Original Posted By: airlion2(at)gmail.com
Just a quick reminder that the West Coast Pietenpol Gathering is just a week and a half away!-- Saturday June 1st is fast approaching and I am really looking forward to the event.- I hope to see you there.- -(See the attached info sheet for the details.)- -Mike Groah414MVTulare CA________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Hangar door riff-raff
Pietenpol-List: Hangar door riff-raff
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: fuel flow test
Original Posted By: shad bell
Rick,What Terry said. =C2-The other variable you need is the maximum angle of attack. =C2-Most of the reading I've done on the Pietenpol airfoil suggests an angle of attack at CLMax of approximately 11-12 degrees. =C2-Others may want to correct that number. =C2-But if accurate, you'd want to chalk your fuselage at approximately 17 degrees up-angle, measured at the top longeron.KenOn Thu, May 23, 2013 at 1:42 PM, jarheadpilot82 wrote:ail.com>Rick,You can find the following information in AC 90-89A, "AMATEUR-BUILT AIRCRAFT AND ULTRALIGHT FLIGHT TESTING HANDBOOK"Here is the link-http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/medi ... 9A.pdfJust so you don't have to search for the info, I have included the appropriate section below-Section 11. Additional Engine Tests, Paragraph 1e., Page 23Fuel Flow and Unusable Fuel Check: This is a field test to ensure the aircraft engine will get enough fuel to run properly, even if the aircraft is in a steep climb or stall attitude.(1) First, place the aircraft=99s nose at an angle 5 degrees above the highest anticipated climb angle. The easiest and safest way to do this with a conventional gear aircraft is to dig a hole and place the aircraft=99s tail in it. For a nose gear aircraft, build a ramp to raise the nose gear to the proper angle.(2) Make sure the aircraft is tied-down and chocked. With minimum fuel in the tanks, disconnect the fuel line to carburetor. The fuel flow with a gravity flow system should be 150 percent of the fuel consumption of the engine at full throttle. With a fuel system that is pressurized, the fuel flow should be at least 125 percent. When the fuel stops flowing, the remaining fuel is the =98=98unusable fuel=99=99 quantity.(3) Since the fuel consumption of most modern engines is approximately .55 pounds per brake horsepower per hour for a 100 horsepower engine, the test fuel flow should be 82.5 pounds (13.7 gallons) per hour for gravity feed, or 68.75 pounds (11.5 gallons) per hour for a pressurized system. The pounds per hour divided by 60 equals 1.4 pounds and 1.15 pounds per minute fuel rate respectively. NOTE: Formula for fuel flow rate gravity feed is .55 x engine horsepower x 1.50 = pounds of fuel per hour divided by 60 to get pounds per minute, divided by 6 to get gallons per minute. For a pressurized system, substitute 1.25 for 1.50 to determine fuel flow rate.This document just gives you the logic behind the test.Hope it helps.--------Semper Fi,Terry HandAthens, GARead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 9#401239st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Piet ... nics.comle, List Admin.="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution__ ... ______Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 15:47:16 -0700 (PDT)
Rick,What Terry said. =C2-The other variable you need is the maximum angle of attack. =C2-Most of the reading I've done on the Pietenpol airfoil suggests an angle of attack at CLMax of approximately 11-12 degrees. =C2-Others may want to correct that number. =C2-But if accurate, you'd want to chalk your fuselage at approximately 17 degrees up-angle, measured at the top longeron.KenOn Thu, May 23, 2013 at 1:42 PM, jarheadpilot82 wrote:ail.com>Rick,You can find the following information in AC 90-89A, "AMATEUR-BUILT AIRCRAFT AND ULTRALIGHT FLIGHT TESTING HANDBOOK"Here is the link-http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/medi ... 9A.pdfJust so you don't have to search for the info, I have included the appropriate section below-Section 11. Additional Engine Tests, Paragraph 1e., Page 23Fuel Flow and Unusable Fuel Check: This is a field test to ensure the aircraft engine will get enough fuel to run properly, even if the aircraft is in a steep climb or stall attitude.(1) First, place the aircraft=99s nose at an angle 5 degrees above the highest anticipated climb angle. The easiest and safest way to do this with a conventional gear aircraft is to dig a hole and place the aircraft=99s tail in it. For a nose gear aircraft, build a ramp to raise the nose gear to the proper angle.(2) Make sure the aircraft is tied-down and chocked. With minimum fuel in the tanks, disconnect the fuel line to carburetor. The fuel flow with a gravity flow system should be 150 percent of the fuel consumption of the engine at full throttle. With a fuel system that is pressurized, the fuel flow should be at least 125 percent. When the fuel stops flowing, the remaining fuel is the =98=98unusable fuel=99=99 quantity.(3) Since the fuel consumption of most modern engines is approximately .55 pounds per brake horsepower per hour for a 100 horsepower engine, the test fuel flow should be 82.5 pounds (13.7 gallons) per hour for gravity feed, or 68.75 pounds (11.5 gallons) per hour for a pressurized system. The pounds per hour divided by 60 equals 1.4 pounds and 1.15 pounds per minute fuel rate respectively. NOTE: Formula for fuel flow rate gravity feed is .55 x engine horsepower x 1.50 = pounds of fuel per hour divided by 60 to get pounds per minute, divided by 6 to get gallons per minute. For a pressurized system, substitute 1.25 for 1.50 to determine fuel flow rate.This document just gives you the logic behind the test.Hope it helps.--------Semper Fi,Terry HandAthens, GARead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 9#401239st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Piet ... nics.comle, List Admin.="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution__ ... ______Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 15:47:16 -0700 (PDT)
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: fuel flow test
Original Posted By: Steve Emo
Rick,What Terry said. =C2-The other variable you need is the maximum angle of attack. =C2-Most of the reading I've done on the Pietenpol airfoil suggests an angle of attack at CLMax of approximately 11-12 degrees. =C2-Others may want to correct that number. =C2-But if accurate, you'd want to chalk your fuselage at approximately 17 degrees up-angle, measured at the top longeron.KenOn Thu, May 23, 2013 at 1:42 PM, jarheadpilot82 wrote:ail.com>Rick,You can find the following information in AC 90-89A, "AMATEUR-BUILT AIRCRAFT AND ULTRALIGHT FLIGHT TESTING HANDBOOK"Here is the link-http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/medi ... 9A.pdfJust so you don't have to search for the info, I have included the appropriate section below-Section 11. Additional Engine Tests, Paragraph 1e., Page 23Fuel Flow and Unusable Fuel Check: This is a field test to ensure the aircraft engine will get enough fuel to run properly, even if the aircraft is in a steep climb or stall attitude.(1) First, place the aircraft=99s nose at an angle 5 degrees above the highest anticipated climb angle. The easiest and safest way to do this with a conventional gear aircraft is to dig a hole and place the aircraft=99s tail in it. For a nose gear aircraft, build a ramp to raise the nose gear to the proper angle.(2) Make sure the aircraft is tied-down and chocked. With minimum fuel in the tanks, disconnect the fuel line to carburetor. The fuel flow with a gravity flow system should be 150 percent of the fuel consumption of the engine at full throttle. With a fuel system that is pressurized, the fuel flow should be at least 125 percent. When the fuel stops flowing, the remaining fuel is the =98=98unusable fuel=99=99 quantity.(3) Since the fuel consumption of most modern engines is approximately .55 pounds per brake horsepower per hour for a 100 horsepower engine, the test fuel flow should be 82.5 pounds (13.7 gallons) per hour for gravity feed, or 68.75 pounds (11.5 gallons) per hour for a pressurized system. The pounds per hour divided by 60 equals 1.4 pounds and 1.15 pounds per minute fuel rate respectively. NOTE: Formula for fuel flow rate gravity feed is .55 x engine horsepower x 1.50 = pounds of fuel per hour divided by 60 to get pounds per minute, divided by 6 to get gallons per minute. For a pressurized system, substitute 1.25 for 1.50 to determine fuel flow rate.This document just gives you the logic behind the test.Hope it helps.--------Semper Fi,Terry HandAthens, GARead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 9#401239st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Piet ... nics.comle, List Admin.="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution__ ... __________
Rick,What Terry said. =C2-The other variable you need is the maximum angle of attack. =C2-Most of the reading I've done on the Pietenpol airfoil suggests an angle of attack at CLMax of approximately 11-12 degrees. =C2-Others may want to correct that number. =C2-But if accurate, you'd want to chalk your fuselage at approximately 17 degrees up-angle, measured at the top longeron.KenOn Thu, May 23, 2013 at 1:42 PM, jarheadpilot82 wrote:ail.com>Rick,You can find the following information in AC 90-89A, "AMATEUR-BUILT AIRCRAFT AND ULTRALIGHT FLIGHT TESTING HANDBOOK"Here is the link-http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/medi ... 9A.pdfJust so you don't have to search for the info, I have included the appropriate section below-Section 11. Additional Engine Tests, Paragraph 1e., Page 23Fuel Flow and Unusable Fuel Check: This is a field test to ensure the aircraft engine will get enough fuel to run properly, even if the aircraft is in a steep climb or stall attitude.(1) First, place the aircraft=99s nose at an angle 5 degrees above the highest anticipated climb angle. The easiest and safest way to do this with a conventional gear aircraft is to dig a hole and place the aircraft=99s tail in it. For a nose gear aircraft, build a ramp to raise the nose gear to the proper angle.(2) Make sure the aircraft is tied-down and chocked. With minimum fuel in the tanks, disconnect the fuel line to carburetor. The fuel flow with a gravity flow system should be 150 percent of the fuel consumption of the engine at full throttle. With a fuel system that is pressurized, the fuel flow should be at least 125 percent. When the fuel stops flowing, the remaining fuel is the =98=98unusable fuel=99=99 quantity.(3) Since the fuel consumption of most modern engines is approximately .55 pounds per brake horsepower per hour for a 100 horsepower engine, the test fuel flow should be 82.5 pounds (13.7 gallons) per hour for gravity feed, or 68.75 pounds (11.5 gallons) per hour for a pressurized system. The pounds per hour divided by 60 equals 1.4 pounds and 1.15 pounds per minute fuel rate respectively. NOTE: Formula for fuel flow rate gravity feed is .55 x engine horsepower x 1.50 = pounds of fuel per hour divided by 60 to get pounds per minute, divided by 6 to get gallons per minute. For a pressurized system, substitute 1.25 for 1.50 to determine fuel flow rate.This document just gives you the logic behind the test.Hope it helps.--------Semper Fi,Terry HandAthens, GARead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 9#401239st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Piet ... nics.comle, List Admin.="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution__ ... __________
Pietenpol-List: Hangar door riff-raff
Original Posted By: Ken Bickers
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Hangar door riff-raff
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Hangar door riff-raff
Pietenpol-List: Re: Hangar door riff-raff
Original Posted By: "echobravo4"
Alright I'll buy that. Keep the lift strut sound when loaded in compression. Thanks!Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Hangar door riff-raff
Alright I'll buy that. Keep the lift strut sound when loaded in compression. Thanks!Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Hangar door riff-raff
RE: Pietenpol-List: Hangar door riff-raff
Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Ken,The worst part is your valuable time that he, and people like him, arewasting with un-constructive commentary. There are soooo many responses thatcome to mind with these guys (most are four-letter words), but I have seenyou in action and know how restrained you can be! You could hang a giantsign in your doorway, "STUPID PEOPLE STAY OUT!", and he would walk rightunder it, thinking that it doesn't apply to him! The only solace I can offer is that, while you are practicing yourself-restraint, think of me and just about every other Pietenpoler at anairport, and know that we may very likely be thinking of you at that verymoment. Gary BootheNX308MB
Ken,The worst part is your valuable time that he, and people like him, arewasting with un-constructive commentary. There are soooo many responses thatcome to mind with these guys (most are four-letter words), but I have seenyou in action and know how restrained you can be! You could hang a giantsign in your doorway, "STUPID PEOPLE STAY OUT!", and he would walk rightunder it, thinking that it doesn't apply to him! The only solace I can offer is that, while you are practicing yourself-restraint, think of me and just about every other Pietenpoler at anairport, and know that we may very likely be thinking of you at that verymoment. Gary BootheNX308MB
Re: Pietenpol-List: Hangar door riff-raff
Original Posted By: Ken Bickers
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Pietenpol expertsUNSOLICITEDIt's amazing how many experts come out of the woodwork when they visit your Pietproject either while under construction or on a visit to the hangar or at afly-in. I was at a fly-in Saturday with my Piet and a gent comes up every year and sayshe's still building his Pietenpol. (this has been going on for about 15 years)He thenasks me if my plane is a Greg or a Pietenpol. I walk away to get the pancakebreakfast and everytime I glance toward my Piet he's explaining my plane to anyonewho will listen nearby. With great hand gestures and lots of words he tells allabout my build and the plane, the plane's history, and on and on. One gent who visits the plane still thinks my engine is out of a Volkswagon. Another told me that wood landing gear would never hold up to hard landings. Anothertold me I had to use all castellated nuts and that elastic stop nuts were not FAAapproved. I used to try to explain things...now I just nod and say 'is thatso?'Thank God for the Tony Bingelis books. Mike C.________________________________________________________________________________Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 11:23:24 -0600Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Hangar door riff-raff
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Pietenpol expertsUNSOLICITEDIt's amazing how many experts come out of the woodwork when they visit your Pietproject either while under construction or on a visit to the hangar or at afly-in. I was at a fly-in Saturday with my Piet and a gent comes up every year and sayshe's still building his Pietenpol. (this has been going on for about 15 years)He thenasks me if my plane is a Greg or a Pietenpol. I walk away to get the pancakebreakfast and everytime I glance toward my Piet he's explaining my plane to anyonewho will listen nearby. With great hand gestures and lots of words he tells allabout my build and the plane, the plane's history, and on and on. One gent who visits the plane still thinks my engine is out of a Volkswagon. Another told me that wood landing gear would never hold up to hard landings. Anothertold me I had to use all castellated nuts and that elastic stop nuts were not FAAapproved. I used to try to explain things...now I just nod and say 'is thatso?'Thank God for the Tony Bingelis books. Mike C.________________________________________________________________________________Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 11:23:24 -0600Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Hangar door riff-raff
Pietenpol-List: Re: one man's jury strut fitting idea
Original Posted By: Michael Perez
A couple of points, just for reference. 2RN's original struts are just like those. During the gear collapse, the wheelsactually bent up 3 of the 4 struts. They bent RIGHT there at the weld and intwo cases, actually broke there as well. Which allowed easy visibility to theinside which showed a lot of corrosion on the welds. The builders log showed they were used struts. I don't know if they were professionallywelded or not. I just mention it, I was certainly surprised by it.I replaced them with aluminum struts, and DEFINITELY did not feel comfortable weldinga tab on them. I was going to just drill, use an eye bolt with appropriatespacer inside to prevent crush. Which brings me to the second point of consideration, easy...Since I was retrofitting, I was fitting existing jury struts, so the tab locationwas more critical than vice versa. THAT'S the main reason I reluctantly went with the cub style, adjustability. Idon't think they are as "clean" and I certainly wasn't looking forward to makingthem . Took a couple hours to bend up the first, and only a couple to dothe next three combined. Turned out better looking than I imagined and wasn'tas hard as I thought it would be.Also, easy enough to remove and go with the Champ style, but not so much the otherway around.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 10:28:33 -0700 (PDT)
A couple of points, just for reference. 2RN's original struts are just like those. During the gear collapse, the wheelsactually bent up 3 of the 4 struts. They bent RIGHT there at the weld and intwo cases, actually broke there as well. Which allowed easy visibility to theinside which showed a lot of corrosion on the welds. The builders log showed they were used struts. I don't know if they were professionallywelded or not. I just mention it, I was certainly surprised by it.I replaced them with aluminum struts, and DEFINITELY did not feel comfortable weldinga tab on them. I was going to just drill, use an eye bolt with appropriatespacer inside to prevent crush. Which brings me to the second point of consideration, easy...Since I was retrofitting, I was fitting existing jury struts, so the tab locationwas more critical than vice versa. THAT'S the main reason I reluctantly went with the cub style, adjustability. Idon't think they are as "clean" and I certainly wasn't looking forward to makingthem . Took a couple hours to bend up the first, and only a couple to dothe next three combined. Turned out better looking than I imagined and wasn'tas hard as I thought it would be.Also, easy enough to remove and go with the Champ style, but not so much the otherway around.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 10:28:33 -0700 (PDT)
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: fuel flow test
Original Posted By: Ken Bickers
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: fuel flow test
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: fuel flow test
Re: Pietenpol-List: Hangar door riff-raff
Original Posted By: Ken Bickers
You should change his name to Dale the FishermanDick N ----- Original Message -----
You should change his name to Dale the FishermanDick N ----- Original Message -----
Re: Pietenpol-List: Hangar door riff-raff
Original Posted By: Ken Bickers
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Hangar door riff-raff
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Hangar door riff-raff
RE: Pietenpol-List: Hangar door riff-raff
Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Those who can do - do. Those who cannot come into your hanger and tellyou how to do it. The world is full of experts.
Those who can do - do. Those who cannot come into your hanger and tellyou how to do it. The world is full of experts.
Pietenpol-List: Re: Hangar door riff-raff
Original Posted By: "jarheadpilot82"
I have a project gathering dust. This winter I built a hanger and I amnow moving the project into it to see if I can get it moving. I bought aFord engine in good shape and want to start getting the cooling systemtogether for it. Where have the other Ford guys been getting the nice brass/copper rads?And how did we get the design right? Which core and so forth?Robert Gow________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Hangar door riff-raff
I have a project gathering dust. This winter I built a hanger and I amnow moving the project into it to see if I can get it moving. I bought aFord engine in good shape and want to start getting the cooling systemtogether for it. Where have the other Ford guys been getting the nice brass/copper rads?And how did we get the design right? Which core and so forth?Robert Gow________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Hangar door riff-raff
Original Posted By: shad bell
When I was in the Training Department at my current employer we put it this way-1. Them that can, do.2. Them that can't do, teach.3. Them that can't teach, evaluate.4. Them that can't evaluate, administrate.--------Semper Fi,Terry HandAthens, GARead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 15:40:05 -0700 (PDT)
When I was in the Training Department at my current employer we put it this way-1. Them that can, do.2. Them that can't do, teach.3. Them that can't teach, evaluate.4. Them that can't evaluate, administrate.--------Semper Fi,Terry HandAthens, GARead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 15:40:05 -0700 (PDT)
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: fuel flow test
Original Posted By:> Ken Bickers
True recommendation with empty tank. Have one guy poor in1/2 gallon. Hold finger over outlet tube after 1/2 gal in time how long it takes to drain . Worst caseSteveOn May 23, 2013, at 6:47 PM, shad bell wrote:> > One other thing you need to consider is the fuel flow rate at minimum fuel, it might pass the flow rate check with full fuel, but may not be sufficient when the fuel level gets lower (due to loss of head pressure).> > Shad> > --- On Thu, 5/23/13, Ken Bickers wrote:>
True recommendation with empty tank. Have one guy poor in1/2 gallon. Hold finger over outlet tube after 1/2 gal in time how long it takes to drain . Worst caseSteveOn May 23, 2013, at 6:47 PM, shad bell wrote:> > One other thing you need to consider is the fuel flow rate at minimum fuel, it might pass the flow rate check with full fuel, but may not be sufficient when the fuel level gets lower (due to loss of head pressure).> > Shad> > --- On Thu, 5/23/13, Ken Bickers wrote:>
Original Posted By: Isablcorky(at)aol.com
A corollary my grandfather supposedly used to say about doctors graduating frommedical school: The top third make good teachers, the middle third make gooddoctors and the bottom third make good money. His medical degree almost got himshipped out to the Western Front in the medical corps when would become knownas Armistice Day happened. I still have his lieutenants bars.DaveRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
A corollary my grandfather supposedly used to say about doctors graduating frommedical school: The top third make good teachers, the middle third make gooddoctors and the bottom third make good money. His medical degree almost got himshipped out to the Western Front in the medical corps when would become knownas Armistice Day happened. I still have his lieutenants bars.DaveRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Pietenpol-List: Re: Hangar door riff-raff
Original Posted By: "biplan53"
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: anyone have an extra set of tail plans?In a message dated 5/23/2013 6:35:02 P.M. Central Daylight Time, jarheadpilot82(at)hotmail.com writes:--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "jarheadpilot82" Why don't you try contacting Andrew Pietenpol directly? If you explain when you purchased your original set of plans, and explain what happened (howyou lost the tail plans), he might make a price just for those tail plans and send them right out to you. Just a thought.--------Semper Fi,Terry HandAthens, GARead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 37#401237I have an extra set of tail plans, pretty brown but readable. Send me your mailing address,Corky________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Hangar door riff-raff
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: anyone have an extra set of tail plans?In a message dated 5/23/2013 6:35:02 P.M. Central Daylight Time, jarheadpilot82(at)hotmail.com writes:--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "jarheadpilot82" Why don't you try contacting Andrew Pietenpol directly? If you explain when you purchased your original set of plans, and explain what happened (howyou lost the tail plans), he might make a price just for those tail plans and send them right out to you. Just a thought.--------Semper Fi,Terry HandAthens, GARead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 37#401237I have an extra set of tail plans, pretty brown but readable. Send me your mailing address,Corky________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Hangar door riff-raff
Re: Pietenpol-List: Hangar door riff-raff
Original Posted By: Ken Bickers
God must love primitive life forms.He made so many of them. Er, us. SomeoneClif
----- Original Message -----
God must love primitive life forms.He made so many of them. Er, us. SomeoneClif
----- Original Message ----- Original Posted By:>> biplan53
Just so ya,ll know what an expert stands for. x is the unknown factor and spertis a drip under pressure. Cheers, airlionSent from my iPadOn May 24, 2013, at 8:57 AM, Jim Ash wrote:> > > On occasion, I've taught classes and seminars. Once in a while, somebody showsup, not to learn something, but to prove to the world they know more than youdo (I give them the benefit of the doubt that they might, but those that reallydo usually sit quietly and politely).> > In the course of collecting and showing Corvairs, maybe once per each well-attendedcar show I'd get the same type of person with this-or-that Corvair story,but the one in their story had four cylinders. The laugh was that they wereadamant about it. My first couple times, I entertained the discussion, but itgets old fast. I came to saying "That's nice" or something brief, then made myselfscarce. Another trick (if you're thinking fast enough) is to tell the 'expert'you don't know a lot about it (their ludicrous subject), but a friend inthe club over there does and they would really like to hear about it. With alittle savvy, the 'expert' doesn't even know they're being taken for a ride.You get two-fers; the 'expert' goes away, and you get to jerk the chain of a frienda little. Word of caution, this one can go both ways.> > Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and it annoys the pig.> > Jim Ash> > > -----Original Message-----
Just so ya,ll know what an expert stands for. x is the unknown factor and spertis a drip under pressure. Cheers, airlionSent from my iPadOn May 24, 2013, at 8:57 AM, Jim Ash wrote:> > > On occasion, I've taught classes and seminars. Once in a while, somebody showsup, not to learn something, but to prove to the world they know more than youdo (I give them the benefit of the doubt that they might, but those that reallydo usually sit quietly and politely).> > In the course of collecting and showing Corvairs, maybe once per each well-attendedcar show I'd get the same type of person with this-or-that Corvair story,but the one in their story had four cylinders. The laugh was that they wereadamant about it. My first couple times, I entertained the discussion, but itgets old fast. I came to saying "That's nice" or something brief, then made myselfscarce. Another trick (if you're thinking fast enough) is to tell the 'expert'you don't know a lot about it (their ludicrous subject), but a friend inthe club over there does and they would really like to hear about it. With alittle savvy, the 'expert' doesn't even know they're being taken for a ride.You get two-fers; the 'expert' goes away, and you get to jerk the chain of a frienda little. Word of caution, this one can go both ways.> > Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and it annoys the pig.> > Jim Ash> > > -----Original Message-----
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Hangar door riff-raff
Original Posted By: "Dortch, Steven D MAJ MIL USA NGB"
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Hangar door riff-raff UNCLASSIFIEDI think! Therefor I am! I think.On 05/23/13, jarheadpilot82 wrote:> > When I was in the Training Department at my current employer we put it this way-> > 1. Them that can, do.> 2. Them that can't do, teach.> 3. Them that can't teach, evaluate.> 4. Them that can't evaluate, administrate.> > --------> Semper Fi,> > Terry Hand> Athens, GA> > > > > Read this topic online here:> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 255#401255> > > > > > > UNCLASSIFIED________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Hangar door riff-raff UNCLASSIFIEDI think! Therefor I am! I think.On 05/23/13, jarheadpilot82 wrote:> > When I was in the Training Department at my current employer we put it this way-> > 1. Them that can, do.> 2. Them that can't do, teach.> 3. Them that can't teach, evaluate.> 4. Them that can't evaluate, administrate.> > --------> Semper Fi,> > Terry Hand> Athens, GA> > > > > Read this topic online here:> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 255#401255> > > > > > > UNCLASSIFIED________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: Re: Hangar door riff-raff
Original Posted By: "dgaldrich"
> > Rick,> > What Terry said. The other variable you need is the maximum angle of attack. Most of the reading I've done on the Pietenpol airfoil suggests an angle of attack at CLMax of approximately 11-12 degrees. Others may want to correct that number. But if accurate, you'd want to chalk your fuselage at approximately 17 degrees up-angle, measured at the top longeron.> > Ken> > > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 1:42 PM, jarheadpilot82 wrote:mail.com>> > Rick,> > You can find the following information in AC 90-89A, "AMATEUR-BUILT AIRCRAFT AND ULTRALIGHT FLIGHT TESTING HANDBOOK"> > Here is the link-> > http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/medi ... 90-89A.pdf> > Just so you don't have to search for the info, I have included the appropriate section below-> > Section 11. Additional Engine Tests, Paragraph 1e., Page 23> > Fuel Flow and Unusable Fuel Check: This is a field test to ensure the aircraft engine will get enough fuel to run properly, even if the aircraft is in a steep climb or stall attitude.> (1) First, place the aircraft=99s nose at an angle 5 degrees above the highest anticipated climb angle. The easiest and safest way to do this with a conventional gear aircraft is to dig a hole and place the aircraft=99s tail in it. For a nose gear aircraft, build a ramp to raise the nose gear to the proper angle.> (2) Make sure the aircraft is tied-down and chocked. With minimum fuel in the tanks, disconnect the fuel line to carburetor. The fuel flow with a gravity flow system should be 150 percent of the fuel consumption of the engine at full throttle. With a fuel system that is pressurized, the fuel flow should be at least 125 percent. When the fuel stops flowing, the remaining fuel is the =98=98unusable fuel=99=99 quantity.> (3) Since the fuel consumption of most modern engines is approximately .55 pounds per brake horsepower per hour for a 100 horsepower engine, the test fuel flow should be 82.5 pounds (13.7 gallons) per hour for gravity feed, or 68.75 pounds (11.5 gallons) per hour for a pressurized system. The pounds per hour divided by 60 equals 1.4 pounds and 1.15 pounds per minute fuel rate respectively. NOTE: Formula for fuel flow rate gravity feed is .55 x engine horsepower x 1.50 = pounds of fuel per hour divided by 60 to get pounds per minute, divided by 6 to get gallons per minute. For a pressurized system, substitute 1.25 for 1.50 to determine fuel flow rate.> > This document just gives you the logic behind the test.> > Hope it helps.> > --------> Semper Fi,> > Terry Hand> Athens, GA> > > > > Read this topic online here:> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 239#401239> > > > > > > > ==========> st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List> ==========> http://forums.matronics.com> ==========> le, List Admin.> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution> ==========> > > > > > > " rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List> et=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com> llow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution> > > ============================================================================================================================================> ________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Hangar door riff-raff
> > Rick,> > What Terry said. The other variable you need is the maximum angle of attack. Most of the reading I've done on the Pietenpol airfoil suggests an angle of attack at CLMax of approximately 11-12 degrees. Others may want to correct that number. But if accurate, you'd want to chalk your fuselage at approximately 17 degrees up-angle, measured at the top longeron.> > Ken> > > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 1:42 PM, jarheadpilot82 wrote:mail.com>> > Rick,> > You can find the following information in AC 90-89A, "AMATEUR-BUILT AIRCRAFT AND ULTRALIGHT FLIGHT TESTING HANDBOOK"> > Here is the link-> > http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/medi ... 90-89A.pdf> > Just so you don't have to search for the info, I have included the appropriate section below-> > Section 11. Additional Engine Tests, Paragraph 1e., Page 23> > Fuel Flow and Unusable Fuel Check: This is a field test to ensure the aircraft engine will get enough fuel to run properly, even if the aircraft is in a steep climb or stall attitude.> (1) First, place the aircraft=99s nose at an angle 5 degrees above the highest anticipated climb angle. The easiest and safest way to do this with a conventional gear aircraft is to dig a hole and place the aircraft=99s tail in it. For a nose gear aircraft, build a ramp to raise the nose gear to the proper angle.> (2) Make sure the aircraft is tied-down and chocked. With minimum fuel in the tanks, disconnect the fuel line to carburetor. The fuel flow with a gravity flow system should be 150 percent of the fuel consumption of the engine at full throttle. With a fuel system that is pressurized, the fuel flow should be at least 125 percent. When the fuel stops flowing, the remaining fuel is the =98=98unusable fuel=99=99 quantity.> (3) Since the fuel consumption of most modern engines is approximately .55 pounds per brake horsepower per hour for a 100 horsepower engine, the test fuel flow should be 82.5 pounds (13.7 gallons) per hour for gravity feed, or 68.75 pounds (11.5 gallons) per hour for a pressurized system. The pounds per hour divided by 60 equals 1.4 pounds and 1.15 pounds per minute fuel rate respectively. NOTE: Formula for fuel flow rate gravity feed is .55 x engine horsepower x 1.50 = pounds of fuel per hour divided by 60 to get pounds per minute, divided by 6 to get gallons per minute. For a pressurized system, substitute 1.25 for 1.50 to determine fuel flow rate.> > This document just gives you the logic behind the test.> > Hope it helps.> > --------> Semper Fi,> > Terry Hand> Athens, GA> > > > > Read this topic online here:> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 239#401239> > > > > > > > ==========> st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List> ==========> http://forums.matronics.com> ==========> le, List Admin.> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution> ==========> > > > > > > " rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List> et=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com> llow target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution> > > ============================================================================================================================================> ________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Hangar door riff-raff