Zenith601-List Archive Browser

Zenith601-Archive.digest.vol-ar
July 11, 2011 - October 17, 2011

year for you (???). Any thoughts on flying out next year? BTW, took me ~11 years to finish my 601HDS. I thought it was funny that you hinted that 6 years was a 'long time'. For me, you are Mr. Speedy ;-) I'm still trying to figure out how I managed to take a '400 hour' build time and stretch it to 11 years!!! Don -----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Paul Mulwitz
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2011 11:11 AM
Subject: Re: First Flight.
Thanks, Don. That sounds like good advice. When I had non-pilots try to fly the Tecnam I had I told them it was a 2 finger airplane. That tended to work quite well. I'm sure I will be fine with a few more hours. I am just paying the price now for not getting a checkout before flying my own plane. It was unreasonable for me to think I could just jump in and fly it like I was born in it. I don't feel like I had any safety issues to fix, just a lack of perfection on the first try. Paul On 7/11/2011 11:02 AM, Don Honabach wrote: > Paul, > >>> >> I found it difficult to hold the Zodiac in the exact attitude I wanted. > On my 601HDS, I found that it was sensitive to altitude changes as well. One thing I noticed is that the stick is very easy to bias with your hand. In all fair weather cases, whenever altitude hold is an issue for me, I always find that I'm pushing or pulling the stick and not noticing since the controls are so light. I've eventually found that steering with my hand holding the bottom part of the Y leads to super easy altitude holds, as does just using my finger tips ... > > Congrats on your first flight!!! > > Don ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 11, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: First Flight.
Hi Don, I am indeed going to Oshkosh this year. I will not be flying my Zodiac there. I'm taking Delta Airlines to Appleton. My Zodiac will probably be ready to fly to OSH next year, but I'm not sure I will. It is around 2500 miles each way. That is a big trip in a seat that fits more like a suit of clothes than a lounge chair. I originally decided to go because I had a lunch date with Sabrina, but she seems to be mad at me about something or other and is giving me the teenaged-girl cold shoulder. I guess I'll have to find other folks to have lunch with. I signed up for the electric symposium again. I went to the one last year and didn't learn much of value for a home builder considering building an electric powered plane. Perhaps this year's effort will be more on target. At last year's symposium I did get talked into joining the ASTM F37 committee which deals with LSA standards. That has been interesting - to say the least. I'll be accessing email in the evenings while at OSH, so if anybody wants to get together for lunch (or to beat me up for all my transgressions over the last few years) then email is the way to contact me. I also ordered tickets for the Heintz dinner Wednesday night but I'm not sure I will have the nerve to go. Perhaps if I find some body armor to wear . . . Paul Camas, WA On 7/11/2011 11:26 AM, Don Honabach wrote: > Hey Paul, > > Where are you based? Probably too close to do your 40 hours and go to Oshkosh this year for you (???). Any thoughts on flying out next year? > > BTW, took me ~11 years to finish my 601HDS. I thought it was funny that you hinted that 6 years was a 'long time'. For me, you are Mr. Speedy;-) I'm still trying to figure out how I managed to take a '400 hour' build time and stretch it to 11 years!!! > > Don ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Afterfxllc(at)aol.com
Date: Jul 11, 2011
Subject: Re: Gear
It also wouldn't change the CG of the aircraft by much at all. It does help rotate the aircraft for take-off but the actual CG in flight would remain the same or am I missing something? I had an airplane I did the upgrade to that had a 2 inch spacer on the nose gear and when I did the weight and balance I checked it with the nose high (with spacer) weight on the ground and then leveled it and weighed it again for the true cg and what I found was the 2 inch spacer on the ground shifted the CG 65 lbs aft but when leveled the 65 lbs shifted forward. But what this did was allow the pilot to hold the nose off better than I had seen on any 601 yet. The point is the spacer has no effect after the plane is airborne but a big effect on the ground. jeff In a message dated 7/11/2011 2:09:13 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, psm(at)att.net writes: Hi Bobby, I'm confused. I thought the flat side forward moves the wheels forward. That way the wheels are closer to the CG and raising the nose should be easier. Did I miss something? I appreciate your story. Which engine do you have? Paul On 7/11/2011 7:42 AM, _BobbyPaulk(at)comcast.net_ (mailto:BobbyPaulk(at)comcast.net) wrote: Paul I built my 601 with the gear flat side forward. The CG was o.k. normally but with a passenger and light fuel the CG would go to far aft. ( you might check that on your A/C ). CG goes aft as fuel is burned. With a 200 pounder in the right seat I would have to land with about 14 gal. of fuel to stay in range. I also did not like having to get over 50 mph before lifting the nose. The nose would also slam down with the CG forward ( full fuel ). I turned it around and it made all the difference in the world. I can hold the nose off on landing, raise it on T.O. and let the plane fly itself off when it gets ready. The CG is also better - I can not aft load it out of range without going over gross - which I do not do. The prototype photos in our kit showed the gear flat side forward so that is how we installed it on two aircraft. We both have turned them around when doing the "B mod". much, much better. Bobby 120.4 hrs. 601 "B" 3300 Jab. (http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List) (http://www.matronics.com/contribution) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Craig Payne" <craig(at)craigandjean.com>
Subject: First Flight.
Date: Jul 11, 2011
Paul, go to the dinner (I am). People are much friendlier in person than on the Internet. -- Craig ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <paulrod36(at)msn.com>
Subject: Re: First Flight.
Date: Jul 11, 2011
In my self-preservation mode, I want to say that I also will be there, wearing a bright orange vest, emblazoned "I AM NOT PAUL MULWITZ, please do not pelt me with rotten fruit!" emblazoned on front, back, and shoulder patches. Seriously, Oshkosh is a mellow thing, and, best thing, a great opportunity to get detailed verbal and thorough information on how somebody mastered that *&^%$#part that just won't fit right, or how some ad lib engineering made something better. Also, good for motivation when you start thinking "Zenith one, me, zero". Paul R ----- Original Message ----- From: Paul Mulwitz<mailto:psm(at)att.net> To: zenith601-list(at)matronics.com Sent: Monday, July 11, 2011 1:58 PM Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: First Flight. > Hi Don, I am indeed going to Oshkosh this year. I will not be flying my Zodiac there. I'm taking Delta Airlines to Appleton. My Zodiac will probably be ready to fly to OSH next year, but I'm not sure I will. It is around 2500 miles each way. That is a big trip in a seat that fits more like a suit of clothes than a lounge chair. I originally decided to go because I had a lunch date with Sabrina, but she seems to be mad at me about something or other and is giving me the teenaged-girl cold shoulder. I guess I'll have to find other folks to have lunch with. I signed up for the electric symposium again. I went to the one last year and didn't learn much of value for a home builder considering building an electric powered plane. Perhaps this year's effort will be more on target. At last year's symposium I did get talked into joining the ASTM F37 committee which deals with LSA standards. That has been interesting - to say the least. I'll be accessing email in the evenings while at OSH, so if anybody wants to get together for lunch (or to beat me up for all my transgressions over the last few years) then email is the way to contact me. I also ordered tickets for the Heintz dinner Wednesday night but I'm not sure I will have the nerve to go. Perhaps if I find some body armor to wear . . . Paul Camas, WA On 7/11/2011 11:26 AM, Don Honabach wrote: > Hey Paul, > > Where are you based? Probably too close to do your 40 hours and go to Oshkosh this year for you (???). Any thoughts on flying out next year? > > BTW, took me ~11 years to finish my 601HDS. I thought it was funny that you hinted that 6 years was a 'long time'. For me, you are Mr. Speedy;-) I'm still trying to figure out how I managed to take a '400 hour' build time and stretch it to 11 years!!! > > Don http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List m/Navigator?Zenith601-List> http://www.matronics.com/contribution on> ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Jabiru 3300 cooling and noise
From: "mhubel" <mhubel(at)nemon.com>
Date: Jul 11, 2011
I wonder how others have faired with the Jabiru 3300 in the 601XL airframe. I find that even doing everything right, - oil at bottom of dipstick range, 4-5 inches of H2O pressure across the oil cooler and the same on the cylinder heads I have oil temps of 220F with a OAT of 65F at 4500 FT and 6.5 GPH (which is probably about 70% power). Any attempt to run the power even slightly higher results in 230+ temps. At lower altitudes where the OAT is higher, the problem is worse. Then there is the ignition. I have put in Magnacore suppression wire on the magnetos. The wire to the plugs seems to be a high quality suppression wire. There are ferrite cores on every wire. While it is much better than the "as supplied by Jabiru" level, it is still not acceptable for hearing ATC at the edges of their normal hand off range. I have isolated the radio and tried running it on its own battery (no effect). Disconnecting the antenna wire eliminates all noise so it is all coming in through the antenna. I have removed the P leads on the mags and verified they have no effect. All the noise seems to be coming through the high voltage side. -------- Mark Hubelbank N708HU CH601XL Jabiru 3300 Rotec TBI 40-3 carb Sensenich ground adj prop. 70 hr TAF Pictures at photo.hubbles.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=345960#345960 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 11, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Jabiru 3300 cooling and noise
Hi Mark, I wonder how big the ground wire is between your engine and central ground point. Mine is a piece of copper braid that is about 1 inch across folded (it is actually a tube lying flat). That is a lot of copper. I have a smaller piece of copper braid going from the central ground point, on my firewall, to the metal instrument panel. I can't give you a good explanation of why I did this, but a couple of decades designing digital electronics for production taught me you just can't have too much ground current capacity. You can get copper braid wire (it looks like silver because of solder dipping) at any amateur radio supplier. I don't have much experience yet with this plane but the radio seems to work just fine. One other nasty possibility is that there just isn't a good shield in your radio. This is not easy to fix. (Mine is a Garmin SL-30.) Paul XL just entered flight test. On 7/11/2011 3:04 PM, mhubel wrote: > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "mhubel" > > I wonder how others have faired with the Jabiru 3300 in the 601XL airframe. > > I find that even doing everything right, - oil at bottom of dipstick range, 4-5 inches of H2O pressure across the oil cooler and the same on the cylinder heads I have oil temps of 220F with a OAT of 65F at 4500 FT and 6.5 GPH (which is probably about 70% power). Any attempt to run the power even slightly higher results in 230+ temps. At lower altitudes where the OAT is higher, the problem is worse. > > Then there is the ignition. I have put in Magnacore suppression wire on the magnetos. The wire to the plugs seems to be a high quality suppression wire. There are ferrite cores on every wire. While it is much better than the "as supplied by Jabiru" level, it is still not acceptable for hearing ATC at the edges of their normal hand off range. > > I have isolated the radio and tried running it on its own battery (no effect). Disconnecting the antenna wire eliminates all noise so it is all coming in through the antenna. I have removed the P leads on the mags and verified they have no effect. All the noise seems to be coming through the high voltage side. > > -------- > Mark Hubelbank > N708HU > CH601XL > Jabiru 3300 > Rotec TBI 40-3 carb > Sensenich ground adj prop. > 70 hr TAF > Pictures at photo.hubbles.com > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=345960#345960 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Gear
From: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin(at)comcast.net>
Date: Jul 11, 2011
What you describe hear is nearly exactly what I experienced except I originally had my main gear installed with the flat side forward and then turned it around flat side aft. Putting the flat side aft moves the main wheel assemblies (tires, tubes, wheels, brakes and axles) about 4 1/2 inches further forward and the CG of the 40 lb main spring about 2 inches forward. This puts the mains closer to the aircraft's CG so it requires less elevator force to rotate for takeoff and less force to hold the nose off during landing. I think maybe you misstated this? On Jul 11, 2011, at 10:42 AM, BobbyPaulk(at)comcast.net wrote: > Paul > I built my 601 with the gear flat side forward. The CG was o.k. normally but with a passenger and light fuel the CG would go to far aft. ( you might check that on your A/C ). CG goes aft as fuel is burned. With a 200 pounder in the right seat I would have to land with about 14 gal. of fuel to stay in range. I also did not like having to get over 50 mph before lifting the nose. The nose would also slam down with the CG forward ( full fuel ). I turned it around and it made all the difference in the world. I can hold the nose off on landing, raise it on T.O. and let the plane fly itself off when it gets ready. The CG is also better - I can not aft load it out of range without going over gross - which I do not do. The prototype photos in our kit showed the gear flat side forward so that is how we installed it on two aircraft. We both have turned them around when doing the "B mod". > much, much better. > > Bobby > 120.4 hrs. > 601 "B" > 3300 Jab. > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 11, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Gear
I'm really having a hard time with this. I think the issue in my mind is whether or not the spring is bent at 90 degree angle to the edge. That would put the wheels closer to the flat side than the angled side. On the other hand, if the bend is made at an angle (to the center line of the spring) then it would all depend on what the angle was. Paul On 7/11/2011 5:08 PM, Bryan Martin wrote: > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: Bryan Martin > > What you describe hear is nearly exactly what I experienced except I originally had my main gear installed with the flat side forward and then turned it around flat side aft. Putting the flat side aft moves the main wheel assemblies (tires, tubes, wheels, brakes and axles) about 4 1/2 inches further forward and the CG of the 40 lb main spring about 2 inches forward. This puts the mains closer to the aircraft's CG so it requires less elevator force to rotate for takeoff and less force to hold the nose off during landing. > > I think maybe you misstated this? > > On Jul 11, 2011, at 10:42 AM, BobbyPaulk(at)comcast.net wrote: > >> Paul >> I built my 601 with the gear flat side forward. The CG was o.k. normally but with a passenger and light fuel the CG would go to far aft. ( you might check that on your A/C ). CG goes aft as fuel is burned. With a 200 pounder in the right seat I would have to land with about 14 gal. of fuel to stay in range. I also did not like having to get over 50 mph before lifting the nose. The nose would also slam down with the CG forward ( full fuel ). I turned it around and it made all the difference in the world. I can hold the nose off on landing, raise it on T.O. and let the plane fly itself off when it gets ready. The CG is also better - I can not aft load it out of range without going over gross - which I do not do. The prototype photos in our kit showed the gear flat side forward so that is how we installed it on two aircraft. We both have turned them around when doing the "B mod". >> much, much better. >> >> Bobby >> 120.4 hrs. >> 601 "B" >> 3300 Jab. >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 11, 2011
From: Mark Hubelbank <mhubel(at)nemon.com>
Subject: Re: Jabiru 3300 cooling and noise
Paul, The ground is a short run of #4 wire. I also had the thought that the ground might be making it worse. The only thing that your installation might point out is that you have a SL-30. I suspect that Garmin had a noise spike suppressor in the design. It is unlikely that the radio I have has that. A really good spike suppression circuit can reduce the noise 20 db or so. I think I will try an experiment with a King handheld that I have access to. Even if that works, it does not eliminate the source of the noise, it just masks it. On 07/11/2011 7:18 PM, Paul Mulwitz wrote: > > Hi Mark, > > I wonder how big the ground wire is between your engine and central > ground point. Mine is a piece of copper braid that is about 1 inch > across folded (it is actually a tube lying flat). That is a lot of > copper. I have a smaller piece of copper braid going from the central > ground point, on my firewall, to the metal instrument panel. > > I can't give you a good explanation of why I did this, but a couple of > decades designing digital electronics for production taught me you > just can't have too much ground current capacity. > > You can get copper braid wire (it looks like silver because of solder > dipping) at any amateur radio supplier. > > I don't have much experience yet with this plane but the radio seems > to work just fine. > > One other nasty possibility is that there just isn't a good shield in > your radio. This is not easy to fix. (Mine is a Garmin SL-30.) > > Paul > XL just entered flight test. > > On 7/11/2011 3:04 PM, mhubel wrote: >> --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "mhubel" >> >> I wonder how others have faired with the Jabiru 3300 in the 601XL >> airframe. >> >> I find that even doing everything right, - oil at bottom of dipstick >> range, 4-5 inches of H2O pressure across the oil cooler and the same >> on the cylinder heads I have oil temps of 220F with a OAT of 65F at >> 4500 FT and 6.5 GPH (which is probably about 70% power). Any attempt >> to run the power even slightly higher results in 230+ temps. At lower >> altitudes where the OAT is higher, the problem is worse. >> >> Then there is the ignition. I have put in Magnacore suppression wire >> on the magnetos. The wire to the plugs seems to be a high quality >> suppression wire. There are ferrite cores on every wire. While it is >> much better than the "as supplied by Jabiru" level, it is still not >> acceptable for hearing ATC at the edges of their normal hand off range. >> >> I have isolated the radio and tried running it on its own battery (no >> effect). Disconnecting the antenna wire eliminates all noise so it is >> all coming in through the antenna. I have removed the P leads on the >> mags and verified they have no effect. All the noise seems to be >> coming through the high voltage side. >> >> -------- >> Mark Hubelbank >> N708HU >> CH601XL >> Jabiru 3300 >> Rotec TBI 40-3 carb >> Sensenich ground adj prop. >> 70 hr TAF >> Pictures at photo.hubbles.com >> >> >> >> >> Read this topic online here: >> >> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=345960#345960 >> >> >> >> >> >> > > -- Mark Hubelbank NorthEast Monitoring 2 Clock Tower Place Suite 555 Maynard, MA, 01754 - USA mhubel(at)nemon.com 978-443-3955 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 11, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Jabiru 3300 cooling and noise
Hi Mark, I think a 1 inch wide copper braid would produce a lot better ground - particularly for RF noise - than a #4 round wire cable. The copper in your wire would provide plenty of DC current capacity for the starter motor, but RF noise might jump right around it. There is a phenomenon called "Skin effect" that makes high frequency signals migrate away from the center of a conductor. The higher the frequency the more it stays away from the center. For very high frequency noise - around the 120 MHz used by your comm radio this would make your round wire look like a thin tube. You can test my idea relatively easily with a big automotive jumper cable attached between the engine and ground point on your firewall. If this makes the noise change at all it will give a clue to the real problem you are experiencing. You can coil up the jumper cable and add a few tie-wraps to keep it out of the way. Ground problems have always been the hardest ones for me to find (along with all my colleagues). Of course this presumes you are not dealing with a software problem. Those accounted for about 99 percent of all my field problems. Paul On 7/11/2011 5:50 PM, Mark Hubelbank wrote: > > Paul, > The ground is a short run of #4 wire. I also had the thought that > the ground might be making it worse. The only thing that your > installation might point out is that you have a SL-30. I suspect that > Garmin had a noise spike suppressor in the design. It is unlikely that > the radio I have has that. A really good spike suppression circuit can > reduce the noise 20 db or so. I think I will try an experiment with a > King handheld that I have access to. Even if that works, it does not > eliminate the source of the noise, it just masks it. > > On 07/11/2011 7:18 PM, Paul Mulwitz wrote: >> >> Hi Mark, >> >> I wonder how big the ground wire is between your engine and central >> ground point. Mine is a piece of copper braid that is about 1 inch >> across folded (it is actually a tube lying flat). That is a lot of >> copper. I have a smaller piece of copper braid going from the >> central ground point, on my firewall, to the metal instrument panel. >> >> I can't give you a good explanation of why I did this, but a couple >> of decades designing digital electronics for production taught me you >> just can't have too much ground current capacity. >> >> You can get copper braid wire (it looks like silver because of solder >> dipping) at any amateur radio supplier. >> >> I don't have much experience yet with this plane but the radio seems >> to work just fine. >> >> One other nasty possibility is that there just isn't a good shield in >> your radio. This is not easy to fix. (Mine is a Garmin SL-30.) >> >> Paul >> XL just entered flight test. >> >> On 7/11/2011 3:04 PM, mhubel wrote: >>> --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "mhubel" >>> >>> I wonder how others have faired with the Jabiru 3300 in the 601XL >>> airframe. >>> >>> I find that even doing everything right, - oil at bottom of dipstick >>> range, 4-5 inches of H2O pressure across the oil cooler and the same >>> on the cylinder heads I have oil temps of 220F with a OAT of 65F at >>> 4500 FT and 6.5 GPH (which is probably about 70% power). Any attempt >>> to run the power even slightly higher results in 230+ temps. At >>> lower altitudes where the OAT is higher, the problem is worse. >>> >>> Then there is the ignition. I have put in Magnacore suppression wire >>> on the magnetos. The wire to the plugs seems to be a high quality >>> suppression wire. There are ferrite cores on every wire. While it is >>> much better than the "as supplied by Jabiru" level, it is still not >>> acceptable for hearing ATC at the edges of their normal hand off range. >>> >>> I have isolated the radio and tried running it on its own battery >>> (no effect). Disconnecting the antenna wire eliminates all noise so >>> it is all coming in through the antenna. I have removed the P leads >>> on the mags and verified they have no effect. All the noise seems >>> to be coming through the high voltage side. >>> >>> -------- >>> Mark Hubelbank >>> N708HU >>> CH601XL >>> Jabiru 3300 >>> Rotec TBI 40-3 carb >>> Sensenich ground adj prop. >>> 70 hr TAF >>> Pictures at photo.hubbles.com >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Read this topic online here: >>> >>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=345960#345960 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Gear
From: "zodiac601" <timtreat(at)sbcglobal.net>
Date: Jul 11, 2011
I'm not sure what angle you are referring to... when looking at the gear from the wing tip, the axle is nearer the straight (flat) edge of the gear. If you flip the gear around, the axle moves forward as stated above. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=346006#346006 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 11, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Gear
I think that is consistent with my understanding of the whole "Flat side" question. However, it seems several posters are saying they moved from the "Flat side forward" to reverse the position to "Flat side aft" and got the results of moving the wheels forward. I wonder if there is more than one interpretation of the meaning of what the "Flat side" is . . . Paul On 7/11/2011 7:24 PM, zodiac601 wrote: > I'm not sure what angle you are referring to... when looking at the gear from the wing tip, the axle is nearer the straight (flat) edge of the gear. If you flip the gear around, the axle moves forward as stated above. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Afterfxllc(at)aol.com
Date: Jul 12, 2011
Subject: Re: Gear
As you can see the "flat part is aft in the original design so if you reverse the gear the flat side would be forward and the wheels move forward also. In a message dated 7/11/2011 11:14:57 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, psm(at)att.net writes: --> Zenith601-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz I think that is consistent with my understanding of the whole "Flat side" question. However, it seems several posters are saying they moved from the "Flat side forward" to reverse the position to "Flat side aft" and got the results of moving the wheels forward. I wonder if there is more than one interpretation of the meaning of what the "Flat side" is . . . Paul On 7/11/2011 7:24 PM, zodiac601 wrote: > I'm not sure what angle you are referring to... when looking at the gear from the wing tip, the axle is nearer the straight (flat) edge of the gear. If you flip the gear around, the axle moves forward as stated above. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 12, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Gear
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Jabiru 3300 cooling and noise
From: "DaveG601XL" <david.m.gallagher(at)ge.com>
Date: Jul 12, 2011
Mark, I am also using a #4 round cable for engine grounding. I have an I-com A200 radio, which is certainly not a high-end model that I doubt has anything for spike suppression built-in. I have no engine-induced radio noise and have been told my transmissions are pretty clear. I get a little strobe noise in the system, but that is about it. Have you tried a new antenna or antenna wire? Antenna installation and grounding to the aircraft skin itself is quite important too. Also, have you taken your issue to the AeroElectric forum here in Matronics?? There are some real voltheads over there. Do you have the early style, flat, automotive oil cooler or the newer Positech cooler. I have the Positech installed per the Jabiru instructions and have no real issues with it. Oil temps up to 90F oat are usually below 220F. 202-212F are more typical for an average summer flying day. I did add some additional aluminum and RTV around the cooler to ensure as much air as possible goes through it, but that is about it. -------- David Gallagher 601 XL/Jabiru 3300 First flight 7/24/08, Upgraded 3/19/10 Flew it to Oshkosh '09 & '10 180+ hours and climbing! Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=346034#346034 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 12, 2011
From: Mark Hubelbank <mhubel(at)nemon.com>
Subject: Re: Jabiru 3300 cooling and noise
David, I am almost sure the ICOM line all have some form of ANL (automatic noise limiting) in the design I will see if I can check that out. It is really very simple. Unfourtunately, the Microair M760 I have clearly does not. This week, I am going to do some tests with signal processing to simulate an ANL. If that works, I will probably build one as an add on. The alternative would be to use a Becker radio and I have heard mixed reports on the noise rejection of a Becker it may not have ANL either. If my test works, I will publish the design. I have proved that all the noise comes in through the antenna lead. The antenna is on the bottom of the fuselage behind the seats, any further back and there would be risk of antenna contact during landing. Still one source of noise is the exhaust pipe which can act as an antenna. I have not been able to do a test to eliminate that yet. Where is your antenna? I have the Positech cooler with oversize hose and it is very well sealed on the air intake side. There is a lot of air moving through it. I am wondering if this engine has one of the rubbing piston cylinders and is generating excess heat. It does not show when turning it over by hand but when the engine is very hot, perhaps the clearances are too small. If that is the issue, I don't think it is being changed. Note that I can also keep oil temps down to under 220F (which is still above Jabiru recommendations) if I keep the power down to under 6GPH which is well under 75% given the inefficiency of these engines. When I actually want to go somewhere and use a "high cruse" of 2900-3000 RPM at 4500 to 5500 feet and 7 GPH, the oil temperature climbs sharply. On 07/12/2011 7:30 AM, DaveG601XL wrote: > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "DaveG601XL" > > Mark, > > I am also using a #4 round cable for engine grounding. I have an I-com A200 radio, which is certainly not a high-end model that I doubt has anything for spike suppression built-in. I have no engine-induced radio noise and have been told my transmissions are pretty clear. I get a little strobe noise in the system, but that is about it. Have you tried a new antenna or antenna wire? Antenna installation and grounding to the aircraft skin itself is quite important too. Also, have you taken your issue to the AeroElectric forum here in Matronics?? There are some real voltheads over there. > > Do you have the early style, flat, automotive oil cooler or the newer Positech cooler. I have the Positech installed per the Jabiru instructions and have no real issues with it. Oil temps up to 90F oat are usually below 220F. 202-212F are more typical for an average summer flying day. I did add some additional aluminum and RTV around the cooler to ensure as much air as possible goes through it, but that is about it. > > -------- > David Gallagher > 601 XL/Jabiru 3300 > First flight 7/24/08, Upgraded 3/19/10 > Flew it to Oshkosh '09& '10 > 180+ hours and climbing! > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=346034#346034 > > -- Mark Hubelbank NorthEast Monitoring 2 Clock Tower Place Suite 555 Maynard, MA, 01754 - USA mhubel(at)nemon.com 978-443-3955 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Jabiru 3300 cooling and noise
From: "DaveG601XL" <david.m.gallagher(at)ge.com>
Date: Jul 12, 2011
Mark, You are certainly more well versed in radio technology than I am so I will check out of that discussion and monitor it from aside. My antenna is mounted on top near the rear of the baggage deck. I have had people ask me if I tuned my antenna or cable lengths with a SWR meter and all I can do is give a dumb stare in return. I just hooked them all up and started talking. Have you tried extending the rear cowl lip to see if the added pressure drop helps?? Since you already know the pressure drop across your cooler, I assume you are well versed in that trick also. I have the Sensenich wood prop that I am told is shaped to help with hub airflow. How about a new oil temp thermocouple? They are "usually" pretty bullet proof but that would at least eliminate the instrumentation as a source of your problem. Dropping it in boiling water and watching the Dynon readout would would serve the same purpose. Hopefully there are no junctions in the thermocouple wire between the thermocouple and your Dynon. Just to compare observations, it looks like you cruise around faster than I do. If I am just tooling around the area, I set ~2650 RPM. Solo, this gets me about 115MPH IAS and the 100LL flows at around 4.5 GPH. If I kick it up to 2850 RPM, it only seems to get me another 10 MPH at 6.5 GPH. I usually keep the throttle between 2650 and 2750 RPM for cross countries. With my wood prop, I only see 3000 RPM if I am WOT and in a slight dive. Good luck, -------- David Gallagher 601 XL/Jabiru 3300 First flight 7/24/08, Upgraded 3/19/10 Flew it to Oshkosh '09 & '10 180+ hours and climbing! Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=346059#346059 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 12, 2011
From: Mark Hubelbank <mhubel(at)nemon.com>
Subject: Re: Jabiru 3300 cooling and noise
David, I did the sensor calibration and also did tests with thermocouples on both sides of the oil cooler. Even though the pressure difference is well within spec, I may still try the bigger lip just for the summer. If that helps, then one does ask why. If my theory that the exhaust system can act as an antenna (leaking RF from the cylinders). then your top mounted antenna would be better even if in theory it is not as good for ATC communications. I had a AA-5 with an antenna on the top and one on the bottom and the bottom mounted one was clearly better for some ATC use, that is why I picked the bottom location. Still I can think of a way I can do a test to try it without actually making a hole and mounting an antenna. On 07/12/2011 10:37 AM, DaveG601XL wrote: > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "DaveG601XL" > > Mark, > > You are certainly more well versed in radio technology than I am so I will check out of that discussion and monitor it from aside. My antenna is mounted on top near the rear of the baggage deck. I have had people ask me if I tuned my antenna or cable lengths with a SWR meter and all I can do is give a dumb stare in return. I just hooked them all up and started talking. > > Have you tried extending the rear cowl lip to see if the added pressure drop helps?? Since you already know the pressure drop across your cooler, I assume you are well versed in that trick also. I have the Sensenich wood prop that I am told is shaped to help with hub airflow. > > How about a new oil temp thermocouple? They are "usually" pretty bullet proof but that would at least eliminate the instrumentation as a source of your problem. Dropping it in boiling water and watching the Dynon readout would would serve the same purpose. Hopefully there are no junctions in the thermocouple wire between the thermocouple and your Dynon. > > Just to compare observations, it looks like you cruise around faster than I do. If I am just tooling around the area, I set ~2650 RPM. Solo, this gets me about 115MPH IAS and the 100LL flows at around 4.5 GPH. If I kick it up to 2850 RPM, it only seems to get me another 10 MPH at 6.5 GPH. I usually keep the throttle between 2650 and 2750 RPM for cross countries. With my wood prop, I only see 3000 RPM if I am WOT and in a slight dive. > > Good luck, > > -------- > David Gallagher > 601 XL/Jabiru 3300 > First flight 7/24/08, Upgraded 3/19/10 > Flew it to Oshkosh '09& '10 > 180+ hours and climbing! > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=346059#346059 > > -- Mark Hubelbank NorthEast Monitoring 2 Clock Tower Place Suite 555 Maynard, MA, 01754 - USA mhubel(at)nemon.com 978-443-3955 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 12, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Jabiru 3300 cooling and noise
Mark, If you think RF from the engine is being radiated from the exhaust system then the way to fix this is to improve the grounding of the engine. If the engine is well grounded it cannot radiate any signals. Paul On 7/12/2011 8:22 AM, Mark Hubelbank wrote: > David, > I did the sensor calibration and also did tests with thermocouples > on both sides of the oil cooler. Even though the pressure difference > is well within spec, I may still try the bigger lip just for the > summer. If that helps, then one does ask why. > > If my theory that the exhaust system can act as an antenna > (leaking RF from the cylinders). then your top mounted antenna would > be better even if in theory it is not as good for ATC communications. > I had a AA-5 with an antenna on the top and one on the bottom and the > bottom mounted one was clearly better for some ATC use, that is why I > picked the bottom location. Still I can think of a way I can do a test > to try it without actually making a hole and mounting an antenna. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 12, 2011
From: Mark Hubelbank <mhubel(at)nemon.com>
Subject: Re: Jabiru 3300 cooling and noise
Paul, Unfourtunately that is not completely true. The length of the exhaust pipe from the muffler is almost an ideal 1/4 wavelength antenna at aircraft VHF frequencies. Even if everything is perfectly grounded, if some RF energy is coupled from the cylinders or adjacent spark plug wires into the exhaust system, it will do an excellent job of radiating. Some tests will tell, not easy but it can be done. If this is really happening, it might explain why some people have success with resistor plugs. We might note that most production aircraft spark plugs are resistor designs even with shielded wires. This is all theory. On 07/12/2011 11:46 AM, Paul Mulwitz wrote: > > Mark, > > If you think RF from the engine is being radiated from the exhaust > system then the way to fix this is to improve the grounding of the > engine. If the engine is well grounded it cannot radiate any signals. > > Paul > > On 7/12/2011 8:22 AM, Mark Hubelbank wrote: >> David, >> I did the sensor calibration and also did tests with >> thermocouples on both sides of the oil cooler. Even though the >> pressure difference is well within spec, I may still try the bigger >> lip just for the summer. If that helps, then one does ask why. >> >> If my theory that the exhaust system can act as an antenna >> (leaking RF from the cylinders). then your top mounted antenna would >> be better even if in theory it is not as good for ATC communications. >> I had a AA-5 with an antenna on the top and one on the bottom and the >> bottom mounted one was clearly better for some ATC use, that is why I >> picked the bottom location. Still I can think of a way I can do a >> test to try it without actually making a hole and mounting an antenna. > > -- Mark Hubelbank NorthEast Monitoring 2 Clock Tower Place Suite 555 Maynard, MA, 01754 - USA mhubel(at)nemon.com 978-443-3955 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 12, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Gear
Hi Bobby, Thanks for the message. That is the way I installed my gear to begin with. I think this is all just proof that each model airplane flies a bit differently from all the rest. The Tecnam I was flying had the main gear very close to the CG, and that allowed rotation early on takeoff and holding off the nose on landing until the plane was just about stopped. The Zodiac XL is more nose heavy on the main gear. I think this means you need to get it going faster on the runway before lifting the nose. Perhaps you can take off at the same pitch attitude as you get rolling on all three wheels. So, it takes more runway to take off. This is not a big deal since even twice as much runway means about 600 feet instead of 300. I don't think there is any public airport that would be too short for a Zodiac and it was never meant as a bush plane. Paul On 7/12/2011 12:09 PM, BobbyPaulk(at)comcast.net wrote: > Paul, > My gear was installed with the flat side to the rear at first. ( old > man's disease ) Anyway I moved the wheels forward roughly 6" by > turning it around. I weigh 185 lbs. all up flying weight and the nose > does not come up when I enter the plane. My drawings say to install it > flat side forward but the picture in my kit shows it aft. > I am glad i changed it. > > Bobby > 3300 Jabiru > 601 "B" > 120 hrs. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Joe" <backstagelive(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Ride to Oshkosh
Date: Jul 13, 2011
Is there anyone flying into Milwaukee on Sunday July 24th for the EAA convention? I have a fellow Zenith builder that is looking for a ride to Oshkosh. His plane gets into Milwaukee about 2:15 PM. Contact me off list at backstagelive(at)gmail.com or 920-237-1450 Joe in Oshkosh Zeniths to Oshkosh ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: matco park brake location
From: "chris Sinfield" <chris_sinfield(at)yahoo.com.au>
Date: Jul 13, 2011
Can those that have installed the Matco park brake shoot me a photo of their location please. I have the duel brakes and not sure if to put the brake an the firewall or the floor? and how you ran the cable Chris Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=346186#346186 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Joe" <backstagelive(at)gmail.com>
Subject: More Rooms at Gruenhagem
Date: Jul 13, 2011
I just got off the phone with Gruenhagen Hall in Oshkosh. They have announced they are opening more rooms for EAA. There was some construction going on there and it looks like they are ahead of schedule. "To make a reservation, contact UW-Oshkosh at 920-424-3226 between 8 a.m. Room rates are $55 per night, with a three-night minimum on all reservations." Joe in Oshkosh Zeniths to Oshkosh ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Joe" <backstagelive(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Gruenhagen
Date: Jul 13, 2011
I just got off the phone with Gruenhagen Hall in Oshkosh. They have announced they are opening more rooms for EAA. There was some construction going on there and it looks like they are ahead of schedule. "To make a reservation, contact UW-Oshkosh at 920-424-3226 between 8 a.m. Room rates are $55 per night, with a three-night minimum on all reservations." Joe in Oshkosh Zeniths to Oshkosh ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: matco park brake location
From: "rgeese" <rgeese1(at)columbus.rr.com>
Date: Jul 14, 2011
Hey Chris, Here is a link to all my 601XL construction photos to date. https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=2c08001814b26710#cid=2C08001814B26710&id=2C08001814B26710%21286 If you go to photos 278 thru 285 you will see how I installed my Matco parking brake valve, brake lines, and control cable, however I just have single brakes. I'm not flying yet and haven't added fluid, but it looks like the setup will work well. Looking forward to going to Oshkosh in a couple of weeks!!! Ron Geese Columbus, Ohio USA Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=346319#346319 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: matco park brake location
From: "chris Sinfield" <chris_sinfield(at)yahoo.com.au>
Date: Jul 15, 2011
thanks Did you have to make an extra bracket to get the cable swing angle right? Chris Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=346478#346478 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: matco park brake location
From: "rgeese" <rgeese1(at)columbus.rr.com>
Date: Jul 15, 2011
I only installed one adel clamp just above the valve to stabilize the cable. You can see it in photo #284. Ron Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=346491#346491 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: matco park brake location
From: "AZFlyer" <millrML(at)aol.com>
Date: Jul 15, 2011
Chris, here are 3 pics from my install. Yes, I added a lever to reverse the direction of the brake...but I didn't have it included at the time these were taken. Mike -------- Mike Miller @ millrml(at)aol.com 601 XL-B, 3300, Dynon Remember, "the second mouse gets the cheese"! Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=346506#346506 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/dscn0489_106.jpg http://forums.matronics.com//files/dscn0505_129.jpg http://forums.matronics.com//files/dscn0463_191.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 15, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Second test flight - N773PM.
The weather finally decided to cooperate today for my second flight. Well, almost cooperate. The scattered clouds at 2000 were more like broken, so I limited my activities to straight and level flight and a few simple turns. I am starting to get the feel of the Zodiac XL, but it seems to be a painfully slow process. I would really have gained a lot with a 3 or 4 hour checkout, but there was no way I could get that. I adjusted the rudder cables to deal with the need to stand on the left rudder on the first flight. That worked! There is still room to kick the rudder pedals around and get a slightly different position on the nose wheel and related V-Block, but with the wings level I got the ball centered without any help from the pedals. I don't seem to have the heavy left wing many people talk about. I do have aileron trim and to get the wings level I had a slight right-roll setting. I also canted the engine to the right as suggested in Bingelis' book "Firewall Forward". This is mostly done with large washers in place on the rubber engine mounts. My first attempt to get the tachometer reading on my Dynon EMS-120 failed. I managed to get it right in flight by changing the second tachometer count field to 6. There are two fields (left and right?) and I needed to change both from 4 to 6 to get a reasonable reading on the tach. I kept a good eye on the cylinder head temperatures and reduced power whenever I saw over 350 in level flight. I didn't pay much attention to it while using full power on takeoff. Keeping the CHT green meant keeping the RPM around 2700 max. This yielded a level cruise indicated speed of around 110 knots. I hope to be able to run at higher RPM as the engine gets a little more broken in. I am also scheming various ways of improving the cooling to achieve a faster cruise speed. The engine has done nothing but purr like a kitten. My meager attempt at slow flight got me around 70 KIAS at 2000 RPM - give or take. I still don't have control of the plane down pat enough to really hold a desired speed or pitch in slightly bumpy air. I tried takeoff runs with 1/2 flaps and no flaps. In both cases I extended the run until the plane really wanted to lift off with just a slight amount of back pressure on the stick. This gave me nice takeoffs without the nose jumping up, but it also used up lots of runway. I would guess the longer run with no flaps was around 1200 feet. Climb (Vx) from takeoff with 1/2 flaps was much better than no flaps. I probably didn't do it at the right speed so I won't make any issue over the actual numbers yet. I also haven't tried taking off with full flaps yet. Maybe next time. In general the flight went pretty well. However, I think I have figured out one thing -- when I grow up I don't think I want to be a test pilot for a living . . . Paul Camas, WA ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Deems Herring <dsleepy47(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Second test flight - N773PM.
Date: Jul 15, 2011
Anyone interested in the Vx part of this thread mght want to look here: htt p://www.experimentalaircraft.info/flight-planning/aircraft-climb-performanc e.php for some further discussion. Also look here: http://forums.aopa.org/ showthread.php?t=74645&highlight=soft+field&page=2 I think if you do the calculations you would find that unless your 601 is very oddly built cl imb rate will be greatest with a clean wing. One thing I find is that pilot s used to high wing planes will almost never pitch up to a high enough AOA to achieve Vx at first in a bubble canopy low wing aircraft because of the difference in the perceived AOA. Even when I brief Cessna pilots what I am going to do When I establish a Vx climb takeoff in my Grumman I can see th em stiffen up in the right seat until I point out that the airspeed is stab le at 77 Knots because in a Vx climb you can't see anything but sky=2C cowl ing and wings plus you are quite reclined in the seat. Don't confuse ground roll distance with total distance to 50 ft. I DO NOT recommend doing high AOA takeoffs until you have gotten very comfo rtable with your aircraft in slow flight at altitude. Be safe out there. Deems > I tried takeoff runs with 1/2 flaps and no flaps. In both cases I > extended the run until the plane really wanted to lift off with just a > slight amount of back pressure on the stick. This gave me nice takeoffs > without the nose jumping up=2C but it also used up lots of runway. I > would guess the longer run with no flaps was around 1200 feet. > > Climb (Vx) from takeoff with 1/2 flaps was much better than no flaps. I > probably didn't do it at the right speed so I won't make any issue over > the actual numbers yet. I also haven't tried taking off with full flaps > yet. Maybe next time. > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 15, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Second test flight - N773PM.
Hi Deems, Thanks for the comments and links. I read the first referenced document, and found it interesting but lacking in details. It also seemed to be rather biased. I suspect the universe considered by the author included only part 23 planes that all have somewhat similar (poor) performance. The comment that some manufacturers recommend use of flaps for short field takeoffs is misleading. Indeed some plane manufacturers recommend flaps for all takeoffs. I have flown several such planes including the Cessna 182 and Tecnam Echo Super. I am convinced that all planes fly faster and with less drag then they can go while rolling on the ground. While it is true flaps introduce some drag they also increase lift. The drag impact is exponential with speed. Put differently, flaps always increase lift and as speed increases they increase drag with much more impact at higher speeds. This suggests at least the possibility that best performance is achieved using flaps for takeoff. Indeed, some planes like the C-182 can barely get in the air at all without flaps. I didn't see any discussion of the best way to clear obstacles. I suspect the ideal takeoff method in many planes is to use a small amount of flaps to get off the ground quickly and then to remove those flaps when clear of obstacles. I know the government folks like to talk about 50 foot obstacles, but around here the trees are A LOT taller than 50 feet. I think the key to understanding the best way to take off is to find the balance between power, airspeed, and flaps. In a plane like mine (Zodiac XL with Jabiru 3300A) there is so much excess power that climb performance should be good at low speeds with any flap setting. Paul Camas, WA On 7/15/2011 7:22 PM, Deems Herring wrote: > Anyone interested in the Vx part of this thread mght want to look > here: > http://www.experimentalaircraft.info/flight-planning/aircraft-climb-performance.php > for some further discussion. Also look here: > http://forums.aopa.org/showthread.php?t=74645&highlight=soft+field&page=2 > I think if you do the calculations you would find that unless your 601 > is very oddly built climb rate will be greatest with a clean wing. One > thing I find is that pilots used to high wing planes will almost never > pitch up to a high enough AOA to achieve Vx at first in a bubble > canopy low wing aircraft because of the difference in the perceived > AOA. Even when I brief Cessna pilots what I am going to do When I > establish a Vx climb takeoff in my Grumman I can see them stiffen up > in the right seat until I point out that the airspeed is stable at 77 > Knots because in a Vx climb you can't see anything but sky, cowling > and wings plus you are quite reclined in the seat. > > Don't confuse ground roll distance with total distance to 50 ft. > > I DO NOT recommend doing high AOA takeoffs until you have gotten very > comfortable with your aircraft in slow flight at altitude. Be safe out > there. > > Deems > > > > I tried takeoff runs with 1/2 flaps and no flaps. In both cases I > > extended the run until the plane really wanted to lift off with just a > > slight amount of back pressure on the stick. This gave me nice takeoffs > > without the nose jumping up, but it also used up lots of runway. I > > would guess the longer run with no flaps was around 1200 feet. > > > > Climb (Vx) from takeoff with 1/2 flaps was much better than no flaps. I > > probably didn't do it at the right speed so I won't make any issue over > > the actual numbers yet. I also haven't tried taking off with full flaps > > yet. Maybe next time. > > > > * > > > * ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: My almost finished kit for sale...
From: "Gig Giacona" <wrgiacona(at)gmail.com>
Date: Jul 19, 2011
I've given up planes and taken up Harley's. The kit is almost finished and available if you want to make an offer. A link to many photos below. -------- W.R. "Gig" Giacona 601XL Under Construction See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347098#347098 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <s_thatcher(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Zenith601-List Digest: 1 Msgs - 07/19/11
Date: Jul 20, 2011
After 6 years plus, I can't believe you're giving up! Harley's can only jump a few inches off the ground. Actually really sorry to hear that you are selling the plane. I remember all the work we both did at the Corvair College and how really neat your engine looked before you got delivery. The Zodiac looks very good. Hope you get a good price since I know you put a lot of sweat and tears into it. Take care Gig. Scott _________________________________________ Scott Thatcher, Palm Beach Gardens, FL 601XLB with WW Corvair, Registered as E-LSA, 60+ hours N601EL, http://www.placestofly.com, http://www.eaa203.com, http://www.mykitlog.com/sdthatcher > Subject: Zenith601-List: My almost finished kit for sale... > From: "Gig Giacona" <wrgiacona(at)gmail.com> > > > I've given up planes and taken up Harley's. The kit is almost finished and > available > if you want to make an offer. > > A link to many photos below. > > -------- > W.R. "Gig" Giacona > 601XL Under Construction > See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347098#347098 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 20, 2011
From: Steve Look <slook(at)mchsi.com>
Subject: Insurance
After calling just about everybody, I finally have insured my 601XL kit. Avemco came in best with 15k coverage for $240/yr. At first they quoted in liability coverage combined for $401/yr. I told the nice lady that unless the kit fell on somebody that I couldn't see the need. She said some airports require liability on any plane based there. Maybe.... If anything happens to the kit, I have to produce receipts to establish value. So now the kit is moving out to the hanger at the big city airport { 2k0 } and all the fun that involves. I have ordered my fuse kit from Zenith for pickup the Friday before Open Hanger Day in September. It might be a real airplane someday at this rate.... Steve Steve Look Monticello, IL 601XLB "Dogs have owners, Cats have staff" ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 20, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Insurance
Hi Steve, Well done. You probably need to save your receipts for a couple of other reasons too. They support your claim that you bought the plane and built it yourself, and you probably need to pay "Use" tax before you can use it in your state. I was able to get by the use tax issue by getting my tax specialist to agree to an estimate instead of going through 6 years of receipts. There is no guarantee that will work with anybody else. Good luck, Paul XL 3 hours into flight test. On 7/20/2011 12:09 PM, Steve Look wrote: > > After calling just about everybody, I finally have insured my 601XL kit. > > Avemco came in best with 15k coverage for $240/yr. At first they > quoted in liability coverage combined for $401/yr. I told the nice > lady that unless the kit fell on somebody that I couldn't see the > need. She said some airports require liability on any plane based > there. Maybe.... > > If anything happens to the kit, I have to produce receipts to > establish value. > > So now the kit is moving out to the hanger at the big city airport { > 2k0 } and all the fun that involves. I have ordered my fuse kit from > Zenith for pickup the Friday before Open Hanger Day in September. > > It might be a real airplane someday at this rate.... > > Steve > > Steve Look > Monticello, IL > 601XLB > "Dogs have owners, Cats have staff" > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 23, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Summary: 5 hours of phase I flight test.
I completed the first 5 hours of flight test yesterday and flew another hour today. The weather is finally cooperating. I now have all the instruments and avionics working properly. Most of it worked from the beginning, but there were a few hold-outs. I had the squelch set wrong on my Garmin SL-30 so I wasn't hearing many radio calls. Also the intercom function wasn't working on the SL-30 because I had not grounded the required pin on the rear connector to enable it. The LRI worked fine when I finally got the air tubes hooked up correctly (they were reversed). I fixed a problem with the Dynon tachometer input by adding a 27K resistor in series with the input line - as recommended when I called Dynon. It was working at low and high RPMs but went crazy at mid-power settings. The airframe has performed remarkably well. I discovered today that the elevator trim runs out before lowering any flaps on approach for landing. I plan to add a fixed trim tab on the other side of the elevator to fix this problem. Perhaps I will adjust the horizontal stabilizer rigging some time in the future, but I am reluctant to mess with that. My plane has no tendency to lower the left wing as many have reported. This is probably because I canted the engine to the right as suggested in Bingellis' book. I have found the "Nicest" takeoffs happen with 1/2 flaps and landings work best with full flaps. I'm confident the landings will be even better when I don't have to hold the nose up against the pitch trim. The engine has performed without any noticeable flaws. It is a new Jabiru 3300A with hydraulic lifters. I have had issues with cooling that show up mostly in cylinder head temperature on #3, but also have seen some high oil heat in extended climbs. These have been solved by reducing power until cooling works satisfactorily. I use full power on takeoff, but extended climb and cruise are done at around 2700 RPM (red line is 3300) and 90 KIAS. I will probably try to get the engine to run harder after cleaning up the trim problem. Perhaps extra lip on the lower cowl will be the first step. Eventually I hope to find the energy to install "Internal pressure recovery" air intake ports for the cooling ports and maybe for the oil cooler intake port as well. These fancy ports have an expanding cross section as the air moves in from the front so the airspeed is reduced and pressure increased. You see them on most new high performance cowls (they have small round intake holes in the cowl instead of the larger square-ish ones). One oddity with the engine has to do with "Air Starts". I stalled the engine while idling it for an approach and discovered it just wouldn't start again by adding throttle. One twist of the starter key got it going again. I was prepared for this by the documents that suggested you just can't get this engine started without the starter - even with a turning propeller. The biggest problems have been "Pilot shortcomings". I really would have benefited from a good checkout. Unfortunately, with much of the fleet still grounded and none in commercial service I was unable to do that. For anyone in the future who can get a good checkout before entering flight test my advice is to go ahead and get the training first. Paul Camas, WA N773PM in flight test. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Peter W Johnson" <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au>
Subject: Summary: 5 hours of phase I flight test.
Date: Jul 24, 2011
Paul, Nice to see things are progressing. I too run out of elevator trim with full flaps, especially when flying solo. I added a sheet of ally to the existing elevator trim tab increasing its area a bit and that made a lot of difference. I used a piece of scrap sheet and double sided tape to try it out. Its still there. After a few hours, I added the aileron trim tab. I fly with and without passengers and always seem to be trying to trim with the fuel selector, using fuel out of the heavy side first etc. The trim tab made for much more relaxed flying! I have an O-200 with the Zenith supplied engine mount, check out the off set:- http://zodiac.cpc-world.com/pages/IMG_1163_JPG.htm I had a check out with our local agent in Bendigo's 601 before my first flight. It was definitely worth the time and effort. Allan's 601 has a Rotax and is a bit different in W&B that my O-200. Still better that flying "green" though. Have fun Peter Wonthaggi Australia http://zodiac.cpc-world.com -----Original Message----- From: owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Paul Mulwitz Sent: Sunday, 24 July 2011 10:27 AM Subject: Zenith601-List: Summary: 5 hours of phase I flight test. I completed the first 5 hours of flight test yesterday and flew another hour today. The weather is finally cooperating. I now have all the instruments and avionics working properly. Most of it worked from the beginning, but there were a few hold-outs. I had the squelch set wrong on my Garmin SL-30 so I wasn't hearing many radio calls. Also the intercom function wasn't working on the SL-30 because I had not grounded the required pin on the rear connector to enable it. The LRI worked fine when I finally got the air tubes hooked up correctly (they were reversed). I fixed a problem with the Dynon tachometer input by adding a 27K resistor in series with the input line - as recommended when I called Dynon. It was working at low and high RPMs but went crazy at mid-power settings. The airframe has performed remarkably well. I discovered today that the elevator trim runs out before lowering any flaps on approach for landing. I plan to add a fixed trim tab on the other side of the elevator to fix this problem. Perhaps I will adjust the horizontal stabilizer rigging some time in the future, but I am reluctant to mess with that. My plane has no tendency to lower the left wing as many have reported. This is probably because I canted the engine to the right as suggested in Bingellis' book. I have found the "Nicest" takeoffs happen with 1/2 flaps and landings work best with full flaps. I'm confident the landings will be even better when I don't have to hold the nose up against the pitch trim. The engine has performed without any noticeable flaws. It is a new Jabiru 3300A with hydraulic lifters. I have had issues with cooling that show up mostly in cylinder head temperature on #3, but also have seen some high oil heat in extended climbs. These have been solved by reducing power until cooling works satisfactorily. I use full power on takeoff, but extended climb and cruise are done at around 2700 RPM (red line is 3300) and 90 KIAS. I will probably try to get the engine to run harder after cleaning up the trim problem. Perhaps extra lip on the lower cowl will be the first step. Eventually I hope to find the energy to install "Internal pressure recovery" air intake ports for the cooling ports and maybe for the oil cooler intake port as well. These fancy ports have an expanding cross section as the air moves in from the front so the airspeed is reduced and pressure increased. You see them on most new high performance cowls (they have small round intake holes in the cowl instead of the larger square-ish ones). One oddity with the engine has to do with "Air Starts". I stalled the engine while idling it for an approach and discovered it just wouldn't start again by adding throttle. One twist of the starter key got it going again. I was prepared for this by the documents that suggested you just can't get this engine started without the starter - even with a turning propeller. The biggest problems have been "Pilot shortcomings". I really would have benefited from a good checkout. Unfortunately, with much of the fleet still grounded and none in commercial service I was unable to do that. For anyone in the future who can get a good checkout before entering flight test my advice is to go ahead and get the training first. Paul Camas, WA N773PM in flight test. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 23, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Summary: 5 hours of phase I flight test.
Hi Peter, Your offset looks a lot like mine. I started trying to set 3 degrees to the right, but after running the engine it settled in at perhaps half that amount. I installed aileron trim in my original build. It does seem to help. Today I played with it a bit and found it is more of a hint at controlling the roll than a direct order. The large dihedral angle probably makes shifting the roll position of the plane a bit difficult. I'll keep your idea in mind about extending the elevator trim. I thought about a fixed trim tab because I always seem to trim in the up direction and never in the down direction. It is "Up" trim that I need more of for flying with flaps. Best regards, Paul On 7/23/2011 9:22 PM, Peter W Johnson wrote: > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "Peter W Johnson" > > Paul, > > Nice to see things are progressing. > > I too run out of elevator trim with full flaps, especially when flying solo. > I added a sheet of ally to the existing elevator trim tab increasing its > area a bit and that made a lot of difference. I used a piece of scrap sheet > and double sided tape to try it out. Its still there. > > After a few hours, I added the aileron trim tab. I fly with and without > passengers and always seem to be trying to trim with the fuel selector, > using fuel out of the heavy side first etc. The trim tab made for much more > relaxed flying! > > I have an O-200 with the Zenith supplied engine mount, check out the off > set:- http://zodiac.cpc-world.com/pages/IMG_1163_JPG.htm > > I had a check out with our local agent in Bendigo's 601 before my first > flight. It was definitely worth the time and effort. Allan's 601 has a Rotax > and is a bit different in W&B that my O-200. Still better that flying > "green" though. > > Have fun > > Peter > Wonthaggi Australia > http://zodiac.cpc-world.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Paul Mulwitz > Sent: Sunday, 24 July 2011 10:27 AM > To: zenith601-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Zenith601-List: Summary: 5 hours of phase I flight test. > > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz > > I completed the first 5 hours of flight test yesterday and flew another > hour today. The weather is finally cooperating. > > I now have all the instruments and avionics working properly. Most of > it worked from the beginning, but there were a few hold-outs. I had the > squelch set wrong on my Garmin SL-30 so I wasn't hearing many radio > calls. Also the intercom function wasn't working on the SL-30 because I > had not grounded the required pin on the rear connector to enable it. > The LRI worked fine when I finally got the air tubes hooked up correctly > (they were reversed). I fixed a problem with the Dynon tachometer input > by adding a 27K resistor in series with the input line - as recommended > when I called Dynon. It was working at low and high RPMs but went crazy > at mid-power settings. > > The airframe has performed remarkably well. I discovered today that the > elevator trim runs out before lowering any flaps on approach for > landing. I plan to add a fixed trim tab on the other side of the > elevator to fix this problem. Perhaps I will adjust the horizontal > stabilizer rigging some time in the future, but I am reluctant to mess > with that. My plane has no tendency to lower the left wing as many have > reported. This is probably because I canted the engine to the right as > suggested in Bingellis' book. I have found the "Nicest" takeoffs happen > with 1/2 flaps and landings work best with full flaps. I'm confident > the landings will be even better when I don't have to hold the nose up > against the pitch trim. > > The engine has performed without any noticeable flaws. It is a new > Jabiru 3300A with hydraulic lifters. I have had issues with cooling > that show up mostly in cylinder head temperature on #3, but also have > seen some high oil heat in extended climbs. These have been solved by > reducing power until cooling works satisfactorily. I use full power on > takeoff, but extended climb and cruise are done at around 2700 RPM (red > line is 3300) and 90 KIAS. I will probably try to get the engine to run > harder after cleaning up the trim problem. Perhaps extra lip on the > lower cowl will be the first step. Eventually I hope to find the energy > to install "Internal pressure recovery" air intake ports for the cooling > ports and maybe for the oil cooler intake port as well. These fancy > ports have an expanding cross section as the air moves in from the front > so the airspeed is reduced and pressure increased. You see them on most > new high performance cowls (they have small round intake holes in the > cowl instead of the larger square-ish ones). > > One oddity with the engine has to do with "Air Starts". I stalled the > engine while idling it for an approach and discovered it just wouldn't > start again by adding throttle. One twist of the starter key got it > going again. I was prepared for this by the documents that suggested > you just can't get this engine started without the starter - even with a > turning propeller. > > The biggest problems have been "Pilot shortcomings". I really would > have benefited from a good checkout. Unfortunately, with much of the > fleet still grounded and none in commercial service I was unable to do > that. For anyone in the future who can get a good checkout before > entering flight test my advice is to go ahead and get the training first. > > Paul > Camas, WA > N773PM in flight test. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Austin" <daveaustin2(at)primus.ca>
Subject: Re: Summary: 5 hours of phase I flight test.
Date: Jul 24, 2011
Paul, Great to hear things are coming together well. Re the elevator trim, I adjusted the elevator position quickly when I found the same problem as you have. Reasoning being that I found I was having to put in el. trim at cruise which was causing un-necessary drag. I elongated the hole in the rear elevator mounts so that I had an adjustment capability and by trial and error got it set for no drag at cruise (neutral trim). Then added a small piece to the trim tab to give me the authority needed. Not forgetting to do a full trim both ways test to be sure that I could overcome the trim effect with the stick at approach speeds in case of trim runaway (which has happened!) No more problems for with that 13 years! Dave Austin 601HDS 912U ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 24, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Summary: 5 hours of phase I flight test.
Thanks Dave, I guess I am getting the message that adding some area to the trim tab is a better solution than putting a fixed trim tab on the other side of the elevator. It does make sense now that I think about it. The extra trim tab would add drag while the extension to the existing tab only adds drag when it is actually needed. I like your idea of adjusting the stab. rigging. Still, I want to hold off on that effort until I am further along in my testing. Right now my biggest goal is to get the plane and pilot (me) flying well enough to make nice landings. Takeoffs have been worked out pretty well, but the landings are not yet a thing of beauty. I really appreciate the advice I have been getting on this list. It has helped me move along quickly and also to avoid "Fixes" that are not the best solution to the problem at hand. Paul On 7/24/2011 3:51 AM, Dave Austin wrote: > > > Paul, > Great to hear things are coming together well. > Re the elevator trim, I adjusted the elevator position quickly when I > found the same problem as you have. Reasoning being that I found I > was having to put in el. trim at cruise which was causing un-necessary > drag. I elongated the hole in the rear elevator mounts so that I had > an adjustment capability and by trial and error got it set for no drag > at cruise (neutral trim). Then added a small piece to the trim tab to > give me the authority needed. Not forgetting to do a full trim both > ways test to be sure that I could overcome the trim effect with the > stick at approach speeds in case of trim runaway (which has > happened!) No more problems for with that 13 years! > Dave Austin 601HDS 912U > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 24, 2011
From: Mark Hubelbank <mhubel(at)nemon.com>
Subject: Re: Summary: 5 hours of phase I flight test.
Paul, One other option on the elivator trim. I also ran out of trim with full flaps and zenith did not have any good ideas. I moved the Stabilizer to the the center of its allowed range, it was a bit off in the wrong direction) and then added a spring on the elevator cable to nutrilize the weight of the elevator. I figured one did not need to have aerodynamic fources lifting this static weight. This made the trim just make it with full flaps, no further trim tabs needed. If you are interested, there is a picture of this on photo.hubbles.com (which is being fixed at the moment, it should be back up in a bit). On 07/24/2011 7:44 AM, Paul Mulwitz wrote: > > Thanks Dave, > > I guess I am getting the message that adding some area to the trim tab > is a better solution than putting a fixed trim tab on the other side > of the elevator. It does make sense now that I think about it. The > extra trim tab would add drag while the extension to the existing tab > only adds drag when it is actually needed. > > I like your idea of adjusting the stab. rigging. Still, I want to > hold off on that effort until I am further along in my testing. > > Right now my biggest goal is to get the plane and pilot (me) flying > well enough to make nice landings. Takeoffs have been worked out > pretty well, but the landings are not yet a thing of beauty. > > I really appreciate the advice I have been getting on this list. It > has helped me move along quickly and also to avoid "Fixes" that are > not the best solution to the problem at hand. > > Paul > > > On 7/24/2011 3:51 AM, Dave Austin wrote: >> >> >> Paul, >> Great to hear things are coming together well. >> Re the elevator trim, I adjusted the elevator position quickly when I >> found the same problem as you have. Reasoning being that I found I >> was having to put in el. trim at cruise which was causing >> un-necessary drag. I elongated the hole in the rear elevator mounts >> so that I had an adjustment capability and by trial and error got it >> set for no drag at cruise (neutral trim). Then added a small piece >> to the trim tab to give me the authority needed. Not forgetting to >> do a full trim both ways test to be sure that I could overcome the >> trim effect with the stick at approach speeds in case of trim runaway >> (which has happened!) No more problems for with that 13 years! >> Dave Austin 601HDS 912U >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > -- Mark Hubelbank NorthEast Monitoring 2 Clock Tower Place Suite 555 Maynard, MA, 01754 - USA mhubel(at)nemon.com 978-443-3955 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 24, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Summary: 5 hours of phase I flight test.
Hi Mark, Thanks for the idea. In fact, I was already thinking about some sort of spring "Trim" to assist the motorized tab. That is the way it is done on the Whitman Buttercup I am currently building in my shop. The spring approach has a big advantage in that it doesn't present any additional drag. I'm not sure if it has any disadvantage other than complexity that would be a problem for factory guys who want to save every penny. Many years ago I did a lot of flying in C-172XP. This plane has a bungee rudder trim arrangement with a lever that fits into many notches controlling the amount of trim. Unfortunately for Cessna, the lever always jumped out of its notch when there was even a little turbulence. This made it worse than not having any rudder trim at all. I guess any spring based trim arrangement must be carefully designed so it does its job under all expected conditions. I think for now I will try adding a fixed tab to the motorized one. My only big decision left to make is whether to rivet it on or use duct tape to attach it. This is a hard decision because I have drilled out so many rivets in the last year that removing a riveted tab is a no-brainer. Paul On 7/24/2011 6:15 AM, Mark Hubelbank wrote: > > Paul, > One other option on the elivator trim. I also ran out of trim with > full flaps and zenith did not have any good ideas. I moved the > Stabilizer to the the center of its allowed range, it was a bit off in > the wrong direction) and then added a spring on the elevator cable to > nutrilize the weight of the elevator. I figured one did not need to > have aerodynamic fources lifting this static weight. This made the > trim just make it with full flaps, no further trim tabs needed. If you > are interested, there is a picture of this on photo.hubbles.com (which > is being fixed at the moment, it should be back up in a bit). > > On 07/24/2011 7:44 AM, Paul Mulwitz wrote: >> >> Thanks Dave, >> >> I guess I am getting the message that adding some area to the trim >> tab is a better solution than putting a fixed trim tab on the other >> side of the elevator. It does make sense now that I think about it. >> The extra trim tab would add drag while the extension to the existing >> tab only adds drag when it is actually needed. >> >> I like your idea of adjusting the stab. rigging. Still, I want to >> hold off on that effort until I am further along in my testing. >> >> Right now my biggest goal is to get the plane and pilot (me) flying >> well enough to make nice landings. Takeoffs have been worked out >> pretty well, but the landings are not yet a thing of beauty. >> >> I really appreciate the advice I have been getting on this list. It >> has helped me move along quickly and also to avoid "Fixes" that are >> not the best solution to the problem at hand. >> >> Paul >> >> >> On 7/24/2011 3:51 AM, Dave Austin wrote: >>> >>> >>> Paul, >>> Great to hear things are coming together well. >>> Re the elevator trim, I adjusted the elevator position quickly when >>> I found the same problem as you have. Reasoning being that I found >>> I was having to put in el. trim at cruise which was causing >>> un-necessary drag. I elongated the hole in the rear elevator mounts >>> so that I had an adjustment capability and by trial and error got it >>> set for no drag at cruise (neutral trim). Then added a small piece >>> to the trim tab to give me the authority needed. Not forgetting to >>> do a full trim both ways test to be sure that I could overcome the >>> trim effect with the stick at approach speeds in case of trim >>> runaway (which has happened!) No more problems for with that 13 years! >>> Dave Austin 601HDS 912U >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Bob Emery <bobemery51(at)gmail.com>
Subject: EGT in Jab 3300a
Date: Jul 25, 2011
Hi all I am up to 5 hrs in my new 601XLB. Flying off my 25 local hrs. Flew over lake Macquarie yesterday. What a buzz. I have my CHTs in range now but I am wondering what is normal EGT range. By reducing power after TO I get them down a bit to around 1350 F max I have a Sensenich ground adjustable prop Seem highest with RPM around 2500 to 2600( cct and even descending) I live inNewcastle NSW fly out of Cessnock I would like to network with locals, who is out there? Bob Emery Sent from my iPhone On 24/07/2011, at 4:59 PM, Zenith601-List Digest Server wrote: > * > > ================================================= > Online Versions of Today's List Digest Archive > ================================================= > > Today's complete Zenith601-List Digest can also be found in either of the > two Web Links listed below. The .html file includes the Digest formatted > in HTML for viewing with a web browser and features Hyperlinked Indexes > and Message Navigation. The .txt file includes the plain ASCII version > of the Zenith601-List Digest and can be viewed with a generic text editor > such as Notepad or with a web browser. > > HTML Version: > > http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=html&Chapter 11-07-23&Archive=Zenith601 > > Text Version: > > http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=txt&Chapter 11-07-23&Archive=Zenith601 > > > =============================================== > EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive > =============================================== > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Zenith601-List Digest Archive > --- > Total Messages Posted Sat 07/23/11: 3 > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > Today's Message Index: > ---------------------- > > 1. 05:32 PM - Summary: 5 hours of phase I flight test. (Paul Mulwitz) > 2. 09:27 PM - Re: Summary: 5 hours of phase I flight test. (Peter W Johnson) > 3. 11:43 PM - Re: Summary: 5 hours of phase I flight test. (Paul Mulwitz) > > > > ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ > > > From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net> > Subject: Zenith601-List: Summary: 5 hours of phase I flight test. > > > I completed the first 5 hours of flight test yesterday and flew another > hour today. The weather is finally cooperating. > > I now have all the instruments and avionics working properly. Most of > it worked from the beginning, but there were a few hold-outs. I had the > squelch set wrong on my Garmin SL-30 so I wasn't hearing many radio > calls. Also the intercom function wasn't working on the SL-30 because I > had not grounded the required pin on the rear connector to enable it. > The LRI worked fine when I finally got the air tubes hooked up correctly > (they were reversed). I fixed a problem with the Dynon tachometer input > by adding a 27K resistor in series with the input line - as recommended > when I called Dynon. It was working at low and high RPMs but went crazy > at mid-power settings. > > The airframe has performed remarkably well. I discovered today that the > elevator trim runs out before lowering any flaps on approach for > landing. I plan to add a fixed trim tab on the other side of the > elevator to fix this problem. Perhaps I will adjust the horizontal > stabilizer rigging some time in the future, but I am reluctant to mess > with that. My plane has no tendency to lower the left wing as many have > reported. This is probably because I canted the engine to the right as > suggested in Bingellis' book. I have found the "Nicest" takeoffs happen > with 1/2 flaps and landings work best with full flaps. I'm confident > the landings will be even better when I don't have to hold the nose up > against the pitch trim. > > The engine has performed without any noticeable flaws. It is a new > Jabiru 3300A with hydraulic lifters. I have had issues with cooling > that show up mostly in cylinder head temperature on #3, but also have > seen some high oil heat in extended climbs. These have been solved by > reducing power until cooling works satisfactorily. I use full power on > takeoff, but extended climb and cruise are done at around 2700 RPM (red > line is 3300) and 90 KIAS. I will probably try to get the engine to run > harder after cleaning up the trim problem. Perhaps extra lip on the > lower cowl will be the first step. Eventually I hope to find the energy > to install "Internal pressure recovery" air intake ports for the cooling > ports and maybe for the oil cooler intake port as well. These fancy > ports have an expanding cross section as the air moves in from the front > so the airspeed is reduced and pressure increased. You see them on most > new high performance cowls (they have small round intake holes in the > cowl instead of the larger square-ish ones). > > One oddity with the engine has to do with "Air Starts". I stalled the > engine while idling it for an approach and discovered it just wouldn't > start again by adding throttle. One twist of the starter key got it > going again. I was prepared for this by the documents that suggested > you just can't get this engine started without the starter - even with a > turning propeller. > > The biggest problems have been "Pilot shortcomings". I really would > have benefited from a good checkout. Unfortunately, with much of the > fleet still grounded and none in commercial service I was unable to do > that. For anyone in the future who can get a good checkout before > entering flight test my advice is to go ahead and get the training first. > > Paul > Camas, WA > N773PM in flight test. > > > ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ > > > From: "Peter W Johnson" <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au> > Subject: RE: Zenith601-List: Summary: 5 hours of phase I flight test. > > > Paul, > > Nice to see things are progressing. > > I too run out of elevator trim with full flaps, especially when flying solo. > I added a sheet of ally to the existing elevator trim tab increasing its > area a bit and that made a lot of difference. I used a piece of scrap sheet > and double sided tape to try it out. Its still there. > > After a few hours, I added the aileron trim tab. I fly with and without > passengers and always seem to be trying to trim with the fuel selector, > using fuel out of the heavy side first etc. The trim tab made for much more > relaxed flying! > > I have an O-200 with the Zenith supplied engine mount, check out the off > set:- http://zodiac.cpc-world.com/pages/IMG_1163_JPG.htm > > I had a check out with our local agent in Bendigo's 601 before my first > flight. It was definitely worth the time and effort. Allan's 601 has a Rotax > and is a bit different in W&B that my O-200. Still better that flying > "green" though. > > Have fun > > Peter > Wonthaggi Australia > http://zodiac.cpc-world.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Paul Mulwitz > Sent: Sunday, 24 July 2011 10:27 AM > Subject: Zenith601-List: Summary: 5 hours of phase I flight test. > > > I completed the first 5 hours of flight test yesterday and flew another > hour today. The weather is finally cooperating. > > I now have all the instruments and avionics working properly. Most of > it worked from the beginning, but there were a few hold-outs. I had the > squelch set wrong on my Garmin SL-30 so I wasn't hearing many radio > calls. Also the intercom function wasn't working on the SL-30 because I > had not grounded the required pin on the rear connector to enable it. > The LRI worked fine when I finally got the air tubes hooked up correctly > (they were reversed). I fixed a problem with the Dynon tachometer input > by adding a 27K resistor in series with the input line - as recommended > when I called Dynon. It was working at low and high RPMs but went crazy > at mid-power settings. > > The airframe has performed remarkably well. I discovered today that the > elevator trim runs out before lowering any flaps on approach for > landing. I plan to add a fixed trim tab on the other side of the > elevator to fix this problem. Perhaps I will adjust the horizontal > stabilizer rigging some time in the future, but I am reluctant to mess > with that. My plane has no tendency to lower the left wing as many have > reported. This is probably because I canted the engine to the right as > suggested in Bingellis' book. I have found the "Nicest" takeoffs happen > with 1/2 flaps and landings work best with full flaps. I'm confident > the landings will be even better when I don't have to hold the nose up > against the pitch trim. > > The engine has performed without any noticeable flaws. It is a new > Jabiru 3300A with hydraulic lifters. I have had issues with cooling > that show up mostly in cylinder head temperature on #3, but also have > seen some high oil heat in extended climbs. These have been solved by > reducing power until cooling works satisfactorily. I use full power on > takeoff, but extended climb and cruise are done at around 2700 RPM (red > line is 3300) and 90 KIAS. I will probably try to get the engine to run > harder after cleaning up the trim problem. Perhaps extra lip on the > lower cowl will be the first step. Eventually I hope to find the energy > to install "Internal pressure recovery" air intake ports for the cooling > ports and maybe for the oil cooler intake port as well. These fancy > ports have an expanding cross section as the air moves in from the front > so the airspeed is reduced and pressure increased. You see them on most > new high performance cowls (they have small round intake holes in the > cowl instead of the larger square-ish ones). > > One oddity with the engine has to do with "Air Starts". I stalled the > engine while idling it for an approach and discovered it just wouldn't > start again by adding throttle. One twist of the starter key got it > going again. I was prepared for this by the documents that suggested > you just can't get this engine started without the starter - even with a > turning propeller. > > The biggest problems have been "Pilot shortcomings". I really would > have benefited from a good checkout. Unfortunately, with much of the > fleet still grounded and none in commercial service I was unable to do > that. For anyone in the future who can get a good checkout before > entering flight test my advice is to go ahead and get the training first. > > Paul > Camas, WA > N773PM in flight test. > > > ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ > > > From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net> > Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Summary: 5 hours of phase I flight test. > > > Hi Peter, > > Your offset looks a lot like mine. I started trying to set 3 degrees to > the right, but after running the engine it settled in at perhaps half > that amount. > > I installed aileron trim in my original build. It does seem to help. > Today I played with it a bit and found it is more of a hint at > controlling the roll than a direct order. The large dihedral angle > probably makes shifting the roll position of the plane a bit difficult. > > I'll keep your idea in mind about extending the elevator trim. I > thought about a fixed trim tab because I always seem to trim in the up > direction and never in the down direction. It is "Up" trim that I need > more of for flying with flaps. > > Best regards, > > Paul > > On 7/23/2011 9:22 PM, Peter W Johnson wrote: >> --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "Peter W Johnson" >> >> Paul, >> >> Nice to see things are progressing. >> >> I too run out of elevator trim with full flaps, especially when flying solo. >> I added a sheet of ally to the existing elevator trim tab increasing its >> area a bit and that made a lot of difference. I used a piece of scrap sheet >> and double sided tape to try it out. Its still there. >> >> After a few hours, I added the aileron trim tab. I fly with and without >> passengers and always seem to be trying to trim with the fuel selector, >> using fuel out of the heavy side first etc. The trim tab made for much more >> relaxed flying! >> >> I have an O-200 with the Zenith supplied engine mount, check out the off >> set:- http://zodiac.cpc-world.com/pages/IMG_1163_JPG.htm >> >> I had a check out with our local agent in Bendigo's 601 before my first >> flight. It was definitely worth the time and effort. Allan's 601 has a Rotax >> and is a bit different in W&B that my O-200. Still better that flying >> "green" though. >> >> Have fun >> >> Peter >> Wonthaggi Australia >> http://zodiac.cpc-world.com >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com >> [mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Paul Mulwitz >> Sent: Sunday, 24 July 2011 10:27 AM >> To: zenith601-list(at)matronics.com >> Subject: Zenith601-List: Summary: 5 hours of phase I flight test. >> >> --> Zenith601-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz >> >> I completed the first 5 hours of flight test yesterday and flew another >> hour today. The weather is finally cooperating. >> >> I now have all the instruments and avionics working properly. Most of >> it worked from the beginning, but there were a few hold-outs. I had the >> squelch set wrong on my Garmin SL-30 so I wasn't hearing many radio >> calls. Also the intercom function wasn't working on the SL-30 because I >> had not grounded the required pin on the rear connector to enable it. >> The LRI worked fine when I finally got the air tubes hooked up correctly >> (they were reversed). I fixed a problem with the Dynon tachometer input >> by adding a 27K resistor in series with the input line - as recommended >> when I called Dynon. It was working at low and high RPMs but went crazy >> at mid-power settings. >> >> The airframe has performed remarkably well. I discovered today that the >> elevator trim runs out before lowering any flaps on approach for >> landing. I plan to add a fixed trim tab on the other side of the >> elevator to fix this problem. Perhaps I will adjust the horizontal >> stabilizer rigging some time in the future, but I am reluctant to mess >> with that. My plane has no tendency to lower the left wing as many have >> reported. This is probably because I canted the engine to the right as >> suggested in Bingellis' book. I have found the "Nicest" takeoffs happen >> with 1/2 flaps and landings work best with full flaps. I'm confident >> the landings will be even better when I don't have to hold the nose up >> against the pitch trim. >> >> The engine has performed without any noticeable flaws. It is a new >> Jabiru 3300A with hydraulic lifters. I have had issues with cooling >> that show up mostly in cylinder head temperature on #3, but also have >> seen some high oil heat in extended climbs. These have been solved by >> reducing power until cooling works satisfactorily. I use full power on >> takeoff, but extended climb and cruise are done at around 2700 RPM (red >> line is 3300) and 90 KIAS. I will probably try to get the engine to run >> harder after cleaning up the trim problem. Perhaps extra lip on the >> lower cowl will be the first step. Eventually I hope to find the energy >> to install "Internal pressure recovery" air intake ports for the cooling >> ports and maybe for the oil cooler intake port as well. These fancy >> ports have an expanding cross section as the air moves in from the front >> so the airspeed is reduced and pressure increased. You see them on most >> new high performance cowls (they have small round intake holes in the >> cowl instead of the larger square-ish ones). >> >> One oddity with the engine has to do with "Air Starts". I stalled the >> engine while idling it for an approach and discovered it just wouldn't >> start again by adding throttle. One twist of the starter key got it >> going again. I was prepared for this by the documents that suggested >> you just can't get this engine started without the starter - even with a >> turning propeller. >> >> The biggest problems have been "Pilot shortcomings". I really would >> have benefited from a good checkout. Unfortunately, with much of the >> fleet still grounded and none in commercial service I was unable to do >> that. For anyone in the future who can get a good checkout before >> entering flight test my advice is to go ahead and get the training first. >> >> Paul >> Camas, WA >> N773PM in flight test. >> >> > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Bob Emery <bobemery51(at)gmail.com>
Subject: EGT in Jab 3300a
Date: Jul 25, 2011
Hi all I am up to 5 hrs in my new 601XLB. Flying off my 25 local hrs. Flew over lake Macquarie yesterday. What a buzz. I have my CHTs in range now but I am wondering what is normal EGT range. By reducing power after TO I get them down a bit to around 1350 F max I have a Sensenich ground adjustable prop Seem highest with RPM around 2500 to 2600( cct and even descending) I live inNewcastle NSW fly out of Cessnock I would like to network with locals, who is out there? Bob Emery Sent from my iPhone On 24/07/2011, at 4:59 PM, Zenith601-List Digest Server wrote: > * > > ================================================= > Online Versions of Today's List Digest Archive > ================================================= > > Today's complete Zenith601-List Digest can also be found in either of the > two Web Links listed below. The .html file includes the Digest formatted > in HTML for viewing with a web browser and features Hyperlinked Indexes > and Message Navigation. The .txt file includes the plain ASCII version > of the Zenith601-List Digest and can be viewed with a generic text editor > such as Notepad or with a web browser. > > HTML Version: > > http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=html&Chapter 11-07-23&Archive=Zenith601 > > Text Version: > > http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=txt&Chapter 11-07-23&Archive=Zenith601 > > > =============================================== > EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive > =============================================== > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Zenith601-List Digest Archive > --- > Total Messages Posted Sat 07/23/11: 3 > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > Today's Message Index: > ---------------------- > > 1. 05:32 PM - Summary: 5 hours of phase I flight test. (Paul Mulwitz) > 2. 09:27 PM - Re: Summary: 5 hours of phase I flight test. (Peter W Johnson) > 3. 11:43 PM - Re: Summary: 5 hours of phase I flight test. (Paul Mulwitz) > > > > ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ > > > From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net> > Subject: Zenith601-List: Summary: 5 hours of phase I flight test. > > > I completed the first 5 hours of flight test yesterday and flew another > hour today. The weather is finally cooperating. > > I now have all the instruments and avionics working properly. Most of > it worked from the beginning, but there were a few hold-outs. I had the > squelch set wrong on my Garmin SL-30 so I wasn't hearing many radio > calls. Also the intercom function wasn't working on the SL-30 because I > had not grounded the required pin on the rear connector to enable it. > The LRI worked fine when I finally got the air tubes hooked up correctly > (they were reversed). I fixed a problem with the Dynon tachometer input > by adding a 27K resistor in series with the input line - as recommended > when I called Dynon. It was working at low and high RPMs but went crazy > at mid-power settings. > > The airframe has performed remarkably well. I discovered today that the > elevator trim runs out before lowering any flaps on approach for > landing. I plan to add a fixed trim tab on the other side of the > elevator to fix this problem. Perhaps I will adjust the horizontal > stabilizer rigging some time in the future, but I am reluctant to mess > with that. My plane has no tendency to lower the left wing as many have > reported. This is probably because I canted the engine to the right as > suggested in Bingellis' book. I have found the "Nicest" takeoffs happen > with 1/2 flaps and landings work best with full flaps. I'm confident > the landings will be even better when I don't have to hold the nose up > against the pitch trim. > > The engine has performed without any noticeable flaws. It is a new > Jabiru 3300A with hydraulic lifters. I have had issues with cooling > that show up mostly in cylinder head temperature on #3, but also have > seen some high oil heat in extended climbs. These have been solved by > reducing power until cooling works satisfactorily. I use full power on > takeoff, but extended climb and cruise are done at around 2700 RPM (red > line is 3300) and 90 KIAS. I will probably try to get the engine to run > harder after cleaning up the trim problem. Perhaps extra lip on the > lower cowl will be the first step. Eventually I hope to find the energy > to install "Internal pressure recovery" air intake ports for the cooling > ports and maybe for the oil cooler intake port as well. These fancy > ports have an expanding cross section as the air moves in from the front > so the airspeed is reduced and pressure increased. You see them on most > new high performance cowls (they have small round intake holes in the > cowl instead of the larger square-ish ones). > > One oddity with the engine has to do with "Air Starts". I stalled the > engine while idling it for an approach and discovered it just wouldn't > start again by adding throttle. One twist of the starter key got it > going again. I was prepared for this by the documents that suggested > you just can't get this engine started without the starter - even with a > turning propeller. > > The biggest problems have been "Pilot shortcomings". I really would > have benefited from a good checkout. Unfortunately, with much of the > fleet still grounded and none in commercial service I was unable to do > that. For anyone in the future who can get a good checkout before > entering flight test my advice is to go ahead and get the training first. > > Paul > Camas, WA > N773PM in flight test. > > > ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ > > > From: "Peter W Johnson" <vk3eka(at)bigpond.net.au> > Subject: RE: Zenith601-List: Summary: 5 hours of phase I flight test. > > > Paul, > > Nice to see things are progressing. > > I too run out of elevator trim with full flaps, especially when flying solo. > I added a sheet of ally to the existing elevator trim tab increasing its > area a bit and that made a lot of difference. I used a piece of scrap sheet > and double sided tape to try it out. Its still there. > > After a few hours, I added the aileron trim tab. I fly with and without > passengers and always seem to be trying to trim with the fuel selector, > using fuel out of the heavy side first etc. The trim tab made for much more > relaxed flying! > > I have an O-200 with the Zenith supplied engine mount, check out the off > set:- http://zodiac.cpc-world.com/pages/IMG_1163_JPG.htm > > I had a check out with our local agent in Bendigo's 601 before my first > flight. It was definitely worth the time and effort. Allan's 601 has a Rotax > and is a bit different in W&B that my O-200. Still better that flying > "green" though. > > Have fun > > Peter > Wonthaggi Australia > http://zodiac.cpc-world.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Paul Mulwitz > Sent: Sunday, 24 July 2011 10:27 AM > Subject: Zenith601-List: Summary: 5 hours of phase I flight test. > > > I completed the first 5 hours of flight test yesterday and flew another > hour today. The weather is finally cooperating. > > I now have all the instruments and avionics working properly. Most of > it worked from the beginning, but there were a few hold-outs. I had the > squelch set wrong on my Garmin SL-30 so I wasn't hearing many radio > calls. Also the intercom function wasn't working on the SL-30 because I > had not grounded the required pin on the rear connector to enable it. > The LRI worked fine when I finally got the air tubes hooked up correctly > (they were reversed). I fixed a problem with the Dynon tachometer input > by adding a 27K resistor in series with the input line - as recommended > when I called Dynon. It was working at low and high RPMs but went crazy > at mid-power settings. > > The airframe has performed remarkably well. I discovered today that the > elevator trim runs out before lowering any flaps on approach for > landing. I plan to add a fixed trim tab on the other side of the > elevator to fix this problem. Perhaps I will adjust the horizontal > stabilizer rigging some time in the future, but I am reluctant to mess > with that. My plane has no tendency to lower the left wing as many have > reported. This is probably because I canted the engine to the right as > suggested in Bingellis' book. I have found the "Nicest" takeoffs happen > with 1/2 flaps and landings work best with full flaps. I'm confident > the landings will be even better when I don't have to hold the nose up > against the pitch trim. > > The engine has performed without any noticeable flaws. It is a new > Jabiru 3300A with hydraulic lifters. I have had issues with cooling > that show up mostly in cylinder head temperature on #3, but also have > seen some high oil heat in extended climbs. These have been solved by > reducing power until cooling works satisfactorily. I use full power on > takeoff, but extended climb and cruise are done at around 2700 RPM (red > line is 3300) and 90 KIAS. I will probably try to get the engine to run > harder after cleaning up the trim problem. Perhaps extra lip on the > lower cowl will be the first step. Eventually I hope to find the energy > to install "Internal pressure recovery" air intake ports for the cooling > ports and maybe for the oil cooler intake port as well. These fancy > ports have an expanding cross section as the air moves in from the front > so the airspeed is reduced and pressure increased. You see them on most > new high performance cowls (they have small round intake holes in the > cowl instead of the larger square-ish ones). > > One oddity with the engine has to do with "Air Starts". I stalled the > engine while idling it for an approach and discovered it just wouldn't > start again by adding throttle. One twist of the starter key got it > going again. I was prepared for this by the documents that suggested > you just can't get this engine started without the starter - even with a > turning propeller. > > The biggest problems have been "Pilot shortcomings". I really would > have benefited from a good checkout. Unfortunately, with much of the > fleet still grounded and none in commercial service I was unable to do > that. For anyone in the future who can get a good checkout before > entering flight test my advice is to go ahead and get the training first. > > Paul > Camas, WA > N773PM in flight test. > > > ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ > > > From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net> > Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Summary: 5 hours of phase I flight test. > > > Hi Peter, > > Your offset looks a lot like mine. I started trying to set 3 degrees to > the right, but after running the engine it settled in at perhaps half > that amount. > > I installed aileron trim in my original build. It does seem to help. > Today I played with it a bit and found it is more of a hint at > controlling the roll than a direct order. The large dihedral angle > probably makes shifting the roll position of the plane a bit difficult. > > I'll keep your idea in mind about extending the elevator trim. I > thought about a fixed trim tab because I always seem to trim in the up > direction and never in the down direction. It is "Up" trim that I need > more of for flying with flaps. > > Best regards, > > Paul > > On 7/23/2011 9:22 PM, Peter W Johnson wrote: >> --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "Peter W Johnson" >> >> Paul, >> >> Nice to see things are progressing. >> >> I too run out of elevator trim with full flaps, especially when flying solo. >> I added a sheet of ally to the existing elevator trim tab increasing its >> area a bit and that made a lot of difference. I used a piece of scrap sheet >> and double sided tape to try it out. Its still there. >> >> After a few hours, I added the aileron trim tab. I fly with and without >> passengers and always seem to be trying to trim with the fuel selector, >> using fuel out of the heavy side first etc. The trim tab made for much more >> relaxed flying! >> >> I have an O-200 with the Zenith supplied engine mount, check out the off >> set:- http://zodiac.cpc-world.com/pages/IMG_1163_JPG.htm >> >> I had a check out with our local agent in Bendigo's 601 before my first >> flight. It was definitely worth the time and effort. Allan's 601 has a Rotax >> and is a bit different in W&B that my O-200. Still better that flying >> "green" though. >> >> Have fun >> >> Peter >> Wonthaggi Australia >> http://zodiac.cpc-world.com >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com >> [mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Paul Mulwitz >> Sent: Sunday, 24 July 2011 10:27 AM >> To: zenith601-list(at)matronics.com >> Subject: Zenith601-List: Summary: 5 hours of phase I flight test. >> >> --> Zenith601-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz >> >> I completed the first 5 hours of flight test yesterday and flew another >> hour today. The weather is finally cooperating. >> >> I now have all the instruments and avionics working properly. Most of >> it worked from the beginning, but there were a few hold-outs. I had the >> squelch set wrong on my Garmin SL-30 so I wasn't hearing many radio >> calls. Also the intercom function wasn't working on the SL-30 because I >> had not grounded the required pin on the rear connector to enable it. >> The LRI worked fine when I finally got the air tubes hooked up correctly >> (they were reversed). I fixed a problem with the Dynon tachometer input >> by adding a 27K resistor in series with the input line - as recommended >> when I called Dynon. It was working at low and high RPMs but went crazy >> at mid-power settings. >> >> The airframe has performed remarkably well. I discovered today that the >> elevator trim runs out before lowering any flaps on approach for >> landing. I plan to add a fixed trim tab on the other side of the >> elevator to fix this problem. Perhaps I will adjust the horizontal >> stabilizer rigging some time in the future, but I am reluctant to mess >> with that. My plane has no tendency to lower the left wing as many have >> reported. This is probably because I canted the engine to the right as >> suggested in Bingellis' book. I have found the "Nicest" takeoffs happen >> with 1/2 flaps and landings work best with full flaps. I'm confident >> the landings will be even better when I don't have to hold the nose up >> against the pitch trim. >> >> The engine has performed without any noticeable flaws. It is a new >> Jabiru 3300A with hydraulic lifters. I have had issues with cooling >> that show up mostly in cylinder head temperature on #3, but also have >> seen some high oil heat in extended climbs. These have been solved by >> reducing power until cooling works satisfactorily. I use full power on >> takeoff, but extended climb and cruise are done at around 2700 RPM (red >> line is 3300) and 90 KIAS. I will probably try to get the engine to run >> harder after cleaning up the trim problem. Perhaps extra lip on the >> lower cowl will be the first step. Eventually I hope to find the energy >> to install "Internal pressure recovery" air intake ports for the cooling >> ports and maybe for the oil cooler intake port as well. These fancy >> ports have an expanding cross section as the air moves in from the front >> so the airspeed is reduced and pressure increased. You see them on most >> new high performance cowls (they have small round intake holes in the >> cowl instead of the larger square-ish ones). >> >> One oddity with the engine has to do with "Air Starts". I stalled the >> engine while idling it for an approach and discovered it just wouldn't >> start again by adding throttle. One twist of the starter key got it >> going again. I was prepared for this by the documents that suggested >> you just can't get this engine started without the starter - even with a >> turning propeller. >> >> The biggest problems have been "Pilot shortcomings". I really would >> have benefited from a good checkout. Unfortunately, with much of the >> fleet still grounded and none in commercial service I was unable to do >> that. For anyone in the future who can get a good checkout before >> entering flight test my advice is to go ahead and get the training first. >> >> Paul >> Camas, WA >> N773PM in flight test. >> >> > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: matco park brake location
From: "w8n2bup" <johnrich(at)everestkc.net>
Date: Jul 27, 2011
I put my Matco brake on the console between the seat and instrument panel above my fuel selector. I still need to make a nice knob for the lever but I don't need any linkage cable and it uses the empty space. Also looks great with the label next to it. I also used the 1/8th size tubing from Matco. I would be happy to talk about it if you want to call me. John 913-915-1989 Central time. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347888#347888 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/mvc_076s_162.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jul 28, 2011
From: Albert Rupp <a.f.rupp(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: matco park brake location
John, If you are using the Matco MC-5 brake actuator the vent hole on the top of the actuator has to be the highest point in the hydraulic system. See note in the Matco web site. Al Rupp 601XLB Corvair Lake Placid NY ________________________________ From: w8n2bup <johnrich(at)everestkc.net> Sent: Thu, July 28, 2011 1:10:06 AM Subject: Zenith601-List: Re: matco park brake location I put my Matco brake on the console between the seat and instrument panel above my fuel selector. I still need to make a nice knob for the lever but I don't need any linkage cable and it uses the empty space. Also looks great with the label next to it. I also used the 1/8th size tubing from Matco. I would be happy to talk about it if you want to call me. John 913-915-1989 Central time. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347888#347888 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/mvc_076s_162.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: matco park brake location
From: "w8n2bup" <johnrich(at)everestkc.net>
Date: Jul 28, 2011
Hi Al. Thanks for the concern. You are correct in the need for the reservoir to be at the highest point. I traded my reservoir style back to matco for 2 more slave ones like the ones I have for the passenger side. Then used a remote reservoir ( also from matco ) that is mounted higher on the firewall than my valve. I really like the 1/8th tubing because it was easy to route under the seat and come out of the floor behind the landing gear at a very sharp angle pointed right at the back of the legs. I just drilled a 1/2 inch hole in the floor (one on each side ), then riveted a square piece of faring over it with a 1/8th hole drilled at a sharp angle through the faring. No elbows needed this way and the 1/8th tubing lays against the bottom very snugly about 3 inches exposed before sticking out toward the back of the leg. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=347956#347956 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: AOA with Dynon
From: "chris Sinfield" <chris_sinfield(at)yahoo.com.au>
Date: Jul 29, 2011
Hi Has anyone successfully used their original Zenith supplied Static probe to get the Dynon D100 Angle of Attack indication to work? And if you did how did you do it and what angle was it bent down to?? Or do you have to bite the bullet and buy Dynon's Unheated probe???? Chris.. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348044#348044 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Don Honabach <don.honabach(at)pcperfect.com>
Subject: AOA with Dynon
Date: Jul 30, 2011
Chris - I'm using Dynon's Unheated Probe for the AOA on my D180. Works well. Never tried the ZAC one. Thanks, Don -----Original Message----- From: owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of chris Sinfield Sent: Friday, July 29, 2011 6:50 PM Subject: Zenith601-List: AOA with Dynon --> Hi Has anyone successfully used their original Zenith supplied Static probe to get the Dynon D100 Angle of Attack indication to work? And if you did how did you do it and what angle was it bent down to?? Or do you have to bite the bullet and buy Dynon's Unheated probe???? Chris.. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348044#348044 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: AOA with Dynon
From: "Alan Smith" <alsmith(at)olemac.net>
Date: Jul 31, 2011
You must have twp pressure ports for the angle of attack to work. There is a drawing on the Dynon web site that may help. AL Smith -------- alschief Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348184#348184 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: AOA with Dynon
From: "merlin" <cw4jasper(at)bellsouth.net>
Date: Jul 31, 2011
Check with Gus at "flywithgus.com" or call him. I've seen a video on how he does this with the supplied pitot tube. It may be on the EAA website. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348186#348186 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: AOA with Dynon
From: "chris Sinfield" <chris_sinfield(at)yahoo.com.au>
Date: Aug 03, 2011
anyone got a good Email address as his "flywith gus" one just bounces back? Chris Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348485#348485 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: AOA with Dynon
From: "Ron Lendon" <ron.lendon(at)gmail.com>
Date: Aug 03, 2011
Chris, The angle of attack uses two pitot pickups, one is straight into the wind, the other is at a forty-five degree angle to the wind. The hole sizes are the same ( tube ID ) and it works by pressure differential. You can add a tube to the straight tube as long as you bend the new tube so the end is presented to the wind 45 degrees away from the original tube. -------- Ron Lendon, Detroit, MI WW Corvair with Roy's Garage 5th bearing Zodiac XL, ScrapBuilder ;-) http://www.mykitlog.com/rlendon Corvair Engine Prints: http://www.zenith.aero/profile/RonLendon Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348563#348563 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: AOA with Dynon
From: "chris Sinfield" <chris_sinfield(at)yahoo.com.au>
Date: Aug 04, 2011
So Ron if I bend the bottom tube of the Zenith probe down 45 Deg and use another static vent source from the fuse sides then it should work if connected to a Dynon? Chris Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348581#348581 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 04, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: AOA with Dynon
Hi Chris, I have a Lift Reserve Indicator (LRI) I built while waiting for one of my sub-kits to arrive. It seems to work in a similar fashion to the Dynon AOA. It uses a metal divider to choose which of two input ports gets the larger amount of air pressure - depending on the attitude of the airplane. Rather than having one direct pitot tube and one at a 45 degree angle it has one input pointed up and another pointed down. I mentioned all that to allow me to point out that the idea works just fine but the actual implementation needs to be adjusted and calibrated to be useful in flight. I have an analog gauge that shows the differential pressure. Dynon just shows a few points of data which (presumably) show similar information. You might need to tweak the angle of the second pressure input tube to get a reading on the Dynon that is useful. Paul Camas, WA On 8/4/2011 6:03 AM, chris Sinfield wrote: > So Ron > if I bend the bottom tube of the Zenith probe down 45 Deg and use another static vent source from the fuse sides then it should work if connected to a Dynon? > Chris ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Christoph Steiner <mcr01steiner(at)mac.com>
Subject: Re: AOA with Dynon
Date: Aug 04, 2011
Sam Buchanan successfully used a different pressure source for the Dynon AOA indicator: http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=36346 How to build your own is described here, ( I think this is the one Paul is referring to): http://www.pegazair.on-the-net.ca/ClareSquared/pictures/airframe/lri.htm It seems a similar probe with only the lower port, mounted at an appropriate location, should work with the Dynon. Christoph > > Hi Chris, > > I have a Lift Reserve Indicator (LRI) I built while waiting for one of my sub-kits to arrive. It seems to work in a similar fashion to the Dynon AOA. It uses a metal divider to choose which of two input ports gets the larger amount of air pressure - depending on the attitude of the airplane. Rather than having one direct pitot tube and one at a 45 degree angle it has one input pointed up and another pointed down. > ... > Paul > Camas, WA > > On 8/4/2011 6:03 AM, chris Sinfield wrote: >> So Ron >> if I bend the bottom tube of the Zenith probe down 45 Deg and use another static vent source from the fuse sides then it should work if connected to a Dynon? >> Chris > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Steve Sims" <zenoah(at)mchsi.com>
Subject: Canopy Question
Date: Aug 04, 2011
I am installing a forward hinge canopy on my 601 HDS. Zenith sent the side covers 6C3-6/1 which are larger than the original version and also curved which the drawings don=99t address. If anyone has some close up pictures of their installation please send them to me. Thanks, Steve Sims 601HDS Corvair ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: AOA with Dynon
From: "Ron Lendon" <ron.lendon(at)gmail.com>
Date: Aug 05, 2011
chris Sinfield wrote: > So Ron > if I bend the bottom tube of the Zenith probe down 45 Deg and use another static vent source from the fuse sides then it should work if connected to a Dynon? > Chris Yep! -------- Ron Lendon, Detroit, MI WW Corvair with Roy's Garage 5th bearing Zodiac XL, ScrapBuilder ;-) http://www.mykitlog.com/rlendon Corvair Engine Prints: http://www.zenith.aero/profile/RonLendon Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348714#348714 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: AOA with Dynon
From: "alsmith" <alan.smith(at)nutreco.com>
Date: Aug 05, 2011
It takes two Ram Air inputs and one static Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=348720#348720 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Larry McFarland" <larry(at)macsmachine.com>
Subject: Canopy Question
Date: Aug 06, 2011
Steve, This page is my whole canopy installation. Hope it helps a bit. http://www.macsmachine.com/html/canopy.htm Larry McFarland 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com From: owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Steve Sims Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 7:19 PM Subject: [Probable Spam] Zenith601-List: Canopy Question I am installing a forward hinge canopy on my 601 HDS. Zenith sent the side covers 6C3-6/1 which are larger than the original version and also curved which the drawings don=99t address. If anyone has some close up pictures of their installation please send them to me. Thanks, Steve Sims 601HDS Corvair ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 06, 2011
From: Bill Naumuk <naumuk(at)windstream.net>
Subject: AeroElectric connection
All- Since my panel is wired and functional, I have a copy of AeroElectric Connection that I put in a ring binder for sale. Make an offer. Thanks. Bill ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Oil Cooler and Misc HD parts
From: "MHerder" <michaelherder(at)beckgroup.com>
Date: Aug 15, 2011
Have a 7 bar Aero Classics oil cooler, used for 60 hrs on a 601 HD. New $265 will sell for half that, shipped to anywhere in CONUS. Also have quite a few HD parts that I didn't use, including a panel and some other misc parts. Make an offer. I'll work to develop a list. Have facet fuel pump, Dynon D100 tray, will sell everything I have for half the list cost. Gascolator fittings and fuel shut offs all sorts of goodies. Just trying to buy a few gallons of avgas and get rid of some stuff I probably wont use! Dynon tray is a good deal for anyone that wants to use a dynon, but doesn't want to fork out the dough right now. -------- Zodiac 601 HD Jabiru 3300 Wood Sensinich 64x47 Finally Flying Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349587#349587 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Wood prop?
Date: Aug 16, 2011
I noticed in Michael signature "Senjsenjitch wood prop". That would be my c hoice for my new Franklin install. However i keep my plane outside. Is t his a bad idea to have a wood prop on a plane exposed mto the elements of na ture? Is there a way to protect the prop? Sent from my iPad On Aug 15, 2011, at 10:30 PM, "MHerder" wrote: > > -------- > Zodiac 601 HD > Jabiru 3300 > Wood Sensinich 64x47 > Finally Flying > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "fritz" <klondike(at)megalink.net>
Subject: Franklin engine
Date: Aug 16, 2011
Michel-- Could you give us a "short story" on your Franklin engine. HP, weight, age etc---- I read a long time ago about Franklin trying to make a comeback (Poland, I believe). I always felt, Franklin was underrated by the general public--- my opinion only. Fritz ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michel Therrien" <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 7:03 AM Subject: Zenith601-List: Wood prop? I noticed in Michael signature "Senjsenjitch wood prop". That would be my choice for my new Franklin install. However i keep my plane outside. Is this a bad idea to have a wood prop on a plane exposed mto the elements of nature? Is there a way to protect the prop? Sent from my iPad On Aug 15, 2011, at 10:30 PM, "MHerder" wrote: > > -------- > Zodiac 601 HD > Jabiru 3300 > Wood Sensinich 64x47 > Finally Flying > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "gpjann1(at)netzero.com" <gpjann1(at)netzero.net>
Date: Aug 16, 2011
Subject: Re: Zenith601-List Digest: 1 Msgs - 08/15/11
Any HD outer wing panels or parts for sale? GPJ My email address is gpjann1(at)netzero.com ---------- Original Message ---------- From: Zenith601-List Digest Server <zenith601-list(at)matronics.com> Subject: Zenith601-List Digest: 1 Msgs - 08/15/11 Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2011 23:59:16 -0700 * ================================================= Online Versions of Today's List Digest Archive ================================================= Today's complete Zenith601-List Digest can also be found in either of the two Web Links listed below. The .html file includes the Digest formatted in HTML for viewing with a web browser and features Hyperlinked Indexes and Message Navigation. The .txt file includes the plain ASCII version of the Zenith601-List Digest and can be viewed with a generic text editor such as Notepad or with a web browser. HTML Version: http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=html&Chapter 11-08-15&Archive=Zenith601 Text Version: http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=txt&Chapter 11-08-15&Archive=Zenith601 =============================================== EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive =============================================== ---------------------------------------------------------- Zenith601-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Mon 08/15/11: 1 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 07:34 PM - Oil Cooler and Misc HD parts (MHerder) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Subject: Zenith601-List: Oil Cooler and Misc HD parts From: "MHerder" <michaelherder(at)beckgroup.com> Have a 7 bar Aero Classics oil cooler, used for 60 hrs on a 601 HD. New $265 will sell for half that, shipped to anywhere in CONUS. Also have quite a few HD parts that I didn't use, including a panel and some other misc parts. Make an offer. I'll work to develop a list. Have facet fuel pump, Dynon D100 tray, will sell everything I have for half the list cost. Gascolator fittings and fuel shut offs all sorts of goodies. Just trying to buy a few gallons of avgas and get rid of some stuff I probably wont use! Dynon tray is a good deal for anyone that wants to use a dynon, but doesn't want to fork out the dough right now. -------- Zodiac 601 HD Jabiru 3300 Wood Sensinich 64x47 Finally Flying Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349587#349587 ____________________________________________________________ Penny Stock Jumping 3000% Sign up to the #1 voted penny stock newsletter for free today! http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/4e4aef915ad816a99f2st03vuc ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bob Gibfried" <rfg842(at)cox.net>
Subject: Wood props
Date: Aug 17, 2011
Wood props have been used for years and years. If you've ever been to Alaska you probably have seen lots of airplanes, both metal and fabric with wooden props sitting year round in the weather and under three foot of snow. Only thing I was ever told was to wax the props regularly, inspect them for cracks and leave the props horizontal to make sure the internal moisture is evenly balanced. Bob PS I've got a Stuba (Florida) wood prop on my Volks engine. Has worked find for the past ten years. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Joe" <backstagelive(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Just a couple of questions
Date: Aug 23, 2011
I have a couple of questions I hope you can help me with. I just finished all of the changes for the B model change and now it's time to start on regular construction again! I ran into a few small snags I hope you can give me some advise on. I have brass through the firewall threaded fittings for my 2 fuel lines going through the firewall. Someone at EAA told me to use aluminum fittings rather than the brass because they were lighter and safer. I can understand the lightness, but I don't understand why they would be safer. What are you guys using for through the firewall fittings for your fuel lines? I don't mind sacrificing weight for safety. I have seen rubber fuel lines with steel reinforcement on the outside in both a race car and in an RV6. What is the safest way to build a fuel system and what are the finest products I can buy made for safety? Tonight I fit the stab to the fuselage for the very first time! It was a great feeling to see the stab sitting there on the fuselage. I knew there would be a sizable gap between the fuselage skins and the bottom of the stab, but I didn't think it would be big enough to put my finger in there! What are you guys doing with that big open hole? Would it be worth it to build a fairing of some sort on the bottom of the stab? Is there a reason for the big gap? I am also ordering a new elevator for my plane from the factory, unless I can find a used or unbuilt one. There are 2 types. One with the trim tab cut into the elevator, and one with a full tab on the outside of the elevator. I saw both in Oshkosh and they both look OK for me, but which one is better? Which one is lighter? I am preparing a web page this week where you will be able to go and download pictures of the banquet and award ceremonies. I filmed the entire banquet and I still can't get over the incredible speech Paul Poberezny gave. I will have this available shortly for everyone. Thanks for any help you can give. It feels good to be working on something other than the retrofit!!! Joe in Oshkosh ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 24, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Just a couple of questions
Hi Joe, I agree with you about Paul Poberezny's speech. He stole the show. The biggest part of my memory of the event is the notion that he is still building planes at age 90. This must be a hobby that is good for your health! I don't remember what material I used for the fuel line going through the firewall. I do know I have only one line going through. I think I have the normal arrangement of fuel lines going from the two tanks to the fuel selector which is mounted on the center console. From there one line goes to the gascolator which is mounted on the bottom of the cabin and from there through the firewall. I can't imagine why you would have two lines going through the firewall. I guess the ideal material for the tube going through the firewall would be steel. it will stand up to the heat of a fire a lot better than either brass or aluminum. Brass would hold up better than aluminum. I have no idea how these materials act in the presence of fuel. Perhaps there is a chance of interaction with the fuel, but brass fittings are quite normal in fuel systems. I don't think you need to worry about the hole under the horizontal stabilizer. The fuselage blocks airflow in this area. Good luck with your project. Paul Camas, WA XL - 10 hours flight test completed. On 8/23/2011 9:52 PM, Joe wrote: > > I have a couple of questions I hope you can help me with. > > I just finished all of the changes for the B model change and now it's > time to start on regular construction again! I ran into a few small > snags I hope you can give me some advise on. > > I have brass through the firewall threaded fittings for my 2 fuel > lines going through the firewall. Someone at EAA told me to use > aluminum fittings rather than the brass because they were lighter and > safer. I can understand the lightness, but I don't understand why they > would be safer. What are you guys using for through the firewall > fittings for your fuel lines? I don't mind sacrificing weight for > safety. I have seen rubber fuel lines with steel reinforcement on the > outside in both a race car and in an RV6. What is the safest way to > build a fuel system and what are the finest products I can buy made > for safety? > > Tonight I fit the stab to the fuselage for the very first time! It was > a great feeling to see the stab sitting there on the fuselage. I knew > there would be a sizable gap between the fuselage skins and the bottom > of the stab, but I didn't think it would be big enough to put my > finger in there! What are you guys doing with that big open hole? > Would it be worth it to build a fairing of some sort on the bottom of > the stab? Is there a reason for the big gap? > > I am also ordering a new elevator for my plane from the factory, > unless I can find a used or unbuilt one. There are 2 types. One with > the trim tab cut into the elevator, and one with a full tab on the > outside of the elevator. I saw both in Oshkosh and they both look OK > for me, but which one is better? Which one is lighter? > > I am preparing a web page this week where you will be able to go and > download pictures of the banquet and award ceremonies. I filmed the > entire banquet and I still can't get over the incredible speech Paul > Poberezny gave. I will have this available shortly for everyone. > > Thanks for any help you can give. It feels good to be working on > something other than the retrofit!!! > > Joe in Oshkosh > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Larry McFarland" <larry(at)macsmachine.com>
Subject: Just a couple of questions
Date: Aug 24, 2011
HI Joe, Don't use automotive fittings in your airplane. 3/8 aluminum tube is a better way of getting your fuel system plumbed. Check out Aircraft Spruce and get a set of Bingelis books that will steer you to the best alternatives in fuel systems. Shutoff valves should be ball valve, because the typical tapered brass valve will gall and seep fuel eventually. I used up two before changing to the ball valve. The images below show how I got thru the firewall. http://www.macsmachine.com/images/headertank/full/ball%20valve.gif http://www.macsmachine.com/images/subaruengine/full/pump&gascolator.gif Good luck, Larry McFarland 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com -----Original Message----- From: owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Joe Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 11:52 PM Subject: [Probable Spam] Zenith601-List: Just a couple of questions I have a couple of questions I hope you can help me with. I just finished all of the changes for the B model change and now it's time to start on regular construction again! I ran into a few small snags I hope you can give me some advise on. I have brass through the firewall threaded fittings for my 2 fuel lines going through the firewall. Someone at EAA told me to use aluminum fittings rather than the brass because they were lighter and safer. I can understand the lightness, but I don't understand why they would be safer. What are you guys using for through the firewall fittings for your fuel lines? I don't mind sacrificing weight for safety. I have seen rubber fuel lines with steel reinforcement on the outside in both a race car and in an RV6. What is the safest way to build a fuel system and what are the finest products I can buy made for safety? Tonight I fit the stab to the fuselage for the very first time! It was a great feeling to see the stab sitting there on the fuselage. I knew there would be a sizable gap between the fuselage skins and the bottom of the stab, but I didn't think it would be big enough to put my finger in there! What are you guys doing with that big open hole? Would it be worth it to build a fairing of some sort on the bottom of the stab? Is there a reason for the big gap? I am also ordering a new elevator for my plane from the factory, unless I can find a used or unbuilt one. There are 2 types. One with the trim tab cut into the elevator, and one with a full tab on the outside of the elevator. I saw both in Oshkosh and they both look OK for me, but which one is better? Which one is lighter? I am preparing a web page this week where you will be able to go and download pictures of the banquet and award ceremonies. I filmed the entire banquet and I still can't get over the incredible speech Paul Poberezny gave. I will have this available shortly for everyone. Thanks for any help you can give. It feels good to be working on something other than the retrofit!!! Joe in Oshkosh ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Just a couple of questions
From: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin(at)comcast.net>
Date: Aug 24, 2011
It's called a firewall for a reason, it's supposed to provide some protection from a fire in the engine compartment. Fire resistance should be a factor for any penetrations through the firewall. They should provide at least as much protection as the material of the firewall itself. Brass will tolerate heat better than aluminum. Galvanized steel is even better. I ran my rubber fuel line through the firewall inside a steel bulkhead cable fitting and covered it with fire-sleeve. I built steel baffles around my other firewall penetrations and filled them in with high temp RTV or other resistant material. On Aug 24, 2011, at 12:52 AM, Joe wrote: > > I have a couple of questions I hope you can help me with. > > I just finished all of the changes for the B model change and now it's time to start on regular construction again! I ran into a few small snags I hope you can give me some advise on. > > I have brass through the firewall threaded fittings for my 2 fuel lines going through the firewall. Someone at EAA told me to use aluminum fittings rather than the brass because they were lighter and safer. I can understand the lightness, but I don't understand why they would be safer. What are you guys using for through the firewall fittings for your fuel lines? I don't mind sacrificing weight for safety. I have seen rubber fuel lines with steel reinforcement on the outside in both a race car and in an RV6. What is the safest way to build a fuel system and what are the finest products I can buy made for safety? > > Tonight I fit the stab to the fuselage for the very first time! It was a great feeling to see the stab sitting there on the fuselage. I knew there would be a sizable gap between the fuselage skins and the bottom of the stab, but I didn't think it would be big enough to put my finger in there! What are you guys doing with that big open hole? Would it be worth it to build a fairing of some sort on the bottom of the stab? Is there a reason for the big gap? > > I am also ordering a new elevator for my plane from the factory, unless I can find a used or unbuilt one. There are 2 types. One with the trim tab cut into the elevator, and one with a full tab on the outside of the elevator. I saw both in Oshkosh and they both look OK for me, but which one is better? Which one is lighter? > > I am preparing a web page this week where you will be able to go and download pictures of the banquet and award ceremonies. I filmed the entire banquet and I still can't get over the incredible speech Paul Poberezny gave. I will have this available shortly for everyone. > > Thanks for any help you can give. It feels good to be working on something other than the retrofit!!! > > Joe in Oshkosh > > > > > > -- Bryan Martin N61BM, CH 601 XL, RAM Subaru, Stratus re-drive. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 24, 2011
From: Jeff Davidson <jeffrey_davidson(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Just a couple of questions
I am certainly no expert, but here are a few things I did and learned along the way: I have a leading edge fuel tanks only system. No header tank. I used the Zenith supplied 30R7 rubber fuel lines where the lines might move and aluminum tubing inside the fuselage and cabin where the lines were fixed in place. The tanks overflows are not interconnected, so the selector AndAir valve has no "both" position. I installed Facet pumps, 40105 I believe, next to both tanks. After that per Chris Heintz' recommendation, are check valves to keep fuel from re-entering the tanks. Lines from both tanks then run up to the selctor valve. From there down to the Dynon fuel flow transducer down to the copper bulkhead fitting. On the engine side the bulkhead fitting empties into the gascolator. From there to the fuel pressure guage and then on to the engine driven pump on the 3300A. Here is what I think I learned putting this together: 1) Don't suck fuel, especially auto fuel! Put the pumps where they will push the fuel. 2) The 30R7 fuel lines are fine in areas that are subject to vibration. Just use firesleeve over it in the engine compartment. 3) Putting the gascolator in the engine compartment makes it hard to get it away from the exhaust pipes should it drip fuel for some reason. 4) Yes, only one hole in the firewall is needed for fuel. 5) The pressure from the electric fuel pump and the engine fuel pump are not additive. The pressure stays between the 1 and 3 PSI that the Bing float bowl likes. So I run the electric pump on the active tank all the time. 6) On the Zenith welded tanks, you still need to create the 45 degree angle into the relative wind on the tank overflow pipe. I hope this helps. This setup got me to Oshkosh this year! Jeff D. -----Original Message----- >From: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin(at)comcast.net> >Sent: Aug 24, 2011 5:08 PM >To: Zenith 601 List >Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Just a couple of questions > > >It's called a firewall for a reason, it's supposed to provide some protection from a fire in the engine compartment. Fire resistance should be a factor for any penetrations through the firewall. They should provide at least as much protection as the material of the firewall itself. Brass will tolerate heat better than aluminum. Galvanized steel is even better. > >I ran my rubber fuel line through the firewall inside a steel bulkhead cable fitting and covered it with fire-sleeve. I built steel baffles around my other firewall penetrations and filled them in with high temp RTV or other resistant material. > > >On Aug 24, 2011, at 12:52 AM, Joe wrote: > >> >> I have a couple of questions I hope you can help me with. >> >> I just finished all of the changes for the B model change and now it's time to start on regular construction again! I ran into a few small snags I hope you can give me some advise on. >> >> I have brass through the firewall threaded fittings for my 2 fuel lines going through the firewall. Someone at EAA told me to use aluminum fittings rather than the brass because they were lighter and safer. I can understand the lightness, but I don't understand why they would be safer. What are you guys using for through the firewall fittings for your fuel lines? I don't mind sacrificing weight for safety. I have seen rubber fuel lines with steel reinforcement on the outside in both a race car and in an RV6. What is the safest way to build a fuel system and what are the finest products I can buy made for safety? >> >> Tonight I fit the stab to the fuselage for the very first time! It was a great feeling to see the stab sitting there on the fuselage. I knew there would be a sizable gap between the fuselage skins and the bottom of the stab, but I didn't think it would be big enough to put my finger in there! What are you guys doing with that big open hole? Would it be worth it to build a fairing of some sort on the bottom of the stab? Is there a reason for the big gap? >> >> I am also ordering a new elevator for my plane from the factory, unless I can find a used or unbuilt one. There are 2 types. One with the trim tab cut into the elevator, and one with a full tab on the outside of the elevator. I saw both in Oshkosh and they both look OK for me, but which one is better? Which one is lighter? >> >> I am preparing a web page this week where you will be able to go and download pictures of the banquet and award ceremonies. I filmed the entire banquet and I still can't get over the incredible speech Paul Poberezny gave. I will have this available shortly for everyone. >> >> Thanks for any help you can give. It feels good to be working on something other than the retrofit!!! >> >> Joe in Oshkosh >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >-- >Bryan Martin >N61BM, CH 601 XL, >RAM Subaru, Stratus re-drive. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 24, 2011
From: Jeff Davidson <jeffrey_davidson(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Just a couple of questions
Joe, For what it is worth, I choose the recessed trim tab on the elevator just so it wouldn't either catch someone as they walked by or get damaged somehow because it sticks out. The recessed one works fine on my HD. I have the non-recessed trim tab arrangement on the aileron. If you are thinking of a trim tab there, I suggest you wait. I don't use it at all. Jeff D -----Original Message----- >From: Joe <backstagelive(at)gmail.com> >Sent: Aug 24, 2011 12:52 AM >To: zenith601-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Zenith601-List: Just a couple of questions > > >I have a couple of questions I hope you can help me with. > >I just finished all of the changes for the B model change and now it's time >to start on regular construction again! I ran into a few small snags I hope >you can give me some advise on. > >I have brass through the firewall threaded fittings for my 2 fuel lines >going through the firewall. Someone at EAA told me to use aluminum fittings >rather than the brass because they were lighter and safer. I can understand >the lightness, but I don't understand why they would be safer. What are you >guys using for through the firewall fittings for your fuel lines? I don't >mind sacrificing weight for safety. I have seen rubber fuel lines with steel >reinforcement on the outside in both a race car and in an RV6. What is the >safest way to build a fuel system and what are the finest products I can buy >made for safety? > >Tonight I fit the stab to the fuselage for the very first time! It was a >great feeling to see the stab sitting there on the fuselage. I knew there >would be a sizable gap between the fuselage skins and the bottom of the >stab, but I didn't think it would be big enough to put my finger in there! >What are you guys doing with that big open hole? Would it be worth it to >build a fairing of some sort on the bottom of the stab? Is there a reason >for the big gap? > >I am also ordering a new elevator for my plane from the factory, unless I >can find a used or unbuilt one. There are 2 types. One with the trim tab cut >into the elevator, and one with a full tab on the outside of the elevator. I >saw both in Oshkosh and they both look OK for me, but which one is better? >Which one is lighter? > >I am preparing a web page this week where you will be able to go and >download pictures of the banquet and award ceremonies. I filmed the entire >banquet and I still can't get over the incredible speech Paul Poberezny >gave. I will have this available shortly for everyone. > >Thanks for any help you can give. It feels good to be working on something >other than the retrofit!!! > >Joe in Oshkosh > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Just a couple of questions
Date: Aug 24, 2011
Jeff, when i tested check valves in line with fuel pumps, i found there would be much more back flow into the opposite tank with a check valve than without... So i decided to deinstall them. Sent from my iPad On Aug 24, 2011, at 7:40 PM, Jeff Davidson wrote: > > ... installed Facet pumps, 40105 I believe, next to both tanks. After that per Chris Heintz' recommendation, are check valves to keep fuel from re-entering the tanks. ... > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: AMD Assembled aircraft
From: "K Dilks" <kevindilks(at)btinernet.com>
Date: Aug 25, 2011
Does any one know or know where to find out how many 601/ 650 aircraft AMD has built? I need to know this to try and assure the UK authority's that the Grove landing gear and associated brackets are reliable and airworthy as its not "standard" on the 601 xl. Are AMD still trading? as I dont seem to be able to make contact with them. Thanks Kev -------- Back home ................. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=350533#350533 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 25, 2011
From: Terry Phillips <ttp44(at)rkymtn.net>
Subject: Re: AMD Assembled aircraft
Kev My understanding is that the Heintz' family sold AMD a year or two ago. The company was resurrected as Eastman Aviation, http://www.eastmanair.com/index.php# On the website, they offer Zenair designs. Regarding numbers of aircraft built and sold by AMD, I suspect that the best one could do would be to make an online search of the FAA registration records. I'm not very good at that, and you have to be careful, because sometimes aircraft are registered under different names. I doubt that Eastman would be willing to tell you how many aircraft were sold, but it never hurts to ask. Good luck. Terry On 8/25/2011 6:02 AM, K Dilks wrote: > Does any one know or know where to find out how many 601/ 650 aircraft AMD has built? > I need to know this to try and assure the UK authority's that the Grove landing gear and associated brackets are reliable and airworthy as its not "standard" on the 601 xl. > Are AMD still trading? as I dont seem to be able to make contact with them. > > Thanks > Kev -- Terry Phillips ttp44~at~rkymtn.net Corvallis MT ZU-601XL/Jab 3300 s .. l .. o .. o .. w build kit - Tail& flaps are done; Upgrading wings& ailerons per AMD Safety Directive http://www.mykitlog.com/N47TP/ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 26, 2011
From: Jeff Davidson <jeffrey_davidson(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Just a couple of questions
Michel, I have check valves on both sides next to the tanks. So the valve on the opposite tank stops the flow if the selector valve leaks a little. The selector valve only allows flow from one side or the other at any one time as long as it is fully in the detent. My Facet pumps are operated independently, usually one at a time as intended. There is documentation that the Facet pumps do allow fuel flow in the backwards direction when not operating. If anything, the check valves are overkill but Chris himself drew it up for me. And Fred Hulen, or was it Hinde, anyway the fluid design engineer on this list agreed. Anyway, it seems to work for me. Jeff -----Original Message----- >From: Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> >Sent: Aug 24, 2011 8:41 PM >To: "zenith601-list(at)matronics.com" >Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Just a couple of questions > > >Jeff, when i tested check valves in line with fuel pumps, i found there would be much more back flow into the opposite tank with a check valve than without... So i decided to deinstall them. > >Sent from my iPad > >On Aug 24, 2011, at 7:40 PM, Jeff Davidson wrote: > >> >> ... installed Facet pumps, 40105 I believe, next to both tanks. After that per Chris Heintz' recommendation, are check valves to keep fuel from re-entering the tanks. ... >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Just a couple of questions
Date: Aug 27, 2011
Jeff, i do not use a selector valve. Iselect tanks by selecting the fuel pump to be activated. My valves are for shutoff. I found that the pump not in use will allow a bit of flow in the backward direction. However, i also found that with the ACS check valve, the backward flow will be more than twice as much with a check vqlve in place. I think this might be because of the pulsating action of the pump and the sync of the check valve action with the one internal to the pump. Sent from my iPad On Aug 26, 2011, at 6:58 PM, Jeff Davidson wrote: > > Michel, > I have check valves on both sides next to the tanks. So the valve on the opposite tank stops the flow if the selector valve leaks a little. The selector valve only allows flow from one side or the other at any one time as long as it is fully in the detent. My Facet pumps are operated independently, usually one at a time as intended. There is documentation that the Facet pumps do allow fuel flow in the backwards direction when not operating. If anything, the check valves are overkill but Chris himself drew it up for me. And Fred Hulen, or was it Hinde, anyway the fluid design engineer on this list agreed. Anyway, it seems to work for me. > Jeff > > > -----Original Message----- >> From: Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> >> Sent: Aug 24, 2011 8:41 PM >> To: "zenith601-list(at)matronics.com" >> Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Just a couple of questions >> >> >> Jeff, when i tested check valves in line with fuel pumps, i found there would be much more back flow into the opposite tank with a check valve than without... So i decided to deinstall them. >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >> On Aug 24, 2011, at 7:40 PM, Jeff Davidson wrote: >> >>> >>> ... installed Facet pumps, 40105 I believe, next to both tanks. After that per Chris Heintz' recommendation, are check valves to keep fuel from re-entering the tanks. ... >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 27, 2011
From: Jeff Davidson <jeffrey_davidson(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Just a couple of questions
Michel, I understand. I had already designed my system similar to that in the Piper Warrior that I learned to fly in before I learned about what is a simpler design without the selector valve. I do still alternate the active pumps too but also must change the selector valve in coordination. So the procedure for changing tanks is to check fuel pressure, turn on the opposite pump, move the selector, turn off the origonal pump, and check fuel pressure after the change. I presume that your procedure involves shutting off the valve for the inactive tank. That difference in design may account for the difference in the behavior of the check valve. But yes, the Facet pumps do allow some flow back into the opposite tank. Jeff -----Original Message----- >From: Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> >Sent: Aug 27, 2011 7:28 AM >To: "zenith601-list(at)matronics.com" >Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Just a couple of questions > > >Jeff, i do not use a selector valve. Iselect tanks by selecting the fuel pump to be activated. My valves are for shutoff. I found that the pump not in use will allow a bit of flow in the backward direction. However, i also found that with the ACS check valve, the backward flow will be more than twice as much with a check vqlve in place. I think this might be because of the pulsating action of the pump and the sync of the check valve action with the one internal to the pump. > >Sent from my iPad > >On Aug 26, 2011, at 6:58 PM, Jeff Davidson wrote: > >> >> Michel, >> I have check valves on both sides next to the tanks. So the valve on the opposite tank stops the flow if the selector valve leaks a little. The selector valve only allows flow from one side or the other at any one time as long as it is fully in the detent. My Facet pumps are operated independently, usually one at a time as intended. There is documentation that the Facet pumps do allow fuel flow in the backwards direction when not operating. If anything, the check valves are overkill but Chris himself drew it up for me. And Fred Hulen, or was it Hinde, anyway the fluid design engineer on this list agreed. Anyway, it seems to work for me. >> Jeff >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> >>> Sent: Aug 24, 2011 8:41 PM >>> To: "zenith601-list(at)matronics.com" >>> Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Just a couple of questions >>> >>> >>> Jeff, when i tested check valves in line with fuel pumps, i found there would be much more back flow into the opposite tank with a check valve than without... So i decided to deinstall them. >>> >>> Sent from my iPad >>> >>> On Aug 24, 2011, at 7:40 PM, Jeff Davidson wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> ... installed Facet pumps, 40105 I believe, next to both tanks. After that per Chris Heintz' recommendation, are check valves to keep fuel from re-entering the tanks. ... >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 27, 2011
From: Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Just a couple of questions
-=0AOK, I see...- I just found on my web site the information on the te st I did back when I installed my fuel system: =0A-=0A"Fuel pump check va lve =0Atest=0AI checked how much gas was flowing through the system in the =0Aopposite tank. Well, there is a leak. The fuel pump has internal check valves, =0Abut they are not perfect. I tried putting a check valve in ser ies with the fuel =0Apump and the result is worse! Instead of about 0.5 to 0.8 liter per hour, I get =0A3 to 4 liter per hour of cross-transfer. Thi s may be explained by the fact that =0Atwo check valve in series somewhat c ancel their capabilities (there is no flow =0Ato push the ball or diaphragm in the check valve). I removed the check valve I =0Aput in there (and had to replace a segment of fuel line)."=0A-=0AOn another note, I noticed it is tough to get to my web site as the Zenith Builder Ring link apparently highjack the web page.- I found that by cancelling the page load as soon as my page shows up allow it to be seen.- I would like to correct that, b ut I no longer have the software to update my site... when I have time, I'l l try to resolve that.=0A-=0A----------------------------=0AMichel Therri en CH601-HD, C-GZGQ=0Ahttp://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601=0Ahttp://pages.inf init.net/mthobby=0A=0AFrom: Jeff Davidson <jeffrey_davidson(at)earthlink.net> =0ATo: zenith601-list(at)matronics.com=0ASent: Saturday, August 27, 2011 8:11: 49 AM=0ASubject: Re: Zenith601-List: Just a couple of questions=0A=0A--> Ze nith601-List message posted by: Jeff Davidson =0A=0AMichel,=0AI understand.- I had already designed my system simila r to that in the Piper Warrior that I learned to fly in before I learned ab out what is a simpler design without the selector valve.- I do still alte rnate the active pumps too but also must change the selector valve in coord ination.- So the procedure for changing tanks is to check fuel pressure, turn on the opposite pump, move the selector, turn off the origonal pump, a nd check fuel pressure after the change.- I presume that your procedure i nvolves shutting off the valve for the inactive tank.- That difference in design may account for the difference in the behavior of the check valve. - But yes, the Facet pumps do allow some flow back into the opposite tank .=0AJeff=0A=0A=0A-----Original Message-----=0A>From: Michel Therrien <mther r(at)yahoo.com>=0A>Sent: Aug 27, 2011 7:28 AM=0A>To: "zenith601-list@matronics .com" =0A>Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Just a errien =0A>=0A>Jeff, i do not use a selector valve.- I select tanks by selecting the fuel pump to be activated.- My valves are for shutoff.- - I found that the pump not in use will allow a bit of fl ow in the backward direction. However, i also found that with the ACS check valve, the backward flow will be more than twice as much with a check vqlv e in place.- I think this might be because of the pulsating action of th e pump and the sync of the check valve action with the one internal to the pump.=0A>=0A>Sent from my iPad=0A>=0A>On Aug 26, 2011, at 6:58 PM, Jeff Dav idson wrote:=0A>=0A>> --> Zenith601-List m essage posted by: Jeff Davidson =0A>> =0A>> Michel,=0A>> I have check valves on both sides next to the tanks.- So th e valve on the opposite tank stops the flow if the selector valve leaks a l ittle.- The selector valve only allows flow from one side or the other at any one time as long as it is fully in the detent.- My Facet pumps are o perated independently, usually one at a time as intended.- There is docum entation that the Facet pumps do allow fuel flow in the backwards direction when not operating.- If anything, the check valves are overkill but Chri s himself drew it up for me.- And Fred Hulen, or was it Hinde, anyway the fluid design engineer on this list agreed.- Anyway, it seems to work for me.=0A>> Jeff- =0A>> =0A>> =0A>> -----Original Message-----=0A>>> From: Michel Therrien =0A>>> Sent: Aug 24, 2011 8:41 PM=0A>>> T o: "zenith601-list(at)matronics.com" =0A>>> Subj ect: Re: Zenith601-List: Just a couple of questions=0A>>> =0A>>> --> Zenith 601-List message posted by: Michel Therrien =0A>>> =0A>>> Jeff, when i tested check valves in line with fuel pumps, i found there wo uld be much more back flow into the opposite tank with a check valve than w ithout... So i decided to deinstall them.=0A>>> =0A>>> Sent from my iPad=0A >>> =0A>>> On Aug 24, 2011, at 7:40 PM, Jeff Davidson =0A>>>> =0A>>>> ... installed Fac et pumps, 40105 I believe, next to both tanks.- After that per Chris Hein tz' recommendation, are check valves to keep fuel from re-entering the tank s.- ...=0A>>>> =0A>>>> =0A>>> =0A>>> =0A>>> =0A>>> =0A>>> =0A>> =0A>> =0A - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Matt Dralle, List Adm ===== ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Just a couple of questions
Date: Aug 27, 2011
Some Facet pumps have a built in check valve that still allows some back flow through them, this is by design. It is intended to allow the fuel lines downstream of the pump to depressurize after shut down. There are also Facet pumps that are designed to prevent any back flow at all. These are listed as having a built in anti-siphon valve or positive shut off. Here is a link to the Facet- Purolator web page: http://tinyurl.com/252fhcb -- Bryan Martin N61BM, CH 601 XL, RAM Subaru, Stratus re-drive. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "gpjann1(at)netzero.com" <gpjann1(at)netzero.net>
Date: Sep 03, 2011
Subject: WTB-fibreglass cowling
Anyone have any wherabouts of a fibreglass full cowling for a Zenith 601? GPJ ____________________________________________________________ 57-Year-Old Mom Looks 25 Mom Reveals $5 Wrinkle Trick That Has Angered Doctors! http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/4e6257dc2c38fa94a49st04vuc ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Craig Payne" <craig(at)craigandjean.com>
Subject: WTB-fibreglass cowling
Date: Sep 03, 2011
What engine? Jabiru USA will sell you one for a Jabiru 3300. I think Zenith sold one for the Rotax at one time. -- Craig -----Original Message----- From: owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of gpjann1(at)netzero.com Sent: Saturday, September 03, 2011 9:37 AM Subject: Zenith601-List: WTB-fibreglass cowling Anyone have any wherabouts of a fibreglass full cowling for a Zenith 601? GPJ ____________________________________________________________ 57-Year-Old Mom Looks 25 Mom Reveals $5 Wrinkle Trick That Has Angered Doctors! http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/4e6257dc2c38fa94a49st04vuc ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JohnDRead(at)aol.com
Date: Sep 03, 2011
Subject: Re: WTB-fibreglass cowling
If you are using a Jabiru engine try there Jabiru importer. do not archive. Regards, John CH701 - Colorado - Jabiru 3300 Cell: 719-494-4567 Home: 303-648-3261 In a message dated 9/3/2011 10:43:35 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, gpjann1(at)netzero.net writes: --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "gpjann1(at)netzero.com" Anyone have any wherabouts of a fibreglass full cowling for a Zenith 601? GPJ ____________________________________________________________ 57-Year-Old Mom Looks 25 Mom Reveals $5 Wrinkle Trick That Has Angered Doctors! http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/4e6257dc2c38fa94a49st04vuc ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 03, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: WTB-fibreglass cowling
You might try pete(at)usjabiru.com. He is the one I bought mine from . . . Paul Camas, WA On 9/3/2011 9:37 AM, gpjann1(at)netzero.com wrote: > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "gpjann1(at)netzero.com" > > > Anyone have any wherabouts of a fibreglass full cowling for a Zenith 601? > > > GPJ > > ____________________________________________________________ > 57-Year-Old Mom Looks 25 > Mom Reveals $5 Wrinkle Trick That Has Angered Doctors! > http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/4e6257dc2c38fa94a49st04vuc > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: WTB-fibreglass cowling
From: mtherr(at)yahoo.com
Date: Sep 03, 2011
I have one to give (needs packing and shipping). I was user for a subaru. -----Original Message----- From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net> Sender: owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2011 10:04:45 Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: WTB-fibreglass cowling You might try pete(at)usjabiru.com. He is the one I bought mine from . . . Paul Camas, WA On 9/3/2011 9:37 AM, gpjann1(at)netzero.com wrote: > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "gpjann1(at)netzero.com" > > > Anyone have any wherabouts of a fibreglass full cowling for a Zenith 601? > > > GPJ > > ____________________________________________________________ > 57-Year-Old Mom Looks 25 > Mom Reveals $5 Wrinkle Trick That Has Angered Doctors! > http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/4e6257dc2c38fa94a49st04vuc > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Larry McFarland" <larry(at)macsmachine.com>
Subject: Remote oil filter kit for the Stratus Subaru
Date: Sep 09, 2011
http://www.macsmachine.com/html/journal14.htm http://www.macsmachine.com/html/subaruengine.htm Hi guys, I recently finished the installation for putting the oil filter up front where it gets air within the cowl. The links above will guide you to journal 14. See last entries for descriptive detail for doing the remote oil filter kit. The engine page will show what was done to get the kit installed. If you need further info, of course just ask. Do fly safe, Larry McFarland Zenith 601HDS with Stratus Subaru at www.macsmachine.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JohnDRead(at)aol.com
Date: Sep 09, 2011
Subject: CH601 with NSI Subaru
Hello List, I have a Zenith CH601 HDS with a NSI Subaru conversion. The total hours on the plane are five. The original engine had a "flame out" and was replaced by the factory. The aircraft was donated to my foundation by the builder, I would like to sell it so I can finish the CH701 project I am building with my local High School. I am asking $25K for the whole aircraft. Any takers? Regards, John CH701 - Colorado - Jabiru 3300 Cell: 719-494-4567 Home: 303-648-3261 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Larry McFarland" <larry(at)macsmachine.com>
Subject: Flight Test for a Remote Oil Filter Kit on the Stratus
Subaru
Date: Sep 11, 2011
Hi guys, Sept 10 After a Hy-Vee lunch with the guys, I went to the hangar and did a thorough preflight, did take a full 5 quarts to top oil off before startup. The Subaru fired up immediately and I taxied out. Oil temps began at 60 p.s.i. and when warmed went down to 45 p.s.i. Tower cleared me for 10. The lift off was trim-adjusted with no perceptible feel for the weight change up front. I flew south of the control zone to the designated "practice area. Oil temps at 3000 feet reached 228 degrees at 4300 rpm and I progressively brought up the power in 100 rpm increments every 8 minutes or so. CHTs stayed 190 to 200 degrees, EGTs 1380, Coolant 200 and when rpms reached 5100 and airspeed at 128 mph, oil temps never went over 233 degrees. All other temps stayed well in the green. The remote oil filter kit resolved the max temp issues. I stayed on an east west track until I was satisfied that the engine was happy within its full range of operation and then headed back to Moline. Descending at 125 into the pattern was easy, the landing was smooth and I taxied back to the south tees with 175 hours on the engine. The cowl was unbuttoned, the engine was drip-free and oil hoses stayed where they'd been clamped. Pictures are added <http://www.macsmachine.com/html/subaruengine.htm> to the bottom of my engine page that shows the components and installation in greater detail. Very satisfied with this modification! Data was entered into the logs. Larry McFarland 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "gpjann1(at)netzero.com" <gpjann1(at)netzero.net>
Date: Sep 17, 2011
Subject: Looking for wings
I'm looking for outboard wing kits for a 601 HD. Greg 770-277-1637 My email address is gpjann1(at)netzero.com ____________________________________________________________ 57-Year-Old Mom Looks 25 Mom Reveals $5 Wrinkle Trick That Has Angered Doctors! http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/4e74aa1516236569f18st02vuc ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 17, 2011
From: Jeff Davidson <jeffrey_davidson(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Looking for wings
Zenith will sell you what you need. Just let them know exactly which wing kit you want. At different times the HD wing kit included different parts. The major difference was including the the center section or not. Jeff D -----Original Message----- >From: "gpjann1(at)netzero.com" <gpjann1(at)netzero.net> >Sent: Sep 17, 2011 10:09 AM >To: zenith601-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Zenith601-List: Looking for wings > > >I'm looking for outboard wing kits for a 601 HD. >Greg >770-277-1637 > >My email address is gpjann1(at)netzero.com > > >____________________________________________________________ >57-Year-Old Mom Looks 25 >Mom Reveals $5 Wrinkle Trick That Has Angered Doctors! >http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/4e74aa1516236569f18st02vuc > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 20, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Flight Test Update - N776PM
It's been a little over two months since my Zodiac XL got its airworthiness certificate. Yesterday I had my first flight with no squawks. I figured it is time to spread the word on the things I found. Current flight time is around 17 hours. My typical test flight was just over one half hour with just one landing. This might have been a bit shorter if I didn't have to get out from under a class C terminal area before climbing to a reasonable test altitude. Yesterday the air was reasonably cool - around 60 on the ground so it must have been around 45 at 5000 MSL where I did my testing. At full throttle the engine ran smoothly and the plane indicated around 120 knots. I have not calibrated the airspeed yet, but casual comparison with GPS ground speed suggests it is pretty close to correct. I have a Jabiru 3300A with wood Sensenich 64ZK49 propeller (standard stuff when you buy the FWF package from Pete at USA Jabiru). Cylinder head temperatures were all green with the highest around 320. Oil temperature was around 170. At WOT engine RPM was just over 3000 RPM at 5000 MSL. CHTs in full throttle climb were around 1100 and in high cruise around 1300. I am sure I can't remember all the problems I fixed in the first two months of phase I flight test, but I'll try to recount as many as I can. 1. Engine cooling was a big problem. My first attempt at adding rubber seals at the front of the cooing ducts was not correct. I should have fitted the rubber seals carefully to the inlets in the cowl. I also needed to adjust the air dams in the right duct (cylinders 1,3,5) but the other one never needed any adjustment. 2. Nose gear bearings were too tight. The plastic bearings at both the top and bottom of the nose gear column restricted movement instead of just guiding it. The nose should move up and down easily when you put your weight on the propeller drive shaft. The plastic bearings as delivered from ZAC were much too tight. I loosened them on original installation but that wasn't enough. 3. Rudder does not return to center when you remove pressure from the pedals. This problem is unresolved. It doesn't present too much of a problem but it is difficult to keep the ball centered unless you give the left rudder pedal a good kick after maneuvering. A related unresolved problem is the nose tends to wander in yaw - especially in turbulence. I am thinking nice thoughts of adding some sort of fixed vertical stabilizer fin - probably on the bottom of the fuselage to correct this. It is not a big problem but makes flying a bit uncomfortable. 4. I had a few electronic problems with my Dynon and Garmin avionics. The Dynon tachometer needed to have a resistor installed in line with the connection to the alternator (through a fuse). Before adding the resistor the tachometer went nuts in mid range power settings but worked fine above 2200 RPM and below 1700. The only problem with the Garmin stuff was I needed to attach a pin to ground to enable the built-in intercom on my SL-30. I also had issues setting the squelch, but that was just an operator issue. 5. Several times I had the quick drains in the fuel tanks turn into slow leaks. This was caused by tiny pieces of aluminum getting caught in the tiny O-ring that seals the quick drain. I got an extra quick drain valve and learned how to replace a faulty one with a pail under the stream of fuel to collect that fuel that escapes between the time I remove one and install the other one. Then it is a relatively simple task to clean out the defective seal and put it aside for the next occurrence of this problem. 6. At one point I discovered the carburetor was barely attached to the engine. It was held in place by the air intake hose but this was still a bit scary. It was easy to loosen both hose clamps that hold the carburetor and push it firmly in place before tightening the clamps again. 7. Another carburetor problem -- the small hose connecting the carburetor to the air box came off. This caused the engine to drop out randomly with RPM dropping about 500 revs in turbulence when I reduced power for descent. The engine ran more smoothly when I added power to cruise levels. The original hose had a 3/16 ID and was quite loose on the carburetor nipple. I got some vinyl hose with .170 ID at the hardware store and it holds on and works just fine. 8. Elevator trim was not powerful enough to trim pitch when any flaps were employed. I added an extra fixed tab to the rear of the original one and found improvement but I was still unable to get neutral trim with full flaps. A bigger tab fixed this. I think the final extra tab was around 20 square inches to neutralize 20 degrees of flaps. 9. I had a lot of trouble getting the rudder into a neutral position in flight. The nose gear centers when there is no weight on the gear and the connections through the pedals and rudder cables pulls the rudder one way or the other until you get this properly adjusted. This took me many small changes. At one point I didn't like the number of exposed threads in one of the turnbuckles and learned you can get forks that are about a half inch longer than the normal ones to give you more adjustment room. I only needed one of these extra length forks to allow more "Left" rudder in the cable setup. (I am getting really good at installing safety wire in turnbuckles.) In all my experience at being a test pilot for an amateur (me) built aircraft has been quite an experience. The only time I felt at all scared was when the engine was cutting out. Mostly it has been a matter of getting all the little adjustments made to make the plane fly properly. Now, I am looking forward to spending some time in the pattern learning how to do really nice approaches and landings. Paul Camas, WA ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Flight Test Update - N776PM
From: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin(at)comcast.net>
Date: Sep 21, 2011
Did you set the rudder cable tension with no weight on the nose-wheel? The rudder cable tension will decrease with any deflection of the strut due to weight on the wheel because of the angle of the strut. Too much tension will make it harder to self center in flight. On Sep 20, 2011, at 3:50 PM, Paul Mulwitz wrote: > 3. Rudder does not return to center when you remove pressure from the pedals. This problem is unresolved. It doesn't present too much of a problem but it is difficult to keep the ball centered unless you give the left rudder pedal a good kick after maneuvering. -- Bryan Martin N61BM, CH 601 XL, RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 21, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Flight Test Update - N776PM
Hi Brian, The nose strut is fully extended when the plane is sitting normally. This should center the nose wheel, but in my plane it doesn't do that. I don't know exactly why. Also, in flight the nose wheel doesn't center very well. It does rest on the "V" shape in the lower bearing block, but the rotation of the column seems somewhat random. If I kick the left pedal it moves left and stays there. Similarly, if I kick the right pedal it stays rotated a bit to the right. I spoke with an engineer from ZAC about this when I was at OSH. He suggested reducing the "V" shape and making it more flat. This is supposed to make it easier to rotate the nose gear while loaded by the huge bungee. I don't think there is any relationship between the strut position and rudder cable tension. Rudder cable tension works against the position of the rudder pedals. The rudder pedals don't move when the strut goes up and down. I have been careful to set all the cable tensions according to the latest requirements from ZAC. This is problematical since some of the required information is not specified. The elevator position is critical to the elevator cable tensions but there is no discussion of this position in any of the documents I have seen. Fortunately, it doesn't seem to make much difference what elevator cable tension is used. Paul On 9/21/2011 3:10 AM, Bryan Martin wrote: > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: Bryan Martin > > Did you set the rudder cable tension with no weight on the nose-wheel? The rudder cable tension will decrease with any deflection of the strut due to weight on the wheel because of the angle of the strut. Too much tension will make it harder to self center in flight. > > On Sep 20, 2011, at 3:50 PM, Paul Mulwitz wrote: > >> 3. Rudder does not return to center when you remove pressure from the pedals. This problem is unresolved. It doesn't present too much of a problem but it is difficult to keep the ball centered unless you give the left rudder pedal a good kick after maneuvering. > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Flight Test Update - N776PM
From: Jay Bannister <jaybannist(at)cs.com>
Date: Sep 21, 2011
Paul is wrong about the relationship of the nose gear strut position to the rudder pedals. The nose gear strut position definitely does effect the ru dder pedals. If it moves up, both pedals move rearward, loosening the rudd er cables. The attached pdf shows the geometry. However, it did not effect my setting of the rudder cable tension since the bungee kept the nose gear strut on the stop without lifting the nose. Jay -----Original Message----- From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net> Sent: Wed, Sep 21, 2011 5:39 am Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Flight Test Update - N776PM Hi Brian, I don't think there is any relationship between the strut position and rudder cable tension. Rudder cable tension works against the position of the rudder pedals. The rudder pedals don't move when the strut goes up and down. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 21, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Flight Test Update - N776PM
Hi Jay, Looking at your drawing, I would guess the amount of rudder pedal movement caused by nose gear strut movement is a function of the setting of the angle of the rudder pedals. Put differently, if the pedals are moved toward the rear (for short legged guys like me) then the correlated movement would be minimal. If the pedals are set forward (for tall guys) then the movement would be more pronounced. In any case, I agree with Bob that it is not a great idea to make things different by reducing the rudder cable tension. I think my approach of adjusting the relative rudder cable lengths is a better way to get neutral rudder trim. Paul P.S. I had a typo in my tail number. It is N773PM. On 9/21/2011 5:25 AM, Jay Bannister wrote: > Paul is wrong about the relationship of the nose gear strut position > to the rudder pedals. The nose gear strut position definitely does > effect the rudder pedals. If it moves up, both pedals move rearward, > loosening the rudder cables.The attached pdf shows the geometry. > > However, it did not effect my setting of the rudder cable tension > since the bungee kept the nose gear strut on the stop without lifting > the nose. > > Jay ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Flight Test Update - N776PM
From: Jay Bannister <jaybannist(at)cs.com>
Date: Sep 21, 2011
Not so. The geometry remains the same. -----Original Message----- From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net> Sent: Wed, Sep 21, 2011 9:15 am Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Flight Test Update - N776PM Hi Jay, Looking at your drawing, I would guess the amount of rudder pedal mo vement caused by nose gear strut movement is a function of the setting o f the angle of the rudder pedals. Put differently, if the pedals are mo ved toward the rear (for short legged guys like me) then the correlated movement would be minimal. If the pedals are set forward (for tall guys ) then the movement would be more pronounced. In any case, I agree with Bob that it is not a great idea to make th ings different by reducing the rudder cable tension. I think my approac h of adjusting the relative rudder cable lengths is a better way to get neutral rudder trim. Paul ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 21, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Flight Test Update - N776PM
Jay, I don't want to make a big argument over this, but I'm afraid you are not seeing the truth. The angle between the rudder pedals and the nose gear strut will influence how movement in the strut will cause movement in the pedals. Technically this is not geometry but is trigonometry. Perhaps you are not considering that a change in angle between the pedals and strut requires a change in length of the tie rods. If the pedals and strut are parallel then a small movement in the strut will not cause a noticeable movement in the pedals. As the angle increases the connected movement increases. I'm sure there is a SIN or COS function here somewhere but I don't have the energy to work out the equations. In the real world, the strut doesn't move very far at all because the bungee is very strong. I have tried to move it on the ground and my weight is only enough to get the strut to move an inch or so. It needs to be free to move, but I doubt you will ever see much more than an inch or two in the strut which might translate to a few millimeters movement in the rudder pedals. Respectfully, Paul On 9/21/2011 7:44 AM, Jay Bannister wrote: > Not so. The geometry remains the same. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net> > To: zenith601-list > Sent: Wed, Sep 21, 2011 9:15 am > Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Flight Test Update - N776PM > > Hi Jay, > > Looking at your drawing, I would guess the amount of rudder pedal > movement caused by nose gear strut movement is a function of the > setting of the angle of the rudder pedals. Put differently, if the > pedals are moved toward the rear (for short legged guys like me) then > the correlated movement would be minimal. If the pedals are set > forward (for tall guys) then the movement would be more pronounced. > > In any case, I agree with Bob that it is not a great idea to make > things different by reducing the rudder cable tension. I think my > approach of adjusting the relative rudder cable lengths is a better > way to get neutral rudder trim. > > Paul** > * > > > * ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Flight Test Update - N776PM
From: Jay Bannister <jaybannist(at)cs.com>
Date: Sep 21, 2011
Paul, Respectfully - you are dead wrong. My graphic triggernometry is accurate and what I am telling you is factual. And you won't make a big argument over this because this is my last post on the subject. Jay -----Original Message----- From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net> Sent: Wed, Sep 21, 2011 10:11 am Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Flight Test Update - N776PM Jay, I don't want to make a big argument over this, but I'm afraid you ar e not seeing the truth. The angle between the rudder pedals and the nose gear strut will inf luence how movement in the strut will cause movement in the pedals. Tec hnically this is not geometry but is trigonometry. Perhaps you are not considering that a change in angle between the pedals and strut require s a change in length of the tie rods. If the pedals and strut are parallel then a small movement in the st rut will not cause a noticeable movement in the pedals. As the angle in creases the connected movement increases. I'm sure there is a SIN or CO S function here somewhere but I don't have the energy to work out the eq uations. In the real world, the strut doesn't move very far at all because th e bungee is very strong. I have tried to move it on the ground and my w eight is only enough to get the strut to move an inch or so. It needs t o be free to move, but I doubt you will ever see much more than an inch or two in the strut which might translate to a few millimeters movement in the rudder pedals. Respectfully, Paul ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: on a lighter note...
From: "Sabrina" <chicago2paris(at)msn.com>
Date: Sep 21, 2011
Joe, Thank you for the photographs, attached is my favorite... Paul and Chris are amazing. The necklace is a solid gold model of my airplane that Amazon's Jeff Bezos had commissioned to celebrate my airplane's maiden flight. All, It is great to see the list come alive again. Miss you guys, Sabrina Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=352867#352867 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/paul_chris_sabrina_2011_190.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Zenith601-List Digest: 2 Msgs - 09/20/11
From: "DaveG601XL" <david.m.gallagher(at)ge.com>
Date: Sep 21, 2011
Paul, On the rudder, do you suspect that the nose gear strut is binding things up? When I first assembled my nose gear, the lower bearing was acting more like a shaft clamp. I put a thin aluminum shim between the two bearing halves and got the movement I desired. No problems with 3 years and 200 hours of flying. Yeah, you still have to push a Zenith rudder harder than you would in a Champ to overcome the initial "centering tendency," but I have no problems with it going back to center. Hope this helps, -------- David Gallagher 601 XL: flying Next project: Pietenpol Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=352872#352872 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 21, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Zenith601-List Digest: 2 Msgs - 09/20/11
Hi David, Yes, I like your description of a clamp. I wound up taking the lower blocks off and grinding the hole a bit bigger so the column moves freely. I guess there is still a side load from the tie rods connected to the rudder pedals. I also have a tight upper bearing but I don't think that has an impact on rotation. I don't know how to remove the upper bearing without removing the bungee. I had no problem installing and removing the bungee before the engine was installed, but now it looks like a real bear. I was just out doing some circuits and bumps. I found if I land with full flaps the nose wheel behaves when it touches down, but if I do a no-flaps landing it tends to shimmy when it touches down. I wish I know enough about mechanical design to be able to figure out how to stop the shimmy at higher speeds. Paul On 9/21/2011 10:27 AM, DaveG601XL wrote: > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "DaveG601XL" > > Paul, > > On the rudder, do you suspect that the nose gear strut is binding things up? When I first assembled my nose gear, the lower bearing was acting more like a shaft clamp. I put a thin aluminum shim between the two bearing halves and got the movement I desired. No problems with 3 years and 200 hours of flying. Yeah, you still have to push a Zenith rudder harder than you would in a Champ to overcome the initial "centering tendency," but I have no problems with it going back to center. > > Hope this helps, > > -------- > David Gallagher > 601 XL: flying > Next project: Pietenpol > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=352872#352872 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "fritz" <klondike(at)megalink.net>
Subject: bungee cord tool
Date: Sep 21, 2011
try a "8"(?) hinge handle with a 3" extension with a little "duct tape" and you a have a great bungee cord installer----- stick the 3" extension into the tube which goes through the nose strut. Fritz ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Mulwitz" <psm(at)att.net> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 3:10 PM Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Re: Zenith601-List Digest: 2 Msgs - 09/20/11 > > Hi David, > > Yes, I like your description of a clamp. > > I wound up taking the lower blocks off and grinding the hole a bit bigger > so the column moves freely. I guess there is still a side load from the > tie rods connected to the rudder pedals. I also have a tight upper > bearing but I don't think that has an impact on rotation. I don't know > how to remove the upper bearing without removing the bungee. I had no > problem installing and removing the bungee before the engine was > installed, but now it looks like a real bear. > > I was just out doing some circuits and bumps. I found if I land with full > flaps the nose wheel behaves when it touches down, but if I do a no-flaps > landing it tends to shimmy when it touches down. I wish I know enough > about mechanical design to be able to figure out how to stop the shimmy at > higher speeds. > > Paul > > On 9/21/2011 10:27 AM, DaveG601XL wrote: >> --> Zenith601-List message posted by: >> "DaveG601XL" >> >> Paul, >> >> On the rudder, do you suspect that the nose gear strut is binding things >> up? When I first assembled my nose gear, the lower bearing was acting >> more like a shaft clamp. I put a thin aluminum shim between the two >> bearing halves and got the movement I desired. No problems with 3 years >> and 200 hours of flying. Yeah, you still have to push a Zenith rudder >> harder than you would in a Champ to overcome the initial "centering >> tendency," but I have no problems with it going back to center. >> >> Hope this helps, >> >> -------- >> David Gallagher >> 601 XL: flying >> Next project: Pietenpol >> >> >> >> >> Read this topic online here: >> >> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=352872#352872 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: NYTerminat(at)aol.com
Date: Sep 21, 2011
Subject: Re: Zenith601-List Digest: 2 Msgs - 09/20/11
Paul, did you check the balance of the front tire and rim? Bob Spudis In a message dated 9/21/2011 3:14:49 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, psm(at)att.net writes: --> Zenith601-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz Hi David, Yes, I like your description of a clamp. I wound up taking the lower blocks off and grinding the hole a bit bigger so the column moves freely. I guess there is still a side load from the tie rods connected to the rudder pedals. I also have a tight upper bearing but I don't think that has an impact on rotation. I don't know how to remove the upper bearing without removing the bungee. I had no problem installing and removing the bungee before the engine was installed, but now it looks like a real bear. I was just out doing some circuits and bumps. I found if I land with full flaps the nose wheel behaves when it touches down, but if I do a no-flaps landing it tends to shimmy when it touches down. I wish I know enough about mechanical design to be able to figure out how to stop the shimmy at higher speeds. Paul On 9/21/2011 10:27 AM, DaveG601XL wrote: > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "DaveG601XL" > > Paul, > > On the rudder, do you suspect that the nose gear strut is binding things up? When I first assembled my nose gear, the lower bearing was acting more like a shaft clamp. I put a thin aluminum shim between the two bearing halves and got the movement I desired. No problems with 3 years and 200 hours of flying. Yeah, you still have to push a Zenith rudder harder than you would in a Champ to overcome the initial "centering tendency," but I have no problems with it going back to center. > > Hope this helps, > > -------- > David Gallagher > 601 XL: flying > Next project: Pietenpol > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=352872#352872 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 21, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Zenith601-List Digest: 2 Msgs - 09/20/11
Hi Bob, No, I didn't check the balance of the nose wheel. What I did do was make the mistake of thinking if I kept a low tire pressure it would cushion the nose and give me softer touch-down bumps. Unfortunately, the Matco wheel doesn't hold the tire and tube very well without a reasonably high pressure in the tire. The result was the tire and tube rotated in the wheel and turned the metal valve stem into a pretzel. I replaced the tube assembly with one I had laying around the shop and didn't consider the balancing issue. I suppose the nose gear vibrations could be a wheel balance issue, but I can really feel the side to side motion in the rudder pedals when the gear touches down at relatively high speed. My guess is the direct linkage between the pedals and the strut really need some sort of shock absorber or damper in the connection someplace. I also guess the source of the vibration is a slight misalignment between the nose wheel and runway at touchdown. There doesn't seem to be any feature in this design that straightens out the wheel when it is a little out of alignment. The last plane I flew (a Tecnam Echo Super) had a trailing link design in the nose gear that naturally wants to go straight. Paul On 9/21/2011 2:12 PM, NYTerminat(at)aol.com wrote: > Paul, did you check the balance of the front tire and rim? > Bob Spudis > In a message dated 9/21/2011 3:14:49 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > psm(at)att.net writes: > > > Hi David, > > Yes, I like your description of a clamp. > > I wound up taking the lower blocks off and grinding the hole a bit > bigger so the column moves freely. I guess there is still a side > load > from the tie rods connected to the rudder pedals. I also have a > tight > upper bearing but I don't think that has an impact on rotation. I > don't > know how to remove the upper bearing without removing the bungee. > I had > no problem installing and removing the bungee before the engine was > installed, but now it looks like a real bear. > > I was just out doing some circuits and bumps. I found if I land with > full flaps the nose wheel behaves when it touches down, but if I do a > no-flaps landing it tends to shimmy when it touches down. I wish > I know > enough about mechanical design to be able to figure out how to > stop the > shimmy at higher speeds. > > Paul > > On 9/21/2011 10:27 AM, DaveG601XL wrote: > > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: > "DaveG601XL" > > > > Paul, > > > > On the rudder, do you suspect that the nose gear strut is > binding things up? When I first assembled my nose gear, the lower > bearing was acting more like a shaft clamp. I put a thin aluminum > shim between the two bearing halves and got the movement I > desired. No problems with 3 years and 200 hours of flying. Yeah, > you still have to push a Zenith rudder harder than you would in a > Champ to overcome the initial "centering tendency," but I have no > problems with it going back to center. > > > > Hope this helps, > > > > -------- > > David Gallagher > > 601 XL: flying > > Next project: Pietenpol > > > > > > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=352872#352872 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * > > > * ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 21, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: bungee cord tool
Hi Fritz, I'm afraid I am having a hard time visualizing your tool for the bungee. It sounds like the 2 foot long piece of PVC pipe, sharpened at one end, that I used to do the original installation. Alas, my simple tool won't work with the engine installed. Do you have a picture of your tool? Paul On 9/21/2011 1:21 PM, fritz wrote: > > try a "8"(?) hinge handle with a 3" extension with a little "duct > tape" and you a have a great bungee cord installer----- stick the 3" > extension into the tube which goes through the nose strut. > Fritz > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Mulwitz" <psm(at)att.net> > To: > Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 3:10 PM > Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Re: Zenith601-List Digest: 2 Msgs - 09/20/11 > > >> >> Hi David, >> >> Yes, I like your description of a clamp. >> >> I wound up taking the lower blocks off and grinding the hole a bit >> bigger so the column moves freely. I guess there is still a side >> load from the tie rods connected to the rudder pedals. I also have a >> tight upper bearing but I don't think that has an impact on >> rotation. I don't know how to remove the upper bearing without >> removing the bungee. I had no problem installing and removing the >> bungee before the engine was installed, but now it looks like a real >> bear. >> >> I was just out doing some circuits and bumps. I found if I land with >> full flaps the nose wheel behaves when it touches down, but if I do a >> no-flaps landing it tends to shimmy when it touches down. I wish I >> know enough about mechanical design to be able to figure out how to >> stop the shimmy at higher speeds. >> >> Paul >> >> On 9/21/2011 10:27 AM, DaveG601XL wrote: >>> --> Zenith601-List message posted by: >>> "DaveG601XL" >>> >>> Paul, >>> >>> On the rudder, do you suspect that the nose gear strut is binding >>> things up? When I first assembled my nose gear, the lower bearing >>> was acting more like a shaft clamp. I put a thin aluminum shim >>> between the two bearing halves and got the movement I desired. No >>> problems with 3 years and 200 hours of flying. Yeah, you still have >>> to push a Zenith rudder harder than you would in a Champ to overcome >>> the initial "centering tendency," but I have no problems with it >>> going back to center. >>> >>> Hope this helps, >>> >>> -------- >>> David Gallagher >>> 601 XL: flying >>> Next project: Pietenpol >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Read this topic online here: >>> >>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=352872#352872 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: NYTerminat(at)aol.com
Date: Sep 21, 2011
Subject: Re: Zenith601-List Digest: 2 Msgs - 09/20/11
Paul My 701 will get a shake at high speeds and will stop as it slows down. I know that it is the balancing and will take care of it at the next conditional inspection. Not sure what I will use for balance though. Bob In a message dated 9/21/2011 5:39:12 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, psm(at)att.net writes: Hi Bob, No, I didn't check the balance of the nose wheel. What I did do was make the mistake of thinking if I kept a low tire pressure it would cushion the nose and give me softer touch-down bumps. Unfortunately, the Matco wheel doesn't hold the tire and tube very well without a reasonably high pressure in the tire. The result was the tire and tube rotated in the wheel and turned the metal valve stem into a pretzel. I replaced the tube assembly with one I had laying around the shop and didn't consider the balancing issue. I suppose the nose gear vibrations could be a wheel balance issue, but I can really feel the side to side motion in the rudder pedals when the gear touches down at relatively high speed. My guess is the direct linkage between the pedals and the strut really need some sort of shock absorber or damper in the connection someplace. I also guess the source of the vibration is a slight misalignment between the nose wheel and runway at touchdown. There doesn't seem to be any feature in this design that straightens out the wheel when it is a little out of alignment. The last plane I flew (a Tecnam Echo Super) had a trailing link design in the nose gear that naturally wants to go straight. Paul On 9/21/2011 2:12 PM, _NYTerminat(at)aol.com_ (mailto:NYTerminat(at)aol.com) wrote: Paul, did you check the balance of the front tire and rim? Bob Spudis In a message dated 9/21/2011 3:14:49 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, _psm(at)att.net_ (mailto:psm(at)att.net) writes: (mailto:psm(at)att.net) Hi David, Yes, I like your description of a clamp. I wound up taking the lower blocks off and grinding the hole a bit bigger so the column moves freely. I guess there is still a side load from the tie rods connected to the rudder pedals. I also have a tight upper bearing but I don't think that has an impact on rotation. I don't know how to remove the upper bearing without removing the bungee. I had no problem installing and removing the bungee before the engine was installed, but now it looks like a real bear. I was just out doing some circuits and bumps. I found if I land with full flaps the nose wheel behaves when it touches down, but if I do a no-flaps landing it tends to shimmy when it touches down. I wish I know enough about mechanical design to be able to figure out how to stop the shimmy at higher speeds. Paul On 9/21/2011 10:27 AM, DaveG601XL wrote: > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "DaveG601XL"__ (mailto:david.m.gallagher(at)ge.com) > > Paul, > > On the rudder, do you suspect that the nose gear strut is binding things up? When I first assembled my nose gear, the lower bearing was acting more like a shaft clamp. I put a thin aluminum shim between the two bearing halves and got the movement I desired. No problems with 3 years and 200 hours of flying. Yeah, you still have to push a Zenith rudder harder than you would in a Champ to overcome the initial "centering tendency," but I have no problems with it going back to center. > > Hope this helps, > > -------- > David Gallagher > 601 XL: flying > Next project: Pietenpol > > > Read this topic online here: > > _http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=352872#352872_ (http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=352872#352872) > > (http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List) (http://www.matronics.com/contribution) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 21, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Zenith601-List Digest: 2 Msgs - 09/20/11
HI Bob, If I wanted to do that (and I am now considering it) I would take the whole wheel assembly down to my local tire shop and ask them to balance it. They have both the tools and weights to do the job and already know how to do it. Paul On 9/21/2011 2:55 PM, NYTerminat(at)aol.com wrote: > Paul > My 701 will get a shake at high speeds and will stop as it slows down. > I know that it is the balancing and will take care of it at the next > conditional inspection. Not sure what I will use for balance though. > Bob > In a message dated 9/21/2011 5:39:12 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > psm(at)att.net writes: > > Hi Bob, > > No, I didn't check the balance of the nose wheel. > > What I did do was make the mistake of thinking if I kept a low > tire pressure it would cushion the nose and give me softer > touch-down bumps. Unfortunately, the Matco wheel doesn't hold the > tire and tube very well without a reasonably high pressure in the > tire. The result was the tire and tube rotated in the wheel and > turned the metal valve stem into a pretzel. I replaced the tube > assembly with one I had laying around the shop and didn't consider > the balancing issue. > > I suppose the nose gear vibrations could be a wheel balance issue, > but I can really feel the side to side motion in the rudder pedals > when the gear touches down at relatively high speed. My guess is > the direct linkage between the pedals and the strut really need > some sort of shock absorber or damper in the connection someplace. > > I also guess the source of the vibration is a slight misalignment > between the nose wheel and runway at touchdown. There doesn't > seem to be any feature in this design that straightens out the > wheel when it is a little out of alignment. The last plane I flew > (a Tecnam Echo Super) had a trailing link design in the nose gear > that naturally wants to go straight. > > Paul > > On 9/21/2011 2:12 PM, NYTerminat(at)aol.com wrote: >> Paul, did you check the balance of the front tire and rim? >> Bob Spudis >> In a message dated 9/21/2011 3:14:49 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, >> psm(at)att.net writes: >> >> >> Hi David, >> >> Yes, I like your description of a clamp. >> >> I wound up taking the lower blocks off and grinding the hole >> a bit >> bigger so the column moves freely. I guess there is still a >> side load >> from the tie rods connected to the rudder pedals. I also >> have a tight >> upper bearing but I don't think that has an impact on >> rotation. I don't >> know how to remove the upper bearing without removing the >> bungee. I had >> no problem installing and removing the bungee before the >> engine was >> installed, but now it looks like a real bear. >> >> I was just out doing some circuits and bumps. I found if I >> land with >> full flaps the nose wheel behaves when it touches down, but >> if I do a >> no-flaps landing it tends to shimmy when it touches down. I >> wish I know >> enough about mechanical design to be able to figure out how >> to stop the >> shimmy at higher speeds. >> >> Paul >> >> On 9/21/2011 10:27 AM, DaveG601XL wrote: >> > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: >> "DaveG601XL" >> > >> > Paul, >> > >> > On the rudder, do you suspect that the nose gear strut is >> binding things up? When I first assembled my nose gear, the >> lower bearing was acting more like a shaft clamp. I put a >> thin aluminum shim between the two bearing halves and got the >> movement I desired. No problems with 3 years and 200 hours >> of flying. Yeah, you still have to push a Zenith rudder >> harder than you would in a Champ to overcome the initial >> "centering tendency," but I have no problems with it going >> back to center. >> > >> > Hope this helps, >> > >> > -------- >> > David Gallagher >> > 601 XL: flying >> > Next project: Pietenpol >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > Read this topic online here: >> > >> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=352872#352872 >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> * >> >> >> * > * > > href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List > s.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com > p://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution > > * > > * > > > * ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "fritz" <klondike(at)megalink.net>
Subject: Re: bungee cord tool
Date: Sep 21, 2011
I'll try to explain what I used to install my nose gear bungee. It is just a combination of 2 Craftsman tools which most folks would have in their toolbox. Mine happen to be Craftsman brand tools. I just measured my tools. 1) a 10" X 3/8" drive, breaker bar---- this might be the wrong name--- a handle with a hinged end that a socket will fit on. Used to loosen a very tight nut before you can use a ratchet. 2) a 3" X 3/8" drive, extension, used to lengthen the reach between the socket and ratchet, in this case the "breaker bar". 3) duct tape the extension to the breaker bar because when you go to put the bungee on, the force tries to separate the extension form the breaker bar. The bungee is looped behind the "hook" on the top aft of pin through nose strut,brought down around the pin which is secured to the fire wall and brought up as close as possible to the front of the pin which goes through the nose strut. (this we all know--- just trying to explain how I did it without an expensive Bungee tool.) At this time, slide the 3" extension into the forward side of the bungee support pin which goes through the nose strut, have the breaker bar handle inside the bungee cord. The handle will be at about the 5 o'clock position, as you rotate the handle up, the bungee cord will slide down the handle and on to the pin. The duct tape also helps cushion the area where the bungee cord contacts the nose strut pin---- There is a lot of pressure on the bungee cord at this time. I hope this helps, it worked great for me. Maybe some else can explain it better than I did. Fritz ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Mulwitz" <psm(at)att.net> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 5:38 PM Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: bungee cord tool > > Hi Fritz, > > I'm afraid I am having a hard time visualizing your tool for the bungee. > It sounds like the 2 foot long piece of PVC pipe, sharpened at one end, > that I used to do the original installation. Alas, my simple tool won't > work with the engine installed. > > Do you have a picture of your tool? > > Paul > > On 9/21/2011 1:21 PM, fritz wrote: >> >> try a "8"(?) hinge handle with a 3" extension with a little "duct tape" >> and you a have a great bungee cord installer----- stick the 3" extension >> into the tube which goes through the nose strut. >> Fritz >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Mulwitz" <psm(at)att.net> >> To: >> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 3:10 PM >> Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Re: Zenith601-List Digest: 2 Msgs - 09/20/11 >> >> >>> >>> Hi David, >>> >>> Yes, I like your description of a clamp. >>> >>> I wound up taking the lower blocks off and grinding the hole a bit >>> bigger so the column moves freely. I guess there is still a side load >>> from the tie rods connected to the rudder pedals. I also have a tight >>> upper bearing but I don't think that has an impact on rotation. I don't >>> know how to remove the upper bearing without removing the bungee. I had >>> no problem installing and removing the bungee before the engine was >>> installed, but now it looks like a real bear. >>> >>> I was just out doing some circuits and bumps. I found if I land with >>> full flaps the nose wheel behaves when it touches down, but if I do a >>> no-flaps landing it tends to shimmy when it touches down. I wish I know >>> enough about mechanical design to be able to figure out how to stop the >>> shimmy at higher speeds. >>> >>> Paul >>> >>> On 9/21/2011 10:27 AM, DaveG601XL wrote: >>>> --> Zenith601-List message posted by: >>>> "DaveG601XL" >>>> >>>> Paul, >>>> >>>> On the rudder, do you suspect that the nose gear strut is binding >>>> things up? When I first assembled my nose gear, the lower bearing was >>>> acting more like a shaft clamp. I put a thin aluminum shim between the >>>> two bearing halves and got the movement I desired. No problems with 3 >>>> years and 200 hours of flying. Yeah, you still have to push a Zenith >>>> rudder harder than you would in a Champ to overcome the initial >>>> "centering tendency," but I have no problems with it going back to >>>> center. >>>> >>>> Hope this helps, >>>> >>>> -------- >>>> David Gallagher >>>> 601 XL: flying >>>> Next project: Pietenpol >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Read this topic online here: >>>> >>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=352872#352872 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Brad Rawls" <Brad(at)ocbis.com>
Subject: Re: Zenith601-List Digest: 2 Msgs - 09/20/11
Date: Sep 21, 2011
Paul - I had a 180 MPH dragster that used the small aircraft wheels and tires we are dealing with, and it's very easy to balance them at home. Just level the spindle, remove the grease and seals from the bearing, lube the bearings with a light oil, assemble the wheel and bearings on the spindle but only put the spindle nut on where it is just touching the bearings. Give it a light spin and wait for it to stop. The heavy part of the tire will be at 6 O'clock, mark the tire at the position. Do it a couple of times to verify the heavy spot always ends up at 6:00. After that, all you need to do is get some of the stick-on tire weight and apply them opposite the heavy mark until the tire balances. Make sure you clean the wheel real well with solvent before putting the stick-on weights on. On the drag cars we used to put a layer of racer tape over the weight as a precaution, but the stick-on weight glue is really good. Thanks - Brad Brad Rawls Brad(at)ocbis.com From: owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Paul Mulwitz Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 3:06 PM Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Re: Zenith601-List Digest: 2 Msgs - 09/20/11 HI Bob, If I wanted to do that (and I am now considering it) I would take the whole wheel assembly down to my local tire shop and ask them to balance it. They have both the tools and weights to do the job and already know how to do it. Paul On 9/21/2011 2:55 PM, NYTerminat(at)aol.com wrote: Paul My 701 will get a shake at high speeds and will stop as it slows down. I know that it is the balancing and will take care of it at the next conditional inspection. Not sure what I will use for balance though. Bob In a message dated 9/21/2011 5:39:12 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, psm(at)att.net writes: Hi Bob, No, I didn't check the balance of the nose wheel. What I did do was make the mistake of thinking if I kept a low tire pressure it would cushion the nose and give me softer touch-down bumps. Unfortunately, the Matco wheel doesn't hold the tire and tube very well without a reasonably high pressure in the tire. The result was the tire and tube rotated in the wheel and turned the metal valve stem into a pretzel. I replaced the tube assembly with one I had laying around the shop and didn't consider the balancing issue. I suppose the nose gear vibrations could be a wheel balance issue, but I can really feel the side to side motion in the rudder pedals when the gear touches down at relatively high speed. My guess is the direct linkage between the pedals and the strut really need some sort of shock absorber or damper in the connection someplace. I also guess the source of the vibration is a slight misalignment between the nose wheel and runway at touchdown. There doesn't seem to be any feature in this design that straightens out the wheel when it is a little out of alignment. The last plane I flew (a Tecnam Echo Super) had a trailing link design in the nose gear that naturally wants to go straight. Paul On 9/21/2011 2:12 PM, NYTerminat(at)aol.com wrote: Paul, did you check the balance of the front tire and rim? Bob Spudis In a message dated 9/21/2011 3:14:49 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, psm(at)att.net writes: Hi David, Yes, I like your description of a clamp. I wound up taking the lower blocks off and grinding the hole a bit bigger so the column moves freely. I guess there is still a side load from the tie rods connected to the rudder pedals. I also have a tight upper bearing but I don't think that has an impact on rotation. I don't know how to remove the upper bearing without removing the bungee. I had no problem installing and removing the bungee before the engine was installed, but now it looks like a real bear. I was just out doing some circuits and bumps. I found if I land with full flaps the nose wheel behaves when it touches down, but if I do a no-flaps landing it tends to shimmy when it touches down. I wish I know enough about mechanical design to be able to figure out how to stop the shimmy at higher speeds. Paul On 9/21/2011 10:27 AM, DaveG601XL wrote: > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "DaveG601XL" > > Paul, > > On the rudder, do you suspect that the nose gear strut is binding things up? When I first assembled my nose gear, the lower bearing was acting more like a shaft clamp. I put a thin aluminum shim between the two bearing halves and got the movement I desired. No problems with 3 years and 200 hours of flying. Yeah, you still have to push a Zenith rudder harder than you would in a Champ to overcome the initial "centering tendency," but I have no problems with it going back to center. > > Hope this helps, > > -------- > David Gallagher > 601 XL: flying > Next project: Pietenpol > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=352872#352872 > > href= "http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List">http://www.matronics.com /Navigator?Zenith601-List s.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com p://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: bungee cord tool
From: Jay Bannister <jaybannist(at)cs.com>
Date: Sep 21, 2011
Installing the nose gear bungee with a pry bar is OK, if the engine is not installed. With an engine in place, using a pry bar is impossible. I boug ht the recommended installation tool from Kobush Welding. Even with that t ool, removing and re-installing a bungee would be hard, but not impossible. Jay ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 21, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: bungee cord tool
Hi Fritz, I think I get it. Sort of, anyway. It sounds a lot like my sharpened piece of PVC pipe. In that case (with no engine in the way) you put the sharp point on top of the steel tube (the pin on the gear column) after going through the bungee cord. Then when you lift the other end of the pipe the cord slips onto the pin. You can reverse the process by placing the sharp point on the bottom of the pin and twisting it to get the plastic pipe under the bungee cord. Then when you push the other end of the pipe down it lifts the bungee cord and slips it off the pin and down the pipe. I think I followed your tool using the breaker bar and extension to install the bungee, but I don't see how this approach can remove the bungee from the pin. Perhaps some hybrid of the sharpened pipe and the extension/breaker bar? Paul On 9/21/2011 3:24 PM, fritz wrote: > > I'll try to explain what I used to install my nose gear bungee. > > It is just a combination of 2 Craftsman tools which most folks would > have in their toolbox. Mine happen to be Craftsman brand tools. I > just measured my tools. > > 1) a 10" X 3/8" drive, breaker bar---- this might be the wrong name--- > a handle with a hinged end that a socket will fit on. Used to loosen > a very tight nut before you can use a ratchet. > > 2) a 3" X 3/8" drive, extension, used to lengthen the reach between > the socket and ratchet, in this case the "breaker bar". > > 3) duct tape the extension to the breaker bar because when you go to > put the bungee on, the force tries to separate the extension form the > breaker bar. > > The bungee is looped behind the "hook" on the top aft of pin through > nose strut,brought down around the pin which is secured to the fire > wall and brought up as close as possible to the front of the pin which > goes through the nose strut. > > (this we all know--- just trying to explain how I did it without an > expensive Bungee tool.) > > At this time, slide the 3" extension into the forward side of the > bungee support pin which goes through the nose strut, have the breaker > bar handle inside the bungee cord. The handle will be at about the 5 > o'clock position, as you rotate the handle up, the bungee cord will > slide down the handle and on to the pin. > > The duct tape also helps cushion the area where the bungee cord > contacts the nose strut pin---- There is a lot of pressure on the > bungee cord at this time. > > I hope this helps, it worked great for me. Maybe some else can > explain it better than I did. > Fritz > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Mulwitz" <psm(at)att.net> > To: > Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 5:38 PM > Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: bungee cord tool > > >> >> Hi Fritz, >> >> I'm afraid I am having a hard time visualizing your tool for the >> bungee. It sounds like the 2 foot long piece of PVC pipe, sharpened >> at one end, that I used to do the original installation. Alas, my >> simple tool won't work with the engine installed. >> >> Do you have a picture of your tool? >> >> Paul >> >> On 9/21/2011 1:21 PM, fritz wrote: >>> >>> try a "8"(?) hinge handle with a 3" extension with a little "duct >>> tape" and you a have a great bungee cord installer----- stick the 3" >>> extension into the tube which goes through the nose strut. >>> Fritz >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Mulwitz" <psm(at)att.net> >>> To: >>> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 3:10 PM >>> Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Re: Zenith601-List Digest: 2 Msgs - >>> 09/20/11 >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Hi David, >>>> >>>> Yes, I like your description of a clamp. >>>> >>>> I wound up taking the lower blocks off and grinding the hole a bit >>>> bigger so the column moves freely. I guess there is still a side >>>> load from the tie rods connected to the rudder pedals. I also have >>>> a tight upper bearing but I don't think that has an impact on >>>> rotation. I don't know how to remove the upper bearing without >>>> removing the bungee. I had no problem installing and removing the >>>> bungee before the engine was installed, but now it looks like a >>>> real bear. >>>> >>>> I was just out doing some circuits and bumps. I found if I land >>>> with full flaps the nose wheel behaves when it touches down, but if >>>> I do a no-flaps landing it tends to shimmy when it touches down. I >>>> wish I know enough about mechanical design to be able to figure out >>>> how to stop the shimmy at higher speeds. >>>> >>>> Paul >>>> >>>> On 9/21/2011 10:27 AM, DaveG601XL wrote: >>>>> --> Zenith601-List message posted by: >>>>> "DaveG601XL" >>>>> >>>>> Paul, >>>>> >>>>> On the rudder, do you suspect that the nose gear strut is binding >>>>> things up? When I first assembled my nose gear, the lower bearing >>>>> was acting more like a shaft clamp. I put a thin aluminum shim >>>>> between the two bearing halves and got the movement I desired. No >>>>> problems with 3 years and 200 hours of flying. Yeah, you still >>>>> have to push a Zenith rudder harder than you would in a Champ to >>>>> overcome the initial "centering tendency," but I have no problems >>>>> with it going back to center. >>>>> >>>>> Hope this helps, >>>>> >>>>> -------- >>>>> David Gallagher >>>>> 601 XL: flying >>>>> Next project: Pietenpol >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Read this topic online here: >>>>> >>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=352872#352872 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: bungee cord tool
From: davcoberly(at)wmconnect.com
Date: Sep 21, 2011
Jay, I did it with that tool and your right it wasn't exactly fun but can be done. With the Corvair had to remove the intake and carb first to have room. David Coberly 601XLB -----Original Message----- From: Jay Bannister <jaybannist(at)cs.com> Sent: Wed, Sep 21, 2011 2:03 pm Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: bungee cord tool Installing the nose gear bungee with a pry bar is OK, if the engine is not installed. With an engine in place, using a pry bar is impossible. I bought the recommended installation tool from Kobush Welding. Even with that tool, removing and re-installing a bungee would be hard, but not impossible. Jay ________________________________________________________________________________
From: NYTerminat(at)aol.com
Date: Sep 21, 2011
Subject: Re: Zenith601-List Digest: 2 Msgs - 09/20/11
Yes you could put weights on the rim but I was thinking about something inside the tire such as Dyna Beads. My brother uses them in his motorcycle tires and swears by them. Bob In a message dated 9/21/2011 6:09:42 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, psm(at)att.net writes: HI Bob, If I wanted to do that (and I am now considering it) I would take the whole wheel assembly down to my local tire shop and ask them to balance it. They have both the tools and weights to do the job and already know how to do it. Paul On 9/21/2011 2:55 PM, _NYTerminat(at)aol.com_ (mailto:NYTerminat(at)aol.com) wrote: Paul My 701 will get a shake at high speeds and will stop as it slows down. I know that it is the balancing and will take care of it at the next conditional inspection. Not sure what I will use for balance though. Bob In a message dated 9/21/2011 5:39:12 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, _psm(at)att.net_ (mailto:psm(at)att.net) writes: Hi Bob, No, I didn't check the balance of the nose wheel. What I did do was make the mistake of thinking if I kept a low tire pressure it would cushion the nose and give me softer touch-down bumps. Unfortunately, the Matco wheel doesn't hold the tire and tube very well without a reasonably high pressure in the tire. The result was the tire and tube rotated in the wheel and turned the metal valve stem into a pretzel. I replaced the tube assembly with one I had laying around the shop and didn't consider the balancing issue. I suppose the nose gear vibrations could be a wheel balance issue, but I can really feel the side to side motion in the rudder pedals when the gear touches down at relatively high speed. My guess is the direct linkage between the pedals and the strut really need some sort of shock absorber or damper in the connection someplace. I also guess the source of the vibration is a slight misalignment between the nose wheel and runway at touchdown. There doesn't seem to be any feature in this design that straightens out the wheel when it is a little out of alignment. The last plane I flew (a Tecnam Echo Super) had a trailing link design in the nose gear that naturally wants to go straight. Paul On 9/21/2011 2:12 PM, _NYTerminat(at)aol.com_ (mailto:NYTerminat(at)aol.com) wrote: Paul, did you check the balance of the front tire and rim? Bob Spudis In a message dated 9/21/2011 3:14:49 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, _psm(at)att.net_ (mailto:psm(at)att.net) writes: (mailto:psm(at)att.net) Hi David, Yes, I like your description of a clamp. I wound up taking the lower blocks off and grinding the hole a bit bigger so the column moves freely. I guess there is still a side load from the tie rods connected to the rudder pedals. I also have a tight upper bearing but I don't think that has an impact on rotation. I don't know how to remove the upper bearing without removing the bungee. I had no problem installing and removing the bungee before the engine was installed, but now it looks like a real bear. I was just out doing some circuits and bumps. I found if I land with full flaps the nose wheel behaves when it touches down, but if I do a no-flaps landing it tends to shimmy when it touches down. I wish I know enough about mechanical design to be able to figure out how to stop the shimmy at higher speeds. Paul On 9/21/2011 10:27 AM, DaveG601XL wrote: > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "DaveG601XL"__ (mailto:david.m.gallagher(at)ge.com) > > Paul, > > On the rudder, do you suspect that the nose gear strut is binding things up? When I first assembled my nose gear, the lower bearing was acting more like a shaft clamp. I put a thin aluminum shim between the two bearing halves and got the movement I desired. No problems with 3 years and 200 hours of flying. Yeah, you still have to push a Zenith rudder harder than you would in a Champ to overcome the initial "centering tendency," but I have no problems with it going back to center. > > Hope this helps, > > -------- > David Gallagher > 601 XL: flying > Next project: Pietenpol > > > Read this topic online here: > > _http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=352872#352872_ (http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=352872#352872) > > href=_"http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List"_ (http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List) >_http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List_ (http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List) s.matronics.com/">_http://forums.matronics.com_ (http://forums.matronics.com/) p://www.matronics.com/contribution">_http://www.matronics.com/contribution_ (http://www.matronics.com/contribution) (http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List) (http://www.matronics.com/contribution) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 21, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Zenith601-List Digest: 2 Msgs - 09/20/11
Hi Brad, I think I got it. Do you hold the axle horizontally to spin the wheel? Paul On 9/21/2011 3:39 PM, Brad Rawls wrote: > > Paul -- > > I had a 180 MPH dragster that used the small aircraft wheels and tires > we are dealing with, and it's very easy to balance them at home. Just > level the spindle, remove the grease and seals from the bearing, > lube the bearings with a light oil, assemble the wheel and bearings > on the spindle but only put the spindle nut on where it is just > touching the bearings. Give it a light spin and wait for it to stop. > The heavy part of the tire will be at 6 O'clock, mark the tire at the > position. Do it a couple of times to verify the heavy spot always ends > up at 6:00. After that, all you need to do is get some of the stick-on > tire weight and apply them opposite the heavy mark until the tire > balances. Make sure you clean the wheel real well with solvent before > putting the stick-on weights on. On the drag cars we used to put a > layer of racer tape over the weight as a precaution, but the stick-on > weight glue is really good. > > Thanks - Brad > > Brad Rawls > > Brad(at)ocbis.com > > *From:*owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Paul > Mulwitz > *Sent:* Wednesday, September 21, 2011 3:06 PM > *To:* zenith601-list(at)matronics.com > *Subject:* Re: Zenith601-List: Re: Zenith601-List Digest: 2 Msgs - > 09/20/11 > > HI Bob, > > If I wanted to do that (and I am now considering it) I would take the > whole wheel assembly down to my local tire shop and ask them to > balance it. They have both the tools and weights to do the job and > already know how to do it. > > Paul > > On 9/21/2011 2:55 PM, NYTerminat(at)aol.com > wrote: > > Paul > > My 701 will get a shake at high speeds and will stop as it slows down. > I know that it is the balancing and will take care of it at the next > conditional inspection. Not sure what I will use for balance though. > > Bob > > In a message dated 9/21/2011 5:39:12 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > psm(at)att.net writes: > > Hi Bob, > > No, I didn't check the balance of the nose wheel. > > What I did do was make the mistake of thinking if I kept a low > tire pressure it would cushion the nose and give me softer > touch-down bumps. Unfortunately, the Matco wheel doesn't hold the > tire and tube very well without a reasonably high pressure in the > tire. The result was the tire and tube rotated in the wheel and > turned the metal valve stem into a pretzel. I replaced the tube > assembly with one I had laying around the shop and didn't consider > the balancing issue. > > I suppose the nose gear vibrations could be a wheel balance issue, > but I can really feel the side to side motion in the rudder pedals > when the gear touches down at relatively high speed. My guess is > the direct linkage between the pedals and the strut really need > some sort of shock absorber or damper in the connection someplace. > > I also guess the source of the vibration is a slight misalignment > between the nose wheel and runway at touchdown. There doesn't > seem to be any feature in this design that straightens out the > wheel when it is a little out of alignment. The last plane I flew > (a Tecnam Echo Super) had a trailing link design in the nose gear > that naturally wants to go straight. > > Paul > > On 9/21/2011 2:12 PM, NYTerminat(at)aol.com > wrote: > > Paul, did you check the balance of the front tire and rim? > > Bob Spudis > > In a message dated 9/21/2011 3:14:49 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > psm(at)att.net writes: > > > > Hi David, > > Yes, I like your description of a clamp. > > I wound up taking the lower blocks off and grinding the hole a > bit > bigger so the column moves freely. I guess there is still a > side load > from the tie rods connected to the rudder pedals. I also have > a tight > upper bearing but I don't think that has an impact on > rotation. I don't > know how to remove the upper bearing without removing the > bungee. I had > no problem installing and removing the bungee before the > engine was > installed, but now it looks like a real bear. > > I was just out doing some circuits and bumps. I found if I > land with > full flaps the nose wheel behaves when it touches down, but if > I do a > no-flaps landing it tends to shimmy when it touches down. I > wish I know > enough about mechanical design to be able to figure out how to > stop the > shimmy at higher speeds. > > Paul > > On 9/21/2011 10:27 AM, DaveG601XL wrote: > > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: > "DaveG601XL" > > > > > Paul, > > > > On the rudder, do you suspect that the nose gear strut is > binding things up? When I first assembled my nose gear, the > lower bearing was acting more like a shaft clamp. I put a > thin aluminum shim between the two bearing halves and got the > movement I desired. No problems with 3 years and 200 hours of > flying. Yeah, you still have to push a Zenith rudder harder > than you would in a Champ to overcome the initial "centering > tendency," but I have no problems with it going back to center. > > > > Hope this helps, > > > > -------- > > David Gallagher > > 601 XL: flying > > Next project: Pietenpol > > > > > > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=352872#352872 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * * > > * * > > * * > > * * > > * * > > * href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List" >http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List* > > *s.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com* > > *p://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution* > > * * > > * * > * * > * * > * http://www.mat=====================http://forums.matronics.com - List Contribution Web generous nbsp; --> http://www.matronics.com/c= * > * * <http://www.matronics.com/contribution> > <http://www.matronics.com/contribution> > * > > > * ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JohnDRead(at)aol.com
Date: Sep 21, 2011
Subject: Re: Flight Test Update - N776PM
Jay, You had better go and recheck your trigonometry. Adjusting the pedals to the rear making the axis of the rudder pedal parallel to the nose strut will fix the cable tension problem. This problem is similar the need to have the axis of the elevator bellcrank parrallel to the pivot points on the elevator. do not archive. Regards, John CH701 - Colorado - Jabiru 3300 Cell: 719-494-4567 Home: 303-648-3261 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "fritz" <klondike(at)megalink.net>
Subject: Re: bungee cord tool-install only
Date: Sep 21, 2011
Paul-- not for removal. I simply put tape around the pin so there would not be any "sharp" edges and pry'd it off with a large screwdriver. Fritz ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Mulwitz" <psm(at)att.net> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 7:08 PM Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: bungee cord tool > > Hi Fritz, > > I think I get it. Sort of, anyway. > > It sounds a lot like my sharpened piece of PVC pipe. In that case (with > no engine in the way) you put the sharp point on top of the steel tube > (the pin on the gear column) after going through the bungee cord. Then > when you lift the other end of the pipe the cord slips onto the pin. > > You can reverse the process by placing the sharp point on the bottom of > the pin and twisting it to get the plastic pipe under the bungee cord. > Then when you push the other end of the pipe down it lifts the bungee cord > and slips it off the pin and down the pipe. > > I think I followed your tool using the breaker bar and extension to > install the bungee, but I don't see how this approach can remove the > bungee from the pin. > > Perhaps some hybrid of the sharpened pipe and the extension/breaker bar? > > Paul > > On 9/21/2011 3:24 PM, fritz wrote: >> >> I'll try to explain what I used to install my nose gear bungee. >> >> It is just a combination of 2 Craftsman tools which most folks would have >> in their toolbox. Mine happen to be Craftsman brand tools. I just >> measured my tools. >> >> 1) a 10" X 3/8" drive, breaker bar---- this might be the wrong name--- >> a handle with a hinged end that a socket will fit on. Used to loosen a >> very tight nut before you can use a ratchet. >> >> 2) a 3" X 3/8" drive, extension, used to lengthen the reach between the >> socket and ratchet, in this case the "breaker bar". >> >> 3) duct tape the extension to the breaker bar because when you go to put >> the bungee on, the force tries to separate the extension form the breaker >> bar. >> >> The bungee is looped behind the "hook" on the top aft of pin through nose >> strut,brought down around the pin which is secured to the fire wall and >> brought up as close as possible to the front of the pin which goes >> through the nose strut. >> >> (this we all know--- just trying to explain how I did it without an >> expensive Bungee tool.) >> >> At this time, slide the 3" extension into the forward side of the bungee >> support pin which goes through the nose strut, have the breaker bar >> handle inside the bungee cord. The handle will be at about the 5 o'clock >> position, as you rotate the handle up, the bungee cord will slide down >> the handle and on to the pin. >> >> The duct tape also helps cushion the area where the bungee cord contacts >> the nose strut pin---- There is a lot of pressure on the bungee cord at >> this time. >> >> I hope this helps, it worked great for me. Maybe some else can >> explain it better than I did. >> Fritz >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Mulwitz" <psm(at)att.net> >> To: >> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 5:38 PM >> Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: bungee cord tool >> >> >>> >>> Hi Fritz, >>> >>> I'm afraid I am having a hard time visualizing your tool for the bungee. >>> It sounds like the 2 foot long piece of PVC pipe, sharpened at one end, >>> that I used to do the original installation. Alas, my simple tool won't >>> work with the engine installed. >>> >>> Do you have a picture of your tool? >>> >>> Paul >>> >>> On 9/21/2011 1:21 PM, fritz wrote: >>>> >>>> try a "8"(?) hinge handle with a 3" extension with a little "duct tape" >>>> and you a have a great bungee cord installer----- stick the 3" >>>> extension into the tube which goes through the nose strut. >>>> Fritz >>>> >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Mulwitz" <psm(at)att.net> >>>> To: >>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 3:10 PM >>>> Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Re: Zenith601-List Digest: 2 Msgs - >>>> 09/20/11 >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi David, >>>>> >>>>> Yes, I like your description of a clamp. >>>>> >>>>> I wound up taking the lower blocks off and grinding the hole a bit >>>>> bigger so the column moves freely. I guess there is still a side load >>>>> from the tie rods connected to the rudder pedals. I also have a tight >>>>> upper bearing but I don't think that has an impact on rotation. I >>>>> don't know how to remove the upper bearing without removing the >>>>> bungee. I had no problem installing and removing the bungee before >>>>> the engine was installed, but now it looks like a real bear. >>>>> >>>>> I was just out doing some circuits and bumps. I found if I land with >>>>> full flaps the nose wheel behaves when it touches down, but if I do a >>>>> no-flaps landing it tends to shimmy when it touches down. I wish I >>>>> know enough about mechanical design to be able to figure out how to >>>>> stop the shimmy at higher speeds. >>>>> >>>>> Paul >>>>> >>>>> On 9/21/2011 10:27 AM, DaveG601XL wrote: >>>>>> --> Zenith601-List message posted by: >>>>>> "DaveG601XL" >>>>>> >>>>>> Paul, >>>>>> >>>>>> On the rudder, do you suspect that the nose gear strut is binding >>>>>> things up? When I first assembled my nose gear, the lower bearing >>>>>> was acting more like a shaft clamp. I put a thin aluminum shim >>>>>> between the two bearing halves and got the movement I desired. No >>>>>> problems with 3 years and 200 hours of flying. Yeah, you still have >>>>>> to push a Zenith rudder harder than you would in a Champ to overcome >>>>>> the initial "centering tendency," but I have no problems with it >>>>>> going back to center. >>>>>> >>>>>> Hope this helps, >>>>>> >>>>>> -------- >>>>>> David Gallagher >>>>>> 601 XL: flying >>>>>> Next project: Pietenpol >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Read this topic online here: >>>>>> >>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=352872#352872 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: bungee cord tool-install only
Date: Sep 21, 2011
> I changed my nosewheel bungee once with a simple threaded rod as a tool. I had a Soob Engine with the radiator mounte 4 inches from the firewall. I inserted a threaded rod on top of gear leg. Then put a nut and screwed it down to the top plate (notice tat my top plate uses two bolts -- only one removed to accomodate the threaded rod). Then removed second bolt and disasembled the bottom bearing. Finally, unscrewed the rod using vise grip on it. Reverse procedure to install the new bungee. Michel > > Sent from my iPad > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Flight Test Update - N776PM
From: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin(at)comcast.net>
Date: Sep 21, 2011
The nose strut slides up and down parallel to the firewall, the rudder pedals are fixed to pivot at the bottom to the cabin floor and higher up to the steering rods connected to the nose strut. This configuration makes it impossible for the pedals to remain parallel to the strut as the strut deflects. This means that the rudder cable tension will vary with strut deflection. If the distance between the connection points of the cable at the pedal and at the rudder horn varies by a small amount, it will have a significant effect on the cable tension. The cable tension on the ground is not important, the in-flight tension is very important. So, the tension should be set for the in-flight configuration, i.e. with zero strut deflection. Even an sixteenth of an inch of deflection can have a significant effect on tension. If the cables are too tight in flight, friction may make it difficult to self center. On Sep 21, 2011, at 11:04 AM, Paul Mulwitz wrote: > Jay, > > I don't want to make a big argument over this, but I'm afraid you are not seeing the truth. > > The angle between the rudder pedals and the nose gear strut will influence how movement in the strut will cause movement in the pedals. Technically this is not geometry but is trigonometry. Perhaps you are not considering that a change in angle between the pedals and strut requires a change in length of the tie rods. > > If the pedals and strut are parallel then a small movement in the strut will not cause a noticeable movement in the pedals. As the angle increases the connected movement increases. I'm sure there is a SIN or COS function here somewhere but I don't have the energy to work out the equations. > > In the real world, the strut doesn't move very far at all because the bungee is very strong. I have tried to move it on the ground and my weight is only enough to get the strut to move an inch or so. It needs to be free to move, but I doubt you will ever see much more than an inch or two in the strut which might translate to a few millimeters movement in the rudder pedals. > > Respectfully, > > Paul > > On 9/21/2011 7:44 AM, Jay Bannister wrote: >> Not so. The geometry remains the same. >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net> >> To: zenith601-list >> Sent: Wed, Sep 21, 2011 9:15 am >> Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Flight Test Update - N776PM >> >> Hi Jay, >> >> Looking at your drawing, I would guess the amount of rudder pedal movement caused by nose gear strut movement is a function of the setting of the angle of the rudder pedals. Put differently, if the pedals are moved toward the rear (for short legged guys like me) then the correlated movement would be minimal. If the pedals are set forward (for tall guys) then the movement would be more pronounced. >> >> In any case, I agree with Bob that it is not a great idea to make things different by reducing the rudder cable tension. I think my approach of adjusting the relative rudder cable lengths is a better way to get neutral rudder trim. >> >> Paul >> >> >> >> >> -- Bryan Martin N61BM, CH 601 XL, RAM Subaru, Stratus re-drive. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 21, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Flight Test Update - N776PM
Hi Bryan, I agree with your comment in principle, but the actual amount of movement in the rudder pedals will vary depending on the configuration. The Zodiac has fixed seat location, so the only way to adjust the position for people of different length legs is to rotate the rudder pedals in their neutral location. If you rotate them back far enough the upright portion of the rudder pedal can be parallel to the nose gear strut. In this case small movements in the strut will make much smaller movements in the rudder pedals. This is because the rods connecting the strut to the pedals will be perpendicular to the pedal upright members and can move without really moving the pedal much at all. As you move the pedals closer to the firewall for taller people the angle between the tie rods and the pedal upright member moves away from 90 degrees. This means the same movement in the strut will have a bigger impact on the rudder pedal location. As I mentioned earlier, the nose strut movement is pretty small. I have not measured it in normal flight and landing events, but I would guess a normal (gentle) touchdown might move the strut less than an inch. In this case and the case of setting the pedals for a short legged pilot I doubt you would be able to measure any change at all in either the pedal position or cable tension. I agree with you that the tension in flight is the most important. This is the normal situation anyway since the normal position of the strut when the plane is on the ground is fully extended. Paul On 9/21/2011 7:40 PM, Bryan Martin wrote: > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: Bryan Martin > > The nose strut slides up and down parallel to the firewall, the rudder pedals are fixed to pivot at the bottom to the cabin floor and higher up to the steering rods connected to the nose strut. This configuration makes it impossible for the pedals to remain parallel to the strut as the strut deflects. This means that the rudder cable tension will vary with strut deflection. If the distance between the connection points of the cable at the pedal and at the rudder horn varies by a small amount, it will have a significant effect on the cable tension. > > The cable tension on the ground is not important, the in-flight tension is very important. So, the tension should be set for the in-flight configuration, i.e. with zero strut deflection. Even an sixteenth of an inch of deflection can have a significant effect on tension. If the cables are too tight in flight, friction may make it difficult to self center. > > On Sep 21, 2011, at 11:04 AM, Paul Mulwitz wrote: > >> Jay, >> >> I don't want to make a big argument over this, but I'm afraid you are not seeing the truth. >> >> The angle between the rudder pedals and the nose gear strut will influence how movement in the strut will cause movement in the pedals. Technically this is not geometry but is trigonometry. Perhaps you are not considering that a change in angle between the pedals and strut requires a change in length of the tie rods. >> >> If the pedals and strut are parallel then a small movement in the strut will not cause a noticeable movement in the pedals. As the angle increases the connected movement increases. I'm sure there is a SIN or COS function here somewhere but I don't have the energy to work out the equations. >> >> In the real world, the strut doesn't move very far at all because the bungee is very strong. I have tried to move it on the ground and my weight is only enough to get the strut to move an inch or so. It needs to be free to move, but I doubt you will ever see much more than an inch or two in the strut which might translate to a few millimeters movement in the rudder pedals. >> >> Respectfully, >> >> Paul >> >> On 9/21/2011 7:44 AM, Jay Bannister wrote: >>> Not so. The geometry remains the same. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Paul Mulwitz<psm(at)att.net> >>> To: zenith601-list >>> Sent: Wed, Sep 21, 2011 9:15 am >>> Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Flight Test Update - N776PM >>> >>> Hi Jay, >>> >>> Looking at your drawing, I would guess the amount of rudder pedal movement caused by nose gear strut movement is a function of the setting of the angle of the rudder pedals. Put differently, if the pedals are moved toward the rear (for short legged guys like me) then the correlated movement would be minimal. If the pedals are set forward (for tall guys) then the movement would be more pronounced. >>> >>> In any case, I agree with Bob that it is not a great idea to make things different by reducing the rudder cable tension. I think my approach of adjusting the relative rudder cable lengths is a better way to get neutral rudder trim. >>> >>> Paul >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "fritz" <klondike(at)megalink.net>
Subject: Re: bungee cord tool-threaded rod
Date: Sep 22, 2011
sounds like a great idea--- so simple, yet so effective ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michel Therrien" <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 10:25 PM Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: bungee cord tool-install only > >> I changed my nosewheel bungee once with a simple threaded rod as a tool. >> I had a Soob > Engine with the radiator mounte 4 inches from the firewall. > > I inserted a threaded rod on top of gear leg. Then put a nut and screwed > it down to the top plate (notice tat my top plate uses two bolts -- only > one removed to accomodate the threaded rod). Then removed second bolt and > disasembled the bottom bearing. Finally, unscrewed the rod using vise grip > on it. > > Reverse procedure to install the new bungee. > > > Michel >> >> Sent from my iPad >> > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jonathan" <jonathan(at)entry.co.za>
Subject: Amazing around the world flight
Date: Sep 22, 2011
Hi All, Not strictly Zenith, but amazing just the same: The guys from The Airplane Factory are flying around the world, and are on their second last leg, from Rio to Cape Town, they have just taken off, you can follow them with this link: http://www.airplanefactory.co.za/sling4atw.asp Jonathan ZU-EEC CH601XLb (300+ hours, and loving it!) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Brad Rawls" <Brad(at)ocbis.com>
Subject: Re: Zenith601-List Digest: 2 Msgs - 09/20/11
Date: Sep 22, 2011
Yes, you just need to have it 'eyeball' level. Thanks - Brad Brad Rawls Orange County Brokerage 714-550-0159 voice 714-550-0869 fax Brad(at)ocbis.com From: owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Paul Mulwitz Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 4:10 PM Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Re: Zenith601-List Digest: 2 Msgs - 09/20/11 Hi Brad, I think I got it. Do you hold the axle horizontally to spin the wheel? Paul On 9/21/2011 3:39 PM, Brad Rawls wrote: Paul - I had a 180 MPH dragster that used the small aircraft wheels and tires we are dealing with, and it's very easy to balance them at home. Just level the spindle, remove the grease and seals from the bearing, lube the bearings with a light oil, assemble the wheel and bearings on the spindle but only put the spindle nut on where it is just touching the bearings. Give it a light spin and wait for it to stop. The heavy part of the tire will be at 6 O'clock, mark the tire at the position. Do it a couple of times to verify the heavy spot always ends up at 6:00. After that, all you need to do is get some of the stick-on tire weight and apply them opposite the heavy mark until the tire balances. Make sure you clean the wheel real well with solvent before putting the stick-on weights on. On the drag cars we used to put a layer of racer tape over the weight as a precaution, but the stick-on weight glue is really good. Thanks - Brad Brad Rawls Brad(at)ocbis.com From: owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Paul Mulwitz Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 3:06 PM Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Re: Zenith601-List Digest: 2 Msgs - 09/20/11 HI Bob, If I wanted to do that (and I am now considering it) I would take the whole wheel assembly down to my local tire shop and ask them to balance it. They have both the tools and weights to do the job and already know how to do it. Paul On 9/21/2011 2:55 PM, NYTerminat(at)aol.com wrote: Paul My 701 will get a shake at high speeds and will stop as it slows down. I know that it is the balancing and will take care of it at the next conditional inspection. Not sure what I will use for balance though. Bob In a message dated 9/21/2011 5:39:12 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, psm(at)att.net writes: Hi Bob, No, I didn't check the balance of the nose wheel. What I did do was make the mistake of thinking if I kept a low tire pressure it would cushion the nose and give me softer touch-down bumps. Unfortunately, the Matco wheel doesn't hold the tire and tube very well without a reasonably high pressure in the tire. The result was the tire and tube rotated in the wheel and turned the metal valve stem into a pretzel. I replaced the tube assembly with one I had laying around the shop and didn't consider the balancing issue. I suppose the nose gear vibrations could be a wheel balance issue, but I can really feel the side to side motion in the rudder pedals when the gear touches down at relatively high speed. My guess is the direct linkage between the pedals and the strut really need some sort of shock absorber or damper in the connection someplace. I also guess the source of the vibration is a slight misalignment between the nose wheel and runway at touchdown. There doesn't seem to be any feature in this design that straightens out the wheel when it is a little out of alignment. The last plane I flew (a Tecnam Echo Super) had a trailing link design in the nose gear that naturally wants to go straight. Paul On 9/21/2011 2:12 PM, NYTerminat(at)aol.com wrote: Paul, did you check the balance of the front tire and rim? Bob Spudis In a message dated 9/21/2011 3:14:49 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, psm(at)att.net writes: Hi David, Yes, I like your description of a clamp. I wound up taking the lower blocks off and grinding the hole a bit bigger so the column moves freely. I guess there is still a side load from the tie rods connected to the rudder pedals. I also have a tight upper bearing but I don't think that has an impact on rotation. I don't know how to remove the upper bearing without removing the bungee. I had no problem installing and removing the bungee before the engine was installed, but now it looks like a real bear. I was just out doing some circuits and bumps. I found if I land with full flaps the nose wheel behaves when it touches down, but if I do a no-flaps landing it tends to shimmy when it touches down. I wish I know enough about mechanical design to be able to figure out how to stop the shimmy at higher speeds. Paul On 9/21/2011 10:27 AM, DaveG601XL wrote: > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "DaveG601XL" > > Paul, > > On the rudder, do you suspect that the nose gear strut is binding things up? When I first assembled my nose gear, the lower bearing was acting more like a shaft clamp. I put a thin aluminum shim between the two bearing halves and got the movement I desired. No problems with 3 years and 200 hours of flying. Yeah, you still have to push a Zenith rudder harder than you would in a Champ to overcome the initial "centering tendency," but I have no problems with it going back to center. > > Hope this helps, > > -------- > David Gallagher > 601 XL: flying > Next project: Pietenpol > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=352872#352872 > > href= "http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List">http://www.matronics.com /Navigator?Zenith601-List s.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com p://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution http://www.mat=====================http://forums.matronics.com - List Contribution Web generous nbsp; --> http://www.matronics.com/c= <http://www.matronics.com/contribution> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution> Email Forum - Navigator to browse List Un/Subscription, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Carlos Sa <carlossa52(at)gmail.com>
Date: Sep 22, 2011
Subject: Re: wheel balancing
Brad, I believe the procedure you described might not work in all cases. For instance, if you have two identical heavy spots opposed in relation to the wheel centre, it would still wobble. I tried to illustrate this in the picture below. The red marks represent the "heavy spots". As the wheel spins, the centrifugal force at these spots will try to twist the tire, and it will wobble - despite the fact that the CG is on the axle. [image: tire.bmp] Carlos On 22 September 2011 12:19, Brad Rawls wrote: > Yes, you just need to have it =91eyeball=92 level.**** > > ** ** > > Thanks - Brad**** > > ** ** > > Brad Rawls**** > > Orange County Brokerage**** > > 714-550-0159 voice**** > > 714-550-0869 fax**** > > Brad(at)ocbis.com**** > > ** ** > > *From:* owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto: > owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Paul Mulwitz > *Sent:* Wednesday, September 21, 2011 4:10 PM > *To:* zenith601-list(at)matronics.com > *Subject:* Re: Zenith601-List: Re: Zenith601-List Digest: 2 Msgs - > 09/20/11**** > > ** ** > > Hi Brad, > > I think I got it. > > Do you hold the axle horizontally to spin the wheel? > > Paul > > On 9/21/2011 3:39 PM, Brad Rawls wrote: **** > > Paul '**** > > **** > > I had a 180 MPH dragster that used the small aircraft wheels and tires we > are dealing with, and it=92s very easy to balance them at home. Just leve l the > spindle, remove the grease and seals from the bearing, lube the bearing s > with a light oil, assemble the wheel and bearings on the spindle but only > put the spindle nut on where it is just touching the bearings. Give it a > light spin and wait for it to stop. The heavy part of the tire will be at 6 > O=92clock, mark the tire at the position. Do it a couple of times to veri fy > the heavy spot always ends up at 6:00. After that, all you need to do is get > some of the stick-on tire weight and apply them opposite the heavy mark > until the tire balances. Make sure you clean the wheel real well with > solvent before putting the stick-on weights on. On the drag cars we used to > put a layer of racer tape over the weight as a precaution, but the stick- on > weight glue is really good.**** > > **** > > Thanks - Brad**** > > **** > > Brad Rawls**** > > Brad(at)ocbis.com > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Brad Rawls" <Brad(at)ocbis.com>
Subject: wheel balancing
Date: Sep 22, 2011
Carlos - I see your point, but I not sure that would be a real world problem with the small diameters and strong sidewalls we are working with. I was giving Paul a method to use at home as opposed to taking the wheel to a tire shop. A shop would most likely bubble balance the wheel, which is not going to cure the problem you describe. Current spin balance machines would not correct for the problem you are describing either. How would you balance the tire in your diagram? Thanks - Brad Brad Rawls Orange County Brokerage 714-550-0159 voice 714-550-0869 fax Brad(at)ocbis.com From: owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Carlos Sa Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2011 9:42 AM Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: wheel balancing Brad, I believe the procedure you described might not work in all cases. For instance, if you have two identical heavy spots opposed in relation to the wheel centre, it would still wobble. I tried to illustrate this in the picture below. The red marks represent the "heavy spots". As the wheel spins, the centrifugal force at these spots will try to twist the tire, and it will wobble - despite the fact that the CG is on the axle. tire.bmp Carlos On 22 September 2011 12:19, Brad Rawls wrote: Yes, you just need to have it 'eyeball' level. Thanks - Brad Brad Rawls Orange County Brokerage 714-550-0159 voice 714-550-0869 fax Brad(at)ocbis.com From: owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Paul Mulwitz Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 4:10 PM Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Re: Zenith601-List Digest: 2 Msgs - 09/20/11 Hi Brad, I think I got it. Do you hold the axle horizontally to spin the wheel? Paul On 9/21/2011 3:39 PM, Brad Rawls wrote: Paul - I had a 180 MPH dragster that used the small aircraft wheels and tires we are dealing with, and it's very easy to balance them at home. Just level the spindle, remove the grease and seals from the bearing, lube the bearings with a light oil, assemble the wheel and bearings on the spindle but only put the spindle nut on where it is just touching the bearings. Give it a light spin and wait for it to stop. The heavy part of the tire will be at 6 O'clock, mark the tire at the position. Do it a couple of times to verify the heavy spot always ends up at 6:00. After that, all you need to do is get some of the stick-on tire weight and apply them opposite the heavy mark until the tire balances. Make sure you clean the wheel real well with solvent before putting the stick-on weights on. On the drag cars we used to put a layer of racer tape over the weight as a precaution, but the stick-on weight glue is really good. Thanks - Brad Brad Rawls Brad(at)ocbis.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Austin" <daveaustin2(at)primus.ca>
Subject: Flight Test Update - N776PM
Date: Sep 22, 2011
----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Austin" <daveaustin2(at)primus.ca> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 8:42 PM Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: Flight Test Update - N776PM > Hi Paul, > Interesting comments. One question: With your enlarged trim tab, if you had an elevator trim tab > runaway (I have!) can you overcome it with the stick? Try it at a high altitude before you do > get a runaway! > Dave Austin HDS 912U > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Carlos Sa <carlossa52(at)gmail.com>
Date: Sep 22, 2011
Subject: Re: wheel balancing
I don't know how to fix it - I just thought this is the type of thing that can be done in a well-equipped shop...? Carlos On 22 September 2011 13:40, Brad Rawls wrote: > Carlos '**** > > ** ** > > I see your point, but I not sure that would be a real world problem with > the small diameters and strong sidewalls we are working with. I was givi ng > Paul a method to use at home as opposed to taking the wheel to a tire sho p. > A shop would most likely bubble balance the wheel, which is not going to > cure the problem you describe. Current spin balance machines would not > correct for the problem you are describing either. How would you balance > the tire in your diagram?**** > > ** ** > > Thanks - Brad**** > > ** ** > > Brad Rawls**** > > Orange County Brokerage > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 22, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Flight Test Update - N776PM
Hi Dave, I don't know for sure, but I think that would not be a problem. The trim tab size increase is something less than 50 percent. Also, the elevator authority is a lot higher than the total trim force. I have taken off without adjusting the trim from full flaps to neutral with no flaps and the amount of force needed to get the desired pitch was easy to generate. This might be a direct answer to your question. Paul Camas, WA On 9/22/2011 11:32 AM, Dave Austin wrote: > >> Hi Paul, >> Interesting comments. One question: With your enlarged trim tab, if >> you had an elevator trim tab runaway (I have!) can you overcome it >> with the stick? Try it at a high altitude before you do get a runaway! >> Dave Austin HDS 912U >> ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 22, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: wheel balancing
Hi guys, This is a very interesting method to balance the wheel and I'm sure it would be easy to do. Of course this would be messy since you need to remove the wheel bearing grease and repack it, but getting full of grease is not the end of the world. On the other hand, I never thought my wheel needs balancing. If the vibration I experience when touching down at higher speed (without flaps) were from poor wheel balance then I would also experience it when taking off at even higher speed. I do not. I still want a way to damp the shimmy I get when landing at higher speeds with the nose wheel slightly misaligned with the runway. Paul On 9/22/2011 11:46 AM, Carlos Sa wrote: > I don't know how to fix it - I just thought this is the type of thing > that can be done in a well-equipped shop...? > > Carlos > > On 22 September 2011 13:40, Brad Rawls > wrote: > > Carlos > > I see your point, but I not sure that would be a real world > problem with the small diameters and strong sidewalls we are > working with. I was giving Paul a method to use at home as > opposed to taking the wheel to a tire shop. A shop would most > likely bubble balance the wheel, which is not going to cure the > problem you describe. Current spin balance machines would not > correct for the problem you are describing either. How would you > balance the tire in your diagram? > > Thanks - Brad > > Brad Rawls > > Orange County Brokerage > > > * > > > * ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Tonyplane <tonyplane(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: wheel balancing
Date: Sep 22, 2011
FWIW. I have 6x600 tires/wheels all around on my XL. When I first flew it in July 05 I had a bad vibration problem which exhibited itself on lift off, f rom the nose wheel. I jacked up the nose, and by rotating the tire/wheel the tire would always go heavy side down. I bought some stick on weights at a l ocal tire shop and installed them on the wheel's outside inner surface for b alancing. Could spin the wheel after balance and it would stop at random loc ations. No more vibes after lift off. Tony Graziano XL/Jab 3300; 630 fun hrs; N493TG Sent from myiPhone On Sep 22, 2011, at 1:46 PM, Carlos Sa wrote: > I don't know how to fix it - I just thought this is the type of thing that can be done in a well-equipped shop...? > > Carlos > > On 22 September 2011 13:40, Brad Rawls wrote: > Carlos =93 > > > > I see your point, but I not sure that would be a real world problem with t he small diameters and strong sidewalls we are working with. I was giving P aul a method to use at home as opposed to taking the wheel to a tire shop. A shop would most likely bubble balance the wheel, which is not going to cure the problem you describe. Current spin balance machines would not correct f or the problem you are describing either. How would you balance the tire in your diagram? > > > > Thanks - Brad > > > > Brad Rawls > > Orange County Brokerage > > > > ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 24, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: I was wrong.
It turns out the vibration in my nose gear was indeed an out of balance wheel. I discovered yesterday that indeed it started vibrating a little bit on takeoff with no flaps. The vibration was much more noticeable on landing. I bought some stick-on weights from my local tire store and used a slight variation on the balancing method suggested by Brad. Instead of removing the packing grease and replacing it with oil I just loosened the nose wheel axle several turns and spun the wheel in place. That worked just fine. The wheel didn't roll very smoothly since it seemed to bump along on the roller bearings but it still gave a clear indication of the heavy spot. Many thanks to all of you who have helped me figure out all these problems on my plane. Paul Zodiac XL about half way through phase I flight testing. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Sep 24, 2011
Subject: Re: I was wrong.
From: BOB <nyterminat(at)aol.com>
You're welcome. Bob Spudis Paul Mulwitz wrote: > >It turns out the vibration in my nose gear was indeed an out of balance >wheel. I discovered yesterday that indeed it started vibrating a little >bit on takeoff with no flaps. The vibration was much more noticeable on >landing. > >I bought some stick-on weights from my local tire store and used a >slight variation on the balancing method suggested by Brad. Instead of >removing the packing grease and replacing it with oil I just loosened >the nose wheel axle several turns and spun the wheel in place. That >worked just fine. The wheel didn't roll very smoothly since it seemed >to bump along on the roller bearings but it still gave a clear >indication of the heavy spot. > >Many thanks to all of you who have helped me figure out all these >problems on my plane. > >Paul >Zodiac XL about half way through phase I flight testing. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Larry McFarland" <larry(at)macsmachine.com>
Subject: access panel drawing
Date: Sep 28, 2011
Hi guys, I've had a few people ask about a drawing for the inspection panels I use on my 601HDS. The link below will get you to the drawing on my site and clicking the drawing at the bottom of the page will get you to a larger image that's printable. The panels serve my plane well and have never given any difficulty. If you want to make a set of these, the drawing is a good guide. http://www.macsmachine.com/html/winginsppanels.htm Fly safe guys, Larry McFarland 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <rgriffith(at)griffithes.com>
Subject: Engine for sale
Date: Sep 28, 2011
I have a UL Power 260i engine for sale. It is 97hp FADEC engine was taken out of a CH750 that I sold. I fly my 650/601 with the same engine. This is a great price on a great modern real aircraft engine. If really interested contact me off list at rgriffith (at) griffithes (dot) com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: 601xl engine out glide ratio
From: "hallert" <hallert(at)verizon.net>
Date: Oct 01, 2011
Does anyone have any glide data on the zodiac? I have tried some engine idle approaches with my AMD 601 XL and find somewhere around 6:1 ( about 1000ft/min down at 60 kts) with flap setting not making much difference. Ted Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=353714#353714 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 01, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: 601xl engine out glide ratio
Hi Ted, I'm in the middle of flight testing my XL and have found only slightly better glide performance - perhaps 8:1. Yours might be a little bit worse because of the heavy engine. This gets you twice - heavier empty weight and more forward CG. My XL is equipped with a Jabiru 3300A engine which should weigh about 100 pounds less than the O-200 installed. The good news is it is a lot easier to land an airplane with either 8:1 or 6:1 than the 14:1 or so I got from my Tecnam Echo Super. That plane was difficult to get to come down at all. You might do a little bit better if you go slower - perhaps 50 or 55 knots. Paul Camas, WA XL - 17 hours into phase I flight test. On 10/1/2011 1:19 PM, hallert wrote: > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "hallert" > > Does anyone have any glide data on the zodiac? I have tried some engine idle approaches with my AMD 601 XL and find somewhere around 6:1 > ( about 1000ft/min down at 60 kts) with flap setting not making much difference. > > Ted > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=353714#353714 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <paulrod36(at)msn.com>
Subject: Fuel lines
Date: Oct 01, 2011
A question for the Corvair drivers: My pre-supplied Zenith fuel hose is 1/4" Unfortunately, it won't fit over the 1/4" AN fitting I'm using to go through the fuselage skin. Coming out of the finger screen is a 1/8" barb fitting, which does fit inside 1/4" hose. My idea is to use a 1/4" barb, and then go to 3/8" tubing, and eventually up to 1/4" AN fittings, and aluminum fuel line. Has anybody used 1/8" barb fittings, or any other 1/8" component? Did it adequately feed the Corvair engine? (if it will, I'll save a whole lot of work getting to that fitting.) If it was gravity feed, no way. But, with a pump moving the fuel, it's more of a maybe. Any thoughts, or experience with this setup? Paul R ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Fuel lines
From: "Ron Lendon" <ron.lendon(at)gmail.com>
Date: Oct 01, 2011
Running AN-6 (3/8" id hose) from the tanks all the way to the carb. With the low wing it has pumps, but they are in series on the engine side of the firewall. No pressurized fuel in the passenger compartment. This is all done per the WW 601 installation manual. It's flight proven and that's good for me. -------- Ron Lendon, Detroit, MI WW Corvair with Roy's Garage 5th bearing Zodiac XL, ScrapBuilder ;-) http://www.mykitlog.com/rlendon Corvair Engine Prints: http://www.zenith.aero/profile/RonLendon Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=353744#353744 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: 601xl engine out glide ratio
From: "hallert" <hallert(at)verizon.net>
Date: Oct 02, 2011
Paul, You're right about the engine weight. The other strange behavior I have noticed is that slips have practically no effect on the descent rate unlike any other aircraft I have flown. Have you noticed this? Ted Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=353780#353780 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 02, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: 601xl engine out glide ratio
Hi Ted, I haven't tried slips yet. The plane drops so nicely with full flaps I never thought of slips. I have tried to stall my plane and never really got a break. I've been spending most of my time working on engine cooling issues and flight control problems. I'm about the start spending some real time just flying the plane and trying to get good at landing it. The biggest flight control problems have been insufficient trim to trim out full flap configuration and a need to hold left rudder to get it to fly straight. I fixed the trim by adding a fixed tab to the motorized one. The rudder "Trim" problem has been fixed by adjusting the rudder cables. My last change (I hope) is to add a small fin on the bottom rear of the fuselage. I have been unhappy with the yaw stability and hope to improve it a little bit. Especially in turbulence, the nose seems to wander from side to side instead of finding a good position and staying there. I can't imagine why Chris built his planes without a vertical stabilizer, but this seems like the price for that choice. I don't know of any other planes with this rudder configuration. Paul On 10/2/2011 7:41 AM, hallert wrote: > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "hallert" > > Paul, > You're right about the engine weight. The other strange behavior I have noticed is that slips have practically no effect on the descent rate unlike > any other aircraft I have flown. Have you noticed this? > > Ted > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=353780#353780 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Larry McFarland" <larry(at)macsmachine.com>
Subject: Fuel lines
Date: Oct 02, 2011
Hi Paul, I=92d recommend you stay clear of any tube or hose that is less than =BC inch diameter nominal I.D. The UK use 3/8 or more and US Builders nearly always recommend 3/8 tube with =BC as minimum. The Corvair is likely to run on smaller diameter tube flow, but if you have any obstructive debris, icing or other, the small 1/8 inch diameter will shut you down very quickly. I=92d recommend you look for something larger. Respectfully, Larry McFarland 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com From: owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of paulrod36(at)msn.com Sent: Saturday, October 01, 2011 8:57 PM Subject: [Probable Spam] Zenith601-List: Fuel lines A question for the Corvair drivers: My pre-supplied Zenith fuel hose is 1/4" Unfortunately, it won't fit over the 1/4" AN fitting I'm using to go through the fuselage skin. Coming out of the finger screen is a 1/8" barb fitting, which does fit inside 1/4" hose. My idea is to use a 1/4" barb, and then go to 3/8" tubing, and eventually up to 1/4" AN fittings, and aluminum fuel line. Has anybody used 1/8" barb fittings, or any other 1/8" component? Did it adequately feed the Corvair engine? (if it will, I'll save a whole lot of work getting to that fitting.) If it was gravity feed, no way. But, with a pump moving the fuel, it's more of a maybe. Any thoughts, or experience with this setup? Paul R ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 02, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: 601xl engine out glide ratio
Hi Ted, I just took a long look at the Zodiac XL fuselage. I wanted to consider my new fin (which doesn't work) to get some yaw stability. I also considered your comments about slips having little impact. The Zodiac XL has a very funny shape. Because of the flat sides and the angle they make to the tail and the way the front of the cabin is shaped there seems to be no yaw stability at all built into the fuselage. When you slip there is no significant change in the cross section of the fuselage that hits the air flow. This changes once you get the tail out further than the widest point at the cabin center (shoulder area for passengers), but that would be a very deep slip indeed. I wanted to add some yaw stability, but my first attempt to add a fin on the bottom of the fuselage didn't work. In order to get a significant "Height" the fin will hit the ground when the nose is raised. This would be particularly noticeable when doing a full stall landing. I took a look around the airport at other planes, and most of them (particularly TC'd ones) have an extra fin that goes from the front or middle of the fuselage length up to the front of the fixed fin in the tail. I suspect adding such a fin to the XL might give it some stability but this looks like it would be a big job. The top of the rear fuselage has very little strength, and this would probably need to be beefed up to support air loads to the side of the fuselage. And, of course, the XL design as drawn has no vertical stabilizer at all. If you compare the Piper Sport to the Zodiac XL you will see the biggest change is in the addition of a vertical stabilizer. This plane was designed by CZAW and appears to use many parts from the Zodiac XL they used to sell into the European market. I hope somebody else has looked at this with a smarter eye than mine and come up with something that works. Paul Camas, WA On 10/2/2011 7:41 AM, hallert wrote: > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "hallert" > > Paul, > You're right about the engine weight. The other strange behavior I have noticed is that slips have practically no effect on the descent rate unlike > any other aircraft I have flown. Have you noticed this? > > Ted > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=353780#353780 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 02, 2011
From: Mark Hubelbank <mhubel(at)nemon.com>
Subject: Re: 601xl engine out glide ratio
Ted, My CH601LX may be a bit different. It is a Jabiru 3300 powered and has no wheel covers at this time but otherwise it should be somewhat similar. I show a best glide of 65 mph IAS with a sink rate of about 700 feet per min for about a 8:1 ratio. This is at gross, while I have not measured it carefully, I think it is about 500-600 feet per min sink rate with no passenger and part fuel. I have not tried it with the prop stopped, that would probably increase the ratio a bit. I find that at gross and a 75 mph IAS, I can see a sink rate of 1000 feet per min with full flaps and almost 1500 in a slip plus flaps. I do find that slips should not be done below 70 mph IAS or one can have poor aileron control. I also did run out of trim at full flaps and have put in a spring on the elevator to neutralize its weight. This made the trim range just make it to full flaps. I believe you said that you had observed a tendency to roll to one side when near stall. I originally had that problem. It turned out that trailing edge of the right wing was a few mm too low. There had been a measurement error that propogated through construction. This may have nothing to do with your observations but it might be worth checking. While I agree that this is not as stable as a high wing plane, I have not found it to be unusually unstable. I don't find it to be too much different from a PA24 (Piper Comanche) I once had. The PA24 was very unforgiving if you let it drift on its own. Mark Hubelbank Ch601XL-B Jabiru 3300 Sensenich adj prop Rotec TBI-40-3 145 Hours airframe ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: 601xl engine out glide ratio
From: "hallert" <hallert(at)verizon.net>
Date: Oct 03, 2011
Paul and Mark, Thanks for your inputs. I too have insufficient up trim when flying by myself but with a passenger and less fuel it has just enough. I also had to "trim" the rudder by adjusting the cables to center the ball in cruise. Have not noticed the yaw instability you mention Paul. Seems much better than an Allegro which I flew 6 years ago that seemed totally unstable in yaw. Ted Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=353970#353970 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 03, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: 601xl engine out glide ratio
Hi Ted, Rather than unstable, I would call the yaw behavior of the XL astable. It will stay where you put it, but it won't find the best position in yaw, i.e. it won't straighten itself out. If you kick the ruder the yaw position will change and stay in the new position. If it were unstable it wouldn't stay in any position but would constantly wander around. I think this also explains your comment about slips not doing any good to adjust landing approaches. Moving the tail from about 2 feet left of center to the same amount right of center doesn't really change the cross-section presented to the relative wind. There just isn't anything significant on the plane that is lined up with the vertical axis while moving forward. It is only when the tail displacement exceeds the widest part of the fuselage (the shoulder area for passenger and pilot) that the cross section changes. I have been really miserable over this "Feature" since I discovered it a week or two ago. At first I wanted to add some sort of vertical fin to fix the problem but after an attempt to do this I decided I just don't have the engineering skill needed for a change this big. Today I added a bump on the top/front of the engine cowl in the correct position to help line up the nose with the runway on landing. I haven't yet tried out the new feature. The rains have started here in the Pacific NW rain forest and I have no clue when there will be sufficient flying weather for the test. Paul XL in flight test. On 10/3/2011 7:36 PM, hallert wrote: > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "hallert" > > Paul and Mark, > Thanks for your inputs. I too have insufficient up trim when flying by > myself but with a passenger and less fuel it has just enough. I also had to > "trim" the rudder by adjusting the cables to center the ball in cruise. Have > not noticed the yaw instability you mention Paul. Seems much better than > an Allegro which I flew 6 years ago that seemed totally unstable in yaw. > > Ted > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=353970#353970 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: 601xl engine out glide ratio
From: "PatrickW" <pwhoyt(at)yahoo.com>
Date: Oct 04, 2011
Would this improve crosswind landing behavior? - Pat -------- Patrick Hoyt 601XLb/Corvair N63PZ - 99.999% done.... Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=354019#354019 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 04, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: 601xl engine out glide ratio
Hi Pat, I don't think so. The B-52 had cross-wind landing gear that allowed the plane to land with a crab while the wheels went straight down the runway. That seems like a different think from the XL. The XL will fly somewhat sideways with the wings level, but the wheels always point in the same direction as the nose of the plane. This seems to me to make it more difficult to get the wheels going down the runway while landing. You still need to tip the wings into the wind to get it flying straight down the runway in a crosswind. A crab will only help you, in this case, if you have engine power to pull the plane to the side. I could easily be wrong about this question. I still have a lot of testing to do to be sure of anything. Paul XL in phase I flight test. On 10/4/2011 8:44 AM, PatrickW wrote: > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "PatrickW" > > Would this improve crosswind landing behavior? > > - Pat > > -------- > Patrick Hoyt > 601XLb/Corvair > N63PZ - 99.999% done.... > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=354019#354019 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: 601xl engine out glide ratio
From: "hallert" <hallert(at)verizon.net>
Date: Oct 04, 2011
Paul, Does your nosegear have a detent (notch that a pin on the strut drops into when weight is released)? This for me basically locks the rudder when in flight. I only need to push right rudder on climb out. Ted Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=354065#354065 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 04, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: 601xl engine out glide ratio
Hi Ted, Yes I do. However, it doesn't seem to center properly. I need to kick the rudder pedal to get the plane to fly straight forward. If you look at the geometry of the rudder and the fuselage side in front of the rudder you may see that there is a bit of play in the rudder position before it actually moves the tail one way or another. Paul On 10/4/2011 5:13 PM, hallert wrote: > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "hallert" > > Paul, > Does your nosegear have a detent (notch that a pin on the strut drops into when weight is released)? This for me basically locks the rudder when in flight. I only need to push right rudder on climb out. > > Ted > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=354065#354065 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Taildragger CG
From: "dalemed" <dalemed(at)gmail.com>
Date: Oct 05, 2011
I'm building a CH650 with the taildragger option. Can I expect the empty CG to be more forward, aft or the same compared to a comparable equipped nosewheel CH601/650? I can probably calculate the difference if I had accurate weight numbers for the nosewheel assembly. I would assume the same weight for the mains, just a different moment arm. Any info will be greatly appreciated! -------- Dale Flying Cessna 170B Building Zenith CH650 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=354080#354080 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Wing joint covers
From: "heisan" <justin(at)expertron.co.za>
Date: Oct 06, 2011
I was wondering if anybody has any better plans for tensioning the wing skin covers? The plans design just seems rather inelegant. I have been trying to figure out a camming system that can work with a single screw through the bottom skin, but nothing I can think of works. Has anybody else tried anything different here? Justin Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=354224#354224 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 07, 2011
From: Bill Naumuk <naumuk(at)windstream.net>
Subject: Re: Wing joint covers
On 10/06/2011 05:52 PM, heisan wrote: > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "heisan" > > I was wondering if anybody has any better plans for tensioning the wing skin covers? The plans design just seems rather inelegant. > > I have been trying to figure out a camming system that can work with a single screw through the bottom skin, but nothing I can think of works. > > Has anybody else tried anything different here? > > Justin > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=354224#354224 > > Justin- You're building an HD or HDS? Bill -- Bill Naumuk Zen/Vair 601MG ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Wing joint covers
From: "heisan" <justin(at)expertron.co.za>
Date: Oct 08, 2011
naumuk(at)windstream.net wrote: > You're building an HD or HDS? > > Bill > > -- > Bill Naumuk > Zen/Vair 601MG HDS. Thanks, Justin Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=354403#354403 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Bob Miller <rpm(at)robertpmillerphd.com>
Date: Oct 09, 2011
Subject: Barnstormers down--where to sell parts?
I hope this isn't violating any list conventions. I have some Rotax engine instruments for sale, but Barnstormers appears to be down due to cyber attack. Does anyone know of another place to list parts for sale? Thanks, Bob Miller ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Craig Payne" <craig(at)craigandjean.com>
Subject: Barnstormers down--where to sell parts?
Date: Oct 09, 2011
Barnstormers is working fine right now. -- Craig ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "ella" <ella_rhodes(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: Barnstormers down--where to sell parts?
Date: Oct 09, 2011
Its ok now Don ----- Original Message ----- From: "Craig Payne" <craig(at)craigandjean.com> Sent: Sunday, October 09, 2011 6:54 PM Subject: RE: Zenith601-List: Barnstormers down--where to sell parts? > > > Barnstormers is working fine right now. > > -- Craig > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Larry McFarland" <larry(at)macsmachine.com>
Subject: Re: Wing joint covers
Date: Oct 10, 2011
Hi Justin, I didn't use the mechanics of Zenith wing joint covers. I used 6-32 U-type Tinnerman fasteners. On the last two screws on top, rear edge, two 8-32 recess head screws into riveted fasteners. A good fit along the edges and a screw to a tinnerman under the leading edge to the bottom joint cover works fine. Top rear view joint covers shown this link: http://www.macsmachine.com/images/completion/full/viewtopwingjoint.gif Top front view cover this link http://www.macsmachine.com/images/completion/full/viewrtwingjoint.jpg Bottom joint covers and retainers: http://www.macsmachine.com/images/largeassembly1/wingtocentersection/full/co verassy.gif Inside top view joint cover and retainer place: http://www.macsmachine.com/images/largeassembly1/wingtocentersection/full/lo retainer.gif Bottom rear view of joint covers in place: http://www.macsmachine.com/images/largeassembly1/wingtocentersection/full/lw jointcvr.gif Top and bottom covers are separate pieces and joined at the underside forward end of the pieces. This screw secures both pieces to the wing via Tinnerman. Underside view of the covers joining screw. http://www.macsmachine.com/images/completion/full/viewwingjoint.gif The Tinnermans keep the pieces tight on the wing skins and nothing has gotten loose in 5 years. Hope the pictures provide some clarity for a solution. Larry McFarland 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com -----Original Message----- From: owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-zenith601-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Naumuk Sent: Friday, October 07, 2011 4:15 PM Subject: [Probable Spam] Re: Zenith601-List: Wing joint covers On 10/06/2011 05:52 PM, heisan wrote: > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "heisan" > > I was wondering if anybody has any better plans for tensioning the wing skin covers? The plans design just seems rather inelegant. > > I have been trying to figure out a camming system that can work with a single screw through the bottom skin, but nothing I can think of works. > > Has anybody else tried anything different here? > > Justin > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=354224#354224 > > Justin- You're building an HD or HDS? Bill -- Bill Naumuk Zen/Vair 601MG ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: [Probable Spam] Re: Wing joint covers
From: "heisan" <justin(at)expertron.co.za>
Date: Oct 10, 2011
Thanks Larry. That looks like a nice, clean and simple solution. Justin Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=354582#354582 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Looking for 601 firewall forward kit
From: "w8n2bup" <johnrich987(at)hotmail.com>
Date: Oct 11, 2011
I am finally at the point to install my engine, a Jabiru 3300. I have the engine in a crate but need the firewall forward kit. If anyone knows of a source for one or a dealer with a better price than USA Jabiru, I would appreciate a note or a call. Thanks all for the many tips I have received over the years. John (913) 915-1989 Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=354747#354747 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: rudder bearing play
From: "mhubel" <mhubel(at)nemon.com>
Date: Oct 15, 2011
I just noted what I consider excess play in the top rudder bearing in my CH601XL. It seems the design assumes the metal bushing on the AN3 bolt will not move against the mounting plates on the rudder. I plan to fix it with a slightly over sized bushing and hole but I wonder if many others have noted this. -------- Mark Hubelbank N708HU CH601XL Jabiru 3300 Rotec TBI 40-3 carb Sensenich ground adj prop. 70 hr TAF Pictures at photo.hubbles.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=355163#355163 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: rudder bearing play
From: Jay Bannister <jaybannist(at)cs.com>
Date: Oct 15, 2011
Mark, I don't know if this is a common problem; but I recall seeing a video of Gu s Warren on pre-flighting a 601XL where he cautions to check this joint for excessive wear and play. Jay -----Original Message----- From: mhubel <mhubel(at)nemon.com> Sent: Sat, Oct 15, 2011 7:58 pm Subject: Zenith601-List: rudder bearing play I just noted what I consider excess play in the top rudder bearing in my CH601XL. It seems the design assumes the metal bushing on the AN3 bolt will not move against the mounting plates on the rudder. I plan to fix it with a slightly over sized bushing and hole but I wonder i f many others have noted this. -------- Mark Hubelbank N708HU CH601XL Jabiru 3300 Rotec TBI 40-3 carb Sensenich ground adj prop. 70 hr TAF Pictures at photo.hubbles.com Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=355163#355163 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: grand rapids EIS for Jab 3300
From: "chris Sinfield" <chris_sinfield(at)yahoo.com.au>
Date: Oct 16, 2011
Hi All Is anyone using the Grand Rapids EIS Jab package EIS-6000J? and are they happy with it? Just tinking of waht to use with my Jab 3300 Chris.. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=355177#355177 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 16, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: grand rapids EIS for Jab 3300
Hi Chris, I'm using the Dynon pair (EFIS D100, EMS D120) in my Zodiac XL. I am very happy with the way these devices work. There have been some problems, but the company support has been superb. I guess that is one of the big advantages of going with the company that has some 90 percent market share. I bought Dynon's wire harness for the Jabiru 3300 and that turned out to be a good choice. There were a few questionable readings on my first use of the EMS, but it was easy to choose different sensor codes to get what seems like fine readings for all the sensors. Paul Camas, WA On 10/16/2011 3:01 AM, chris Sinfield wrote: > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "chris Sinfield" > > Hi All > Is anyone using the Grand Rapids EIS Jab package EIS-6000J? and are they happy with it? Just tinking of waht to use with my Jab 3300 > Chris.. > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=355177#355177 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: grand rapids EIS for Jab 3300
Date: Oct 16, 2011
Not the 6000, but I can say a lot of good about the company. I bought the 2000 model for my water cooled Subaru about 10 years ago. The EIS was my best purchase in everything I bought for my plane; really liked it. Earlier this year, I called Sandy and asked her about the Model 4000 for my new Franklin engine. Well, she took back my 2000, upgraded it (or replaced it as the new one I received looks new), and she charged me only the cost difference between the two units. She even supplied new wiring harnesses at no additional cost and I did not waste a single penny. This is great service! Michel Sent from my iPad On Oct 16, 2011, at 6:01, "chris Sinfield" wrote: > > Hi All > Is anyone using the Grand Rapids EIS Jab package EIS-6000J? and are they happy with it? Just tinking of waht to use with my Jab 3300 > Chris.. > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=355177#355177 > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: 601 xl nose wheel fork dimension
Date: Oct 16, 2011
Can anyone provide me the dimensions of the fork? (height, width) and fork doubler? Pls, specify if width is from inside or outside the fork. I would like to start fabrication of shafts and forks today for my new wheels. Thanks! ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: rudder bearing play
Date: Oct 16, 2011
Same here. I have seen that some people used bronze bushings on the part that is fixed on the fuselage. I'd like to do that, but I am nervous about minimum edge distance. Michel Sent from my iPad On Oct 15, 2011, at 20:54, "mhubel" wrote: > > I just noted what I consider excess play in the top rudder bearing in my CH601XL. It seems the design assumes the metal bushing on the AN3 bolt will not move against the mounting plates on the rudder. > > I plan to fix it with a slightly over sized bushing and hole but I wonder if many others have noted this. > > -------- > Mark Hubelbank > N708HU > CH601XL > Jabiru 3300 > Rotec TBI 40-3 carb > Sensenich ground adj prop. > 70 hr TAF > Pictures at photo.hubbles.com > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=355163#355163 > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 16, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: rudder bearing play
Your comments on this issue got me to look at my rudder mounting. After only 20 hours of flight I can see measurable wear on the portion of the top bracket hole at the front (toward the nose) of the hole. I think the way this "Hinge" is designed the steel tube is rotating against the aluminum bracket. I don't know what I will do about this. Perhaps a slightly larger steel tube pressed into the aluminum will provide a way for the inner tube to move without removing aluminum. I'm concerned about friction on this approach, but some axle grease might help. Paul Camas, WA XL through 20 hours of phase I testing On 10/15/2011 5:54 PM, mhubel wrote: > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "mhubel" > > I just noted what I consider excess play in the top rudder bearing in my CH601XL. It seems the design assumes the metal bushing on the AN3 bolt will not move against the mounting plates on the rudder. > > I plan to fix it with a slightly over sized bushing and hole but I wonder if many others have noted this. > > -------- > Mark Hubelbank > N708HU > CH601XL > Jabiru 3300 > Rotec TBI 40-3 carb > Sensenich ground adj prop. > 70 hr TAF > Pictures at photo.hubbles.com > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=355163#355163 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: 601 xl nose wheel fork dimension
From: "Sabrina" <chicago2paris(at)msn.com>
Date: Oct 16, 2011
The plans are misleading... they show the outer dimension of the fork as 150 and the inner dimension of the doubler as 160. my fork has an outside dimension of 160mm (nearly 170 counting the doubler) and an inner dimension 150+ requiring additional shims beyond the two 31mm spacers provided... Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=355214#355214 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/a_501.jpg ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Tonyplane <tonyplane(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: grand rapids EIS for Jab 3300
Date: Oct 16, 2011
Chris, I've used the GrandRapids since first flight in July 2005. Great piece of equipment, especially with the limits you can set to get a caution light ( from max/ min Cht, egt, oil press, volts (with rpm boundaries), time limits for switching fuel tanks, max rpm, max fuel flow and low calculated fuel level (with fuel flow option). Etc etc. A lot of engine info for the price. I would use it again if I were to build again. Have had no problems. Tony Graziano 601XL, jab 3300, N403TG, 635 hrs Sent from my iPhone On Oct 16, 2011, at 5:01 AM, "chris Sinfield" wrote: > > Hi All > Is anyone using the Grand Rapids EIS Jab package EIS-6000J? and are they happy with it? Just tinking of waht to use with my Jab 3300 > Chris.. > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=355177#355177 > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: 601 xl nose wheel fork dimension
From: "Sabrina" <chicago2paris(at)msn.com>
Date: Oct 16, 2011
My plans are dated August of 2005, or 9 months after the CH letter... I agree, the letter is less confusing than the plans... Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=355216#355216 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 16, 2011
From: Mark Hubelbank <mhubel(at)nemon.com>
Subject: Re: rudder bearing play
Paul, Given what I thought was a design that had the potential to have a problem here, I am looking at some other solutions. If I find anything that works, I will post it. I expect to be working on it this week. On 10/16/2011 2:22 PM, Paul Mulwitz wrote: > > Your comments on this issue got me to look at my rudder mounting. > > After only 20 hours of flight I can see measurable wear on the portion > of the top bracket hole at the front (toward the nose) of the hole. I > think the way this "Hinge" is designed the steel tube is rotating > against the aluminum bracket. > > I don't know what I will do about this. Perhaps a slightly larger > steel tube pressed into the aluminum will provide a way for the inner > tube to move without removing aluminum. I'm concerned about friction > on this approach, but some axle grease might help. > > Paul > Camas, WA > XL through 20 hours of phase I testing > > > On 10/15/2011 5:54 PM, mhubel wrote: >> --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "mhubel" >> >> I just noted what I consider excess play in the top rudder bearing in >> my CH601XL. It seems the design assumes the metal bushing on the AN3 >> bolt will not move against the mounting plates on the rudder. >> >> I plan to fix it with a slightly over sized bushing and hole but I >> wonder if many others have noted this. >> >> -------- >> Mark Hubelbank >> N708HU >> CH601XL >> Jabiru 3300 >> Rotec TBI 40-3 carb >> Sensenich ground adj prop. >> 70 hr TAF >> Pictures at photo.hubbles.com >> >> >> >> >> Read this topic online here: >> >> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=355163#355163 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > -- Mark Hubelbank NorthEast Monitoring 2 Clock Tower Place Suite 555 Maynard, MA, 01754 - USA mhubel(at)nemon.com 978-443-3955 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 16, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: rudder bearing play
Hi Mark, I currently have my rudder and horizontal stabilizer removed. To make a long story short, before removal the "Chief" mechanic on my field was looking at it and started moving the stab back and forth. I guess the tips moved around 1/2 inch from front to rear. I told him I would tighten the bolts holding it in place and he just laughed saying he never liked this design. He also said something about how the stab should be attached with steel instead of aluminum. After wiggling it and tightening the bolts and wiggling it some more I took it for a flight. After the flight it seemed to move a little bit more than before. I decided to take the stab off and take a good look to try to discover the source of the movement. It became obvious after removing it and the rudder (it wouldn't come off without taking off the rudder too) that the mounting brackets (6B3-3, 6b3-4 in current parts database, 6B1-8 and 6B1-9 in my set of drawings) were bending. I decided to replace them with steel. Then this discussion came up and I looked to see significant wear on the heavy aluminum angle (lower hinge?) for the rudder. This comes as no surprise since the steel tube is rubbing against aluminum and the rudder cables tensioned to 25 pounds each provide a 50 pound force grinding the steel into the aluminum. It must be a real problem for others who have more than 20 hours on their planes. My first thought was to get a piece of steel tube just larger than the current one and press it into the aluminum. Then I heard someone suggest bronze bushing and looked at McMaster Carr for the material. My first cut located much larger bushing stock - starting at 1 inch O.D. with 1/4 inch walls. For now I am hoping you get a brighter idea than any of mine. I have not found any aircraft steel angles, and I could put hardware store steel in there but am reluctant to do that. I guess I could try to bend a 4130 flat into a right angle but that sounds like a big job - that is pretty tough stuff. I anxiously await your own efforts. Perhaps we can find a solution to this horrible design that actually works well. Paul XL 20 hours into phase I testing. On 10/16/2011 3:20 PM, Mark Hubelbank wrote: > > Paul, > Given what I thought was a design that had the potential to have a > problem here, I am looking at some other solutions. If I find anything > that works, I will post it. I expect to be working on it this week. > > On 10/16/2011 2:22 PM, Paul Mulwitz wrote: >> >> Your comments on this issue got me to look at my rudder mounting. >> >> After only 20 hours of flight I can see measurable wear on the >> portion of the top bracket hole at the front (toward the nose) of the >> hole. I think the way this "Hinge" is designed the steel tube is >> rotating against the aluminum bracket. >> >> I don't know what I will do about this. Perhaps a slightly larger >> steel tube pressed into the aluminum will provide a way for the inner >> tube to move without removing aluminum. I'm concerned about friction >> on this approach, but some axle grease might help. >> >> Paul >> Camas, WA >> XL through 20 hours of phase I testing >> >> >> On 10/15/2011 5:54 PM, mhubel wrote: >>> --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "mhubel" >>> >>> I just noted what I consider excess play in the top rudder bearing >>> in my CH601XL. It seems the design assumes the metal bushing on the >>> AN3 bolt will not move against the mounting plates on the rudder. >>> >>> I plan to fix it with a slightly over sized bushing and hole but I >>> wonder if many others have noted this. >>> >>> -------- >>> Mark Hubelbank >>> N708HU >>> CH601XL >>> Jabiru 3300 >>> Rotec TBI 40-3 carb >>> Sensenich ground adj prop. >>> 70 hr TAF >>> Pictures at photo.hubbles.com >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Read this topic online here: >>> >>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=355163#355163 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JohnDRead(at)aol.com
Date: Oct 16, 2011
Subject: Re: rudder bearing play
I made a design for an Oilite bearing in the Rudder of my CH701. The 4130 steel tube is clamped by the through bolt and rotates in the bearing which can be replaced if it should wear. I do not like steel in aluminum as a bearing pair. Picture attached. I did a similar design for all of the rotating bearings on the wings and stab of the 701. Lubricate at assembly with MoS2 grease. Remember our airplanes are Experimental so use the design at your own risk. Regards, John CH701 - Colorado - Jabiru 3300 Cell: 719-494-4567 Home: 303-648-3261 In a message dated 10/16/2011 12:25:57 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, psm(at)att.net writes: --> Zenith601-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz Your comments on this issue got me to look at my rudder mounting. After only 20 hours of flight I can see measurable wear on the portion of the top bracket hole at the front (toward the nose) of the hole. I think the way this "Hinge" is designed the steel tube is rotating against the aluminum bracket. I don't know what I will do about this. Perhaps a slightly larger steel tube pressed into the aluminum will provide a way for the inner tube to move without removing aluminum. I'm concerned about friction on this approach, but some axle grease might help. Paul Camas, WA XL through 20 hours of phase I testing On 10/15/2011 5:54 PM, mhubel wrote: > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "mhubel" > > I just noted what I consider excess play in the top rudder bearing in my CH601XL. It seems the design assumes the metal bushing on the AN3 bolt will not move against the mounting plates on the rudder. > > I plan to fix it with a slightly over sized bushing and hole but I wonder if many others have noted this. > > -------- > Mark Hubelbank > N708HU > CH601XL > Jabiru 3300 > Rotec TBI 40-3 carb > Sensenich ground adj prop. > 70 hr TAF > Pictures at photo.hubbles.com > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=355163#355163 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 16, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: rudder bearing play
Hi John, Thanks for the drawing and comments on the rudder bearings. I'm not familiar with Oilite or sintered bronze. Can you give me any clues where to get that stuff and what form it takes? Do I order bearings or just the material and machine it to my design? Thanks, Paul On 10/16/2011 3:53 PM, JohnDRead(at)aol.com wrote: > I made a design for an Oilite bearing in the Rudder of my CH701. The > 4130 steel tube is clamped by the through bolt and rotates in the > bearing which can be replaced if it should wear. I do not like steel > in aluminum as a bearing pair. Picture attached. I did a similar > design for all of the rotating bearings on the wings and stab of the > 701. Lubricate at assembly with MoS2 grease. Remember our airplanes > are /*Experimental*/ so use the design at your own risk. > Regards, John > > CH701 - Colorado - Jabiru 3300 > > Cell: 719-494-4567 > Home: 303-648-3261 > In a message dated 10/16/2011 12:25:57 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, > psm(at)att.net writes: > > > Your comments on this issue got me to look at my rudder mounting. > > After only 20 hours of flight I can see measurable wear on the > portion > of the top bracket hole at the front (toward the nose) of the > hole. I > think the way this "Hinge" is designed the steel tube is rotating > against the aluminum bracket. > > I don't know what I will do about this. Perhaps a slightly larger > steel > tube pressed into the aluminum will provide a way for the inner > tube to > move without removing aluminum. I'm concerned about friction on this > approach, but some axle grease might help. > > Paul > Camas, WA > XL through 20 hours of phase I testing > > > On 10/15/2011 5:54 PM, mhubel wrote: > > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "mhubel" > > > > I just noted what I consider excess play in the top rudder > bearing in my CH601XL. It seems the design assumes the metal > bushing on the AN3 bolt will not move against the mounting plates > on the rudder. > > > > I plan to fix it with a slightly over sized bushing and hole but > I wonder if many others have noted this. > > > > -------- > > Mark Hubelbank > > N708HU > > CH601XL > > Jabiru 3300 > > Rotec TBI 40-3 carb > > Sensenich ground adj prop. > > 70 hr TAF > > Pictures at photo.hubbles.com > > > > > > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=355163#355163 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: 601 xl nose wheel fork dimension
From: mtherr(at)yahoo.com
Date: Oct 17, 2011
SSBkb24ndC4gIEkgd2lsbCBmYWJyaWNhdGUgdGhlIGF4bGUgdG9vLiAgDQpTZW50IGZyb20gbXkg QmxhY2tCZXJyeSBkZXZpY2Ugb24gdGhlIFJvZ2VycyBXaXJlbGVzcyBOZXR3b3JrDQoNCi0tLS0t T3JpZ2luYWwgTWVzc2FnZS0tLS0tDQpGcm9tOiBKb2huRFJlYWRAYW9sLmNvbQ0KU2VuZGVyOiBv d25lci16ZW5pdGg2MDEtbGlzdC1zZXJ2ZXJAbWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbQ0KRGF0ZTogU3VuLCAxNiBP Y3QgMjAxMSAxODo1NTo0OSANClRvOiA8emVuaXRoNjAxLWxpc3RAbWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbT4NClJl cGx5LVRvOiB6ZW5pdGg2MDEtbGlzdEBtYXRyb25pY3MuY29tDQpTdWJqZWN0OiBSZTogWmVuaXRo NjAxLUxpc3Q6IFJlOiA2MDEgeGwgbm9zZSB3aGVlbCBmb3JrIGRpbWVuc2lvbg0KDQpJZiB5b3Ug aGF2ZSB0aGUgYXhsZSB0aGF0IHNob3VsZCBnaXZlIHlvdSB0aGUgaW5zaWRlIGRpbWVuc2lvbiBm b3IgdGhlICANCmluc2lkZSBkb3VibGVyIGZvcmsuIE9uZSBjb3VsZCBhbHdheXMgbG9vayBvbiB0 aGUgZHJhd2luZ3MgdG9vIQ0KIA0KUmVnYXJkcywgIEpvaG4NCg0KQ0g3MDEgLSBDb2xvcmFkbyAt IEphYmlydSAzMzAwDQoNCkNlbGw6IDcxOS00OTQtNDU2Nw0KSG9tZTogIDMwMy02NDgtMzI2MSAg DQoNCiANCkluIGEgbWVzc2FnZSBkYXRlZCAxMC8xNi8yMDExIDE6MDE6NTAgUC5NLiBNb3VudGFp biBEYXlsaWdodCBUaW1lLCAgDQpicnlhbm1tYXJ0aW5AY29tY2FzdC5uZXQgd3JpdGVzOg0KDQot LT4gIFplbml0aDYwMS1MaXN0IG1lc3NhZ2UgcG9zdGVkIGJ5OiAiYnJ5YW5tbWFydGluIiAgDQo8 YnJ5YW5tbWFydGluQGNvbWNhc3QubmV0Pg0KDQoNCm10aGVycihhdCl5YWhvby5jb20gd3JvdGU6 DQo+ICBDYW4gYW55b25lIHByb3ZpZGUgbWUgdGhlIGRpbWVuc2lvbnMgb2YgdGhlIGZvcms/ICho ZWlnaHQsIHdpZHRoKSBhbmQgDQpmb3JrICBkb3VibGVyPyAgIFBscywgc3BlY2lmeSBpZiB3aWR0 aCBpcyBmcm9tIGluc2lkZSBvciBvdXRzaWRlIHRoZSAgZm9yay4gIEkgDQp3b3VsZCBsaWtlIHRv IHN0YXJ0IGZhYnJpY2F0aW9uIG9mIHNoYWZ0cyBhbmQgZm9ya3MgdG9kYXkgZm9yIG15ICBuZXcg DQp3aGVlbHMuDQo+IA0KPiBUaGFua3MhDQoNCg0KDQpIZXJlJ3MgdGhlIGxldHRlciBJICBkb3du bG9hZGVkLg0KDQotLS0tLS0tLQ0KLS0gDQpCcnlhbiBNYXJ0aW4NCk42MUJNLCBDSCA2MDEgWEws ICBTdHJhdHVzIFN1YmFydS4NCmRvIG5vdCBhcmNoaXZlLg0KDQoNCg0KDQpSZWFkIHRoaXMgdG9w aWMgb25saW5lICBoZXJlOg0KDQpodHRwOi8vZm9ydW1zLm1hdHJvbmljcy5jb20vdmlld3RvcGlj LnBocD9wPTM1NTIxNSMzNTUyMTUNCg0KDQoNCg0KQXR0YWNobWVudHM6ICANCg0KaHR0cDovL2Zv cnVtcy5tYXRyb25pY3MuY29tLy9maWxlcy82MDF4bF9ub3NlX3doZWVsX2ZvcmtfbGV0dGVyXzg4 OC5wZGYNCg0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCg0K ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 16, 2011
From: Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: rudder bearing play
-=0AThis is what I was thinking... What is the edge distance on the beari ng part that the bushing is installed?- Is there enough aluminum left?=0A -=0A----------------------------=0AMichel Therrien CH601-HD, C-GZGQ=0Ahtt p://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601=0Ahttp://pages.infinit.net/mthobby=0A=0A=0A ________________________________=0AFrom: "JohnDRead(at)aol.com" <JohnDRead@aol .com>=0ATo: zenith601-list(at)matronics.com=0ASent: Sunday, October 16, 2011 6 :53:07 PM=0ASubject: Re: Zenith601-List: rudder bearing play=0A=0A=0A =0AI -made a design for an Oilite bearing in the Rudder of my CH701. The =0A41 30 steel tube is clamped by the through bolt and-rotates in the bearing =0Awhich can be replaced if it should wear. I do not like steel in aluminum as a =0Abearing pair. Picture attached. I did a similar design for all of the rotating =0Abearings on the wings and stab of the 701. Lubricate at ass embly with MoS2 =0Agrease.-Remember our airplanes are Experimental so use the design at your own risk. =0A=0ARegards, =0AJohn=0A=0ACH701 - Colorado - Jabiru 3300=0A=0ACell: 719-494-4567=0AHome: =0A303-648-3261 =0A ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Afterfxllc(at)aol.com
Date: Oct 16, 2011
Subject: Re: rudder bearing play
The best fix for this would be a Bell crank bearing like this _http://www.aircraftspruce.com/menus/ap/bearings_bellcrank.html_ (http://www.aircraftspruce.com/menus/ap/bearings_bellcrank.html) but you would then have the rudder too far aft and the rear saddle would look funny. So another fix would be to use an Aurora bearing upper and lower like this _http://www.aircraftspruce.com/menus/ap/bearings_aurora.html_ (http://www.aircraftspruce.com/menus/ap/bearings_aurora.html) But you would have to install a nut plate to the backside (inside) of the rudder along with a doublers on the outside. Every 601 I have done upgrades to have had to have the bushings replaced so the extra effort involved in opening up the rudder would be time well spent to fix this. Jeff ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JohnDRead(at)aol.com
Date: Oct 17, 2011
Subject: Re: rudder bearing play
Hi Paul, The manufacturer of the bearings I used for the rudder mod is Symmco Inc. _www.symmco.com_ (http://www.symmco.com) in Sykesville PA. The Upper Rudder bearing is p/n SF-812-5 the Lower Rudder bearing is p/n SF-812-4. You can download their catalog from their web site. I reamed the holes in the plates to 0.0375, the bearings are 0.377 OD which gives a light press fit into the plates. The 4130 material supplied by Zenith is a good fit in the bearings. The bolts are torqued to the normal torque for AN3 bolts. Regards, John CH701 - Colorado - Jabiru 3300 Cell: 719-494-4567 Home: 303-648-3261 In a message dated 10/16/2011 6:34:43 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, psm(at)att.net writes: Hi John, Thanks for the drawing and comments on the rudder bearings. I'm not familiar with Oilite or sintered bronze. Can you give me any clues where to get that stuff and what form it takes? Do I order bearings or just the material and machine it to my design? Thanks, Paul On 10/16/2011 3:53 PM, _JohnDRead(at)aol.com_ (mailto:JohnDRead(at)aol.com) wrote: I made a design for an Oilite bearing in the Rudder of my CH701. The 4130 steel tube is clamped by the through bolt and rotates in the bearing which can be replaced if it should wear. I do not like steel in aluminum as a bearing pair. Picture attached. I did a similar design for all of the rotating bearings on the wings and stab of the 701. Lubricate at assembly with MoS2 grease. Remember our airplanes are Experimental so use the design at your own risk. Regards, John CH701 - Colorado - Jabiru 3300 Cell: 719-494-4567 Home: 303-648-3261 In a message dated 10/16/2011 12:25:57 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, _psm(at)att.net_ (mailto:psm(at)att.net) writes: (mailto:psm(at)att.net) Your comments on this issue got me to look at my rudder mounting. After only 20 hours of flight I can see measurable wear on the portion of the top bracket hole at the front (toward the nose) of the hole. I think the way this "Hinge" is designed the steel tube is rotating against the aluminum bracket. I don't know what I will do about this. Perhaps a slightly larger steel tube pressed into the aluminum will provide a way for the inner tube to move without removing aluminum. I'm concerned about friction on this approach, but some axle grease might help. Paul Camas, WA XL through 20 hours of phase I testing On 10/15/2011 5:54 PM, mhubel wrote: > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: "mhubel"__ (mailto:mhubel(at)nemon.com) > > I just noted what I consider excess play in the top rudder bearing in my CH601XL. It seems the design assumes the metal bushing on the AN3 bolt will not move against the mounting plates on the rudder. > > I plan to fix it with a slightly over sized bushing and hole but I wonder if many others have noted this. > > -------- > Mark Hubelbank > N708HU > CH601XL > Jabiru 3300 > Rotec TBI 40-3 carb > Sensenich ground adj prop. > 70 hr TAF > Pictures at photo.hubbles.com > > > Read this topic online here: > > _http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=355163#355163_ (http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=355163#355163) > > (http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List) (http://www.matronics.com/contribution) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JohnDRead(at)aol.com
Date: Oct 17, 2011
Subject: Re: rudder bearing play
There is plenty of metal for the edge distance at least on the 701 plates. I do not know about 601s I'll check them on my hangar buddies plane to verify. Regards, John CH701 - Colorado - Jabiru 3300 Cell: 719-494-4567 Home: 303-648-3261 In a message dated 10/16/2011 8:01:45 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, mtherr(at)yahoo.com writes: This is what I was thinking... What is the edge distance on the bearing part that the bushing is installed? Is there enough aluminum left? ---------------------------- Michel Therrien CH601-HD, C-GZGQ http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601 http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby From: "JohnDRead(at)aol.com" <JohnDRead(at)aol.com> Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2011 6:53:07 PM Subject: Re: Zenith601-List: rudder bearing play I made a design for an Oilite bearing in the Rudder of my CH701. The 4130 steel tube is clamped by the through bolt and rotates in the bearing which can be replaced if it should wear. I do not like steel in aluminum as a bearing pair. Picture attached. I did a similar design for all of the rotating bearings on the wings and stab of the 701. Lubricate at assembly with MoS2 grease. Remember our airplanes are Experimental so use the design at your own risk. Regards, John CH701 - Colorado - Jabiru 3300 Cell: 719-494-4567 Home: 303-648-3261 (http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith601-List) (http://www.matronics.com/contribution) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 17, 2011
From: Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: rudder bearing play
Hi John, Thanks for the info. I looked at McMaster and found gobs of choices for Oilite bearings. The were so inexpensive (most under $1) I thought it might be possible to find them at a local hardware store. Thanks again, Paul On 10/16/2011 10:16 PM, JohnDRead(at)aol.com wrote: > Hi Paul, > The manufacturer of the bearings I used for the rudder mod > is Symmco Inc. www.symmco.com <http://www.symmco.com> in Sykesville > PA. The Upper Rudder bearing is p/n SF-812-5 the Lower Rudder bearing > is p/n SF-812-4. You can download their catalog from their web site. I > reamed the holes in the plates to 0.0375, the bearings are 0.377 OD > which gives a light press fit into the plates. The 4130 material > supplied by Zenith is a good fit in the bearings. The bolts are > torqued to the normal torque for AN3 bolts. > Regards, John > > CH701 - Colorado - Jabiru 3300 > > Cell: 719-494-4567 > Home: 303-648-3261 > In a message dated 10/16/2011 6:34:43 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, > psm(at)att.net writes: > > Hi John, > > Thanks for the drawing and comments on the rudder bearings. > > I'm not familiar with Oilite or sintered bronze. Can you give me > any clues where to get that stuff and what form it takes? Do I > order bearings or just the material and machine it to my design? > > Thanks, > > Paul > > On 10/16/2011 3:53 PM, JohnDRead(at)aol.com wrote: >> I made a design for an Oilite bearing in the Rudder of my CH701. >> The 4130 steel tube is clamped by the through bolt and rotates in >> the bearing which can be replaced if it should wear. I do not >> like steel in aluminum as a bearing pair. Picture attached. I did >> a similar design for all of the rotating bearings on the wings >> and stab of the 701. Lubricate at assembly with MoS2 >> grease. Remember our airplanes are /*Experimental*/ so use the >> design at your own risk. >> Regards, John >> >> CH701 - Colorado - Jabiru 3300 >> >> Cell: 719-494-4567 >> Home: 303-648-3261 >> In a message dated 10/16/2011 12:25:57 P.M. Mountain Daylight >> Time, psm(at)att.net writes: >> >> >> Your comments on this issue got me to look at my rudder mounting. >> >> After only 20 hours of flight I can see measurable wear on >> the portion >> of the top bracket hole at the front (toward the nose) of the >> hole. I >> think the way this "Hinge" is designed the steel tube is >> rotating >> against the aluminum bracket. >> >> I don't know what I will do about this. Perhaps a slightly >> larger steel >> tube pressed into the aluminum will provide a way for the >> inner tube to >> move without removing aluminum. I'm concerned about friction >> on this >> approach, but some axle grease might help. >> >> Paul >> Camas, WA >> XL through 20 hours of phase I testing >> >> >> On 10/15/2011 5:54 PM, mhubel wrote: >> > --> Zenith601-List message posted by: >> "mhubel" >> > >> > I just noted what I consider excess play in the top rudder >> bearing in my CH601XL. It seems the design assumes the metal >> bushing on the AN3 bolt will not move against the mounting >> plates on the rudder. >> > >> > I plan to fix it with a slightly over sized bushing and >> hole but I wonder if many others have noted this. >> > >> > -------- >> > Mark Hubelbank >> > N708HU

July 11, 2011 - October 17, 2011

Zenith601-Archive.digest.vol-ar