Brodhead Pietenpol Association

Original Posted By: "(null) raykrause"
Way to go...looks great!--------Serve the Lord with gladness,MikeRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________

Original Posted By: Matt Dralle
Mike,I got two of the jury struts on today, but lost a couple fittings for the othertwo? Maybe my wife hid them? It's amazing what I can lose over a three year buildtime! It pays to build faster, or be more organized.I hope to have some CG numbers within a week, or so. Now that my "friend" , Scott,threw it on my shoulders! Maybe he will have to confirm my numbers beforeI publish them? Scott is the EAA Councilor for the Pietenpols. He has inspectedmine once and gave me a few pointers that I followed. He is a real sourceof great information on all things Pietenpol. When he speaks, we should all listen.He has test flown several Pietenpols for builders, if I remember correctly.Stay tuned,Ray KrauseSent from my iPad> On Nov 29, 2016, at 12:20 PM, AircamperN11MS wrote:> > > Mike,> > Ray is correct. I have flown both the "T" and "A" powered Scouts. I probablyweighed about 190 lbs when I did fly them. The "A" flew very nicely and waslike a sports car. The "T" was very under-powered and I didn't get more thanabout 20' AGL since I took off from about 2850' MSL. The "T" flew like it wastail heavy. The "A" was balanced perfectly. > > It was 20 years ago. I weighed as much as 232 lbs flying my Cont. powered Aircamper.This is not a problem. I have since lost 40 lbs and back down to the190 lb range again. My plane is much happier now.> > Ray could probably give you the best pilot weight range since he has completedthe most recent SkyScout. Yes Ray, I just threw you under the same bus. Wemay as well stick together. > > Conclusion here is that you should pay very close attention and build a lightairplane. Forrest Lovely mentioned the other day that the "A" powered Piet weighed593 lbs after he rebuilt it. This is the one I flew. You can probablybuild a Scout to work with your pilot weight. Just compute the CG multiple timesduring the build process.> > --------> Scott Liefeld> Flying N11MS since March 1972> Steel Tube> C-85-12> Wire Wheels> Brodhead in 1996> > > > > Read this topic online here:> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 508#463508> > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 09:43:29 -0800

Original Posted By: "iowaboy"
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Rebuilding plus questions about elevator cable tension*That Piet belonged to Duane Woolsey from Utah and had an autoengine---Subaru I believe. **Duane flew it all the way to Wisconsin from Utah and then sold it while itwas on the flight line**at Oshkosh. Duane and Steve Eldridge (from Provo I believe) were andprobably are still good friends. **Steve started this list years ago before Matt D. gave it a home. *On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Lostman wrote:>> Hello all,> First post here on Matronics. This summer I acquired a once beautiful> Pietenpol with some neat history. Sadly it was involved in some sore of> accident but no real story behind it. I was basically a basket case of> parts with a good set of wings and a fuselage that needed some wood repair.> Luckily after a very thorough inventory and a lot of time looking over> things I found I have an extremely well built aircraft. It also seems it> won an award at Oshkosk in 1999 after attending Brodhead. I'll try to work> on posting up a rebuild thread later.>> However right now I have one very elusive question. How tight should the> rigging be on the elevator control cables? I've searched all through the> site and all over the internet and haven't found anything. After hooking up> all cables to check over everything I found that the stick is VERY heavy. I> loosened up the cables some but then I seem to have enough slack that it> worries me. However the stick pressure is much better than before. Anyone> have any suggestions for me on this one?>> I've attached a picture of what the plane looked like back in 1999. It> will be very similar once rebuilt. Thanks for any suggestions.> Kenneth>> --------> I'm an airplane addict. I own a Teenie Two, remnants of an Avid, a KR2,> hang glider and paraglider as well as my 1997 Pietenpol Air Camper. As a> CFII/MEI I love sharing the gift of flight with just about anyone that will> fly with me.>>> Read this topic online here:>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 100#463100>>> Attachments:>> http://forums.matronics.com//files/old_ ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Sky Scout

Original Posted By: Glen Schweizer
Glen,That is a lot more wing to build but a neat plane! I hope you post some photos so we can see it.Mike Townsleyglen wrote:> I'm building Chad willie's biplane version(originally a field mod). I widenedmy fus to 30". It'll have about 250square feet of wing surface. Lift,anyone?additionalfus and center section weight penalty about 7pounds> > > > On Nov 29, 2016, at 8:09 AM, Steven Dortch wrote:> > > > Mike, the plane was designed by Mr Pietenpol for 1930s guys when the averagesize was around 150-160 pounds. in the 1950s it increased to 170 and now theFAA says an average male is 191. > > > > The plane will certainly fly with you in it weight wise, but The Air Camperhas about a foot longer wing span and can handle bigger engines. The list evenhas a builder who is really big and he is building a single seat Air Camper.> > > > > > You might consider the long fuselage. and some of the other modificationsfor bigger guys. My cockpit is the short fuselage and at 5'7" it is not overlylarge. > > > > -- > > Blue Skies,> > Steve D> > > > > --------Serve the Lord with gladness,MikeRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________

Original Posted By: "iowaboy"
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Sky Scoutyes LOTS OF RIBS lots of turnbuckles for a bipe too. I can only imagine the noiseof the wind through all that wire. Lot different than my Cessna Different chord on bottom wing. 75% of top wing which is normal pietenpol. Funproject so far I do auto restoration and build street rods for a living so a more vintagestyle suits me. Speaking of vintage, I got a call from a EEA friend about anopportunity at his workplace. I walked into the shop... a stack of wing ribs,spars wings in various stages of completion, a round engine in a corner on astand another over there. Long story short: I get to build airplanes for a living,Stearman biplanes. So much for retirement next spring! KEEP BUILDING, FLYINGAND LET PEOPLE KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING ya never know...> On Nov 30, 2016, at 5:37 PM, iowaboy wrote:> > > Glen,> That is a lot more wing to build but a neat plane! > I hope you post some photos so we can see it.> Mike Townsley> > > glen wrote:>> I'm building Chad willie's biplane version(originally a field mod). I widenedmy fus to 30". It'll have about 250square feet of wing surface. Lift,anyone?additionalfus and center section weight penalty about 7pounds>> >> >>> On Nov 29, 2016, at 8:09 AM, Steven Dortch wrote:>>> >>> Mike, the plane was designed by Mr Pietenpol for 1930s guys when the averagesize was around 150-160 pounds. in the 1950s it increased to 170 and now theFAA says an average male is 191. >>> >>> The plane will certainly fly with you in it weight wise, but The Air Camperhas about a foot longer wing span and can handle bigger engines. The list evenhas a builder who is really big and he is building a single seat Air Camper.>>> >>> >>> You might consider the long fuselage. and some of the other modifications forbigger guys. My cockpit is the short fuselage and at 5'7" it is not overlylarge. >>> >>> -- >>> Blue Skies,>>> Steve D>>> >>> >> > > > --------> Serve the Lord with gladness,> Mike> > > > > Read this topic online here:> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 605#463605> > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Sky Scout

Original Posted By: Comcast
Help,OK, guys. As expected, my SkyScout is a little tail heavy with the wood prop. Imay be able to fix that if I go with a metal prop on the A-65. What size haveyou folks with the A-65 been using? My A-65 is newly overhauled and should bepretty strong running. The empty weight is now 646 lbs, with the wood prop....maybe15-20 lbs more with the metal prop. Remember, it is just a one-holer!The engine has the tapered shaft, if that makes any difference?Anyone with a good metal prop of the right size for sale?I would appreciate any help!Thanks,Ray KrauseSent from my iPad> On Nov 29, 2016, at 8:30 PM, (null) raykrause wrote:> > Mike,> > I got two of the jury struts on today, but lost a couple fittings for the othertwo? Maybe my wife hid them? It's amazing what I can lose over a three yearbuild time! It pays to build faster, or be more organized.> > I hope to have some CG numbers within a week, or so. Now that my "friend" , Scott,threw it on my shoulders! Maybe he will have to confirm my numbers beforeI publish them? Scott is the EAA Councilor for the Pietenpols. He has inspectedmine once and gave me a few pointers that I followed. He is a real sourceof great information on all things Pietenpol. When he speaks, we should alllisten. He has test flown several Pietenpols for builders, if I remember correctly.> > Stay tuned,> > Ray Krause> > Sent from my iPad> >> On Nov 29, 2016, at 12:20 PM, AircamperN11MS wrote:>> >> >> Mike,>> >> Ray is correct. I have flown both the "T" and "A" powered Scouts. I probablyweighed about 190 lbs when I did fly them. The "A" flew very nicely and waslike a sports car. The "T" was very under-powered and I didn't get more thanabout 20' AGL since I took off from about 2850' MSL. The "T" flew like it wastail heavy. The "A" was balanced perfectly. >> >> It was 20 years ago. I weighed as much as 232 lbs flying my Cont. powered Aircamper.This is not a problem. I have since lost 40 lbs and back down to the190 lb range again. My plane is much happier now.>> >> Ray could probably give you the best pilot weight range since he has completedthe most recent SkyScout. Yes Ray, I just threw you under the same bus. Wemay as well stick together. >> >> Conclusion here is that you should pay very close attention and build a lightairplane. Forrest Lovely mentioned the other day that the "A" powered Pietweighed 593 lbs after he rebuilt it. This is the one I flew. You can probablybuild a Scout to work with your pilot weight. Just compute the CG multiple timesduring the build process.>> >> -------->> Scott Liefeld>> Flying N11MS since March 1972>> Steel Tube>> C-85-12>> Wire Wheels>> Brodhead in 1996>> >> >> >> >> Read this topic online here:>> >> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... 508#463508>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > ________________________________________________________________________________

Original Posted By: "tools"
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Sky ScoutI'm just thinking outside the box. I'm a Piet wanna be. FWI, if engine performance is what is desired with the prop you have, adding weightby changing props would alter 2 items weight on the nose and thrust performance.(??)Could you trial the balance concern with weights opposed to the actual prop?Just a thought!- Rich________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Sky Scout

Original Posted By: "(null) raykrause"
My a65 was super anemic with a sensenich 72x42 wood prop, which is generally goodfor most folks. Only turned 1900 static. Put a metal sensenich 72x44 andit flies like a totally different, and better, plane. Turns 2350 static.Props and engines seem to be very individual... But that's what worked for me.ToolsRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________

Original Posted By: "Clif Dawson"
Thanks for the thoughts. I'm in the process of adding and moving weights around. I have some barbel weights with a hole that actually fits over the shaft that sticks through the propeller. If I get time, I will do that this afternoon. I like the advise to add weight ti the firewall rather than change props.I knew I would be close on the W/B, as calculated before covering the plane. So the wing is slanted back 5.5". But on the Scout, that makes the leading edge about even with the firewall! So adding weight to the firewall may not do much good. Adding weight to the front of the engine (the prop) would really help. This is an interesting problem! Maybe I'm not doing this correctly?RaySent from my iPad> On Dec 11, 2016, at 6:27 AM, Comcast wrote:> > > I'm just thinking outside the box. > > I'm a Piet wanna be. > > FWI, if engine performance is what is desired with the prop you have, adding weight by changing props would alter 2 items weight on the nose and thrust performance. (??)> > Could you trial the balance concern with weights opposed to the actual prop?> > Just a thought!> > - Rich> ==================================================================================================================================================================================================================> > > ________________________________________________________________________________

Original Posted By: Steven Dortch
Just make one of those round "bullet" spinners from heavy metaland bolt it to your prop hub.ClifI will beg you for advice, your reply will be concise, and I will listen very nicelyand then go out and do exactly what I want. So adding weight to the firewall may not do much good. Adding weight to the front of the engine (the prop) would really help. This is an interesting problem! Maybe I'm not doing this correctly?Ray--------------------------------------------------------------------------------________________________________________________________________________________

Original Posted By: "(null) raykrause"
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Sky ScoutAdd lightness tot he rear of the plane. Make sure you have used theshortest screws you can in the tail section. Take the extra links off ofyour chains on the tailwheel. It will take pounds up front to make up forounces back near the tail.What about personal weight loss? (That is what I need to do. 20 poundswould be the easiet!) Take out the rear seat pads. move any radios forwardand use a remote?Can you: add a starter? Alternator? Mount a Faux machinegun up front? mounta battery as far forward as possible. Use more and heavier weight oil? Usea spinner that looks like a machinegun? make the Cowling as fancy andheavier as you want? Add a cockpit heat system to the exhaust? Or even makea place to add lead weights to the front of the motor or motor mounts. Thissounds like a great excuse to put on a bigger engine with all the geegaws.As a light infantryman, we carried everything on our back. We always threwthe joker out of the deck. We also cut the cards in half. I cut my sleepingpat down to 10 inches wide and 4 ft long. Just enough to be under my bodyand nothing else. If we could snuggle and it was not too cold we did nottake a sleeping bag, but carried a very light poncho liner. My point ismake sure you SAFELY add lightness to the rear as much as possible beforeyou put weight up front.Blue Skies,Steve D.On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 9:43 PM, Clif Dawson wrote:> Just make one of those round "bullet" spinners from heavy metal> and bolt it to your prop hub.>> Clif> I will beg you for advice, your reply will be concise, and I will listen> very nicely> and then go out and do exactly what I want. >>> So adding weight to the firewall may not do much good. Adding weight to> the front of the engine (the prop) would really help. This is an> interesting problem! Maybe I'm not doing this correctly?>> Ray>>> ------------------------------------------------------------> -------------------->>-- Blue Skies,Steve D________________________________________________________________________________

Original Posted By: "iowaboy"
Well, I fear that I have created more heat than light in this thread. I am almostsorry to have even shared it. My only goal was to point out what was likelya contributing factor in the final outcome of this accident. And how it mightaffect all of us builders and flyers if we make similar choices. Nothing more.I sense that there are some forum members that are upset that this has been broughtup before any final report. Neither I, nor the original writer, are accusinga man that was by all accounts, a great pilot and a great human being of anythingother than being human. The point of the thread was to emphasize thatwe all need to think of our choices as we build and how they can affect us ina worst case scenario.FWIW, whether it was 3 feet of prop or only 30 inches of the leading edge, I canonly imagine that the assymetrical loads of that extremely unbalanced prop madefor a wild ride in that final descent.--------Semper Fi,Terry HandAthens, GARead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Sky Scout

Original Posted By: "(null) raykrause"
A suggestion would be to make a new motor mount that would be longer so you wouldmove the weight of the engine and prop forward to help you weight and balance???This way you don't add that much weight to the plane.Now maybe that is not a good idea? I have heard of others who had other designswho did this to help weight and balance.Mike In Iowa--------Serve the Lord with gladness,MikeRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________

Original Posted By: "taildrags"
Vincent: the EAA's "Wood Book" is a great place to read about woodworking techniquesincluding laminating, gluing, clamping, scarfing, and much more. If youcan wait, I'll be going to Salem on Jan. 10 and can take you my copy of the book...it's just sitting on my shelf and I'd be happy to loan it to you. If you'rein more of a hurry than that, I'll also be happy to pop it in the mail toyou if you'll give me your address. I'm in Medford but I go to Salem once amonth for engineering board meetings.--------Oscar ZunigaMedford, ORAir Camper NX41CC "Scout"A75 power, 72x36 Culver propRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Sky Scout

Original Posted By: Mike Lund
>> Subject: Sky Scout>>>>>> >Gentlemen,>> >>> >Since I am not on the way to Broadhead I am viewing the flying clips on>> the>> >Pietenpol website. Maybe next year I can make it.>> >>> >I have been building a Sky Scout for a couple of years and am about 50%>> >finished with the fuselage. I haven't started the wings yet but thetail>> >feathers are nearly complete.>> >>> >I am building per the plans but I think this is somewhat of a misnomer>> since>> >the plans have many mistakes/typos. Would anyone be interested in>> compiling>> >a list of these inaccuracies for both the Sky Scout and Aircamper. Ican>> >contribute many for the Sky Scout.>> >>> >I hope to have the fuse. on the gear soon. Then I can put the ply onthe>> >sides, remount the model A engine (not yet rebuilt), and sit in it in my>> >back yard and make airplane noises. Since I live in a rural community,I>> >figure I can get away with this for several hours before the men inwhite>> >coats show up.>> >>> >I have many questions, but also many tricks and helpful tips that I have>> >learned along the way if anyone is interested. I do not have any>> expensive>> >tools so I have learned to use what I call "poor mans accuracy".>> >>> >I have something that I can share. I have taken all of the back issues>> of>> >the BHP Newsletter and compiled a list of tips etc. that pertain to the>> Sky>> >Scout. These are in a "Word" document. When I am working on the rudder>> for>> >example, I can use the search function (Find/Replace) and it searches my>> >document and stops at every mention of the word "rudder" where therewill>> be>> >a brief description and the Issue and page number to go to in the>> >newsletter.>> >>> >I did this because I knew that I had seen a "tip" that was applicable,>> but>> I>> >could not find it without looking through all of the back issues. My>> crude>> >explanation does not do it justice but I have found it very helpful. If>> >anyone is interested I can email the Word document.>> >>> >Remember that I only noted things that pertained to the Sky Scout, but>> each>> >person could add items that may pertain to their project.>> >>> >Sincerely,>> >>> > Distribution Design Specialist>> > * Lucent Technologies, Inc.>> > *Tel: 404.814.6950>> > *Fax: 404.814.6968>> > * rbl1(at)lucent.com>> >>> >>>>________________________________________________________________________________

Original Posted By: ArkiesAir(at)aol.com
>>> Subject: Sky Scout>>>>>>>>> >Gentlemen,>>> >>>> >Since I am not on the way to Broadhead I am viewing the flying clips on>>> the>>> >Pietenpol website. Maybe next year I can make it.>>> >>>> >I have been building a Sky Scout for a couple of years and am about 50%>>> >finished with the fuselage. I haven't started the wings yet but the>tail>>> >feathers are nearly complete.>>> >>>> >I am building per the plans but I think this is somewhat of a misnomer>>> since>>> >the plans have many mistakes/typos. Would anyone be interested in>>> compiling>>> >a list of these inaccuracies for both the Sky Scout and Aircamper. I>can>>> >contribute many for the Sky Scout.>>> >>>> >I hope to have the fuse. on the gear soon. Then I can put the ply on>the>>> >sides, remount the model A engine (not yet rebuilt), and sit in it inmy>>> >back yard and make airplane noises. Since I live in a rural community,>I>>> >figure I can get away with this for several hours before the men in>white>>> >coats show up.>>> >>>> >I have many questions, but also many tricks and helpful tips that Ihave>>> >learned along the way if anyone is interested. I do not have any>>> expensive>>> >tools so I have learned to use what I call "poor mans accuracy".>>> >>>> >I have something that I can share. I have taken all of the back issues>>> of>>> >the BHP Newsletter and compiled a list of tips etc. that pertain to the>>> Sky>>> >Scout. These are in a "Word" document. When I am working on therudder>>> for>>> >example, I can use the search function (Find/Replace) and it searchesmy>>> >document and stops at every mention of the word "rudder" where there>will>>> be>>> >a brief description and the Issue and page number to go to in the>>> >newsletter.>>> >>>> >I did this because I knew that I had seen a "tip" that was applicable,>>> but>>> I>>> >could not find it without looking through all of the back issues. My>>> crude>>> >explanation does not do it justice but I have found it very helpful.If>>> >anyone is interested I can email the Word document.>>> >>>> >Remember that I only noted things that pertained to the Sky Scout, but>>> each>>> >person could add items that may pertain to their project.>>> >>>> >Sincerely,>>> >>>> > Distribution Design Specialist>>> > * Lucent Technologies, Inc.>>> > *Tel: 404.814.6950>>> > *Fax: 404.814.6968>>> > * rbl1(at)lucent.com>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>________________________________________________________________________________