
Original Posted By: Bert & Nancy Conoly
When making my control horns(rudder+elev.) I noted the opening was about1 in. Having just built my tail, I remembered the spar demension wasonly 5/8 in. So I made my horns with the 5/8's opening. When I saw theuncovered piet. at Pioneer airport the 1in opening was used with 1/8 plyspacers, top and bottom, bringing the spar with to 1in. Will my horns beok without the ply. spacers? or should I build new horns? I see what youmean about thinking these things threw first. I've only been studying myplans since 1974, and am still having these problems!Thanks for anyhelp. Leon Stefan in KS.________________________________________________________________________________
When making my control horns(rudder+elev.) I noted the opening was about1 in. Having just built my tail, I remembered the spar demension wasonly 5/8 in. So I made my horns with the 5/8's opening. When I saw theuncovered piet. at Pioneer airport the 1in opening was used with 1/8 plyspacers, top and bottom, bringing the spar with to 1in. Will my horns beok without the ply. spacers? or should I build new horns? I see what youmean about thinking these things threw first. I've only been studying myplans since 1974, and am still having these problems!Thanks for anyhelp. Leon Stefan in KS.________________________________________________________________________________
> RE: Plans
Original Posted By: Alan Swanson
Good point John. To the best of my knowledge there are no "mistakes" in thePiet plans, just some inconsistencies, vague areas, and incompleteinformation referred to by Piet builder's, that appears to frustrate themin their efforts. For an 18 year old draftsman who was operating under aclose deadline they are excellent drawings. The successful history ofcompleted original design examples is the best illustration of the lack ofmistakes in the original drawings. But I have to believe that a good,comprehensive set, of CAD drawings would make life easier for manybuilder's..... Randall Reihing >Be very careful what you refer to as 'mistakes' in the original plans. Just>because you don't understand something the first time through does not mean>it is a mistake. Those plans are amazingly accurate for their>circumstances.>>JMG>-----Original Message----->From: Lassetter, Russell B (Russell) >To: Pietenpol Discussion >Date: Friday, August 13, 1999 10:39 AM>Subject: RE: Plans>>>>Randall,>>>>I posted a CAD document a week or so ago that was a start toward what you>>describe. Except, I am building the Sky Scout so I have my hands full with>>it's misprints and omissions etc.>>>>I plan to work on a document this weekend that lists the problems that I>>have encountered thus far--only as they relate to dimensional and>structural>>problems. For example, the total length of the fuselage is shown but if>the>>individual spacing between uprights is added up--a completely different>>length is arrived at. For clarification, a person has to delve into past>>issues of the BPAN etc. Needless to say, this type of thing is very>>frustrating and possibly dangerous.>>>>I have no doubt that the airplane as built by Mr. Pietenpol has very little>>room for improvement. However, since I was not there when he built it I>>must follow the plans that he provided. Since these plans are known to>have>>mistakes then it is left up to me to make structurally sound decisions>along>>the way. This is a scarry thought since I am not an aeronautical engineer.>>>>I have both the Flying and Glider Manuals and original plans (Sky Scout)>>purchased from Don Pietenpol. I have found no differences between the two.>>>>Recently someone asked why these plans had not been updated in their 70>year>>history. The reply was that a better airplane can not be built by changing>>the plans.>>>>I don't think that the person wanted redesigned plans--only ones where the>>mistakes had been corrected.>>>>>>>>Randall ReihingUniversity of ToledoCollege of EngineeringMIME Department419-530-8244FAX: 419-530-8206E-Mail: rreihing(at)eng.utoledo.edu________________________________________________________________________________
Good point John. To the best of my knowledge there are no "mistakes" in thePiet plans, just some inconsistencies, vague areas, and incompleteinformation referred to by Piet builder's, that appears to frustrate themin their efforts. For an 18 year old draftsman who was operating under aclose deadline they are excellent drawings. The successful history ofcompleted original design examples is the best illustration of the lack ofmistakes in the original drawings. But I have to believe that a good,comprehensive set, of CAD drawings would make life easier for manybuilder's..... Randall Reihing >Be very careful what you refer to as 'mistakes' in the original plans. Just>because you don't understand something the first time through does not mean>it is a mistake. Those plans are amazingly accurate for their>circumstances.>>JMG>-----Original Message----->From: Lassetter, Russell B (Russell) >To: Pietenpol Discussion >Date: Friday, August 13, 1999 10:39 AM>Subject: RE: Plans>>>>Randall,>>>>I posted a CAD document a week or so ago that was a start toward what you>>describe. Except, I am building the Sky Scout so I have my hands full with>>it's misprints and omissions etc.>>>>I plan to work on a document this weekend that lists the problems that I>>have encountered thus far--only as they relate to dimensional and>structural>>problems. For example, the total length of the fuselage is shown but if>the>>individual spacing between uprights is added up--a completely different>>length is arrived at. For clarification, a person has to delve into past>>issues of the BPAN etc. Needless to say, this type of thing is very>>frustrating and possibly dangerous.>>>>I have no doubt that the airplane as built by Mr. Pietenpol has very little>>room for improvement. However, since I was not there when he built it I>>must follow the plans that he provided. Since these plans are known to>have>>mistakes then it is left up to me to make structurally sound decisions>along>>the way. This is a scarry thought since I am not an aeronautical engineer.>>>>I have both the Flying and Glider Manuals and original plans (Sky Scout)>>purchased from Don Pietenpol. I have found no differences between the two.>>>>Recently someone asked why these plans had not been updated in their 70>year>>history. The reply was that a better airplane can not be built by changing>>the plans.>>>>I don't think that the person wanted redesigned plans--only ones where the>>mistakes had been corrected.>>>>>>>>Randall ReihingUniversity of ToledoCollege of EngineeringMIME Department419-530-8244FAX: 419-530-8206E-Mail: rreihing(at)eng.utoledo.edu________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans
Original Posted By: Warren Shoun
-----Original Message-----
-----Original Message-----
Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans
Original Posted By:> Warren Shoun
That is why I said "at least 3", and is also what caused me to startdrawing each part to full size dimensions, even as a rough drawing. Youwould be astounded at my collection of mental light bulbs going off.....{;~)Cheers,WarrenBert & Nancy Conoly wrote:> -----Original Message-----
That is why I said "at least 3", and is also what caused me to startdrawing each part to full size dimensions, even as a rough drawing. Youwould be astounded at my collection of mental light bulbs going off.....{;~)Cheers,WarrenBert & Nancy Conoly wrote:> -----Original Message-----
Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans
Original Posted By: tmbrant
Tom, I'd welcome CAD drawings also, however I have neither CAD software orexperience to help you. But I can and will learn. Thanx for your offer.Brian Sanders-----Original Message-----
Tom, I'd welcome CAD drawings also, however I have neither CAD software orexperience to help you. But I can and will learn. Thanx for your offer.Brian Sanders-----Original Message-----
Pietenpol-List: Re: Plans
Original Posted By: Alan Swanson
I asked Orrin once how old he was when he drew the plans. He said "about15".I do know they were drawn off from the prototype ships as built.JMG-----Original Message-----
I asked Orrin once how old he was when he drew the plans. He said "about15".I do know they were drawn off from the prototype ships as built.JMG-----Original Message-----
Pietenpol-List: Plans
Original Posted By: "tmbrant1(at)netzero.net"
Subject: Pietenpol-List: PlansDoes somebody has an old set of plans and is able to send it to my country (Argentina)?I will pay for it. I just have the F&GM and because of the exchangerate (I have to multiply everything by 3) the Don's plans became not affordableto me. Thank you very much.Santiago Morete 100mb gratis, Antivirus y AntispamTenelo ya!________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Pietenpol-List: PlansDoes somebody has an old set of plans and is able to send it to my country (Argentina)?I will pay for it. I just have the F&GM and because of the exchangerate (I have to multiply everything by 3) the Don's plans became not affordableto me. Thank you very much.Santiago Morete 100mb gratis, Antivirus y AntispamTenelo ya!________________________________________________________________________________
Re: Pietenpol-List: B & B Aircraft-- Some info
Original Posted By: "Oscar Zuniga"
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: B & B Aircraft-- Some infoHere is the one I have information on :B & C Specialty Products Inc123 East 4thPO Box BNewton, KS 67114 US316-283-8000Fax: 316-283-7400_sales(at)bandcspecialty.com_ (mailto:sales(at)bandcspecialty.com) ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: B & B Aircraft-- Some infoHere is the one I have information on :B & C Specialty Products Inc123 East 4thPO Box BNewton, KS 67114 US316-283-8000Fax: 316-283-7400_sales(at)bandcspecialty.com_ (mailto:sales(at)bandcspecialty.com) ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: Plans
Original Posted By: "pietflyr"
Where can Pietenpol plans be purchased? I'm corresponding with a guy who doesnot use the internet and needs a set of Piet plans.Bob HumbertN491RHWhere can Pietenpol plans be purchased? I'm corresponding with a guywho does not use the internet and needs a set of Piet plans. Bob HumbertN491RH________________________________________________________________________________
Where can Pietenpol plans be purchased? I'm corresponding with a guy who doesnot use the internet and needs a set of Piet plans.Bob HumbertN491RHWhere can Pietenpol plans be purchased? I'm corresponding with a guywho does not use the internet and needs a set of Piet plans. Bob HumbertN491RH________________________________________________________________________________
Re: Pietenpol-List: Plans
Original Posted By: "KMHeide, BA, CPO, FAAOP"
Pietenpol-List: Plans
Original Posted By: Gardiner Mason
Brian, I am looking for eyebrows for a continental engine. GardinerSent from my iPad> On Mar 5, 2014, at 2:34 PM, "N219BR" wrote:> > > Hi All,> > I acquired a Piet that's taking up valuable space right now. I'm looking at partingit out. I have an A-65 mount/cowl, 3 piece wings, cub gear, fittings, and1.5 Corvair cores, plus lots of assorted odds and ends. > > The back end was sticking out of an open hangar here in Washington State, soyou can imagine what the vert/and aft end fuse looks like.> > Let me know what you need, and I'll send pictures. I'm looking at trying to geta Cavalier SA102.5 in the air so, I'd be interested any trades to help me towardthat end. Always willing to help another piet get in the air! I'll be drivingto San Diego in April if anybody along the way needs something.> > Thanks,> > Brian Durham> lake Stevens, WA> > --------> Brian Durham> > > > > Read this topic online here:> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 837#419837> > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Plans
Brian, I am looking for eyebrows for a continental engine. GardinerSent from my iPad> On Mar 5, 2014, at 2:34 PM, "N219BR" wrote:> > > Hi All,> > I acquired a Piet that's taking up valuable space right now. I'm looking at partingit out. I have an A-65 mount/cowl, 3 piece wings, cub gear, fittings, and1.5 Corvair cores, plus lots of assorted odds and ends. > > The back end was sticking out of an open hangar here in Washington State, soyou can imagine what the vert/and aft end fuse looks like.> > Let me know what you need, and I'll send pictures. I'm looking at trying to geta Cavalier SA102.5 in the air so, I'd be interested any trades to help me towardthat end. Always willing to help another piet get in the air! I'll be drivingto San Diego in April if anybody along the way needs something.> > Thanks,> > Brian Durham> lake Stevens, WA> > --------> Brian Durham> > > > > Read this topic online here:> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 837#419837> > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Plans
RE: Pietenpol-List: Plans
Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Well, guess who is now running the Cub Club? Our own illustrious JohnHofmann! John has a J-3 Cub in addition to his Pietenpol.Jack PhillipsNX899JPSmith Mountain Lake, Virginia-----Original Message-----
Well, guess who is now running the Cub Club? Our own illustrious JohnHofmann! John has a J-3 Cub in addition to his Pietenpol.Jack PhillipsNX899JPSmith Mountain Lake, Virginia-----Original Message-----
> Plans
Original Posted By: Ian Holland
> > Like Steve I'm nearing the end of my Piet project--need to cover my one> piece wing and make a cowl/airscoop for Escort Engine. I'm currently> interested in a Pober Pixie or Christavia as a next project. I'd be> interested in buying plans--bargain price, of course--if you know> someone who has some they'd like to get rid of. Bill ________________________________________________________________________________
> > Like Steve I'm nearing the end of my Piet project--need to cover my one> piece wing and make a cowl/airscoop for Escort Engine. I'm currently> interested in a Pober Pixie or Christavia as a next project. I'd be> interested in buying plans--bargain price, of course--if you know> someone who has some they'd like to get rid of. Bill ________________________________________________________________________________
> > Plans
Original Posted By: Domenico Bellissimo
> >> > Like Steve I'm nearing the end of my Piet project--need to cover my one> > piece wing and make a cowl/airscoop for Escort Engine. I'm currently> > interested in a Pober Pixie or Christavia as a next project. I'd be> > interested in buying plans--bargain price, of course--if you know> > someone who has some they'd like to get rid of. BillWhat's your location? I live in Toronto. I have a corvair you can have$100. It's a 140HP. You'll have to remove the heads and replace with110HP heads. I may have a line on a set of 110HP heads for free. You'llnext have to remove the camshaft and replace with a 95HP cam, Possiblyavailable from Clark's corvair Parts, in Sheldon(?), Mass. (trysearching for them on the internet. Also check if they have any rebuiltengines or if they can build one up for you to your specifications.Regards, Domenic________________________________________________________________________________
> >> > Like Steve I'm nearing the end of my Piet project--need to cover my one> > piece wing and make a cowl/airscoop for Escort Engine. I'm currently> > interested in a Pober Pixie or Christavia as a next project. I'd be> > interested in buying plans--bargain price, of course--if you know> > someone who has some they'd like to get rid of. BillWhat's your location? I live in Toronto. I have a corvair you can have$100. It's a 140HP. You'll have to remove the heads and replace with110HP heads. I may have a line on a set of 110HP heads for free. You'llnext have to remove the camshaft and replace with a 95HP cam, Possiblyavailable from Clark's corvair Parts, in Sheldon(?), Mass. (trysearching for them on the internet. Also check if they have any rebuiltengines or if they can build one up for you to your specifications.Regards, Domenic________________________________________________________________________________
> RE: Plans
Original Posted By: Randall Reihing
> Subject: RE: Plans> > > >Randall,> >> >I posted a CAD document a week or so ago that was a start toward what you> >describe. Except, I am building the Sky Scout so I have my hands full with> >it's misprints and omissions etc.> >> >I plan to work on a document this weekend that lists the problems that I> >have encountered thus far--only as they relate to dimensional and> structural> >problems. For example, the total length of the fuselage is shown but if> the> >individual spacing between uprights is added up--a completely different> >length is arrived at. For clarification, a person has to delve into past> >issues of the BPAN etc. Needless to say, this type of thing is very> >frustrating and possibly dangerous.> >> >I have no doubt that the airplane as built by Mr. Pietenpol has very little> >room for improvement. However, since I was not there when he built it I> >must follow the plans that he provided. Since these plans are known to> have> >mistakes then it is left up to me to make structurally sound decisions> along> >the way. This is a scarry thought since I am not an aeronautical engineer.> >> >I have both the Flying and Glider Manuals and original plans (Sky Scout)> >purchased from Don Pietenpol. I have found no differences between the two.> >> >Recently someone asked why these plans had not been updated in their 70> year> >history. The reply was that a better airplane can not be built by changing> >the plans.> >> >I don't think that the person wanted redesigned plans--only ones where the> >mistakes had been corrected.> >> >> >> ________________________________________________________________________________
> Subject: RE: Plans> > > >Randall,> >> >I posted a CAD document a week or so ago that was a start toward what you> >describe. Except, I am building the Sky Scout so I have my hands full with> >it's misprints and omissions etc.> >> >I plan to work on a document this weekend that lists the problems that I> >have encountered thus far--only as they relate to dimensional and> structural> >problems. For example, the total length of the fuselage is shown but if> the> >individual spacing between uprights is added up--a completely different> >length is arrived at. For clarification, a person has to delve into past> >issues of the BPAN etc. Needless to say, this type of thing is very> >frustrating and possibly dangerous.> >> >I have no doubt that the airplane as built by Mr. Pietenpol has very little> >room for improvement. However, since I was not there when he built it I> >must follow the plans that he provided. Since these plans are known to> have> >mistakes then it is left up to me to make structurally sound decisions> along> >the way. This is a scarry thought since I am not an aeronautical engineer.> >> >I have both the Flying and Glider Manuals and original plans (Sky Scout)> >purchased from Don Pietenpol. I have found no differences between the two.> >> >Recently someone asked why these plans had not been updated in their 70> year> >history. The reply was that a better airplane can not be built by changing> >the plans.> >> >I don't think that the person wanted redesigned plans--only ones where the> >mistakes had been corrected.> >> >> >> ________________________________________________________________________________
> Re: Plans
Original Posted By: DonanClara(at)aol.com
> Subject: Re: Plans>> >Hi Randall,> > Feedback: We build these things at least 3 times: Once in our head,> once> >with the plans and one or more times in our hands.>> Actually FOUR!>> One in our head...> One with the plans...> The FIRST one with our hands ( the one that we build wrong)....> THEN the one that works
>> Bert________________________________________________________________________________
> Subject: Re: Plans>> >Hi Randall,> > Feedback: We build these things at least 3 times: Once in our head,> once> >with the plans and one or more times in our hands.>> Actually FOUR!>> One in our head...> One with the plans...> The FIRST one with our hands ( the one that we build wrong)....> THEN the one that works
>> Bert________________________________________________________________________________