Original Posted By: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Wing PositionI've always been curious...Has anyone ever heard of a Pietenpol with the wing moved FORWARD from vertical, for a nose heavy condition ???Chuck G.________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: Wing Position
Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing Position
Original Posted By: "Don Emch"
For those flying I would like to enlist your help. I'm doing someguestimating regarding control setup, weight and balance, etc. Could youshare your wing position, IE 3" aft vertical and also your fuselage size andengine type? I'm also utilizing the recent articles in the Associationnewsletter.Thank you very much!JackDSM________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing Position
For those flying I would like to enlist your help. I'm doing someguestimating regarding control setup, weight and balance, etc. Could youshare your wing position, IE 3" aft vertical and also your fuselage size andengine type? I'm also utilizing the recent articles in the Associationnewsletter.Thank you very much!JackDSM________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing Position
Original Posted By: "Jack Phillips"
Hi Jack,I built the long fuselage. Axle is 1" forward, cabanes are 2" longer, and wingis positioned back 3 1/2", as per the Pietenpols' recommendations. I put thetank in the nose, 14.5 gallons. If you keep the tail very light and use a smalltailwheel you shouldn't have any trouble with c.g.Don EmchNX899DERead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Hi Jack,I built the long fuselage. Axle is 1" forward, cabanes are 2" longer, and wingis positioned back 3 1/2", as per the Pietenpols' recommendations. I put thetank in the nose, 14.5 gallons. If you keep the tail very light and use a smalltailwheel you shouldn't have any trouble with c.g.Don EmchNX899DERead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing Position
Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Hi Jack,Mine is the long fuselage. Cabanes are 2-1/2" longer and the wing is 3-3/4"aft of vertical. Centersection tank, small (4") tailwheel). A65Continental.Jack PhillipsNX899JP "Icarus Plummet"Raleigh, NC-----Original Message-----
Hi Jack,Mine is the long fuselage. Cabanes are 2-1/2" longer and the wing is 3-3/4"aft of vertical. Centersection tank, small (4") tailwheel). A65Continental.Jack PhillipsNX899JP "Icarus Plummet"Raleigh, NC-----Original Message-----
Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing Position
Original Posted By: Ben Charvet
RE: Pietenpol-List: Wing Position
Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Very helpful guys, I will note in a spreadsheet and share. Anyone else thatcan contribute please do. Don is your engine an A65?Thanks again!Jack _____
Very helpful guys, I will note in a spreadsheet and share. Anyone else thatcan contribute please do. Don is your engine an A65?Thanks again!Jack _____
Pietenpol-List: Wing Position
Original Posted By: airlion
Re: Pietenpol-List: Wing Position
Original Posted By: Jack
Wing PositionHi Jack,NX18235 is a long fuselage with an A-65. Cabanes are 2" longer than plans and the wing is 3 1/2" aft. Motor mount built to plans. 14 gallons of fuel in the center section. Axle is 20" aft of the firewall. Tailskid and no brakes.Greg Cardinal ----- Original Message -----
Wing PositionHi Jack,NX18235 is a long fuselage with an A-65. Cabanes are 2" longer than plans and the wing is 3 1/2" aft. Motor mount built to plans. 14 gallons of fuel in the center section. Axle is 20" aft of the firewall. Tailskid and no brakes.Greg Cardinal ----- Original Message -----
Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing Position
Original Posted By: "aerocarjake"
Greg,How did you tie in your 36" center section to the fuselage...? I am consideringa wider center section as well to hold more fuel for my thirsty ROTEC engine.......--------Jake Schultz - curator,Newport Way Air Museum (OK, it's just my home)Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing Position
Greg,How did you tie in your 36" center section to the fuselage...? I am consideringa wider center section as well to hold more fuel for my thirsty ROTEC engine.......--------Jake Schultz - curator,Newport Way Air Museum (OK, it's just my home)Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing Position
Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing Position
Original Posted By: "Piet2112"
Ooops.... correction, Gardiner not Greg. P.s. REALLY sad to see the Sun 'n fun situation......--------Jake Schultz - curator,Newport Way Air Museum (OK, it's just my home)Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing Position
Ooops.... correction, Gardiner not Greg. P.s. REALLY sad to see the Sun 'n fun situation......--------Jake Schultz - curator,Newport Way Air Museum (OK, it's just my home)Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing Position
Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing Position
Original Posted By: "Billy McCaskill"
I know a wooden propeller looks great on the Piet, but I'm curious a metalprop's efficiency is enough to counter act the extra weight of the prop. The only reason I ask, is because the extra 12 or so pounds at the forwardmost part of the airplane might help keep the c.g. within limits withoutmoving the wing. Cost might be the biggest disadvantage at three timesthat of a wooden one though. Has anyone calculated how much ballast wouldbe required to keep the cabanes vertical using the a continental or corvair?Curt MerdanFlower Mound, TXRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing Position
I know a wooden propeller looks great on the Piet, but I'm curious a metalprop's efficiency is enough to counter act the extra weight of the prop. The only reason I ask, is because the extra 12 or so pounds at the forwardmost part of the airplane might help keep the c.g. within limits withoutmoving the wing. Cost might be the biggest disadvantage at three timesthat of a wooden one though. Has anyone calculated how much ballast wouldbe required to keep the cabanes vertical using the a continental or corvair?Curt MerdanFlower Mound, TXRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing Position
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing Position
Original Posted By: Ryan Mueller
Curt, from what I know of the Corvair, I don't think that metal props are recommendeddue to the increased loads imposed on the crankshaft. If you are evenconsidering a metal prop on a Corvair, I think that the 5th bearing is a MANDATORYaddition to the engine. As we all know, the Corvair cranks are susceptibleto breaking, and all of the incidents that I know about have happened whenusing wood props which weigh much less than metal props. If you are intent onkeeping the cabanes vertical, then consider moving the firewall forward an inchor two, building the engine mount a little bit longer, and definitely keepthe tail end as light as possible as you build.--------Billy McCaskillUrbana, ILtail section almost done, starting on ribs soonRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2011 12:45:50 -0500Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing Position
Curt, from what I know of the Corvair, I don't think that metal props are recommendeddue to the increased loads imposed on the crankshaft. If you are evenconsidering a metal prop on a Corvair, I think that the 5th bearing is a MANDATORYaddition to the engine. As we all know, the Corvair cranks are susceptibleto breaking, and all of the incidents that I know about have happened whenusing wood props which weigh much less than metal props. If you are intent onkeeping the cabanes vertical, then consider moving the firewall forward an inchor two, building the engine mount a little bit longer, and definitely keepthe tail end as light as possible as you build.--------Billy McCaskillUrbana, ILtail section almost done, starting on ribs soonRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2011 12:45:50 -0500Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing Position
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing Position
Original Posted By: "aerocarjake"
Jake, I would make the butt strap that joins the center section to the wing panel the same except don't weld the other part of the assembly to it. Make the vertical parts of the 'U' shaped piece square across the top and add another AN4 bolt above the one that's already called for and assemble the assembly directly above the top longeron of the fuselage. Clear as mud? Chuck----- Original Message -----
Jake, I would make the butt strap that joins the center section to the wing panel the same except don't weld the other part of the assembly to it. Make the vertical parts of the 'U' shaped piece square across the top and add another AN4 bolt above the one that's already called for and assemble the assembly directly above the top longeron of the fuselage. Clear as mud? Chuck----- Original Message -----
Re: Pietenpol-List: Wing Position
Original Posted By: Jack
Hi Jack,NX929DH. Short fuse, Straight up and down cabanes, Model A, pilot weight 150. Ended up nose heavy. I twisted the outboard LE of the horizontal stab down to compensate. It worked but it still bugs me. As much as I hate to add weight, I think at some point in time I will add (experiment) some weight inside the fuse at the tail end to try to solve the problem. "They" say that an airplane balanced close to the aft CG range is a better flyer. I believe "them". Dan HelsperPuryear, TN (but tomorrow I am driving up to Poplar Grove so I can fly my Sedan back down here. :O) ............I hate being without an airplane. -----Original Message-----
Hi Jack,NX929DH. Short fuse, Straight up and down cabanes, Model A, pilot weight 150. Ended up nose heavy. I twisted the outboard LE of the horizontal stab down to compensate. It worked but it still bugs me. As much as I hate to add weight, I think at some point in time I will add (experiment) some weight inside the fuse at the tail end to try to solve the problem. "They" say that an airplane balanced close to the aft CG range is a better flyer. I believe "them". Dan HelsperPuryear, TN (but tomorrow I am driving up to Poplar Grove so I can fly my Sedan back down here. :O) ............I hate being without an airplane. -----Original Message-----
Pietenpol-List: Wing Position
Original Posted By: airlion
Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing Position
Original Posted By: "Chris"
Jack,Yes I do have an A-65.Don EmchNX899DERead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Jack,Yes I do have an A-65.Don EmchNX899DERead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
RE: Pietenpol-List: Wing Position
Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
This is some great information for us builders. Remember to include one moreimportant point of information, where is your CG at max weight.ChrisSacramento, CaWestcoastpiet.com _____
This is some great information for us builders. Remember to include one moreimportant point of information, where is your CG at max weight.ChrisSacramento, CaWestcoastpiet.com _____
Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing Position
Original Posted By: "Clif Dawson"
Thanks Chuck.... I believe u understand...... that method is better than cabinetstruts that splay outward - way too Waco...(ha!)--------Jake Schultz - curator,Newport Way Air Museum (OK, it's just my home)Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Thanks Chuck.... I believe u understand...... that method is better than cabinetstruts that splay outward - way too Waco...(ha!)--------Jake Schultz - curator,Newport Way Air Museum (OK, it's just my home)Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing Position
Original Posted By: "Jack Phillips"
If they're splayed out it's not a Pietenpol! :-)Clif> >> Thanks Chuck.... I believe u understand...... that method is better than > cabinet struts that splay outward - way too Waco...(ha!)________________________________________________________________________________
If they're splayed out it's not a Pietenpol! :-)Clif> >> Thanks Chuck.... I believe u understand...... that method is better than > cabinet struts that splay outward - way too Waco...(ha!)________________________________________________________________________________
RE: Pietenpol-List: Wing Position
Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
For mine, at gross weight with pilot, passenger and full fuel my CG is34.67% of the chord of the wing, or 21" aft of the leading edge of the wing.Since my wing leading edge is 16.5" aft of the firewall, this puts my CG atgross weight (90 lbs of fuel, 200 lbs of me and a 170 lb passenger) at 37.5"aft of the firewall. My axle (straight axle, 21" wire wheels) is 19.5" aftof the firewall. Empty weight is 739.5 lbs.Jack PhillipsNX899JP "Icarus Plummet"Raleigh, NC _____
For mine, at gross weight with pilot, passenger and full fuel my CG is34.67% of the chord of the wing, or 21" aft of the leading edge of the wing.Since my wing leading edge is 16.5" aft of the firewall, this puts my CG atgross weight (90 lbs of fuel, 200 lbs of me and a 170 lb passenger) at 37.5"aft of the firewall. My axle (straight axle, 21" wire wheels) is 19.5" aftof the firewall. Empty weight is 739.5 lbs.Jack PhillipsNX899JP "Icarus Plummet"Raleigh, NC _____
Pietenpol-List: Wing Position
Original Posted By: Michael Perez
RE: Pietenpol-List: Speaking of Wing Sweep and CG
Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
It depends on the airfoil, but generally the CG should be somewhere between25% and 33% of the wing chord. Pietenpols seems to be able to handle a moreaft CG than other airfoils, but I would be very leery of flying one with aCG any further aft than about 35%.CG too far aft makes the airplane divergent in stability, meaning that ifthe plane pitches up, it will tend to keep pitching further nose up, ratherthan tending to ease the nose down, as a stable airplane would do. This canquickly lead to loss of control and entering a non-recoverable spin. Notgood.CG too far forward can make it impossible to flare for landing, or even toget the nose up enough to climb. Also not good.Before setting up your test program for your Pietenpol, I strongly recommendreading the book "Flight Testing Homebuilt Aircraft", by Vaughan Askue.http://www.actechbooks.com/products/act226/Jack PhillipsNX899JP "Icarus Plummet"Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia _____
It depends on the airfoil, but generally the CG should be somewhere between25% and 33% of the wing chord. Pietenpols seems to be able to handle a moreaft CG than other airfoils, but I would be very leery of flying one with aCG any further aft than about 35%.CG too far aft makes the airplane divergent in stability, meaning that ifthe plane pitches up, it will tend to keep pitching further nose up, ratherthan tending to ease the nose down, as a stable airplane would do. This canquickly lead to loss of control and entering a non-recoverable spin. Notgood.CG too far forward can make it impossible to flare for landing, or even toget the nose up enough to climb. Also not good.Before setting up your test program for your Pietenpol, I strongly recommendreading the book "Flight Testing Homebuilt Aircraft", by Vaughan Askue.http://www.actechbooks.com/products/act226/Jack PhillipsNX899JP "Icarus Plummet"Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia _____
Re: Pietenpol-List: Speaking of Wing Sweep and CG
Original Posted By: Ryan Mueller
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Speaking of Wing Sweep and CG
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Speaking of Wing Sweep and CG
RE: Pietenpol-List: Speaking of Wing Sweep and CG
Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
20" aft, with a 60" chord (my chord is 60.5" due to the type of trailingedge I put on), would be 33%. 15" would be 25%. Those are pretty typicalnumbers for most airfoils.With my CG at 34.6% of chord, I would definitely not try to spin mine, butit flies well, with no divergent qualities. Stalls are straightforward,with a fairly sharp break (due to the tight radius of the leading edge onthe Pietenpol airfoil) and a slight tendency to drop a wing. It is stablein pitch.Jack PhillipsNX899JP "Icarus Plummet"Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia _____
20" aft, with a 60" chord (my chord is 60.5" due to the type of trailingedge I put on), would be 33%. 15" would be 25%. Those are pretty typicalnumbers for most airfoils.With my CG at 34.6% of chord, I would definitely not try to spin mine, butit flies well, with no divergent qualities. Stalls are straightforward,with a fairly sharp break (due to the tight radius of the leading edge onthe Pietenpol airfoil) and a slight tendency to drop a wing. It is stablein pitch.Jack PhillipsNX899JP "Icarus Plummet"Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia _____
Re: Pietenpol-List: Speaking of Wing Sweep and CG
Original Posted By: KM Heide CPO/FAAOP
RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wing Position
Original Posted By: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
Gardiner,Sorry for the demise of your Piet. My question is when you rebuild willyou do it again just the same, or will you make any changes? I am also a200lb pilot.BrianSLC-UT-----Original Message-----
Gardiner,Sorry for the demise of your Piet. My question is when you rebuild willyou do it again just the same, or will you make any changes? I am also a200lb pilot.BrianSLC-UT-----Original Message-----